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 .
Priority
This application is a 371 filing of international application PCT/KR2023/007083, filed on 05/24/2023, and claims the benefit of foreign application KR10-2022-0078387, filed on 06/27/2022.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 08/16/2024 and 06/30/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Par. [0066], line 1, “the manip0ulation” should read ---the manipulation---
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 9, 11-14, and 18-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 6, “the drive motor” should read ---the at least one drive motor---
Claim 1, line 12, “the drive motor” should read ---the at least one drive motor---
Claim 2, line 3, “the drive motor” should read ---the at least one drive motor---
Claim 4, line 4, “the drive motor” should read ---the at least one drive motor---
Claim 4, line 6, “the drive motor” should read ---the at least one drive motor---
Claim 4, line 7, “the drive motor” should read ---the at least one drive motor---
Claim 5, line 3, “the drive motor” should read ---the at least one drive motor---
Claim 9, line 3, “the recognition criterion” should read ---the preset recognition criterion---
Claim 11, lines 5-6, “the load control part controls” should read ---the load control controls---
Claim 11, line 6, “the drive motor” should read ---the at least one drive motor---
Claim 12, line 2, “the load control is recognized” should read ---the load control signal is recognized---
Claim 13, lines 1-2, “the load is to control the drive motor” should read ---the load control controls the drive motor---
Claim 13, line 2, “the drive motor” should read ---the at least one drive motor---
Claim 13, line 4, “the drive motor” should read ---the at least one drive motor---
Claim 14, lines 1-2, “the load control part is to increase of the exercise load” should read ---the load control increases the exercise load---
Claim 14, line 2, “the drive motor” should read ---the at least one drive motor---
Claim 14, lines 3-4, “the load control is the load change” should read ---the load control signal is the preset load change signal---
Claim 18, lines 4-5, “the load control part controls” should read ---the load control controls---
Claim 19, lines 1-2, “the load control is recognized” should read ---the load control signal is recognized---
Claim 20, line 1, “the load is to control” should read ---the load control controls---
Claim 20, lines 5-6, “the basic load” should read ---the preset basic load---
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-20 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 1 recites “an outside” in line 7. It is unclear what the recited outside is referring to (i.e., an outside of the device body or an outside of the at least one drive motor). Claims 2-15 are similarly rejected by virtue of dependency on claim 1.
Claim 8 recites “the surface” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if this limitation is referring to the upper surface of claim 1 or another materially different surface.
Claim 13 recites “the current exercise load” in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 14-15 are similarly rejected by virtue of dependency on claim 13. Any changes to the limitation of claim 13 should be similarly reflected in the limitation “the current exercise load” in line 4 of claim 14.
Claim 16 recites “an outside” in line 5. It is unclear what the recited outside is referring to (i.e., an outside of the device body or an outside of the at least one drive motor). Claims 17-20 are similarly rejected by virtue of dependency on claim 16.
Claim 20 recites “the current exercise load” in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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, 11, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Drayer et al. (US 2024/0189651).
Regarding independent claim 1, Drayer et al. discloses a muscle exercise device (platform-based strength machine, embodiment of Figs. 4A-4E) comprising:
a device body (platform 400) configured to support a user for exercising (illustrated in alternative embodiment in Fig. 1A);
at least one drive motor (475) installed inside the device body and configured to provide an exercise load (par. [0113], “The resistance mechanisms can include an electric motor 475 mounted to the plate 440, and an encoder 474 (or encoders) coupled to the motor or motors 475. As described herein, the motor 475 operates to provide or apply a load to a cable 472 that passes through a cable guide, where the cable extends from the motor 475 and against the load”);
a load transfer unit (cable 472) configured to transfer the exercise load from the drive motor to an outside (par. [0113]);
a touch detection part (inertial measurement units 480) configured to detect a physical touch applied to an upper surface of the device body (par. [0116], “the IMUs can detect the platform 400 is moving, either in one direction, two directions, or in three-dimensional space” which would include movement from physical touch); and
a load control (control system 220) configured to recognize the physical touch as a load control signal when the physical touch satisfies a preset recognition criterion and to control the exercise load of the drive motor by analyzing the load control signal (par. [0126]. “In some embodiments, the control system 220 can adjust an applied load in response to feedback from IMUs, load cells, and/or other sensor information. For example, in response to a detection of improper and/or unsafe use of the platform 400, the control system 220 can perform various mitigation actions, such as action to ramp down the load, eliminate or turn off the load, lock further movement of the cables, shut down the platform 400, and so on”).
