DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 3-8, 11-14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The claims recite “automatically setting/setting a target weight of exercise equipment based on the estimated PMW”. The BRI of this limitation includes mechanically altering the exercise equipment to set the exercise weight, but the Specification details no such structure for performing the claimed function. The Figures show a screen that presumably outputs the recommended weight, but does not show any mechanical means of automatically adjusting the weight for the user. Therefore, the subject matter of the claims is not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 8 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the movement speed guide". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 11-14 are rejected by virtue of their dependency from claim 8.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1, 3-8, and 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The 101 analysis begins with establishing the Broadest Reasonable Interpretation of claim. Independent claims 1, 8 and 15 are similar in scope and will therefore be analyzed together. The claims recite an exercise guidance device (claim 1) exercise guidance method (claim 8) and a computer readable medium (claim 15).
Regarding claims 1, 10 and 15, the claim recites an exercise guidance device, a processor that receives a PMWinput of a user, “automatically set” a target weight of an exercise machine is described very broadly in the Specification, and therefore corresponds to outputting a target weight (rather than, say, interacting with mechanical components to fully automatically set a desired weight for the user). In fact, the Specification describes a standard weight machine with a selectable stack of weight plates and does not depict in the figures nor describe in the Specification any mechanism to “automatically set” the target weight for the user other than outputting a number. The BRI of the term “automatically select”, therefore corresponds to outputting a target weight to the user. The claim describes a user objectification index, which is a numerical value, and PMW, another value indicative of muscular strength. The claim further recites the user objectification index comprises an exercise trajectory and/or regularity of repetitions in units of sets, but as indicated above the claim requires the user objectification index to be a numerical value, so the exercise trajectory and/or regularity of repetitions in units of sets is therefore also construed to be a numerical value. The claim recites the exercise guidance device comprises a sensor, which the Specification establishes in para. 47 as a laser beam and reflected and measured from a pin of a weight stack to detect location, movement speed and movement direction of a selected number of weights in the stack. The claim recites the exercise trajectory is determined based on sensed distance and corresponds to movement displacement of the fitness equipment plotted against time. Again, however, the exercise trajectory is interpreted to be a numerical value representative of equipment displacement. The claim goes on to recite the regularity of reps is determined based on exercise trajectories, based on whether trajectories match each other based on distance or a length of a time series. This involves mathematical operations of comparing numerical values. Finally, the claim recites the processor is configured to determine the PMW, which is also considered a mathematical operation. The analysis then proceeds to Step 1.
Step 1: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter? Yes claims 1, 3-7 recite a machine, YES for claims 8, 11-14, which recite a process, and YES for claim 15, which recites a non-transitory computer readable medium.
Step 2A, Prong 1: Is the claim directed to a law of nature, natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea?
Yes, the claim recites mathematical operations, which are identified as abstract ideas in MPEP §2106.04.
Step 2A, Prong 2: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? Apart from the mathematical operations, the claim recites a processor, exercise device and sensor. However, these components, nor the disclosure in general, do not reflect improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field, applying or using a judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, no particular machine is recited, there is no transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing and there is no evidence in the disclosure of applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. The exercise machine is generically recited and is only used as a source of the input data for the mathematical process, the “automatic setting” described above with respect to claim interpretation reflects the output of the mathematical process, and nothing in the claim reflects anything other than applying this particular, specific mathematical process to the field of strength training. Therefore, Step 2A: No, the claim is not integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? No. The additional elements are recited as generic components performing there well known functions. The additional elements reflect well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, mathematical operations. - see MPEP 2106.05(d). Therefore, claims 1, 8 and 15 and all claims depending therefrom are not eligible subject matter under 35 USC 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 3-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Belson (US PGPub. 2020/0261771). Belson describes the same invention as claimed, including:
PNG
media_image1.png
570
684
media_image1.png
Greyscale
1. Figure 2 of Belson describing procedure for determining estimated one repetition maximum (1eRM, 228) via user produced force (points 218, 220, 222, 224) at a variety of velocities (210, 212, 214, 216). Curves 206 and 208 represent statistical averages based on e.g. demographics, establishing a predicted force-velocity profile (FVP) for the user, over which the extrapolated actual FVP (226) is plotted.
