DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims.
Therefore, applicant recited specific claim limitation regarding applicant’s invention set forth the metes and bounds for “a largest joint angle value”, “a maximum of the joint” and “a threshold value” as the essence claim invention limitation ought to and must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Double Patenting
The non-statutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper time wise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A non-statutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on non-statutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1 – 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1 - 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,115,663 (hereinafter 663 patent).
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the each of the limitations of the instant claims can be mapped to a claim or a claim limitation of 663 patent. This instant application’s claims are an obvious variant of 663 patent claims. Please see below for claim mapping comparison.
In this instant case, both instant application limitation and 663 patent provides overlapping claim limitation yet only in one obvious variant term differ regarding, actuator in claim 16 of instant application, and, fluidic actuator in claim 16 of 663 patent; however, this “actuator” term in instant application provides broader scope encompassing and covering “fluidic actuator” in 663 patent.
In the same vein, for instance, this “actuator” recited in claim 16 of provided broader claim scope overlapping/encompassing “fluidic actuator” of claim 16 of 663 patent where the claim structure in clams 1 – 20 of instant application is also identical with respect to claims 1 – 20 of 663 patent.
Thus, this instant application is deemed to be obvious variant under and covering the claim scope of nonstatutory double patenting over 663 patent.
Please also see MPEP 804. The specification can be used as a dictionary to learn the meaning of a term in the claim. Toro Co. v. White Consol. Indus., Inc., 199 F.3d 1295, 1299, 53 USPQ2d 1065, 1067 (Fed. Cir. 1999) ("[W]ords in patent claims are given their ordinary meaning in the usage of the field of the invention, unless the text of the patent makes clear that a word was used with a special meaning."); Renishaw PLC v. Marposs Societa' per Azioni, 158 F.3d 1243, 1250, 48 USPQ2d 1117, 1122 (Fed. Cir. 1998) ("Where there are several common meanings for a claim term, the patent disclosure serves to point away from the improper meanings and toward the proper meanings.")…Further, those portions of the specification which provide support for the reference claims may also be examined and considered when addressing the issue of whether a claim in the application defines an obvious variation of an invention claimed in the reference patent or application (as distinguished from an obvious variation of the subject matter disclosed in the reference patent or application). In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 441-42, 164 USPQ 619, 622 (CCPA 1970).
See Chart below:
Instant Application Claims
U.S. Patent No. 12115663
Claim 1
A water and corrosion resistant exoskeleton system configured to operate in a ship on a body of water, the exoskeleton system comprising:
a water and corrosion resistant left and right leg actuator unit configured to be respectively coupled to a left and right leg of a user, the left and right leg actuator units each including:
an upper arm and a lower arm that are rotatably coupled via a joint, the joint positioned at a knee of the user with the upper arm coupled about an upper leg portion of the user above the knee and with the lower arm coupled about a lower leg portion of the user below the knee,
an actuator that extends between the upper arm and lower arm, and
a water and corrosion resistant exoskeleton device configured to operate in a ship on a
body of water that includes:
an actuation system,
and a processor and memory, the memory storing instructions, that when executed by the processor, are configured to control the actuation system to:
cause actuation of the actuators of the left and right leg actuator units,
operate in a first configuration when a determination is made by the exoskeleton device that the exoskeleton system is experiencing an impact,
the determination based at least in part on accelerometer and joint encoder data and a determination that a joint angle of the left leg actuator unit is above a threshold value, where a largest joint angle value corresponds to a maximum extension of the joint;
and operate in a second configuration that is different from the first configuration when the joint angle of the left leg actuator unit is below the threshold value, the second configuration causing generation of constant force by the actuators of the left and right leg actuator units to provide knee torque support to the user as the knee reaches a higher degree of flexion.