PNG
media_image1.png
450
506
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
475
588
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
454
454
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Drayer et al. further discloses wherein the load control signal is determined as a preset emergency brake signal, the load control is to determine the exercise load of the drive motor (see par. [0126]).
Regarding claim 3, Drayer et al. further discloses wherein when the load control signal is recognized at least once, the load control is to determine the load control signal as the emergency brake signal (see par. [0126], response to feedback from IMUs only needs to occur once to alter operation of the drive motors).
Regarding claim 4, Drayer et al. further discloses a user input configured to input a target load (par. [0349], “the user controls include a button configured to control a weight level applied to the one or more handles”),
wherein the load control controls the drive motor so that the exercise load is output by being changed to the target load which is input through the user input (via motor drivers 494 of control system 220), and reduces the exercise load of the drive motor when the emergency brake signal is recognized in a process in which the exercise load of the drive motor is reaching the target load and in a state in which the exercise load has reached the target load (the IMUs 480 are capable of recognizing improper use of the platform 400 while the drive motor is in the process of changing the exercise load to reach the target load or when the target load is reached, and the control system 220 can eliminate or turn off the load or shut down the platform based on detecting improper use; see pars. [0118], [0126], [0129]).
Regarding claim 5, Drayer et al. further discloses further discloses wherein when the emergency brake signal is recognized, the load control reduces the exercise load of the drive motor to a preset basic load (see par. [0126]; also par. [0128], “In some embodiments, the control system 220 can provide a weight control or balancing feature based on data received from the IMUs 280, load cells, and/or other sensors of the platform 110, 210, or 400 and/or the attachments 120 or 230. For example, the control system 220 can automatically adjust loads based on a desired function and/or detected movement of the attachments 230 and/or coupled cables” and par. [0129], “The control system 220 can automatically decrease loads when failure is detected and/or when a spotter is desired. Conversely, the control system 220 can automatically increase loads based on a detected ease of exercise performance by the user (e.g., an auto-load feature or strength detection). In some cases, the control system 220 can increase, decrease, or otherwise tailor the load(s) to a user, an exercise, and/or to a functionality, in various weight increments (+/−1 pound or kilogram, +/−5 pounds, and so on)”).
Regarding claim 6, Drayer et al. further discloses wherein the touch detection part comprises a vibration detection (inertial measurement units 480) installed inside the device body and configured to detect a vibration generated by the physical touch (par. [0116], “The platform 400 can also include various sensors, such as IMUs (inertial measurement units) 480 disposed at different locations within the platform 400” and “the IMUs can detect the platform 400 is moving, either in one direction, two directions, or in three-dimensional space” which includes movement caused by vibration generated by physical touch to the platform).
Regarding claim 7, Drayer et al. further discloses wherein the vibration detection comprises an inertial measurement unit (IMU) sensor (480; see par. [0116]).
Regarding claim 11, Drayer et al. further discloses a user input configured to input a target load (par. [0349], “the user controls include a button configured to control a weight level applied to the one or more handles”),
wherein when it is determined that the load control signal is a preset exercise initiation signal while a preset exercise preparation condition is recognized (par. [0128], “the control system 220 can provide a weight control or balancing feature based on data received from the IMUs 280, load cells, and/or other sensors of the platform 110, 210, or 400 and/or the attachments 120 or 230. For example, the control system 220 can automatically adjust loads based on a desired function and/or detected movement of the attachments 230 and/or coupled cables”), the load control part controls the drive motor so that the exercise load is output by being changed to the target load which is input through the user input (see par. [0126] and par. [0129], “the control system 220 can increase, decrease, or otherwise tailor the load(s) to a user, an exercise, and/or to a functionality, in various weight increments (+/−1 pound or kilogram, +/−5 pounds, and so on). For example, the control system 220 can tailor or control an applied load to mimic a burnout (e.g., a burnout mode), lifting with chains (e.g., a chains mode), eccentric-focused movements (e.g., an eccentric mode), concentric-focused movements (e.g., a concentric mode), and/or other exercise modes”).