Regarding claim 1, A weight exercise guide device comprising: a processor (para. 14: “a controller circuit (104), which may include a processor”) muscle strength estimation unit configured to estimate a muscle strength value of a user's specific muscle strength based on user data (para. 53: “In the example shown, the machine of FIG. 1 prompts and/or demonstrates to the user how to use the handles and/or attachments (110) to perform an isokinetic seed movement. The machine may manifest three or four isokinetic seed movements for the user to perform. In one embodiment, the machine uses video prompts on a monitor, and for the isokinetic seed movement, the user mimics what they see in the video and are instructed to move the actuator (110) as fast and as powerfully as they possibly can. The machine's resistance dynamically changes to match the user's applied force, while allowing the user to move the resistance at a prescribed constant speed during the concentric phase, establishing for a given speed (210), for example 50 inches/second, a corresponding produced force (218).” The “isokinetic seed movement” represents the maximum force generated by a user, since the instructions are for the user to move the actuator as fast and as powerfully as they possibly can. This “isokinetic seed movement” is considered the estimated muscle strength value of a user as required by the claim); a detection unit configured to detect a percentile value to which the estimated muscle strength value belongs among preset adult muscle strength percentile values (para. 49: “For a given movement, using empirical studies one or more theoretical FVPs (206), (208) may be plotted in general for a typical human being in general, or for a typical human being of a given age, sex, and/or other demographic/physical characteristics.”); and a PMW estimation unit configured to estimate a PMW of exercise equipment the user intends to use based on the detected percentile value, wherein the PMW indicates a muscular strength capable of being exerted by an individual against the resistance of a weight with maximum effort (para. 64: “For example, it is determined that a given user has a 1 eRM of 50 lb using the machine in FIG. 1 and the technique described above with isokinetic seed movements. According to a traditional percentage 1 eRM chart, a 10 rep max may use a weight equal to 75% of the 1 eRM, or 37.5 lb.”); an exercise goal setting unit configured to automatically set a target weight of exercise equipment based on the estimated PMW and display the target weight of the exercise equipment on a display (para. 64: “For example, it is determined that a given user has a 1 eRM of 50 lb using the machine in FIG. 1 and the technique described above with isokinetic seed movements. According to a traditional percentage 1 eRM chart, a 10 rep max may use a weight equal to 75% of the 1 eRM, or 37.5 lb. This may be too heavy as the user may only be able to complete a single set of 10 reps. Instead, an adjustment between 10-15% may be made. For example, if a 10% adjustment is made associated with a 15 rep max, then 75%-10%=65% of the 1 eRM, which is 32.5 lb. The 10 rep suggestion than would be equivalent to the 15 rep max, producing the suggestion that a user do 32 lbs for 10 reps to start.”); a sensing unit (paras. 19-21 describe optical sensors, position measurement sensors, optical encoders, motor power sensor, user tension sensor, torque/tension strain sensor and/or gauge to measure how much tension/force is being applied to the actuator by the user) configured to measure a physical movement of the exercise equipment providing resistance to the user, the sensing unit being configured to measure, in real time, at least one of a position, a movement speed, or a movement direction of the exercise equipment providing resistance (Fig. 2, velocity), wherein the processor is configured to: detect an exercise trace of the user based on the measured physical movement (Fig. 2); and generate an objectification index based on exercise records obtained while the user uses the exercise equipment, the objectification index including at least one of a weight, a number of repetitions, a number of sets, the exercise trace, a movement speed, or a regularity of repetitions (para. 64: “This may be too heavy as the user may only be able to complete a single set of 10 reps. Instead, an adjustment between 10-15% may be made. For example, if a 10% adjustment is made associated with a 15 rep max, then 75%-10%=65% of the 1 eRM, which is 32.5 lb. The 10 rep suggestion than would be equivalent to the 15 rep max, producing the suggestion that a user do 32 lbs for 10 reps to start.”), a machine learning processing unit configured to update the estimated PMW based on the objectification index generated while the user uses the exercise equipment; and wherein the exercise goal setting unit is configured to update the target weight of the exercise equipment based on the updated PMW (para. 51: “In one embodiment, an ongoing recalibration of the strength determination is done without requiring the user to repeat the isokinetic seed movements; instead, the user's performance on each movement is used to update a user's strength level determination.”).
Regarding claim 3, wherein the PMW estimation unit is configured to estimate a PMW corresponding to the estimated muscle strength value by matching a PMW percentile value of exercise equipment obtained from a population using the exercise equipment the user intends to use with the preset adult muscle strength percentile value, using a matching table (para. 49: “FIG. 2 illustrates an example of strength determination based on isokinetic seed movements. FIG. 2 is a two-dimensional with an x-axis along movement velocity (202) and a y-axis along force produced (204) for that movement. For a given movement, using empirical studies one or more theoretical FVPs (206), (208) may be plotted in general for a typical human being in general, or for a typical human being of a given age, sex, and/or other demographic/physical characteristics.”).
Regarding claim 4, wherein the PMW percentile value of the exercise equipment obtained from the population is updated using PMW data of the user who used exercise equipment the user intended to use in at least one smart gym, and in this case, the matching table is updated (para. 49: “FIG. 2 illustrates an example of strength determination based on isokinetic seed movements. FIG. 2 is a two-dimensional with an x-axis along movement velocity (202) and a y-axis along force produced (204) for that movement. For a given movement, using empirical studies one or more theoretical FVPs (206), (208) may be plotted in general for a typical human being in general, or for a typical human being of a given age, sex, and/or other demographic/physical characteristics.”).
Regarding claim 5, wherein the user data comprises at least some of a user's gender, age, weight, height, BMI, and body fat percentage (para. 49: “FIG. 2 illustrates an example of strength determination based on isokinetic seed movements. FIG. 2 is a two-dimensional with an x-axis along movement velocity (202) and a y-axis along force produced (204) for that movement. For a given movement, using empirical studies one or more theoretical FVPs (206), (208) may be plotted in general for a typical human being in general, or for a typical human being of a given age, sex, and/or other demographic/physical characteristics.”).
Regarding claim 6, wherein the specific muscle strength comprises a grip strength (para. 69: “Force-Time Prediction—For a given movement, over a range of motion and/or over time t, both the 1 eRM, or B, and LVP, or a, may vary. Force-time prediction analysis determines the corresponding variations over time and plots them as a function of index t. This in turn allows a tracking of translation and/or rotation of the actuator (110) to give coaching and correction to the user on form of an entire movement.”).
Regarding claim 7, wherein a target weight of exercise equipment that the user intends to use varies depending on the user's exercise purpose received through a user interface (para. 64: “For example, it is determined that a given user has a 1 eRM of 50 lb using the machine in FIG. 1 and the technique described above with isokinetic seed movements. According to a traditional percentage 1 eRM chart, a 10 rep max may use a weight equal to 75% of the 1 eRM, or 37.5 lb. This may be too heavy as the user may only be able to complete a single set of 10 reps. Instead, an adjustment between 10-15% may be made. For example, if a 10% adjustment is made associated with a 15 rep max, then 75%-10%=65% of the 1 eRM, which is 32.5 lb. The 10 rep suggestion than would be equivalent to the 15 rep max, producing the suggestion that a user do 32 lbs for 10 reps to start.”).
Claim(s) 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Belson (US PGPub. 2020/0261771). Belson describes the same invention as claimed, including:
Regarding claim 8, An weight exercise guide method comprising: calculating, by a muscle strength estimation unit, an estimated muscle strength value obtained by estimating a user's specific muscle strength based on user data (para. 53: “In the example shown, the machine of FIG. 1 prompts and/or demonstrates to the user how to use the handles and/or attachments (110) to perform an isokinetic seed movement. The machine may manifest three or four isokinetic seed movements for the user to perform. In one embodiment, the machine uses video prompts on a monitor, and for the isokinetic seed movement, the user mimics what they see in the video and are instructed to move the actuator (110) as fast and as powerfully as they possibly can. The machine's resistance dynamically changes to match the user's applied force, while allowing the user to move the resistance at a prescribed constant speed during the concentric phase, establishing for a given speed (210), for example 50 inches/second, a corresponding produced force (218).” The “isokinetic seed movement” represents the maximum force generated by a user, since the instructions are for the user to move the actuator as fast and as powerfully as they possibly can.); detecting, by a detection unit, a percentile value to which the estimated muscle strength value belongs among preset adult muscle strength percentile values (paras. 57 and 58: “[0057] With one data point (218) or more (220, 222, 224) data points, a FVP (226) may be estimated for the user. This FVP (226) may intercept the y-axis at point (228), which represents the 1 eRM of the user. [0058] Thus with at least one isokinetic seed movement, and practically with 3-4 reps of an isokinetic seed movement at varying speeds, by comparing an amount of force resisted at each given velocity, extrapolation may permit a slope to be drawn and an 1 eRM determination is made based on the drawn slope.”); and estimating, by a PMW estimation unit, a PMW of exercise equipment the user intends to use based on a percentile value to which the estimated muscle strength value belongs, wherein the PMW indicates a muscular strength capable of being exerted by an individual against the resistance of a weight with maximum effort (para. 10: “The user's produced force at the prescribed speed is mapped to a predetermined force-velocity profile/plot (“FVP”) to determine strength, for example an estimated one rep maximum (“1 eRM”) for the user for the muscle group associated with the isokinetic seed movement, wherein the 1 eRM is an estimate of the one rep maximum, or how much weight a user could maximally exercise for a given movement for a single cycle, that is without further repetition.” 1eRM is considered the PMW as required by the claim); automatically setting, by an exercise goal setting unit, a target weight of exercise equipment based on the estimated PMW, and displaying the target weight of the exercise equipment on a display (para. 10: “The user's produced force at the prescribed speed is mapped to a predetermined force-velocity profile/plot (“FVP”) to determine strength, for example an estimated one rep maximum (“1 eRM”) for the user for the muscle group associated with the isokinetic seed movement, wherein the 1 eRM is an estimate of the one rep maximum, or how much weight a user could maximally exercise for a given movement for a single cycle, that is without further repetition.” 1eRM is considered the PMW as required by the claim); displaying, on the display, the movement speed guide together with a measured movement speed of the exercise equipment on a reference line, while the user moves the exercise equipment according to the movement speed guide (Fig. 2 velocity); measuring, by a sensing unit (paras. 19-21 describe optical sensors, position measurement sensors, optical encoders, motor power sensor, user tension sensor, torque/tension strain sensor and/or gauge to measure how much tension/force is being applied to the actuator by the user), a physical movement of the exercise equipment providing resistance to the user, the sensing unit being configured to measure, in real time, at least one of a position, a movement speed, or a movement direction of the exercise equipment providing resistance (Fig. 2 shows velocity); detecting an exercise trace of the user based on the measured physical movement (Fig. 2); generating an objectification index based on exercise records obtained while the user uses the exercise equipment, the objectification index including at least one of weight, a number of repetitions, a number of sets, the exercise trace, a movement speed, or a regularity of repetitions (para. 64: “This may be too heavy as the user may only be able to complete a single set of 10 reps. Instead, an adjustment between 10-15% may be made. For example, if a 10% adjustment is made associated with a 15 rep max, then 75%-10%=65% of the 1 eRM, which is 32.5 lb. The 10 rep suggestion than would be equivalent to the 15 rep max, producing the suggestion that a user do 32 lbs for 10 reps to start.”); updating the estimated PMW based on the objectification index; and updating the target weight of the exercise equipment based on the updated PMW (para. 51: “In one embodiment, an ongoing recalibration of the strength determination is done without requiring the user to repeat the isokinetic seed movements; instead, the user's performance on each movement is used to update a user's strength level determination.”).
