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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/10/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant has amended claims 1-16 and 18-20. Claims 1-20 are currently being considered. Applicant’s arguments, filed 7/15/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-4, 8-10, and 18-20 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and claims 5-7, 11-17 under 35 U.S.C. 103 and have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Kim et. al. (United States Patent Application Publication US 2023/0081168 A1).
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-4, 8-10, 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loh et. al. (United States Patent Application Publication US 2020/0121987 A1 in view of Kim et. al. (United States Patent Application Publication US 2023/0081168 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Loh et. al. discloses an information processing device, comprising: one or more processors configured to: obtain skeleton capture data regarding a subject generated from an image; calculate a value of an exercise load of the subject based on the skeleton capture data (Loh et. al. see [0014], [0015], [0021], [0052], [0056], Fig. 2, 3, 5, 6, for an exercise supplementary analysis processing unit 312, 543, 610 that performs processing for generating skeletal capture data 200 from images captured by cameras 104a and 104b; and [0024], [0032]-[0036], [0052], [0056], Figure 3, 5, 6 for a calorie calculation processing unit 316, 538, 614 that calculates that calorie consumption corresponding to the “value of the exercise load” of a user on the basis of the exercise of the user, detected by the exercise supplementary analysis processing unit 312, 543, and 610).
However, Loh et. al. fails to disclose sequentially calculate a cumulative exercise load of the subject from a start of a competition based on the calculated value of the exercise load; determine that a break in the competition has occurred; correct the cumulative exercise load in consideration of restoration of a physical condition of the subject during the break in the competition; and continue the sequential calculation of the cumulative exercise load using the corrected cumulative exercise load after the break in the competition.
Kim et. al. teaches sequentially calculate a cumulative exercise load of the subject from a start of a competition based on the calculated value of the exercise load; determine that a break in the competition has occurred; correct the cumulative exercise load in consideration of restoration of a physical condition of the subject during the break in the competition; and continue the sequential calculation of the cumulative exercise load using the corrected cumulative exercise load after the break in the competition (Kim et. al. abstract, [0134]-[0147]: the condition information may include exercise type information reflecting whether the target exercise session is a match session or a training session. The condition information may include information of a length of elapsed time from a previous match session to the target exercise session. [0162]: The system may provide exercise load information by sensing information of a sports player participating in an exercise session through the sensing platform, calculating the exercise load information from the information sensed through the server, and displaying the exercise load information calculated through the terminal. [0234]-[0238], [0250] Figure 8: when a sports player A participates in a specific exercise session A, a sequence of kinematic information for each of the time units for the sports player A may be collected and/or measured. [0257]).
PNG
media_image1.png
555
518
media_image1.png
Greyscale
These features are important to the claimed invention because the exercise load is affected by competition and rest. Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Loh et. al. and Kim et. al. so that the exercise load is counted more accurately.
Regarding claim 2, Loh et. al. further discloses the information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to estimate an exercise mode of the subject from the skeleton capture data, and calculate the value of the exercise load of the subject based on a reference value of an amount of exercise according to the estimated exercise mode (Loh et. al. [0022] describes providing a repetition counting processing unit 314, 536, 612 that identifies the type of exercise being performed by the user by comparing the exercise of the user, acquired from the skeletal capture data, with known joint movements, and then counts the number of times the identified exercise is performed).
Regarding claim 3, Loh et. al. further discloses the information processing device according to claim 2, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to estimate a running speed of the subject as the exercise mode(Loh et. al. [0034] and table 3 cites running (with intensity categories) and jumping as types of exercises performed by a user).
Regarding claim 4, Loh et. al. further discloses the information processing device according to claim 2, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to estimate a jumping motion of the subject as the exercise mode (Loh et. al. [0034] and table 3 cites running (with intensity categories) and jumping as types of exercises performed by a user).
Regarding claim 8, Loh et. al. further discloses the information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to sequentially calculate values of the exercise load for a competitor who is the subject between the start and an end of the competition (Loh et. al. [0026]-[0027] indicates that the exercise data generated during training are measured in real time, the exercise data are stored in a cloud, and the data stored in the cloud are presented to a mobile terminal or the like of the user).
