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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea or mental) without significantly more.
Independent Claim 1 recites:
1. An electronic device comprising: at least one processor (additional element analyzed under step 2B) comprising processing circuitry (additional element under step 2B); and memory (additional element analyzed under step 2B) storing instructions that when executed by the at least one processor individually and/or collectively, cause the electronic device to at least: determine a distance from a first part of a body of a user to a second part of a lower arm of the user based on length information of a cable (step 2A, prong 1: abstract idea, mental process, one can determine a distance and length in their mind) generated by a first sensor (additional element analyzed under step 2B) proximate at least a part of the body of the user, determine a first rotation angle of the lower arm in a three-dimensional space based on rotation information (step 2A, prong 1: mental process, one can determine rotation angle in one's mind) generated by a second sensor (additional element analyzed under step 2B) attached proximate to the second part, determine a second rotation angle of an upper arm in the three-dimensional space based on the distance from the first part to the second part and the first rotation angle of the lower arm (step 2A, prong 1: mental process, one can determine rotation angle in one's mind), determine a position of the upper arm and a position of the lower arm in the three-dimensional space based on the first rotation angle of the lower arm and the second rotation angle of the upper arm (step 2A, prong 1:mental process, one can determine an arm position in one's mind), and determine an arm posture of the user based on the position of the upper arm and the position of the lower arm (step 2A, prong 1:mental process, one can determine arm posture in one's mind).
Independent Claim 13 recites:
13. A method of determining an arm posture of a user of a wearable apparatus, the method comprising: determining a distance from a first part of a body of the user to a second part of a lower arm of the user based on length information of a cable (step 2A, prong 1: abstract idea, mental process, one can determine a distance and length in their mind) generated by a first sensor (additional element analyzed under step 2B) arranged on at least a part of the body of the user; determining a first rotation angle of the lower arm in a three-dimensional space based on rotation information (step 2A, prong 1: abstract idea, mental process, one can determine a rotation angle in their mind) generated by a second sensor (additional element analyzed under step 2B) attached to the second part; determining a second rotation angle of an upper arm in the three-dimensional space based on the distance from the first part to the second part and the first rotation angle of the lower arm (step 2A, prong 1: abstract idea, mental process, one can determine a rotation angle in their mind); determining a position of the upper arm and a position of the lower arm in the three-dimensional space based on the first rotation angle of the lower arm and the second rotation angle of the upper arm (step 2A, prong 1: abstract idea, mental process, one can determine a arm position in their mind); and determining the arm posture based on the position of the upper arm and the position of the lower arm (step 2A, prong 1: abstract idea, mental process, one can determine an arm posture in their mind).
Independent Claim 14 recites:
14. A wearable device comprising: a first sensor (additional element analyzed under step 2B) connected to a cable (additional element under step 2B); at least one processor (additional element analyzed under step 2B) comprising processing circuitry (additional element analyzed under step 2B); and memory (additional element analyzed under step 2B) storing instructions that when executed by the at least one processor individually and/or collectively, cause the electronic device to at least: determine a distance from a first part of a body of a user to a second part of a lower arm of the user based on length information of the cable (step 2A, prong 1: abstract idea, mental process, one can determine a distance in their mind) generated by the first sensor arranged on at least a part of the body of the user, determine a first rotation angle of the lower arm in a three-dimensional space based on rotation information (step 2A, prong 1: abstract idea, mental process, one can determine a rotation angle in their mind) generated by a second sensor (additional element analyzed under step 2B) attached to the second part, determine a second rotation angle of an upper arm in the three-dimensional space based on the distance from the first part to the second part and the first rotation angle of the lower arm (step 2A, prong 1: abstract idea, mental process, one can determine a rotation angle in their mind), determine a position of the upper arm and a position of the lower arm in the three-dimensional space based on the first rotation angle of the lower arm and the second rotation angle of the upper arm (step 2A, prong 1: abstract idea, mental process, one can determine an arm position in their mind), and determine an arm posture of the user based on the position of the upper arm and the position of the lower arm (step 2A, prong 1: abstract idea, mental process, one can determine an arm posture in their mind).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the above limitations in bold analyzed under step 2A appear to be directed to mental processes and/or abstract idea related to certain methods of human activity because the limitations concern data collection, data analysis and determining the results of data analysis which could be done mentally or by hand with pen and paper.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because:
In re-evaluating the additional elements identified in the claims above, the claims require the additional elements of: "at least one processor", "memory", "processing circuitry", "first sensor", "second sensor", which are additional elements that merely recite the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely includes instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea.