Claim 1
A water and corrosion resistant exoskeleton system configured to operate in a ship on a body of water, the exoskeleton system comprising:
a water and corrosion resistant left and right leg actuator unit configured to be respectively coupled to a left and right leg of a user, the left and right leg actuator units each including:
an upper arm and a lower arm that are rotatably coupled via a joint, the joint positioned at a knee of the user with the upper arm coupled about an upper leg portion of the user above the knee and with the lower arm coupled about a lower leg portion of the user below the knee,
a fluidic bellows actuator that extends between the upper arm and lower arm, and
a water and corrosion resistant exoskeleton device configured to operate in a ship on a body of water that includes:
a fluidic system,
and a processor and memory, the memory storing instructions, that when executed by the processor, are configured to control the fluidic system to:
introduce fluid to the fluidic bellows actuators of the left and right leg actuator units to cause actuation of the fluidic bellows actuators of the left and right leg actuator units,
operate in a first configuration when a determination is made by the exoskeleton device that the exoskeleton system is experiencing an impact,
the determination based at least in part on accelerometer and joint encoder data and a determination that a joint angle of the left actuator unit is above a threshold value, where a largest joint angle value corresponds to a maximum extension of the joint;
and operate in a second configuration that is different from the first configuration when the joint angle of the left leg actuator unit is below the threshold value, the second configuration causing generation of constant force by the fluidic bellows actuators of the left and right leg actuator units to provide knee torque support to the user as the knee reaches a higher degree of flexion.
Claim 2
The exoskeleton system of claim 1, wherein the exoskeleton device is worn on the torso of the user.
Claim 2
The exoskeleton system of claim 1, wherein the exoskeleton device is worn on the torso of the user.
Claim 3
The exoskeleton system of claim 1, wherein the exoskeleton device is coupled to the ship in the body of water through a mechanical element.
Claim 3
The exoskeleton system of claim 1, wherein the exoskeleton device is coupled to the ship in the body of water through a mechanical element.
Claim 4
The exoskeleton system of claim 1, wherein the exoskeleton system is operably coupled to a ship in the body of water, the exoskeleton system operably coupled to the ship via:
a power line configured to provide electrical power to the exoskeleton system from an electrical power source of the ship.
Claim 4
The exoskeleton system of claim 1, wherein the exoskeleton system is operably coupled to a ship in the body of water, the exoskeleton system operably coupled to the ship via: a fluidic line configured to provide the fluid to the exoskeleton system from a fluid source of the ship…
a power line configured to provide electrical power to the exoskeleton system from an electrical power source of the ship.
Claim 5
The exoskeleton system of claim 1, further comprising a quick release system configured to quickly release the user from the exoskeleton device via a mechanism
Claim 5
The exoskeleton system of claim 1, further comprising a quick release system configured to quickly release the user from the exoskeleton device via a mechanism.
Claim 6
The exoskeleton system of claim 1, further comprising a quick release system configured to quickly release the user from the left leg actuator unit via a mechanism.
Claim 6
The exoskeleton system of claim 1, further comprising a quick release system configured to quickly release the user from the left leg actuator unit via a mechanism.
Claim 7
The exoskeleton system of claim 1, wherein the first configuration of the exoskeleton system controls a rate of the actuator of the left leg actuation unit such that an actuation force the left leg actuation unit increases as the joint angle decreases from the joint being in flexion.
Claim 7
The exoskeleton system of claim 1, wherein the first configuration of the exoskeleton system controls a rate of introducing the fluid to the fluidic bellows actuator of the left leg actuation unit such that a fluid pressure within the fluidic bellows actuator of the left leg actuation unit increases as the joint angle decreases from the joint being in flexion.
Claim 8
An exoskeleton system configured to operate on a boat in a body of water, the exoskeleton system comprising:
one or more leg actuator units including:
an actuator,
a plurality of sensors; and
an exoskeleton device configured to operate on the boat in the body of water that includes:
an actuation system, and a processor and memory, the memory storing instructions, that when executed by the processor,
are configured to control the exoskeleton system to: cause actuation of actuator of the one or more leg actuator units.
Claim 8
An exoskeleton system configured to operate on a boat in a body of water, the exoskeleton system comprising:
one or more leg actuator units including:
a fluidic bellows actuator,
a plurality of sensors; and
an exoskeleton device configured to operate on the boat in the body of water that includes:
a fluidic system, and a processor and memory, the memory storing instructions, that when executed by the processor,
are configured to control the exoskeleton system to: introduce fluid to the fluidic bellows actuator of the one or more leg actuator units to cause actuation of the fluidic bellows actuator of the one or more leg actuator units.