Regarding independent claim 16, Drayer et al. discloses an exercise device (platform-based strength machine, embodiment of Figs. 4A-4E) comprising:
a device body (platform 400);
a drive motor (475) configured to provide an exercise load (par. [0113], “The resistance mechanisms can include an electric motor 475 mounted to the plate 440, and an encoder 474 (or encoders) coupled to the motor or motors 475. As described herein, the motor 475 operates to provide or apply a load to a cable 472 that passes through a cable guide, where the cable extends from the motor 475 and against the load”);
a load transfer unit (cable 472) configured to transfer the exercise load from the drive motor to an outside (par. [0113]);
a touch detection (inertial measurement units 480) configured to detect a physical touch applied to an upper surface of the device body (par. [0116], “the IMUs can detect the platform 400 is moving, either in one direction, two directions, or in three-dimensional space” which would include movement from physical touch); and
a load control (control system 220) configured to recognize the physical touch as a load control signal when the physical touch satisfies a preset recognition criterion and to control the exercise load of the drive motor by analyzing the load control signal (par. [0126]. “In some embodiments, the control system 220 can adjust an applied load in response to feedback from IMUs, load cells, and/or other sensor information. For example, in response to a detection of improper and/or unsafe use of the platform 400, the control system 220 can perform various mitigation actions, such as action to ramp down the load, eliminate or turn off the load, lock further movement of the cables, shut down the platform 400, and so on”).
Regarding claim 17, Drayer et al. further discloses wherein the load control signal is determined as a preset emergency brake signal, the load control is to determine the exercise load of the drive motor (see par. [0126]).
Regarding claim 18, Drayer et al. further discloses a user input configured to input a target load (par. [0349], “the user controls include a button configured to control a weight level applied to the one or more handles”),
wherein when it is determined that the load control signal is a preset exercise initiation signal while a preset exercise preparation condition is recognized (par. [0128], “the control system 220 can provide a weight control or balancing feature based on data received from the IMUs 280, load cells, and/or other sensors of the platform 110, 210, or 400 and/or the attachments 120 or 230. For example, the control system 220 can automatically adjust loads based on a desired function and/or detected movement of the attachments 230 and/or coupled cables”), the load control part controls the drive motor so that the exercise load is output by being changed to the target load which is input through the user input (see par. [0126] and par. [0129], “the control system 220 can increase, decrease, or otherwise tailor the load(s) to a user, an exercise, and/or to a functionality, in various weight increments (+/−1 pound or kilogram, +/−5 pounds, and so on). For example, the control system 220 can tailor or control an applied load to mimic a burnout (e.g., a burnout mode), lifting with chains (e.g., a chains mode), eccentric-focused movements (e.g., an eccentric mode), concentric-focused movements (e.g., a concentric mode), and/or other exercise modes”).
Claims 1-3, 5, 8-9, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lemos et al. (US 2014/0228175).
Regarding independent claim 1, Lemos et al. discloses a muscle exercise device (Figs. 22-25) comprising:
a device body (rack system 2400 with platform, weight system 2200, and cable carriage system 2300) configured to support a user for exercising;
at least one drive motor (2312) installed inside the device body (motor 2312 installed inside cable carriage system 2300, see Fig. 23) and configured to provide an exercise load (see par. [0091], motor 2312 decreases or increases slack in weight-bearing cable 2305/2405 as the user exercises to maintain or release the tension or load on lifting bar 2404);
a load transfer unit (weight-bearing cable 2305/2405) configured to transfer the exercise load from the drive motor to an outside (see par. [0091]);
a touch detection part configured to detect a physical touch applied to an upper surface of the device body (par. [0095], “a pressure sensor pad may be positioned on a platform on which the user stands during exercise that the user can step on to generate a signal to the electronic system to disengage the motor from the screw member”); and
a load control (electronic system, see par. [0095]) configured to recognize the physical touch as a load control signal when the physical touch satisfies a preset recognition criterion and to control the exercise load of the drive motor by analyzing the load control signal (par. [0095], “The release switch, sensor, or lever may be engaged with motor 2312 and/or screw member 2311, and when triggered (e.g. by the foot of a user in an emergency situation) may disengage the motor 2312 from the screw member 2311, allowing the screw member to rotate freely, thereby allowing the cable carriage to rapidly move toward an end of the lever member and creating slack in the weight-bearing cable”).
PNG
media_image4.png
312
592
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
406
574
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Lemos et al. further discloses wherein the load control signal is determined as a preset emergency brake signal, the load control is to determine the exercise load of the drive motor (see par. [0095]).
Regarding claim 3, Lemos et al. further discloses wherein when the load control signal is recognized at least once, the load control is to determine the load control signal as the emergency brake signal (see par. [0095]).
Regarding claim 5, Lemos et al. further discloses wherein when the emergency brake signal is recognized, the load control reduces the exercise load of the drive motor to a preset basic load (the Office notes “a preset basic load” is broad, and therefore the electronic system causing the motor 2312 to disengage from the screw member 2311, and therefore provide no tension in the weight bearing cable 2305/2405, the lack of tension represents a preset basic load of zero).
