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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-19, as filed on 06/13/2024, are currently pending and considered below.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered:
Claims 9-11: “a variable arc length by adjusting the length and height of said curved ramp” (the specifications do not further elaborate how the ramps (110, 210, 310, 350, 410, 450 would either change in length or change in height, further none of the figures show ramps with any structures that would allow for the ramps to change in either height or length).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims listed below are objected to because of the following informalities (appropriate correction is required):
Claim 2: amend to be dependent on claim 1 (currently dependent on itself).
Claims: amend “in an abduction direction” to ---in an abduction direction---.
Claims: amend “in an adduction direction” to ---in an adduction direction---.
Claims 9-11: amend “the length” to ---a length---.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(A)(1) as being anticipated by US 20040242381 A1 (Parmater).
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Parmater discloses a hip rehabilitation device (Figure 1) comprising:
a ramp (rail sets 40, 41) with controlled motion (via central rail support member 13) through a foothold truck (foot rests 22, 23) and track system (rails 11, 12) with adjustable resistance (“when the center support is adjusted up, the sliding resistance is increased. Similarly, when the center support is lowered, the sliding resistance is decreased” Paragraph 6) for strengthening hip flexion and abduction muscles (“This exercise strengthens and tones the gluteus muscles” Paragraph 49; gluteus are included in the hip flexion and abduction muscle grouping).
Regarding Claim 2, Parmater further discloses the device of claim 2 wherein said track system includes a curved ramp (rails 11, 12 are curved) along which said foothold truck travels (see Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 3, Parmater further discloses the device of claim 2 wherein said track system is configured to control the movement of said foothold truck in a direction away from the body's midline in an abduction direction (see Figure 1 wherein the pedals 22, 23 moved laterally away from a centerline of the device wherein the rails are in parallel allowing for movement away from the centerline).
Regarding Claim 4, Parmater further discloses the device of claim 2 wherein said track system is configured to control the movement of said foothold truck in a direction toward the midline of the user's body in an adduction direction (See Figure 1 wherein the pedals 22, 23 move along rails 11, 12 allowing for lateral and medial movements of the pedals 22,23 relative to the centerline).
Regarding Claim 5, Parmater further discloses the device of claim 2 wherein said track system is configured to control the movement of said foothold truck in a direction away from the body's midline in an abduction direction and toward the midline of the user's body in an adduction direction (See Figure 1 wherein the pedals 22, 23 move along rails 11, 12 allowing for lateral and medial movements of the pedals 22,23 relative to the centerline).
Claims 1, 12-14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(A)(1) as being anticipated by US 20140011647 A1 (Lalaoua).
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Lalaoua discloses a hip rehabilitation device (Figure 1) comprising:
a ramp (slide tracks 3 with pedals 4) with controlled motion through a foothold truck (pedals 4 with connecting base 41) and track system (curved slide tracks 3) with adjustable resistance for strengthening hip flexion and abduction muscles (“The O-Ring elastic bands have three different resistance degrees. The user can increase or decrease tension” Paragraph 33).
Regarding Claim 12, Lalaoua further discloses the device of claims 1 wherein said foothold truck rotates in relation to said track system (“tilt in multiple slopes and angle positions from down or up simultaneously” Paragraph 36; said foot pedals 4 rotate about said tracks 3).
Regarding Claim 13, Lalaoua further discloses the device of claims 1 wherein said foothold truck rotates in increment of 15 degrees in relation to said track system (“tilt in multiple slopes and angle positions from down or up simultaneously” Paragraph 36; said foot pedals 4 are capable of rotating in 15-degree increments about respective tracks 3).
Regarding Claim 14, Lalaoua further discloses the device of claims 1 further including sensors that track the movement of said foothold truck (“counting times of repetitive actions. counter device comprises a pair of sensors and an indicator” Paragraph 35).
Regarding Claim 16, Lalaoua further discloses the device of claims 1 further including limit switches that track the movement of said foothold truck (“counter device comprises a pair of sensors and an indicator… … The sensors are connected with the indicator fixed mounted on the top of the central base 1. Once the foot pedal touches the sensor, the indicator will show the times of accumulative actions” Paragraph 35; the sensor functions as a limiter switch to count the passages).
Claims 1, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(A)(1) as being anticipated by US 7090621 B2 (Loane).
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Loane discloses a hip rehabilitation device (Figure 36) comprising:
a ramp (rails 415 with footpad assembly 470) with controlled motion through a foothold truck (footpad assembly 470) and track system (rails 415) with adjustable resistance for hip flexion and abduction muscles (“progressive resistance to the knee, hip and pelvic core musculature” Col. 52, lines 22-23).
