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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-3 and 6-11 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-3 and 6-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cardona et al. (hereinafter Cardona – US Doc. No. 20190118066) in view of Bergmann-Good et al. (hereinafter Bergmann-Good – US Doc. No. 20250135287) and further in view of Schindler (US Doc. No. 20190262664).
Regarding claim 1, Cardon discloses a method of controlling a system having a communicable smart home mat (Figure 2, element 214), the method comprising: capturing an image of a user through a camera of a television (TV) (see paragraph 0032 – note the various different cameras and that the cameras can be mounted anywhere within the system which would include in the UI 212; see also paragraph 0035 – note that the UI 212 can be a television); outputting graphic images related to a virtual exercise environment to guide the user positioned on the smart home mat through a display of the TV (see paragraph 0035 – note that the UI 212 provides real-time feedback); and controlling the graphic images related to the virtual exercise environment to be changed based on at least one of information on exercise amounts of the user or information on a health status of the user (see paragraphs 0041-0042).
Bergmann-Good discloses an exercise device including a display (Figure 13, element 1204), a camera (see paragraph 0177), and a smart mat (Figure 13, element 1210) wherein an avatar of the user is generated and displayed (see avatar [unnumbered] as shown in the smart mirror; see also paragraph 0165 – note the avatar is created to be displayed to the user).
Schindler discloses a method of creating a customized adaptive workout routine wherein a camera captures an image of the user (Figure 1, elements 102-104) and then displays an image of the user [read: avatar] then creatures a workout routine for the user (Figure 1, element 106) and wherein the user may further modify the image for which the device then interprets the modifications goal information and creates a new workout routine based on the modified image [read: goal information] (see paragraph 0042).
It would have been obvious to combine the fitness system as disclosed by Cardona with the exercise device including generation and display of a user avatar as disclosed by Bergmann-Good and the workout routine generation based on the user modifying an image as disclosed by Schindler, the combination yielding predictable results and no more than one of ordinary skill in the art would expect from such an arrangement and to allow the user to user imagery to indicate goal information for creating a more customized user-friendly workout routine.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Cardona, Bergmann-Good, and Schindler discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 as discussed in the claim 1 rejection above. Cardona further discloses that the information on the exercise amounts of the user is determined based on at least one of a foot pressure or foot speed of the user recognized by the smart home mat (see paragraph 0041 – note the use of pressure data from the pressure sensors in the mat).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Cardona, Bergmann-Good, and Schindler discloses all of the limitations of claim 2 as discussed in the claim 2 rejection above. Cardona further discloses that the smart home mat comprises at least one of a cover film, a ground electrode, foam, adhesive tape, or a sensor pattern (Figure 2, elements 236-238 – note that the 4 sensors comprise a sensor pattern).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Cardona, Bergmann-Good, and Schindler discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 as discussed in the claim 1 rejection above. Cardona further discloses that the information on the health status of the user is determined based on at least one of a heart rate, a blood pressure, or a blood sugar recognized by a wearable device worn by the user (see paragraph 0050 – note that heart rate is monitored).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Cardona, Bergmann-Good, and Schindler discloses all of the limitations of claim 6 as discussed in the claim 6 rejection above. Cardona further discloses that based on the information on the health status of the user corresponds to a first level, displaying a graphic image guiding the user to change an exercise speed on the smart home mat (see paragraph 0035 – note that the display includes real-time feedback that includes speed; see also paragraph 0063).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Cardona, Bergmann-Good, and Schindler discloses all of the limitations of claim 7 as discussed in the claim 7 rejection above. Bergmann-Good further discloses based on the information on the health status of the user corresponds to a second level: displaying a graphic image guiding the user to stop exercise on the smart home mat (see paragraph 0219 – note that the user feedback includes safety factors and other contextual data for the intervention). Although Bergmann-Good does disclose suggesting a user chat or conversational activity (see paragraph 0077), Bergmann-Good does not specifically disclose sending an emergency call signal to a medical institution automatically.
Since the system is already capable of initiating a call or conversational activity based on user preferences and the system is also monitoring the users biometric data including heart rate, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to allow the device to automatically send an emergency call signal to a medical institution in the case of a medical emergency which would yield predictable results and no more than one of ordinary skill in the art would expect from such an arrangement.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Cardona, Bergmann-Good, and Schindler discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 as discussed in the claim 1 rejection above. Cardona further discloses storing the information on the exercise amounts of the user performed on the smart home mat in a memory (Figure 4, element 410); and displaying levels of physical changes of the user based on data stored in the memory (see paragraph 0063).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Cardona, Bergmann-Good, and Schindler discloses all of the limitations of claim 9 as discussed in the claim 9 rejection above. Bergmann-Good further discloses displaying the levels further comprises: estimating an age group of the user positioned on the smart home mat through the camera of the TV (see paragraphs 0113, 0123, and 0125 – note that the system receives input data identifying qualities associated with the user as well as biometric data and that the user data includes age ); based on that the age group of the user falls within a first range, displaying extent of the physical changes by changing a body size of the virtual avatar (see paragraph 0138 – note that the avatar is changed based on the user preferences which include age); and based on that the age group of the user falls within a second range, displaying the extent of the physical changes by changing a color of a separate graphic image different from the virtual avatar (see paragraph 0138 – note that the avatar is changed based on the user preferences which include color preferences).
Apparatus claim 11 is drawn to the apparatus corresponding to the method of using same as claimed in claim 1. Therefore, apparatus claim 11 corresponds to method claim 1, and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as discussed above.
Conclusion
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 ADAM R GIESY whose telephone number is (571)272-7555. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-6.
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, Patrick Edouard can be reached at 5712727603. 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.
/ADAM R. GIESY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2622