Claim 9
The exoskeleton system of claim 8, wherein the instructions, that when executed by the processor, are further configured to control the exoskeleton system to:
operate in a first configuration when a joint angle of a joint of at least one of the one or more leg actuator units is above a threshold value, where a largest joint angle value corresponds to a maximum extension of the joint;
and operate in a second configuration that is different from the first configuration when the joint angle of the at least one of the one or more leg actuator units is below the threshold value, the second configuration causing generation of constant force by one or more actuators of the one or more leg actuator units to provide knee torque support to a knee of a user wearing the one or more leg actuator units as the knee of the user reaches a higher degree of flexion.
Claim 9
The exoskeleton system of claim 8, wherein the instructions, that when executed
by the processor, are further configured to control the exoskeleton system to:
operate in a first configuration when a joint angle of a joint of at least one of the leg actuator units 1s above a threshold value, where a largest joint angle value corresponds to a maximum extension of the joint;
and operate in a second configuration that is different from the first configuration when the joint angle of the at least one of the leg actuator units is below the threshold value, the second configuration causing generation of constant force by the fluidic bellows actuators of the leg actuator units to provide knee torque support to a knee of a user wearing the one or more actuator units as the knee of the user reaches a higher degree of flexion.
Claim 10
The exoskeleton system of claim 9, wherein the instructions, that when executed by the processor, are further configured to control the exoskeleton system to:
tune operating parameters of the first configuration based at least in part of data from a left knee joint encoder of the exoskeleton system indicating proximity of the joint angle to the threshold value.
Claim 10
The exoskeleton system of claim 9, wherein the instructions, that when executed by the processor, are further configured to control the exoskeleton system to:
tune operating parameters of the first configuration based at least in part of data from a left knee joint encoder of the exoskeleton system indicating proximity of the joint angle to the threshold value.
Claim 11
The exoskeleton system of claim 8, wherein the exoskeleton device is coupled to a vehicle in the body of water.
Claim 11
The exoskeleton system of claim 8, wherein the exoskeleton device is worn on the torso of a user.
Claim 12
The exoskeleton system of claim 8, wherein the exoskeleton device is coupled to a vehicle in the body of water.
Claim 12
The exoskeleton system of claim 8, wherein the exoskeleton device is coupled to a vehicle in the body of water.
Claim 13
The exoskeleton system of claim 8, wherein the exoskeleton system is coupled to a vehicle in the body of water, the exoskeleton system coupled to the vehicle via one or more of:
a power line configured to provide electrical power to the exoskeleton system from an electrical power source of the vehicle;
or a communication line configured to provide for communication between the exoskeleton system and the vehicle.
Claim 13
The exoskeleton system of claim 8, wherein the exoskeleton system is coupled to a vehicle in the body of water, the exoskeleton system coupled to the vehicle via one or more of:
a power line configured to provide electrical power to the exoskeleton system from an electrical power source of the vehicle;
or a communication line configured to provide for communication between the exoskeleton system and the vehicle;
or a fluidic line configured to provide fluid to the exoskeleton system from a fluid source of the vehicle;
Claim 14
The exoskeleton system of claim 13, further comprising a quick release system configured to quickly release the exoskeleton system from the vehicle.
Claim 14
The exoskeleton system of claim 13, further comprising a quick release system configured to quickly release the exoskeleton system from the vehicle.
Claim 15
The exoskeleton system of claim 8, further comprising a quick release system configured to quickly release a user from the exoskeleton device.
Claim 15
The exoskeleton system of claim 8, further comprising a quick release system configured to quickly release a user from the exoskeleton device.
Claim 16
An exoskeleton system, the exoskeleton system comprising:
one or more actuator units, the one or more actuator units including:
an actuator;
one or more sensors;
and an exoskeleton device that includes:
an actuation system,
and a processor and memory, the memory storing instructions, that when executed by the processor, are configured to control the exoskeleton system to: cause actuation of the actuator of the one or more actuator units.
