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 § 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 - 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1: Is the claimed invention a statutory category of invention?
Claims 1 and 7 are directed to a method / system for lumbar-pelvic training (Step 1, Yes).
Step 2A, Prong 1: Does the claim recite an abstract idea?
The limitation of steps: … a sensing unit configured to detect a user's movement changes in real time to generate at least one movement information; a processing unit configured to acquire and analyze the movement information, and generate at least one control signal; a feedback unit configured to receive the control signal and provide at least one real-time feedback for the user based on said control signal; and a display unit configured to display the real-time feedback as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for a sensing unit, a processing unit, a feedback unit and a display unit. The claimed method akin to mental process of observations, evaluations, and judgements of a human physical therapist. The mere nominal recitation of a processing unit performing these steps does not take the claim limitation outside of the mental processes grouping. Thus, the claim recites a mental process (Step 2A, Prong 1: yes).
Step 2A, Prong 2: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
Per the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, if a claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application of that exception, a claim is not "directed to" a judicial exception. Alternatively, a claim that does not integrate a recited judicial exception into a practical application is directed to the exception. Evaluating whether a claim integrates an abstract idea into a practical application is performed by a) identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the abstract idea, and b) evaluating those additional elements individual and in combination to determine whether they integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, using one or more of the considerations laid out by the Supreme Court and the Federal Circuit. Exemplary considerations indicative that an additional element (or combination of elements) may have or has not been integrated into a practical application are set forth in the 2019 PEG
With respect to the instant claims, claim 1 and 7 recite a sensing unit, a processing unit, a feedback unit and a display unit. It is particularly noted that the use of a processing unit "as a tool" to perform an abstract method and component for sensing, feedback and display unit that only amount to extra solution activity are indicated in the 2019 PEG as examples that an additional element has not been integrated into a practical application. Even in combination, the recited additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits, such as an improvement to a computing system, on practicing the abstract idea (STEP 2A, Prong 2: NO).
Step 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
Claim 1 and 7 recite a sensing unit, a processing unit, a feedback unit and a display unit set forth above for Step 2A, Prong 2. Regarding these limitations: Applicant's specification describes these features in generic manner "… the sensory unit 110 comprises at least one inertial measurement unit (IMU) sensor”; “the processing unit 120 can be various processors, central processing units, microprocessors or other computing devices”; “said display unit 140 comprises a screen. The visual real-time feedback is displayed on the screen and the user can further adjust their posture according to the feedback through the screen”; “the feedback unit 130 further comprises a sound emitter or light emitter” in the Applicant’s published application, para. [0027] – [0032]). There is no indication in the Specification that Applicants have achieved an advancement or improvement in computer for providing lumbar-pelvic training. Dependent claims 2 – 6 and 8 – 13 inherit the deficiencies of their respective parent claims through their dependencies and do not recite additional limitations sufficient to direct the claims to more than the claimed abstract idea, and are thus rejected for the same reasons.
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 (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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 – 7 and 9 – 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by Chang et al. (US 2013/0207889 A1).
Re claims 1, 7:
Chang teaches 1. A lumbar-pelvic training system (Chang, Abstract), comprising:
a sensing unit configured to detect a user's movement changes in real time to generate at least one movement information (Chang, Abstract, “provides real-time feedback to the user based on the user's real-time posture”; [0044], “It should be noted that the sensor can be attached to the user's trunk, for example along the cervical, thoracic, lumbar, or sacral spine as noted, or on anterior surface of the trunk”; [0042], “Wireless communication module 404 synchronizes user data ( e.g., postural descriptions, pelvic tilt angles, determined movement states, state changes, and/or raw accelerometer data”);
a processing unit configured to acquire and analyze the movement information, and generate at least one control signal (Chang, [0030], “a microprocessor that analyzes directional movement data from the accelerometer … the microprocessor can analyze accelerometer data indicative of a user's motion in real-time to determine a user's movement state (e.g., standing, sitting, lying, running, or walking) and assess the user's posture in that movement state”);
a feedback unit configured to receive the control signal and provide at least one real-time feedback for the user based on said control signal (Chang, Abstract, “then provides real-time feedback to the user based on the user's real-time posture”; fig. 4, “feedback”; fig. 6); and a display unit configured to display the real-time feedback (Chang, fig. 4 and fig. 6; [0176], “convey postural feedback to the user. The animated graphic is an avatar, an abstracted real-time animated character that reflects the movement and posture of the user in real-time”; Abstract).