Regarding claim 9, Loh et. al. further discloses the information processing device according to claim 1, further comprising: one or more memories, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to store values, of the cumulative exercise load of the subject, sequentially calculated for the subject in the one or more memories (Loh et. al. [0026]-[0027] indicates that the exercise data generated during training are measured in real time, the exercise data are stored in a cloud, and the data stored in the cloud are presented to a mobile terminal or the like of the user).
Regarding claim 10, Loh et. al. further discloses the information processing device according to claim 1, the one or more processors are further configured to generate presentation information which reflects a value of the cumulative exercise load of the subject (Loh et. al. [0026]-[0027] indicates that the exercise data generated during training are measured in real time, the exercise data are stored in a cloud, and the data stored in the cloud are presented to a mobile terminal or the like of the user).
Regarding claim 18, which is an information processing method, comprising: by an information processing device, which corresponds to the device of claim 1, which the rejection analysis is incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 19, which is a non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon, computer executable instructions, which when executed by an information processing device, cause the information processing device to execute operations, which corresponds to the device of claim 1, which the rejection analysis is incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 20, which is an information analysis system, comprising: an imaging device; and an information processing device including one or more processors, which corresponds to the device of claim 1, which the rejection analysis is incorporated herein.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loh et. al. (United States Patent Application Publication US 2020/0121987 A1) and Kim et. al. (United States Patent Application Publication US 2023/0081168 A1)in further view of "MET Levels of Common Recreational Activities" American College of Sports Medicine. The Compendium of Physical Activities. ACSM Resource Manual 5th Edition, 2006. (Year: 2006).
Regarding claim 5, Loh et. al. further discloses the information processing device according to claim 2 (Loh et. al. [0034] and table 3). However, Loh et. al. fails to disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to estimate a contact of the subject with a person as the exercise mode. American College of Sports Medicine discloses a category related to “football touch/flag”, “football, competitive”, “Judo/karate/taekwondo” which involves “contact with another person”. It would have been obvious for a person skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have easily conceived adding these categories to the exercise categories identified when calculating the calorie consumption in the invention disclosed in Loh et. al. This is important to the claimed invention so that the exercise mode has a quantifiable unit.
Claim(s) 6-7, 11-12, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loh et. al. (United States Patent Application Publication US 2020/0121987 A1) and Kim et. al. (United States Patent Application Publication US 2023/0081168 A1) in further view of Kita (Japanese Patent JP 2017185192 A).
Regarding claim 6, Loh et. al. further discloses the information processing device according to claim 1. However, Loh et. al. fails to disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: obtain weather information at a location of the subject; and correct the value of the exercise load before the cumulative exercise load is sequentially calculated for the subject using the weather information.
Kita teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: obtain weather information at a location of the subject; and correct the value of the exercise load before the cumulative exercise load is sequentially calculated for the subject using the weather information (Kita [0026], [0027] describes an information processing device that provides a user with exercise support, wherein, when the exercise load is calculated, an allowable amount (corresponding to the “offset value”) of the exercise load is corrected in accordance with environmental data (corresponding to the “weather data”) from a second sensor unit 17 and the physical condition (corresponding to the “condition information”) of the user.).
The invention disclosed in Loh et. al. and the invention disclosed in Kita both relate to information processing devices that provide a user with exercise support, and therefore, when calculating the exercise load and managing the data in the invention disclosed in Loh et. al., a person skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have easily conceived further adding features such as those described in Kita, in which the value of the allowable amount of the exercise load is corrected in accordance with environmental data and the physical condition of the user, and a cumulative value of the exercise load is calculated and when the cumulative value exceeds the allowable amount, the user is notified thereof.
Regarding claim 7, Loh et. al. further discloses the information processing device according to claim 1. However, Loh et. al. fails to disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: obtain condition information regarding the subject; and correct the value of the exercise load before the cumulative exercise load is sequentially calculated for the subject using the condition information.
Kita teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: obtain condition information regarding the subject; and correct the value of the exercise load before the cumulative exercise load is sequentially calculated for the subject using the condition information (Kita [0026], [0027] describes an information processing device that provides a user with exercise support, wherein, when the exercise load is calculated, an allowable amount (corresponding to the “offset value”) of the exercise load is corrected in accordance with environmental data (corresponding to the “weather data”) from a second sensor unit 17 and the physical condition (corresponding to the “condition information”) of the user. Kita [0021], [0022], Figure 2a, 2b indicates that when managing the exercise load, a cumulative value of the exercise load is calculated, and when the cumulative value exceeds the allowable amount, a notification is issued to a mobile terminal 1 of the user.).
The invention disclosed in Loh et. al. and the invention disclosed in Kita both relate to information processing devices that provide a user with exercise support, and therefore, when calculating the exercise load and managing the data in the invention disclosed in Loh et. al., a person skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have easily conceived further adding features such as those described in Kita, in which the value of the allowable amount of the exercise load is corrected in accordance with environmental data and the physical condition of the user, and a cumulative value of the exercise load is calculated and when the cumulative value exceeds the allowable amount, the user is notified thereof.
Regarding claim 11, Loh et. al. further discloses the information processing device according to claim 10. However, Loh et. al. fails to disclose wherein the presentation information includes information regarding the cumulative exercise load of the subject from the start of the competition.
Kita teaches wherein the presentation information includes information regarding the cumulative exercise load of the subject from the start of the competition (Kita [0021], [0022], Figure 2a, 2b indicates that when managing the exercise load, a cumulative value of the exercise load is calculated, and when the cumulative value exceeds the allowable amount, a notification is issued to a mobile terminal 1 of the user.).
The invention disclosed in Loh et. al. and the invention disclosed in Kita both relate to information processing devices that provide a user with exercise support, and therefore, when calculating the exercise load and managing the data in the invention disclosed in Loh et. al., a person skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have easily conceived further adding features such as those described in Kita, in which the value of the allowable amount of the exercise load is corrected in accordance with environmental data and the physical condition of the user, and a cumulative value of the exercise load is calculated and when the cumulative value exceeds the allowable amount, the user is notified thereof.
Regarding claim 12, Loh et. al. further discloses the information processing device according to claim 10. However, Loh et. al. fails to disclose wherein the presentation information includes information indicating whether the cumulative exercise load of the subject from the start of the competition is in a high-load state.
Kita teaches wherein the presentation information includes information indicating whether the cumulative exercise load of the subject from the start of the competition is in a high-load state (Kita [0021], [0022], Figure 2a, 2b indicates that when managing the exercise load, a cumulative value of the exercise load is calculated, and when the cumulative value exceeds the allowable amount, a notification is issued to a mobile terminal 1 of the user.).
Regarding claim 16, Loh et. al. discloses the information processing device according to claim 10. However, Loh et. al. fails to disclose wherein the presentation information includes information regarding the cumulative exercise load of the subject from the start of the competition and an offset value given to the value of the cumulative exercise load at the start of the competition.
Kita teaches wherein the presentation information includes information regarding the cumulative exercise load of the subject from the start of the competition and an offset value given to the value of the cumulative exercise load at the start of the competition (Kita [0026], [0027] describes an information processing device that provides a user with exercise support, wherein, when the exercise load is calculated, an allowable amount (corresponding to the “offset value”) of the exercise load is corrected in accordance with environmental data (corresponding to the “weather data”) from a second sensor unit 17 and the physical condition (corresponding to the “condition information”) of the user. Kita [0021], [0022], Figure 2a, 2b indicates that when managing the exercise load, a cumulative value of the exercise load is calculated, and when the cumulative value exceeds the allowable amount, a notification is issued to a mobile terminal 1 of the user.).
The invention disclosed in Loh et. al. and the invention disclosed in Kita both relate to information processing devices that provide a user with exercise support, and therefore, when calculating the exercise load and managing the data in the invention disclosed in Loh et. al., a person skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have easily conceived further adding features such as those described in Kita, in which the value of the allowable amount of the exercise load is corrected in accordance with environmental data and the physical condition of the user, and a cumulative value of the exercise load is calculated and when the cumulative value exceeds the allowable amount, the user is notified thereof.
Claim(s) 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loh et. al. (United States Patent Application Publication US 2020/0121987 A1) and Kim et. al. (United States Patent Application Publication US 2023/0081168 A1) in further view of Aoshima (Japanese Patent JP-2015123156-A).
Regarding claim 13, Loh et. al. further discloses the information processing device according to claim 10. However, Loh et. al. fails to disclose wherein the presentation information includes prediction information regarding the cumulative exercise load of the subject until an end of the competition.
Aoshima teaches wherein the presentation information includes prediction information regarding the cumulative exercise load of the subject until an end of the competition (Aoshima [0064]-[0071] and figure 7, 8 describes an exercise support device that successively calculates and manages the exercise load (the amount of sweating) of a user, wherein the exercise load up to the point of reaching a goal is predicted on the basis of change in the cumulative amount of the exercise load from the start to points X1 and X4).