Regarding claim 8, Lemos et al. further discloses wherein the physical touch is generated by foot tapping while a user is on the surface of the device body (par. [0095], user steps on pressure sensor pad).
Regarding claim 9, Lemos et al. further discloses wherein when an intensity of the physical touch is greater than or equal to a preset reference intensity, the load control determines that the recognition criterion is satisfied (see par. [0095], where no user stepping on pressure sensor pad is the preset reference intensity and a user stepping on the pressure sensor pad creates an intensity greater than the preset reference intensity).
Regarding independent claim 16, Lemos et al. discloses an exercise device (Figs. 22-25) comprising:
a device body (rack system 2400 with platform, weight system 2200, and cable carriage system 2300);
a drive motor (2312) configured to provide an exercise load (see par. [0091], motor 2312 decreases or increases slack in weight-bearing cable 2305/2405 as the user exercises to maintain or release the tension or load on lifting bar 2404);
a load transfer unit (weight-bearing cable 2305/2405) configured to transfer the exercise load from the drive motor to an outside (see par. [0091]);
a touch detection configured to detect a physical touch applied to an upper surface of the device body (par. [0095], “a pressure sensor pad may be positioned on a platform on which the user stands during exercise that the user can step on to generate a signal to the electronic system to disengage the motor from the screw member”); and
a load control (electronic system, see par. [0095]) configured to recognize the physical touch as a load control signal when the physical touch satisfies a preset recognition criterion and to control the exercise load of the drive motor by analyzing the load control signal (par. [0095], “The release switch, sensor, or lever may be engaged with motor 2312 and/or screw member 2311, and when triggered (e.g. by the foot of a user in an emergency situation) may disengage the motor 2312 from the screw member 2311, allowing the screw member to rotate freely, thereby allowing the cable carriage to rapidly move toward an end of the lever member and creating slack in the weight-bearing cable”).
Regarding claim 17, Lemos et al. further discloses wherein the load control signal is determined as a preset emergency brake signal, the load control is to determine the exercise load of the drive motor (see par. [0095]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lemos et al. (US 2014/0228175) and further in view of Rubin et al. (US Pat. 11,123,609).
Regarding claim 10, Lemos et al. does not teach wherein the load control analyzes the load control signal based on at least one of a number of times of successive occurrences of the load control signal and a pattern of the load control signal.
Rubin et al., in the same field of endeavor with regards to exercise equipment comprising a touch detection part configured to detect a physical touch and a control for controlling operation of an exercise device, teaches measuring a series of double- or triple-taps on a surface of exercise equipment to control a function of the exercise equipment (Col. 21, lines 37-40, “the user may “double-tap” or “triple-tap” a portion of the exercise platform while standing on the exercise platform to wake the exercise platform and transition from the Home Sleep state 1202.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the touch detection and load control of Lemos et al. to respond to a pattern that corresponds to a series of successive taps/load control signals by the user, as is similarly taught by Rubin et al., for the purpose of preventing accidental singular engagement with the touch detection part from disengaging the motor of Lemos et al.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-15 and 19-20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 12, the prior art of record fails to disclose or reasonably suggest a muscle exercise device in combination with all of the structural and functional limitations, and further comprising wherein when the load control signal is recognized twice in succession, the load control determines the load control signal as the exercise initiation signal.
Regarding claim 13, the prior art of record fails to disclose or reasonably suggest a muscle exercise device in combination with all of the structural and functional limitations, and further comprising wherein the load control controls the drive motor so that the exercise load reaches the target load from a preset basic load according to the exercise initiation signal, and changes the current exercise load which is output from the drive motor to the target load when it is determined that the load control signal is a preset load change signal while the exercise load reaches the target load from the basic load. Claims 14 and 15 depend from claim 13 and are indicated as allowable subject matter for the same reasons as claim 13.
Regarding claim 19, the prior art of record fails to disclose or reasonably suggest an exercise device in combination with all of the structural and functional limitations, and further comprising wherein when the load control signal is recognized twice in succession, the load control determines the load control signal as the exercise initiation signal. Claim 20 depends from claim 19 and is indicated as allowable subject matter for the same reasons as claim 19.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 for additional pertinent prior art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHLEEN FISK whose telephone number is (571)272-1042. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-4PM M-F (Central).
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.
/KATHLEEN M FISK/Examiner, Art Unit 3784