Claim 16
An exoskeleton system, the exoskeleton system comprising:
one or more actuator units, the one or more actuator units including:
a fluidic actuator,
one or more sensors;
and an exoskeleton device that includes:
a fluidic system,
and a processor and memory, the memory storing instructions, that when executed by the processor, are configured to control the exoskeleton system to: introduce fluid to the fluidic actuator of the one or more actuator units to cause actuation of the fluidic actuator of the one or more actuator units.
Claim 17
The exoskeleton system of claim 16, wherein the exoskeleton system is configured to operate in a maritime environment.
Claim 17
The exoskeleton system of claim 16, wherein the exoskeleton system 1s configured to operate in a maritime environment.
Claim 18
The exoskeleton system of claim 16, wherein the instructions, that when executed by the processor, are further configured to control the exoskeleton system to: operate in a second configuration that is different from a first configuration when a determination is made that a joint angle of at least one of the one or more actuation units has passed a threshold value.
Claim 18
The exoskeleton system of claim 16, wherein the instructions, that when executed by the processor, are further configured to control the exoskeleton system to: operate in a second configuration that is different from a first configuration when a determination is made that a joint angle of at least one of the one or more actuation units has passed a threshold value.
Claim 19
The exoskeleton system of claim 18, wherein the instructions, that when executed by the processor, are further configured to control the exoskeleton system to: tune operating parameters of a first configuration based at least in part on data from a joint encoder indicating a change in the joint angle.
Claim 19
The exoskeleton system of claim 18, wherein the instructions, that when executed by the processor, are further configured to control the exoskeleton system to: tune operating parameters of a first configuration based at least in part of data from a joint encoder indicating a change in the joint angle.
Claim 20
The exoskeleton system of claim 16, wherein the exoskeleton system is coupled to a vehicle in a body of liquid,
the exoskeleton system coupled to the vehicle via one or more of:
a power line configured to provide power to the exoskeleton system from a power source of the vehicle;
or a communication line configured to provide for communication between the exoskeleton system and the vehicle.
Claim 20
The exoskeleton system of claim 16, wherein the exoskeleton system is coupled to a vehicle in a body of liquid,
the exoskeleton system coupled to the vehicle via one or more of:
a power line configured to provide power to the exoskeleton system from a power source of the vehicle;
or a communication line configured to provide for communication between the exoskeleton system and the vehicle.
a fluidic line configured to provide fluid to the exoskeleton system from a fluid source of the vehicle;
In this instant case, both instant application limitation and 663 patent discussed overlapping claim limitation yet only in one obvious variant term differ regarding, actuator in claim 16 of instant application, and, fluidic actuator in claim 16 of 663 patent.
In the same vein, this “actuator” recited in claim 16 of provided broader claim scope overlapping/encompassing “fluidic actuator” of claim 16 of 663 patent as the term meaning for claims 1 – 20 of instant application and claims 1 – 20 of 663 patent.
Thus, this instant application is deemed to be obvious variant under nonstatutory double patenting over 663 patent.
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.
Claim 1 is 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. It is also noted that dependent claims are also rejected based upon dependency status.
Regarding claim 1, applicant recited claim limitation regarding, “system configured to operate in a ship on a body of water”…“device configured to operate in a ship on a body of water” does not provide sufficient antecedent basis. Appropriate clarification is required.
Regarding claim 1, applicant recited claim limitation regarding, “a determination…encoder data…joint angle…above a threshold value” does not distinctly and particularly set forth what exactly is above the threshold value as whether the encoder data above threshold value or the joint angle itself above threshold value that ought to be set forth particularly and distinctly regards applicant’s invention to set forth the metes and bounds for clarification and distinction.
Upon further review, skilled in the art could only locate a pluarlity of threshold values commensurate to applicant recited in claim limitation stating a joint value as uncertain as whether directs to joint encoder data or joint degree itself, Para 0030, where there is also the actuator pressure threshold value corresponding to joint angle, Para 0031. Appropriate further clarification is required.
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.
Claims 1 - 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xia et al (Wearable Robots for Human Underwater Movement Ability Enhancement, IEEE CAA Journal June 2022) in view of Wang et al (An Underwater Lower-Extremity Soft Exoskeleton for Breaststorke Assistance, IEEE TMRB Journal 2020) in view of Hine et al (US Pat Pub No. 2018/0134359).