The invention disclosed in Loh et. al. and the invention disclosed in Aoshima both relate to information processing devices that provide a user with exercise support, and therefore, when managing the exercise load in the invention disclosed in Loh et. al., a person skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have easily conceived further adding a feature such as that described in Aoshima, in which the value of the exercise load up to the end of a competition is predicted on the basis of the exercise load value from the start of the competition up to the current point in time.
Regarding claim 14, Loh et. al. further discloses the information processing device according to claim 13. However, Loh et. al. fails to disclose wherein the prediction information is generated based on an amount of change in the cumulative exercise load of the subject from the start of the competition to present time.
Aoshima teaches wherein the prediction information is generated based on an amount of change in the cumulative exercise load of the subject from the start of the competition to present time (Aoshima [0064]-[0071] and figure 7, 8 describes an exercise support device that successively calculates and manages the exercise load (the amount of sweating) of a user, wherein the exercise load up to the point of reaching a goal is predicted on the basis of change in the cumulative amount of the exercise load from the start to points X1 and X4).
The invention disclosed in Loh et. al. and the invention disclosed in Aoshima both relate to information processing devices that provide a user with exercise support, and therefore, when managing the exercise load in the invention disclosed in Loh et. al., a person skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention could have easily conceived further adding a feature such as that described in Ichikawa, in which the value of the exercise load up to the end of a competition is predicted on the basis of the exercise load value from the start of the competition up to the current point in time.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loh et. al. (United States Patent Application Publication US 2020/0121987 A1) and Kim et. al. (United States Patent Application Publication US 2023/0081168 A1) in further view of Ichikawa (Japanese Patent JP-2016116743-A).
Regarding claim 15, Loh et. al. discloses the information processing device according to claim 13. However, Loh et. al. fails to disclose wherein the prediction information is generated on based on the cumulative exercise load of the subject in a past competition.
Ichikawa teaches wherein the prediction information is generated on based on the cumulative exercise load of the subject in a past competition (Ichikawa [0045]-[0067] and figures 4-6 describes an exercise support device that successively calculates and manages fatigue accumulated by a user while exercising, wherein, when estimating the future degree of fatigue of the user, the degree of fatigue is calculated on the basis of exercise information acquired during similar exercise performed by the user in the past.
The invention disclosed in Loh et. al. and the invention disclosed in Ichikawa both relate to information processing devices that provide a user with exercise support, and therefore, when managing the exercise load in the invention disclosed in Loh et. al., a person skilled in the art could have easily conceived of further adding a feature such as that described in Ichikawa, in which the future degree of fatigue is calculated on the basis of exercise information acquired during similar exercise performed by the user in the past.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loh et. al. (United States Patent Application Publication US 2020/0121987 A1) and Kim et. al. (United States Patent Application Publication US 2023/0081168 A1) in further view of Sinan, Chen et al. “Characterizing Quality of In-home Physical Activities Using Bone-based Human Sensing.” (2020). (Year: 2020).
Regarding claim 17, Loh et. al. further discloses the information processing device according to claim 10. However, Loh et. al. fails to disclose wherein the presentation information includes information regarding a recognition range of the subject.
Chen et. al. teaches wherein the presentation information includes information regarding a recognition range of the subject (Chen et. al. p. 1-6 describes an information processing device comprising a processing unit that acquires an output value (corresponding to the “skeletal capture data” of bone sensing from time-series images acquired from a camera, and assesses the amount of physical activity (corresponding to the “value of the exercise load” from the acquired output value of the bone sensing.
This is important to the claimed invention because it provides information with regards to the information presented including a recognition range of the subject that indicates the various stress the body undergoes during exercise. Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Loh et. al. and the teachings of Chen et. al. because both relate to information processing devices that provide a user with exercise support.
Conclusion
Response to Amendment
Examiner has carefully considered all amendments and conducted an updated search. An updated search revealed new prior art that is used to reject all claims.
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 JESSICA YIFANG LIN whose telephone number is (571)272-6435. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00am-6:15pm, with optional day off.
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, Vu Le can be reached at 571-272-7332. 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.
/JESSICA YIFANG LIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2668 August 20, 2026
/VU LE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2668
Prosecution Insights