The additional elements do not amount to a practical application because the limitations
appear to be extra solution activity where data to be analyzed is obtained by the abstract idea or mental process.
The additional elements appear to be routine and conventional in the art as exhibited by Applicant’s description:
1) The “processor” to include processing circuitry to perform various functions to execute program instructions as described on page 8, line 24 – page 9, line 10; and page 10, line 20 – page 11, line 8.
2) The “memory” including volatile or non-volatile memory as described on page 11, lines 9-12.
3) The "first sensor" and "second sensor" include a sensor circuit that includes an encoder, position sensor, biometric sensor, temperature sensor, proximity sensor, IMU to measure motion of a user as described on page 9, lines 11-24.
Accordingly, in light of Applicant’s specification, the claimed terms "at least one processor", "memory", "processing circuitry", "first sensor", "second sensor", are reasonably construed as generic computing devices and sensors. Like SAP America vs Investpic, LLC (Federal Circuit 2018), it is clear, from the claims themselves and the specification, that these limitations require no improved computer resources, just already available technology, with their already available basic functions, to use as tools in executing the claimed process. See MPEP 2106.05(f). Moreover, the above-identified abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application in accordance with MPEP 2106.04(d) because the claimed electronic device and method merely implements the above-identified abstract idea (e.g., mental process and certain method of organizing human activity) using rules (e.g., computer instructions) executed by a computer (e.g., the "at least one processor", "memory", "processing circuitry", "first sensor", "second sensor" as claimed). In other words, these claims are merely directed to an abstract idea with additional generic computer elements and sensors which do not add a meaningful limitation to the abstract idea because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer according to MPEP 2106.05(f).
Taking the additional elements individually and in combination, the additional elements do not provide significantly more. Specifically, when viewed individually, the above-identified additional elements in independent Claims 1, 13, and 14 (and their dependent claims) do not add significantly more because they are simply an attempt to limit the abstract idea to a particular technological environment according to MPEP 2106.05(h). When viewed as a combination, these above-identified additional elements simply instruct the practitioner to implement the claimed functions with well-understood, routine and conventional activity specified at a high level of generality in a particular technological environment according to MPEP 2106.05(h). When viewed as whole, the above-identified additional elements do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself according to MPEP 2106.04(d)(2) and 2106.05(e). Moreover, neither the general computer elements nor any other additional element adds meaningful limitations to the abstract idea because these additional elements represent insignificant extra-solution activity according to MPEP 2106.05(g). As such, there is no inventive concept sufficient to transform the claimed subject matter into a patent-eligible application as required by MPEP 2106.05.
Dependent claims 2-12 and 15-20 include limitations that either further define the abstract idea (and thus don’t make the abstract idea any less abstract) or amount to no more than generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use because they are merely incidental or token additions to the claims that do not alter or affect how the claimed functions/steps are performed.
Accordingly, as indicated above, each of the above-identified claims recites an abstract idea according to MPEP 2106.04(d) or mental process as in MPEP 2106.04(a).
Therefore, for at least the above reasons, none of the Claims 1-20 amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Accordingly, Claims 1-20 are not patent eligible and are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
References Cited
The closest prior art to Park et al. (US Pat. No. 12,151,134) teaches a wearable device having a cable and sensors attachable to different parts of a user’s arm, but fails to teach determining arm posture of a user by determining a distance from a first part of a body of a user to a second part of a lower arm of the user based on length information of the cable generated a the first sensor arranged on at least a part of the body of the user, determining a first rotation angle of the lower arm in a three-dimensional space based on rotation information generated by a second sensor attached to the second part, determining a second rotation angle of an upper arm in the three-dimensional space based on the distance from the first part to the second part and the first rotation angle of the lower arm, de determining a position of the upper arm and a position of the lower arm in the three-dimensional space based on the first rotation angle of the lower arm and the second rotation angle of the upper arm, and determining an arm posture of the user based on the position of the upper arm and the position of the lower arm.
PNG
media_image1.png
554
638
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW S LO whose telephone number is (571)270-1702. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon. - Fri. (9:30 am - 5:30 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, 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ANDREW S LO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784