Regarding claims 1, 9 and 18, Xia et al shows a water and corrosion resistant exoskeleton system (See at least Page 971 for underwater application used for high quality oil paint on the coil and waterproof case application for water proof and corrosion resistant purpose; also on Page 970 states good sealing property for hydraulic and pneumatic system of exoskeleton removing air source) configured to operate on a body of water (See at least Page 967 for underwater wearable exoskeleton),
a water and corrosion resistant left and right leg actuator configured to be respectively coupled to a left and right leg of a user (See at least Page 970 III. Core Technologies and Challenges A. Actuation for figure 3a and 3b with actuator unit on both left and right leg of a user),
the left and right leg actuator units each including an upper arm and a lower arm that are rotatably coupled via a joint (See at least Page 970 A. Actuation for the choice of actuator in exoskeleton design as figure 3a for left and right leg actuator unit each with upper arm and lower arm with motor in between as the joint coupled with),
the joint positioned at a knee of the user with the upper arm coupled about an upper leg portion of the user above the knee and with the lower arm coupled about a lower leg portion of the user below the knee (See at least Page 971 for place motor joint besides human knee joint coupled with upper leg portion above knee and lower leg portion below knee on both figure 3a and 3b);
an actuator that extends between the upper arm and lower arm (See at least Page 971 for place motor joint besides human knee joint coupled with upper leg portion arm and lower leg portion arm on both figure 3a and 3b);
a water and corrosion resistant exoskeleton device configured to operate on a body of water (See at least Page 971 for underwater application that is used with high quality oil paint on the coil and with waterproof case application for water proof and corrosion resistant; good sealing property for hydraulic and pneumatic system of exoskeleton removing air source stated at underwater environment discussed on Page 971) that includes:
an actuation system (See at least Page 970 III. A. Actuation for actuation system), and a processor and memory (See at least Page 969 for STM 32 single chip controller with ARM Cortex processor core and static RAM and flash memory; please also see supplemental reference STM 32 single chip controller),
the memory storing instructions are configured to control the actuation system when executed by the processor to (See at least Page 969 for STM 32 single chip controller with ARM Cortex processor core and static RAM and flash memory; Please also see supplemental reference STM 32 single chip controller):
cause actuation of the actuators of the left and right leg actuator units (See at least Page 969 for human machine coordination when wearing skeletons for required hip and joint torque and exoskeleton amplify hip and knee using actuator; also Page 970 III.A. Actuation for exoskeleton actuator),
operate in a first configuration when a determination is made by the exoskeleton device experiencing an impact (See at least Page 971 B. Sensing for phases for swim gait cycle; also triboelectric sensor used to measure joint angle and pressure sensor to detect foot contact) ,
the determination based at least in part on accelerometer and joint encoder data (See at least Page 969 II.B. for rigid underwater exoskeleton using rotary encoder measure joint angle; See at least Page 974 for Inertia sensor measure acceleration for also on figure 5); however, Xia et al does not further discuss the control mechanism configuration in detail for first and second configuration yet merely mentions utilization of sensor and encoder for exoskeleton operation control;
Wang et al further shows a determination that a joint angle of the left leg actuator unit is above a threshold value (See at least Page 9 for sweep phase as using assistance force mode with respect varying joint angle also exhibited on Figure 17 for knee angle under 100 degree at first/second swimmer; also on equation 11 for summation junction using reference value Lmin with respect to current angle value represented by L for difference actuates assistive force control mode),
a largest joint angle value corresponds to a maximum extension of the joint (See at least Page 9 for equation 11 for L cable length stretched Lmax indicates a largest joint angle value at maximum extension with cable stretched ; also on page 3 for leg stretch out backward from the body in a straight line);
operate in a second configuration that is different from the first configuration when the joint angle of the left leg actuator unit is below the threshold value (See at least Page 9 for real time control system detected phases based on joint angle; see at least Page 9 for equation 11 for L cable length stretched exceed the Lmax, indicates into transparent mode/second controller configuration shown on figure 9 in glide and recovery phases also shown on figure 17 without assistive force; also on page 3 for knee bent at maximum 135 degree angle);
the second configuration causing generation of constant force by the actuators of the left and right leg actuator units to provide knee torque support to the user as the knee reaches a higher degree of flexion (See at least figure 9 for transparent mode controller providing torque force control with constant force input reference with respect to minus (-) cable tension force up as knee reaches higher degree of flexion, where the constant force compensated by force PID controller);
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, to provide plurality of control configurations of Wang, for the exoskeleton of Xia, in order to provide improving swimming/diving ability desired by Xia, since Wang et al is also mentioned by Xia, Page 968, to achieve desired motion phased based control switching control as also stated on Page 972 of Xia and exhibited further detail configuration in Wang. Xia modified does not further discuss that the system and device configurated to operate in a ship.