Regarding claim 11, wherein the estimating of the PMW comprises estimating a PMW matching the estimated muscle strength value by using a matching table that matches a PMW percentile value of exercise equipment obtained from a population using the exercise equipment that the user intends to use with the preset adult muscle strength percentile value (para. 53: “In the example shown, the machine of FIG. 1 prompts and/or demonstrates to the user how to use the handles and/or attachments (110) to perform an isokinetic seed movement. The machine may manifest three or four isokinetic seed movements for the user to perform. In one embodiment, the machine uses video prompts on a monitor, and for the isokinetic seed movement, the user mimics what they see in the video and are instructed to move the actuator (110) as fast and as powerfully as they possibly can. The machine's resistance dynamically changes to match the user's applied force, while allowing the user to move the resistance at a prescribed constant speed during the concentric phase, establishing for a given speed (210), for example 50 inches/second, a corresponding produced force (218).” The “isokinetic seed movement” represents the maximum force generated by a user, since the instructions are for the user to move the actuator as fast and as powerfully as they possibly can.).
Regarding claim 12, wherein the user data comprises at least some of a user's gender, age, weight, height, BMI, and body fat percentage (para. 49: “FIG. 2 illustrates an example of strength determination based on isokinetic seed movements. FIG. 2 is a two-dimensional with an x-axis along movement velocity (202) and a y-axis along force produced (204) for that movement. For a given movement, using empirical studies one or more theoretical FVPs (206), (208) may be plotted in general for a typical human being in general, or for a typical human being of a given age, sex, and/or other demographic/physical characteristics.”).
Regarding claim 13, wherein the specific muscle strength comprises a grip strength (para. 69: “Force-Time Prediction—For a given movement, over a range of motion and/or over time t, both the 1 eRM, or B, and LVP, or a, may vary. Force-time prediction analysis determines the corresponding variations over time and plots them as a function of index t. This in turn allows a tracking of translation and/or rotation of the actuator (110) to give coaching and correction to the user on form of an entire movement.”).
Regarding claim 14, wherein a target weight of exercise equipment that the user intends to use is automatically set differently depending on the user's exercise purpose received through a user interface (para. 64: “For example, it is determined that a given user has a 1 eRM of 50 lb using the machine in FIG. 1 and the technique described above with isokinetic seed movements. According to a traditional percentage 1 eRM chart, a 10 rep max may use a weight equal to 75% of the 1 eRM, or 37.5 lb. This may be too heavy as the user may only be able to complete a single set of 10 reps. Instead, an adjustment between 10-15% may be made. For example, if a 10% adjustment is made associated with a 15 rep max, then 75%-10%=65% of the 1 eRM, which is 32.5 lb. The 10 rep suggestion than would be equivalent to the 15 rep max, producing the suggestion that a user do 32 lbs for 10 reps to start.”).
Claim(s) 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Belson (US PGPub. 2020/0261771). Belson describes the same invention as claimed, including:
Regarding claim 15, A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium, wherein the computer-readable recording medium stores instructions that cause a computing device to perform a weight exercise guide, the method comprising: calculating, by a muscle strength estimation unit, an estimated muscle strength value obtained by estimating a user's specific muscle strength based on user data (para. 53: “In the example shown, the machine of FIG. 1 prompts and/or demonstrates to the user how to use the handles and/or attachments (110) to perform an isokinetic seed movement. The machine may manifest three or four isokinetic seed movements for the user to perform. In one embodiment, the machine uses video prompts on a monitor, and for the isokinetic seed movement, the user mimics what they see in the video and are instructed to move the actuator (110) as fast and as powerfully as they possibly can. The machine's resistance dynamically changes to match the user's applied force, while allowing the user to move the resistance at a prescribed constant speed during the concentric phase, establishing for a given speed (210), for example 50 inches/second, a corresponding produced force (218).” The “isokinetic seed movement” represents the maximum force generated by a user, since the instructions are for the user to move the actuator as fast and as powerfully as they possibly can.); detecting, by a detection unit, a percentile value to which the estimated muscle strength value belongs among preset adult muscle strength percentile values (paras. 57 and 58: “[0057] With one data point (218) or more (220, 222, 224) data points, a FVP (226) may be estimated for the user. This FVP (226) may intercept the y-axis at point (228), which represents the 1 eRM of the user. [0058] Thus with at least one isokinetic seed movement, and practically with 3-4 reps of an isokinetic seed movement at varying speeds, by comparing an amount of force resisted at each given velocity, extrapolation may permit a slope to be drawn and an 1 eRM determination is made based on the drawn slope.”); estimating, by a PMW estimation unit, a PMW of exercise equipment the user intends to use based on a percentile value to which the estimated muscle strength value belongs, wherein the PMW indicates a muscular strength capable of being exerted by an individual against the resistance of a weight with maximum effort (see Fig. 2); and setting, by an exercise goal setting unit, a target weight of exercise equipment based on the estimated PMW, and displaying the target weight of the exercise equipment on a display (para. 10: “The user's produced force at the prescribed speed is mapped to a predetermined force-velocity profile/plot (“FVP”) to determine strength, for example an estimated one rep maximum (“1 eRM”) for the user for the muscle group associated with the isokinetic seed movement, wherein the 1 eRM is an estimate of the one rep maximum, or how much weight a user could maximally exercise for a given movement for a single cycle, that is without further repetition.” 1eRM is considered the PMW as required by the claim); measuring, by a sensing unit (paras. 19-21 describe optical sensors, position measurement sensors, optical encoders, motor power sensor, user tension sensor, torque/tension strain sensor and/or gauge to measure how much tension/force is being applied to the actuator by the user), a physical movement of the exercise equipment providing resistance to the user, the sensing unit being configured to measure, in real time, at least one of a position, a movement speed, or a movement direction of the exercise equipment providing resistance (Fig. 2, velocity); detecting, by the processor, an exercise trace of the user based on the measured physical movement (Fig. 2); generating, by the processor, an objectification index based on exercise records obtained while the user uses the exercise equipment, the objectification index including at least one of a weight, a number of repetitions, a number of sets, the exercise trace, a movement speed, or a regularity of repetitions (para. 64: “This may be too heavy as the user may only be able to complete a single set of 10 reps. Instead, an adjustment between 10-15% may be made. For example, if a 10% adjustment is made associated with a 15 rep max, then 75%-10%=65% of the 1 eRM, which is 32.5 lb. The 10 rep suggestion than would be equivalent to the 15 rep max, producing the suggestion that a user do 32 lbs for 10 reps to start.”); updating, by a machine learning processing unit, the estimated PMW based on the objectification index; and updating, by the exercise goal setting unit, the target weight of the exercise equipment based on the updated PMW (para. 51: “In one embodiment, an ongoing recalibration of the strength determination is done without requiring the user to repeat the isokinetic seed movements; instead, the user's performance on each movement is used to update a user's strength level determination.”).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding the 101 rejections, applicant argues that the claims now recite sensors tied to an exercise machine and therefore the claims are not directed to mathematical operations. As discussed above, the claims are still considered directed to mathematical operations, as the sensor measurements only serve as inputs to the claimed mathematical operations, and do not meaningfully limit the judicial exception.
Applicant further argues that automatically setting the exercise weight is not a mathematical operation. As discussed in the claim interpretation section of the 101 rejection above, the BRI of automatically setting the exercise weight includes outputting the result of the mathematical operations. Therefore this step is not enough to overcome the finding that the claim is directed to a judicial exception without significantly more.
Applicant further argues that the claim reflects a specific improvement in exercise machines. Examiner notes that the BRI of the claimed process is directed to the mathematical operations of determining the PWM for the user, and the specification does not describe a technical solution to a technical problem in the manner the courts have recognized amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea.
Applicant argues that setting the target weight of the exercise machine automatically may involve the physical change or movement of the exercise machine, however Examiner notes this feature is not described in the Specification in such a way as to establish possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding Belson, Applicant argues that Belson does not show updating the PMW based on a user objectification index. This concept is described in para. 84: “In step 502, the strength determination is updated based at least in part on user performance on a non-isokinetic seed movement.”. Applicant argues that Belson does not disclose the combination of physical measurement via the sensing unit (the sensing unit that generates the data in Fig. 2), objectification index generation including exercise traces and real-time machine learning-based target weight recalibration (paras. 52, 84).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUNDHARA M GANESAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3340. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30AM-5:30PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, LoAn Jimenez can be reached at (571)272-4966. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SUNDHARA M GANESAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784
Prosecution Insights