DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/20/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 objected to because of the following informalities: “a lower pace indication mode” should read “a lower pace visual indication mode”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 32 objected to because of the following informalities: “the method comprising” should read “comprising:”. 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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 14, 18, 21, 22, 25-28 and 30 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.
Regarding claims 4 and 9, the limitation “a predetermined frequency” is recited twice, therefore, it is unclear if the lower and upper pace modes are determined relative to the same threshold or to different thresholds. For purposes of examination the indefinite limitation has been deemed to claim that the lower and upper pace modes are determined relative to the same predetermined frequency.
Regarding claims 3, 5 and 9 all recite “a muscle”. It is unclear if this is the same muscle as recited in claim 1. For purposes of examination the indefinite limitation has been deemed to claim the same muscle.
Regarding claims 14, 18 and 28, the limitations “optionally” render the claims indefinite, because it is unclear if the limitations that follow are part of the claimed invention. For purposes of examination the indefinite limitation has been deemed to claim that the limitations that follow “optionally” or not part of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 22, the limitation “a controller” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if this is the same controller as set forth in claim 1. For purposes of examination the indefinite limitation has been deemed to claim the same controller.
Regarding claim 22, the limitation “the biometric data store” renders the claim indefinite because the limitation lacks proper antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 25, the limitation “the exercise” renders the claim indefinite because the limitation lacks proper antecedent basis.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-8, 18 and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20090171233 A1 to Lanfermann et al. (hereinafter, Langermann).
Regarding claims 1 and 32, Lanfermann discloses an apparatus and method comprising inter alia:
a garment comprising:
at least one muscle activity sensor (sensor 2) configured to detect activity of a muscle at least partially covered by the garment ([0049] “The sensor 2 comprises a multitude of electrodes 20 for example EMG electrodes… detect neural signals of the patient… the magnitude as well as spatial distribution of the neural signal.”); and
at least one electrical visual indicator device (display device 1); and
a controller (processing element 3), the controller being configured to:
receive from the at least one muscle activity sensor an activity signal indicative of detected activity of the muscle ([0049] “Each electrode 20 of the sensor 2 is connected to a processing element 3, which analyzes the multitude of measurement signals and generates a pattern of the magnitude and/or source location of the neural signal.”); and
cause the at least one electrical visual indicator device to output a visual indication of the detected activity of the muscle in dependence on the received activity signal ([0049] “The processing element 3 comprises a control unit 3a, which drives the display device 1. The generated pattern of the magnitude and/or source location of the neural signal is input into the control unit 3a and thus the magnitude and/or source location of the neural signal is visualized on the display device 1.”).
Regarding claim 3, Lanfermann discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the at least one electrical visual indicator device comprises a plurality of LEDs ([0016]) and wherein: the controller is configured to cause one or more of the plurality of LEDs to illuminate in dependence on the received activity signal ([0031] “…analyzing a magnitude and/or source location of the neural signal and/or, depending on the magnitude and/or source location of the signal, controlling a multitude of LEDs of the display device. A pattern of the magnitude and source location of the detected signals is visualized for the patient, which advantageously refers to the actual neural activity in the body part of the patient.”).
Regarding claim 4, Lanfermann discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the at least one muscle activity sensor is a plurality of muscle activity sensors ([0049] “The sensor 2 comprises a multitude of electrodes 20 for example EMG electrodes. The electrodes 20 detect neural signals of the patient…”), each muscle activity sensor configured to detect activity of a muscle at least partially covered by the garment, in a respective region of the body of the wearer ([0050] “each electrode 20 is allocated to a certain muscle or muscle group of the patient”; FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 5, Lanfermann discloses the apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the controller is configured to receive a respective activity signal indicative of detected activity of a muscle from each respective muscle activity sensor ([0049] “Each electrode 20 of the sensor 2 is connected to a processing element 3, which analyzes the multitude of measurement signals and generates a pattern of the magnitude and/or source location of the neural signal.”); and cause the at least one electrical visual indicator device to output a visual indication of the detected activity of the muscle in the respective region of the body of the wearer, in dependence on each respective activity signal ([0050] “Each electrode 20 is allocated to a number of LEDs 10 as the total number of LEDs 10 in the display device 1” and “each electrode 20 is allocated to a certain muscle or muscle group of the patient”).
Regarding claim 6, Lanfermann discloses the apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the plurality of LEDs are arranged in one or more lines (FIGS. 2 and 2).
Regarding claim 7, Lanfermann discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the visual indication comprises at least two visual indication modes, each visual indication mode being a different visual indication mode to each other visual indication mode of the at least two visual indication modes, the at least one electrical visual indicator device is configured to output visual indications in the at least two visual indication modes ([0046]); and the controller is configured to cause the at least one electrical visual indicator device to output a visual indication in one of the at least two visual indication modes, in dependence on the received activity signal ([0017] “. Multiple color LEDs offer the advantage that the magnitude of the neural signal can be displayed by certain colors.”).
Regarding claim 8, Lanfermann discloses the apparatus according to claim 7, wherein the controller is configured to cause the at least one electrical visual indicator device to output a visual indication in a first visual indication mode if the activity signal is indicative of a first degree of activity of the muscle; and output a visual indication in a second visual indication mode, different to the first visual indication mode, if the activity signal is indicative of a second degree of activity of the muscle ([0046] “For example a red LED signal represents a strong neural signal and a yellow LED signal represents a weak neural signal.”).
Regarding claim 18, Lanfermann discloses the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the garment comprises a locating structure for each electrode, the or each locating structure comprising an outermost surface configured to increase the frictional forces between the garment and the skin of the wearer of the garment to thereby limit the movement of each respective electrode relative to the skin of the wearer (the piece of clothing and positioning means/skin contacting surface of the fabric holds electrodes 20 against the body, thereby limiting their movement relative to the skin, [0014], [0047]).
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.
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) 9 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lanfermann in view of US 20140135593 A1 to Jayalth et al. (hereinafter, Jayalth).
Lanfermann discloses the apparatus according to claim 7 except for expressly disclosing (Claim 9) wherein the controller is configured to determine a frequency with which the activity signal is indicative of activation of a muscle and cause the at least one electrical visual indicator device to output a visual indication in a lower pace indication mode if the frequency is below a predetermined threshold frequency or to output a visual indication in an upper pace visual indication mode if the frequency is above a predetermined threshold frequency and (Claim 14) wherein the muscle activity sensor comprises at least two first electrodes arranged to contact the skin of a first region of a wearer of the garment and to thereby detect muscle activity of one or more muscles in the first region, at least two second electrodes arranged to contact the skin of a second region of the wearer and to thereby detect muscle activity of one or more muscles in the second region, and wherein the controller is configured to receive a first activity signal indicative of detected activity of one or more muscles in the first region from the first electrodes, receive a second activity signal indicative of detected activity of one or more muscles in the second region from the second electrodes, determine one or more indicators of relative performance of the one or more muscles in the first region and the one or more muscles in the second region, in dependence on the first activity signal and the second activity signal and output the one or more indicators of relative performance.
However, Jayalth teaches a garment 102 with EMG sensors 104A-104C and a controller 103 (FIG. 1A) and (Claim 9) compares “the number of exertion repetitions in a set (obtained from the muscle activation data from the sensors 104A-104C) with the reference exertion repetitions” ([0071]) and compares “the duration of the exertion of individual muscles (e.g., obtained from the muscle activation data from the sensors 104A-104C)” ([0071]) which is determining a frequency with which the activity signal is indicative of activation of a muscle relative to a predetermine reference. At stage 210, the resulting feedback includes coaching such as “slow down and lower your arm” ([0075]) which is an indication that the pace is above the reference. (Claim 14) Jayalth also teaches wherein the muscle activity sensor comprises at least two first electrodes arranged to contact the skin of a first region of a wearer of the garment and to thereby detect muscle activity of one or more muscles in the first region, at least two second electrodes arranged to contact the skin of a second region of the wearer and to thereby detect muscle activity of one or more muscles in the second region ([0028], [0036], [0064]; stage 206, FIG. 2), and wherein the controller is configured to receive a first activity signal indicative of detected activity of one or more muscles in the first region from the first electrodes, receive a second activity signal indicative of detected activity of one or more muscles in the second region from the second electrodes, determine one or more indicators of relative performance of the one or more muscles in the first region and the one or more muscles in the second region, in dependence on the first activity signal and the second activity signal ([0038], [0070]) and output the one or more indicators of relative performance ([0075], stage 210).
One having an ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed would have found it obvious to (Claim 9) modify the controller of Lanfermann to determine the repetition frequency from the EMG activity signal, and to output a pace indication when that frequency exceeds a reference as taught by Jayalth, because Jayalth teaches at [0038] that this would have informed the subject that they are using proper form, whether the muscle is injured and whether repetition and intensity are proper and (Claim 14) modify the controller of Lanfermann to determine and output the relative performance of Jayalth because Jayalth teaches at [0038] and [0043] this would have identied incorrect form or compression by other muscles.
Claim(s) 10 and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lanfermann in view of US 20080090703 A1 to Rosenburg.
Lanfermann discloses the apparatus according to claim 1 except for expressly disclosing (Claim 10) wherein the apparatus comprises a computer readable memory comprising exercise information about one or more exercises, and wherein the controller is configured to receive exercise information from the computer readable memory, determine when the wearer is performing an exercise in dependence on the received exercise information and the activity signal, determine when the wearer has completed the exercise in dependence on the received exercise information and the activity signal, cause the at least one electrical visual indicator device to output a rest phase visual indication when the exercise has been completed and subsequently, cause the at least one electrical visual indicator device to stop outputting the rest phase visual indication after a predetermined period and (Claim 27) wherein the controller is configured to determine when an exercise has been carried out in dependence on the motion signal, determine the frequency with which the exercise is carried out in a period and thereby determine an estimate of the rate at which the exercise is carried out and output the estimated rate at which the exercise is carried out.
However, Roseburg teaches a computer readable memory comprising exercise information about one or more exercises, and (Claim 10) wherein the controller is configured to receive exercise information from the computer readable memory ([0125] “An exercise regimen comprises one or more exercise scripts which may be retrievably stored in a datastore. Each exercise regimen includes a number of distinct exercise activity sets, each with a predefined number of repetitive motions.”), determine when the wearer is performing an exercise in dependence on the received exercise information and the activity signal ([0125] “The portable computing device 100C may be configured to read the regimen from memory and instruct the user to perform the required tasks.”) ([0077] “The portable computing device 100C is configured to receive and process the data and determine from if a motion event is present and if so increment an internal rep-counter variable.”), determine when the wearer has completed the exercise in dependence on the received exercise information and the activity signal ([0077] “if a required number of counts have been reached for a current exercise activity set of a current exercise regimen, and if so, determine that exercise activity set to be complete”), cause the at least one electrical visual indicator device to output a rest phase visual indication when the exercise has been completed and subsequently ([0077] “if a required number of counts have been reached for a current exercise activity set of a current exercise regimen, and if so, determine that exercise activity set to be complete”), cause the at least one electrical visual indicator device to stop outputting the rest phase visual indication after a predetermined period ([0121] “once an exercise activity set is completed by a user, the routines may provide a predetermined rest period to the user before the next exercise activity set is required to be performed… optionally displaying the elapsed time to the user along with an indication of the total allowed rest time”), and subsequently, cause the at least one electrical visual indicator device to stop outputting the rest phase visual indication after a predetermined period ([0121] “The user may be prompted when a rest period is about to expire or has expired 1034.”) and (Claim 27) wherein the controller is configured to determine when an exercise has been carried out in dependence on the motion signal ([0077]), determine the frequency with which the exercise is carried out in a period and thereby determine an estimate of the rate at which the exercise is carried out ([0094]; FIG. 6) and output the estimated rate at which the exercise is carried out ([0094]; FIG. 6).
One having an ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed would have found it obvious to modify the controller of Langermann to read Rosenberg’s stored exercise regimen, determine exercise performance and completeion from the received activity signal and output the rest phase indication on LEDs 10 for the allotted rest time and ending the LED light when the predetermine period expires as Ronseburg teaches at [0005]-[0006] that providing collecting the exercise activity and providing rest period indications would have provided an automated system that would have assessed performance and documented completion, and would have been less time consuming and more convenient.
Claim(s) 11 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lanfermann in view of US 20020169387 A1 to Marmaropoulos et al. (hereinafter, Marmaropoulos).
Lanfermann discloses the apparatus according to claim 1 except for expressly disclosing wherein the apparatus comprises at least one impedance sensor configured for detecting a parameter indicative of a bioelectrical impedance of the wearer, the at least one impedance sensor comprising at least two electrodes, and wherein the controller is configured to: receive the detected parameter; determine a body fat indicator in dependence on the detected parameter, the body fat indicator being indicative of an amount of body fat of the wearer, and output the body fat indicator.
However, Marmaropoulos teaches wherein the apparatus comprises at least one impedance sensor configured for detecting a parameter indicative of a bioelectrical impedance of the wearer, the at least one impedance sensor comprising at least two electrodes ([0021] and [0024]; FIG. 2), wherein the controller is configured to: receive the detected parameter ([0024]), determine a body fat indicator in dependence on the detected parameter, the body fat indicator being indicative of an amount of body fat of the wearer, and output the body fat indicator ([0024]), and output the body fat indicator ([0025]).
One having an ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed would have found it obvious to include the impedance sensor and body fat determination of Maramaopoulos in the apparatus of Lanfermann, because Marmaropoulos teaches this would have provided an easy to use fat measurement from a wearable garment ([0005]-[0006]).
Claim(s) 21, 25, 26, 28 and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lanfermann in view of US 20170135612 A1 to Singhatat.
Lanfermann discloses the apparatus according to claim 1 except for expressly disclosing (Claims 21) wherein the controller is configured to receive an estimate of the centre of gravity of the wearer, (Claim 25) wherein the garment comprises at least one motion sensor configured for detecting motion of the wearer, and wherein the controller is configured to receive a motion signal indicative of motion of the wearer from the at least one motion sensor, determine a distance, in a direction, from the estimate of the centre of gravity that the wearer moves when performing the exercise, in dependence on the motion signal; and output the distance from the centre of gravity, (Claim 26) wherein the controller is configured to output an alert if the wearer moves more than a predetermined distance from the centre of gravity, (Claim 28) wherein the garment comprises at least one motion sensor configured for detecting motions of the wearer; and the controller is configured to receive a motion signal indicative of the motions of the wearer from the at least one motion sensor, estimate a starting orientation, and estimate a change in orientation from the starting orientation, and (Claim 30) wherein the garment comprises at least one haptic feedback device configured to provide haptic feedback to the wearer, and the controller is configured to cause the haptic feedback device to output haptic feedback.
However, Singhatat teaches (Claims 21) wherein the controller is configured to receive an estimate of the centre of gravity of the wearer (Controller 240 receives inertial measurement 232 ([0042]), which “may be the horizontal translation T of the center of gravity CG of the user” ([0041]), with vertical gravitational axis Vg intersecting center gravity CG, [0032], [0060], FIGS. 1A-1C), (Claim 25) wherein the garment comprises at least one motion sensor configured for detecting motion of the wearer ([0037], [0041], FIGS 2A, 2E), and wherein the controller is configured to receive a motion signal indicative of motion of the wearer from the at least one motion sensor ([0042]), determine a distance, in a direction, from the estimate of the centre of gravity that the wearer moves when performing the exercise, in dependence on the motion signal (Controller 240 quantifies movement vector M “by using an angular displacement of the center of gravity of the user and a horizontal translation of the user relative to the vertical gravitational axis Vg, ([0057]), FIG. 1C. The pose is defined by sway director Ds, ([0032], during balance training or a swing, ([0034], [0054])); and output the distance from the centre of gravity ([0036]), (Claim 26) wherein the controller is configured to output an alert if the wearer moves more than a predetermined distance from the centre of gravity ([0036], [0043]-[0044]), (Claim 28) wherein the garment comprises at least one motion sensor configured for detecting motions of the wearer ([0037], [0041]; FIGS. 2A, 2E), and the controller is configured to receive a motion signal indicative of the motions of the wearer from the at least one motion sensor ([0032], [0041], FIG. 1A), estimate a starting orientation, and estimate a change in orientation from the starting orientation ([0034], [0035], [0042], [0054], [0057]), and (Claim 30) wherein the garment comprises at least one haptic feedback device configured to provide haptic feedback to the wearer, and the controller is configured to cause the haptic feedback device to output haptic feedback ([0037], [0039], [0040], [0042]).
One having an ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed would have found it obvious to modify the apparatus of Lanfermann with the centre of gravity estimate, motion sensor, movement determinators, alert, and haptic feedback device of Singhatat, to provide the wearer real-time feedback that improves the ability to sense and correct imbalance (Singhata: [0005], [0031]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN PATRICK DOUGHERTY whose telephone number is (571)270-5044. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-5pm (Pacific Time).
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, Jacqueline Cheng can be reached at (571)272-5596. 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.
/SEAN P DOUGHERTY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