Hine et al further shows the system and device configurated to operate in a ship (See at least Para 0043 for wave powered vehicle with a float, a tether and swimmer as a system and device operation as in a wave powered ship. Please see supplemental reference).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to provide a secure mechanism to a swimmer exhibited by Hine, for the swimmer of Xia modified, in order to provide safety extraction mechanism, as discussed for control method safety issue, Xia Page 0972, as desired by the Xia modified.
Regarding claims 2 and 11, Xia et al shows the exoskeleton device is worn on the torso of the user (See at least figure 3 for exoskeleton to be worn on the torso of swimmer).
Regarding claims 3 and 12, Xia et al shows the user worn exoskeleton device (See at least figure 3 for exoskeleton to be worn on the torso of swimmer);
Hine modified shows the user is coupled to the ship vehicle in the body of water through a mechanical element ( See at least for the tether as mechanical element connecting the float and swimmer).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to provide a secure mechanism as the swimmer exhibited by Hine, for the swimmer of Xia modified, in order to provide safety extraction mechanism, as discussed for control method safety issue, Xia Page 0972, as desired by the Xia modified.
Regarding claims 4, 13 and 20, Xia shows user wear the exoskeleton as exoskeleton system (See at least figure 3 for exoskeleton to be worn on the torso of user);
Hine et al further shows the diver user is operably coupled to a ship in the body of water (See at least for the tether as mechanical element connecting the float and swimmer), the user operably coupled to the ship via:
a power line configured to provide electrical power to the system from an electrical power source of the ship (See at least Para 0054 for float with motor provide electric power change the upper member dimension height changed; also Para 0072 and 093 for cable with tensile members with tube with electrical conductor for electric conduction power line);
a communication line configured to provide for communication between the user and the ship vehicle (See at least Para 0080 for cable carried with optical fiber and acoustic cable as communication line).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to provide a power and communication mechanism of a swimmer exhibited by Hine, for the swimmer of Xia modified, in order to provide safety extraction utilizing power and acoustic communication of Hine, as discussed for control method safety issue, Xia Page 0972, as desired by the Xia modified.
Regarding claims 5 and 14, Xia et al shows a quick release system to quick release the user from the exoskeleton device (See at least figure 2 for Velcro hoop loop tape release user from the exoskeleton in both left and right leg).
Regarding claims 6 and 15, Xia et al shows a quick release system configured to quickly release the user from the left leg actuator unit in exoskeleton device via a mechanism (See at least figure 2 user release via Velcro hoop loop tape release user from the exoskeleton in both left and right leg).
Regarding claim 7, Wang et al further shows the first configuration of the exoskeleton system controls a rate of the actuator of the left leg actuation unit (See at least figure 9 for assistive control mode using speed as rate of actuator input to PID controller as inner loop)
such that an actuation force the left leg actuation unit increases as the joint angle decreases from the joint being in flexion (Intended Use; See at least figure 9 for assistive control mode using angle sensor as feedback input provided as the assistive force control input as outer looper).
Regarding claims 8 and 16, Xia et al shows an exoskeleton system configured to operate in a body of water (See at least Page 967 I. Introduction for underwater wearable robot exoskeleton ), the exoskeleton system comprising:
one or more leg actuator units (See at least Page 970 III. A. Actuation for leg actuator design upon wearable exoskeleton) including: an actuator (See at least Page 970 III. A. Actuation for leg actuator design upon wearable exoskeleton),
a plurality of sensors (See at least Page 971 III. Sensing for exoskeleton sensor design);
an exoskeleton device configured to operate in the body of water that includes: an actuation system (See at least Page 970 III. A. Actuation for leg actuator design upon wearable exoskeleton), a processor and memory (See at least Page 969 for STM 32 single chip controller with ARM Cortex processor core and static RAM and flash memory; please also see supplemental reference STM 32 single chip controller),
the memory storing instructions when executed by the processor are configured to control the exoskeleton system (See at least Page 969 for STM 32 single chip controller with ARM Cortex processor core and static RAM and flash memory; please also see supplemental reference STM 32 single chip controller) to:
cause actuation of actuator of the one or more leg actuator units (See at least Page 969 for STM 32 single chip controller with ARM Cortex processor core and static RAM and flash memory; please also see supplemental reference STM 32 single chip controller); Xia et al does not further specify operation on a boat;
Hine et al further shows operation in a boat (See at least Para 0043 for wave powered vehicle with a float, a tether and swimmer as a system and device operation as in a wave powered ship. Please see supple–mental reference).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to provide a connection system to the swimmer exhibited by Hine, for the swimmer of Xia discussed, in order to provide safety extraction mechanism, as discussed for control method safety issue, Xia Page 0972 as desired by the Xia.
Regarding claim 10, Wang et al shows tune operating parameters of the first configuration based at least in part of data from a left knee joint encoder of the exoskeleton system (See at least figure 9 for assistive control mode using motor encoder for speed PID controller in inner loo and actuator angle sensor for outer loop build swimming trajectory as feedback input to inner loop) indicating proximity of the joint angle to the threshold value (See at least Page 9 for sweep phase as using assistance force mode with respect varying joint angle also exhibited on Figure 17 for knee angle under 100 degree at first/second swimmer; also on equation 11 for summation junction using reference value Lmin with respect to current angle value represented by L for difference actuates assistive force control mode).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, to provide plurality of control configurations of Wang, for the exoskeleton of Xia, in order to provide improving swimming/diving ability desired by Xia, since Wang et al is also mentioned by Xia, Page 968, to achieve desired motion phased based control switching control as also stated on Page 972 of Xia and exhibited further detail configuration in Wang. Xia modified does not further discuss that the system and device configurated to operate in a ship.
Regarding claim 17, Xia et al shows the exoskeleton system is configured to operate in a maritime environment (See at least Page 967 I. Introduction for underwater wearable robot exoskeleton).
Regarding claim 19, Xia et al does not further discuss tuning the parameter, Wang et al further shows tune operating parameters of a first configuration based at least in part on data from a joint encoder indicating a change in the joint angle (See at least Figure 9 for assistive control mode, first configuration, with outer loop using angle sensor calculating changing angle as part of variable feedback input toward inner loop as part of the parameter for Speed PID controller).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, to provide plurality of control configurations of Wang, for the exoskeleton of Xia, in order to provide improving swimming/diving ability desired by Xia, since Wang et al is also mentioned by Xia, Page 968, to achieve desired motion phased based control switching control as also stated on Page 972 of Xia and exhibited further detail configuration in Wang. Xia modified does not further discuss that the system and device configurated to operate in a ship.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Neuhaus e t al, IEEE ICRA 2004, Concept Designs for Underwater Swimming Exoskeletons.
Wang et al, IEEE T – MRB 2020, An Underwater Lower-Extremity Soft Exoskeleton for Breaststroke Assistance.
Zhang et al, IEEE ICCBS 2018, Concept and Prototype Design of an Underwater Soft Exoskeleton.
Ding et al, IEEE ICRA 2014, Multi – Joint Actuation Platform for Lower Extremity Soft Exosuits.
Xia et al, IEEE CAA Journal of Automation Sinica, 2022, Wearable Robot for Human Underwater Movement Ability Enhancement: A survey.
Xia et al, IEEE ICARM, 2023, A Conceptual Underwater Soft Exoskeleton for Augmenting Human Breaststroke.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ian JEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3274. The examiner can normally be reached 11AM - 7PM.
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, Abby Lin can be reached at 5712703976. 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.
/Ian Jen/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3657
Prosecution Insights