PNG
media_image1.png
228
491
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 36
Regarding Claim 17, Loane further discloses the device of claims 1 further including sensors (LB sensor assembly 600 comprising optical sensor unit 601 and sensor carriage wheel 603) located under said ramp that track the movement of said foothold truck (sensor assembly 600 is located below the track, see Figure 36).
Regarding Claim 19, Loane further discloses the device of claims 1 further including limit switches located under said ramp that track the movement of said foothold truck (sensor assembly 600; “The sensing may be accomplished by interruption of an optical sensor” Col. 8, lines 19-20; the optical sensor functions as a switch triggered when the footpad assembly 470 passing above; see Figure 36 wherein the sensors are located below the rail).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20040242381 A1 (Parmater).
Regarding Claims 6-8, Parmater discloses the invention as substantially claimed, see above. Parmater further discloses the device of claim 2 wherein said track system is configured to control the movement of said foothold truck in a direction away from the body's midline in an abduction direction in an arc of 55 degrees and toward the midline of the user's body in an adduction direction in an arc of 55 degrees (See Figure 1 wherein the pedals 22, 23 move along rails 11, 12 allowing for lateral and medial movements of the pedals 22,23 relative to the centerline) and that any degree of concavity may be chosen for the arc (“Any degree of concavity may be chosen with sound engineering judgment including substantially linear rails” Paragraph 46). Parmater does not disclose wherein the track system is configured to control the movement in an arc of 55 degrees.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the device of Parmater to have an arc of 55 degrees since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of the relative dimension of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distant from the prior art device.” In the instant case, the device of Parmater would not operate differently with the claimed arc. Parmater further describes that the concavity (arc) may be chosen with sound engineering. Further, applicant places no criticality on the arc claimed, indicating only that the arc “may be” the claimed degree. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the concavity to be at an arc of 55 degrees in order to allow the user to have larger variable resistance along the rail.
Claims 9-11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being anticipated by US 20040242381 A1 (Parmater) in view of US 20130217551 A1 (Parnell).
Regarding Claims 9-11, Parmater discloses the invention as substantially claimed, see above. Parmater further discloses wherein said track system is configured to control the movement of said foothold truck in a direction away from the body's midline in an abduction direction in a variable arc length by adjusting a height of said curved ramp (“a rail assembly 10 that slopes upward at selectively varying heights, which is supported by a center rail support member 13.” Paragraph 43; assembly 10 is configured to adjust in height moving one end of the rails upwards/downwards to change the height of the rails; this allows for abduction movement of the user) and toward the midline of the user's body in an adduction direction in a variable arc length by adjusting the height of said curved ramp (“a rail assembly 10 that slopes upward at selectively varying heights, which is supported by a center rail support member 13.” Paragraph 43; assembly 10 is configured to adjust in height moving one end of the rails upwards/downwards to change the height of the rails; this allows for adduction movement by the user).
Parmater does not disclose adjusting a length of said curved ramp.
Parnell teaches an analogous exercise device in the same field of endeavor (Figure 11) comprising:
A ramp with a track system (lateral support system 85) and foothold truck (sled assemblies 38), wherein said track system is configured to control the movement of said foothold truck in a direction away from the body's midline in a variable arc length by adjusting the length of said ramp (“telescopic rails 86… …the rail spread may be adjusted for various lengths to be set for the size needed for the actual user” Paragraph 61; rails are configured to adjust in length via telescoping).
PNG
media_image2.png
309
406
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 11
It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the rails to be telescoping for length adjustment, as taught by Parnell in order to allow for adjustment for users of different sizes.
Claims 15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 7090621 B2 (Loane) in view of US 20230103725 A1 (Neuhaus).
Regarding Claims 15 and 18, Loane discloses the inventions as substantially claimed, see above. Loane further discloses (LB sensor assembly 600 comprising optical sensor unit 601 and sensor carriage wheel 603) located under said ramp that track the movement of said foothold truck (sensor assembly 600 is located below the track, see Figure 36). Loane does not disclose the sensors as 9 degrees of movement sensors.
Neuhaus teaches an analogous exercise device in the same field of endeavor solving the same issue of providing a sensor to track motion comprising: A 9 degrees of movement sensor (“one or more inertial measurement units (inertial sensors, accelerometers, gyroscopes, etc.)” Paragraph 54; IMU units are 9 degrees of freedom sensors). It would have been obvious for one skilled in the art at the time of filing to modify the sensor assembly to include a inertial measurement unit in order to provide additional data regarding the motion of the device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY T MOORE whose telephone number is (571)272-0063. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8:00am - 4:00pm EST.
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 on (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.
/ZACHARY T MOORE/Examiner, Art Unit 3784