7. A lumbar-pelvic training method (Chang, Abstract) comprising the following steps:
(a) configuring a sensing unit on or corresponding to an user (Chang, Abstract, “provides real-time feedback to the user based on the user's real-time posture”; [0044], “It should be noted that the sensor can be attached to the user's trunk, for example along the cervical, thoracic, lumbar, or sacral spine as noted, or on anterior surface of the trunk”; [0042], “Wireless communication module 404 synchronizes user data ( e.g., postural descriptions, pelvic tilt angles, determined movement states, state changes, and/or raw accelerometer data”);
(b) detecting the user's movement changes to generate at least one movement information via the sensing unit (Chang, Abstract, “provides real-time feedback to the user based on the user's real-time posture”; [0044], “It should be noted that the sensor can be attached to the user's trunk, for example along the cervical, thoracic, lumbar, or sacral spine as noted, or on anterior surface of the trunk”; [0042], “Wireless communication module 404 synchronizes user data ( e.g., postural descriptions, pelvic tilt angles, determined movement states, state changes, and/or raw accelerometer data”);
(c) acquiring and analyzing the movement information to generate at least one control signal via a processing unit (Chang, [0030], “a microprocessor that analyzes directional movement data from the accelerometer … the microprocessor can analyze accelerometer data indicative of a user's motion in real-time to determine a user's movement state (e.g., standing, sitting, lying, running, or walking) and assess the user's posture in that movement state”);
(d) receiving the control signal and providing at least one real-time feedback for the user based on said control signal via a feedback unit (Chang, Abstract, “then provides real-time feedback to the user based on the user's real-time posture”; fig. 4, “feedback”; fig. 6);
(e) displaying the real-time feedback via a display unit (Chang, fig. 4 and fig. 6; [0176], “convey postural feedback to the user. The animated graphic is an avatar, an abstracted real-time animated character that reflects the movement and posture of the user in real-time”; Abstract).
Re claim 2:
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the sensing unit comprises at least one inertial measurement unit (IMU) sensor (Chang, [0013]).
Re claim 3:
3. The system of claim 1, wherein the movement information comprises a lumbar-pelvic angle (Chang, [0042]; [0076]).
Re claim 4:
4. The system of claim 1, further comprising a memory unit in communication with the processing unit, configured to store the user's movement (Chang, [0038]).
Re claim 5:
5. The system of claim 1, wherein the display unit comprises a screen (Chang, [0031]).
Re claim 6:
6. The system of claim 5, wherein the real-time feedback comprises a visual movement guidance (Chang, [0159]; fig. 2; [0159]).
Re claim 9:
9. The method of claim 8, wherein the user's movement is a whole-body movement or a partial-body movement (Chang, fig. 2 and fig. 5 show a whole-body pasture).
Re claim 10:
10. The method of claim 7, wherein the movement information is a lumbar-pelvic angle (Chang, [0042]; [0076]).
Re claims 11 – 13:
11. The method of claim 10, wherein analyzing the movement information to generate the control signal in step (c) is determined by comparing the movement information to a lumbar-pelvic angle threshold range. 12. The method of claim 11, wherein the movement information is within the lumbar-pelvic angle threshold range, and then a positive real-time feedback is provided. 13. The method of claim 11, wherein the movement information falls outside the lumbar-pelvic angle threshold range, and then a negative real-time feedback is provided (Chang, [0016]; [0153], “When the user is sitting, good posture is defined as a pelvic tilt angle of +/-10° of the average pelvic angle captured while walking. Poor sitting posture is defined as a pelvic tilt angle greater than +/-10° of the average pelvic angle captured while walking”; [0159], “indicating the user's posture, the avatar displays emotive feedback by, for example, assuming facial expressions and colors associated with good or bad posture”; [0163] – [0164]).
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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang et al. (US 2013/0207889 A1) in view of Duenas (US 2023/0211204 A1).
Re claim 8:
Chang teaches user’s movement includes running, walking, standing, sitting, jumping, squatting, and lying (Chang, [0075]). However, Chang does not explicitly disclose single-leg squat exercise. Duenas teaches an invention related to fitness and rehabilitation equipment in particular, the present disclosure is directed to a device for performing single or double leg squat exercises to ensure spinal fitness and rehabilitation (Duenas, Abstract). Duenas teaches 8. The method of claim 7, wherein the user's movement includes single-leg bridge exercise, cat and dog exercise, lateral slide exercise, single-leg squat exercise, or combinations thereof (Duenas, [0002]; [0005]). Therefore, in view of Duenas, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method described in Chang, by providing the single-leg squat as taught by Duenas, since single or double leg squat exercises to ensure spinal fitness and rehabilitation (Duenas, [0002]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACK YIP whose telephone number is (571)270-5048. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM 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, XUAN THAI can be reached at (571) 272-7147. 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.
/JACK YIP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights