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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/14/2024 was filed simultaneously with the mailing date of the application on 09/14/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
On page 7, paragraph 0052, “elongated member 118” should read –elongated shaft 118—
On page 9, paragraph 0057, “at least one pair of opposing at least one pair of opposing channels” should read –at least one pair of opposing channels 212—
On page 9, paragraph 0058, “At least one force sensor” should read –The at least one force sensor 210—
On page 9, paragraph 0059, “the at least one force sensor” should read –the force sensor 210—
On page 9, paragraph 0060, “connecting member” should read –connecting member 104—
On page 9, paragraph 0060, “at least one pair of channels” should read –at least one pair of channels 212--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 3, 8, 15, and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, lines 5-6, “the at least one attached member” should read –the at least one attachment member--
In claim 3, line 1-2, “the connecting member is selected from an elastic band, chain, cord, rope, cable, and strap” should read --the connecting member is selected from a group consisting of: an elastic band, a chain, a cord, a rope, a cable, and a strap—
In claim 8, lines 2-3, “where in the external device is selected from a computer, mobile phone, laptop, and tablet.”, should read --wherein the external device is selected from a group consisting of: a computer, a mobile phone, a laptop, and a tablet—
In claim 15, line 1-2, “the connecting member is selected from an elastic band, chain, cord, rope, cable, and strap” should read --the connecting member is selected from a group consisting of: an elastic band, a chain, a cord, a rope, a cable, and a strap—
In claim 19, lines 2-3, “where in the external device is selected from a computer, mobile phone, laptop, and tablet.”, should read --wherein the external device is selected from a group consisting of: a computer, a mobile phone, a laptop, and a tablet—.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) of claim 10 is/are:
A/ the generic place holder is unit
B/ the functional language is cooling
C/ cooling unit is not modified by sufficient “structure, material, or acts”
The examiner is considering the controller including the set of performance circuitry with sensor(s) and thermoelectric cooling mechanism to be the corresponding structure of the cooling unit.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 10 and 12 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 limitation “a cooling unit located within the control module for reducing the temperature of the exercise device” of claim 10 has been evaluated under the three-prong test set forth in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, but the result is inconclusive. Thus, it is unclear whether this limitation should be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation uses the word “means” or a generic placeholder coupled with functional language, but it is modified by some structure or material that is ambiguous regarding whether that structure or material is sufficient for performing the claimed function. The boundaries of this claim limitation are ambiguous; therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. For the purposes of examination, the examiner is considering the controller including the set of performance circuitry with sensor(s) and thermoelectric cooling mechanism to be the corresponding structure of the cooling unit.
In response to this rejection, applicant must clarify whether this limitation should be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Mere assertion regarding applicant’s intent to invoke or not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph is insufficient. Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim to clearly invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, by reciting “means” or a generic placeholder for means, or by reciting “step.” The “means,” generic placeholder, or “step” must be modified by functional language, and must not be modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function;
(b) Present a sufficient showing that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, should apply because the claim limitation recites a function to be performed and does not recite sufficient structure, material, or acts to perform that function;
(c) Amend the claim to clearly avoid invoking 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, by deleting the function or by reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to perform the recited function; or
(d) Present a sufficient showing that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, does not apply because the limitation does not recite a function or does recite a function along with sufficient structure, material or acts to perform that function.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the at least one sensor" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The examiner suggests replacing with “the at least one force sensor”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(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 1-4, 6-9, and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Jaquish (PG Patent Publication No. US20230106092A1).
Regarding claim 1, Jaquish shows an exercise device (Jaquish, exercise system 200, paragraph 0115), comprising: an elongated shaft (Jaquish, exercise bar 100, paragraph 100) having a first end and an opposing second end (Jaquish, “a first end and a second end that opposes the first end portion, paragraph 0178), at least one force sensor (Jaquish, sensor 180 configured to measure a mechanical quantity, or property, of the exercise bar including a force applied to the exercise bar 100, paragraph 0191) coupled to the elongated shaft (exercise bar 100); at least one attachment member (Jaquish, first band arm 140 and second band arm 142, paragraph 0209) coupled to the elongated shaft (Jaquish, FIG. 6), a connecting member (Jaquish, exercise band, paragraph 0191), the connecting member (exercise band) adapted to be received by the at least one attached member (Jaquish, “disposed on the exercise bar 100”, paragraph 0191); and a control module (Jaquish, processor 272, paragraph 0200) electrically coupled to the at least one force sensor for reading and recording force output by the at least one force sensor (Jaquish, “evaluate one or more data elements captured by the sensor 180”, paragraph 0200).
PNG
media_image1.png
424
262
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Jaquish
Regarding claim 2, Jaquish shows the exercise device of claim 1, wherein the at least one force sensor is a load cell (Jaquish, Wheatstone bridge sensor 180 that is a configuration of four strain sensors, paragraph 0192).
Regarding claim 3, Jaquish shows the exercise device of claim 1, wherein the connecting member is selected from an elastic band (Jaquish, exercise band, paragraph 0191), chain, cord, rope, cable, and strap.
Regarding claim 4, Jaquish shows the exercise device of claim 1, wherein the at least one attachment member is detachable (Jaquish, see FIG. 8A below; In the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim, the first band arm and the second band arm are detachable as seen in the exploded view of FIG. 8A).
PNG
media_image2.png
790
534
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Jaquish
Regarding claim 6, Jaquish shows the exercise device of claim 1, further comprising a power source (Jaquish, one or more power sources, paragraph 0123) coupled to the control module for powering the control module (Jaquish, “the circuitry of the exercise bar 100 includes a power system 240 that optionally includes a power management system, one or more power sources, a recharging system… the power system 240 is capable of providing power to the exercise bar 100 through the power system 418, allowing the systems and methods of the present disclosure to perform various tasks, such as communicating, by the processor 272”, paragraph 0123) and the at least one force sensor (Jaquish, “by allowing the exercise bar 100 to utilize the power system 240, the exercise bar 100 further utilizes one or more sensors (e.g., sensor 180 of FIG. 8B) of the exercise without requiring the one or more sensors ancillary to the exercise bar 100, and power for the one or more sensors 180, of the exercise bar 100 itself”, paragraph 0123).
Regarding claim 7, Jaquish shows the exercise device of claim 6, wherein the power source is charged wirelessly or through a wired connection (Jaquish, “a recharging system… wired power supply, such as an electrical outlet”, paragraph 0123).
Regarding claim 8, Jaquish shows the exercise device of claim 1, wherein an external device (Jaquish, exemplary client device 300, paragraph 0159) communicates with the exercise device wirelessly (Jaquish, “one or more network or other communication interfaces 474… and one or more communication busses 474 interconnecting the aforementioned components”, paragraph 0159); and where in the external device is selected from a computer (Jaquish, desktop computer, paragraph 0160), mobile phone (Jaquish, mobile phone, paragraph 0160), laptop (Jaquish, laptop computer, paragraph 0160), and tablet (Jaquish, tablet, paragraph 0160).
Regarding claim 9, Jaquish shows the exercise device of claim 8, wherein the exercise device communicates with a third-party application on the external device (Jaquish, “a user interface 1300 is displayed (e.g., by display 478 of the client device 300) that allows the user to start a new exercise session with the exercise bar 100 through a client application 420 (e.g., obtain and store new data from the sensor 180 of the exercise bar 100) or view previous exercise sessions (e.g., prior data from the sensor 180 of the exercise bar 100)”, paragraph 0135; The third-party application of the claimed invention is shown by the client application of Jaquish, and the external device of the claimed invention is shown with the display of the client device of Jaquish).
Regarding claim 11, Jaquish shows the exercise device of claim 1, wherein a middle portion of the connecting member is secured to a foot plate (Jaquish, “by fitting the respective elastic band into the groove of the base and through the first and second band arm”, paragraph 0037; The foot plate of the claimed invention is shown by the base of Jaquish. Jaquish shows “the middle portion” in FIG. 5 as “the respective elastic band” is a single band that traverses across the base in FIG. 5 seen below); and wherein the end user stands on the foot plate (Jaquish, FIG. 5 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
792
484
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Jaquish
Regarding claim 12, Jaquish shows the exercise device of claim 1, wherein the at least one sensor further measures counting repetitions (Jaquish, “the circuitry for the exercise bar 100 includes a model store 222 that is configured to store a plurality of models 224 (e.g., first model 224-1, second model 224-2,… , model V 224-V of FIG. 2B, where V is any positive integer greater than 1, such as 5, 10, 15, or greater). In some embodiments, the model store 222 includes one or more computational models 224 for determining a qualitative aspect of using the exercise bar…. a second model 224-2 of a function of a number of repetitions used with the exercise bar 100”, paragraph 0139) and time between repetitions of an end user (Jaquish, “the maximum data element in the plurality of data elements is a maximum period of time, such as the maximum period of time when performing a respective exercise 214 or a repetition of the respective exercise 214”, paragraph 0220).
Claims 13, 15-16, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mesko (PG Patent Publication No. US20210060377A1).
Regarding claim 13, Mesko shows foot plate (Mesko, platform 110, paragraph 0035), comprising: an upper surface, a lower surface, a pair of opposing side walls, and a pair of opposing end walls, wherein the pair of opposing side walls and the pair of opposing ends walls are integrally connected (Mesko, see annotated FIG. 11 below); at least one pair of opposing channels located in the pair of opposing side walls or the pair of opposing ends walls (Mesko, see annotated FIG. 11 below), the at least one pair of opposing channels adapted to receive a connecting member (Mesko, “the platform 110 may include at least one cutout 116. The cutout 116 may be disposed along one or more edges of the platform 110, such as first edge 130 and second edge 132. The cutout 116 allows space for a resistance band in direct line of sight with the rollers 120 which may be disposed proximal, below, or extending from the second side 114 of the platform 110”, paragraph 0037), wherein the connecting member (Mesko, resistance band, paragraph 0037, FIG. 11) is connected to (Mesko, FIG. 11) an exercise device (Mesko, straight bar, paragraph 0049, FIG. 11); at least one force sensor (Mesko, “The components include an embedded measuring platform 1201, such as a scale, and the resistance experienced by the user can be viewed in the front of the platform via an alphanumeric screen 1202”, paragraph 0055; The scale embedded within the measuring platform shows the at least one force sensor of the claimed invention) located within the upper surface (Mesko, “smart platform 1200, where there is a way of telling the user specifically how much resistance is created by the resistance bands lifted with continuous real time feedback on the amount of resistance. The components include an embedded measuring platform 1201, such as a scale, and the resistance experienced by the user can be viewed in the front of the platform via an alphanumeric screen 1202”, paragraph 0055, FIG. 12; Mesko shows the at least one force sensor being located within the upper surface as FIG. 12 shows the scale being incorporated into the upper surface of the smart platform. Furthermore, Mesko discloses in paragraph 0036, “the first side 112 [which] may generally provide a surface on which a user may stand or otherwise apply pressure”, thereby showing the scale to be incorporated within the upper surface as the user stands on the upper surface); and a control module (Mesko, processing unit(s) 1404, paragraph 0067) electrically coupled to the at least one force sensor for reading and recording force output by the at least one force sensor (Mesko, “Computer 1402 may include a system bus 1408 that couples various system components. Such components may include a processing unit(s) 1404, system memory device(s) 1406, disk storage device(s) 1414, sensor(s) 1435… and communication connection(s) 1444, paragraph 0067).
PNG
media_image4.png
535
609
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
275
392
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Mesko
Regarding claim 15, Mesko shows the exercise device of claim 13, wherein the connecting member is selected from an elastic band (Mesko, rubber or latex resistance band, paragraph 0043), chain, cord, rope (Mesko, rope, paragraph 0043), cable, and strap (Mesko, non-stretch or stretch strap, paragraph 0043).
Regarding claim 16, Mesko shows the exercise device of claim 13, wherein the connecting member comprises: a first end (Mesko, see annotated FIG. 11 below); a second end (Mesko, see annotated FIG. 11 below); and a middle portion connecting the first end and the second end (Mesko, see annotated FIG. 11 below); wherein the middle portion of the connecting member is received in the at least one pair of channels (Mesko, see annotated FIG. 11 below); and wherein the first end of the connecting member is connected to an exercise device (Mesko, see annotated FIG. 11 below).
PNG
media_image6.png
345
465
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Mesko
Regarding claim 19, Mesko shows the foot plate of claim 13, wherein an external device (Mesko, various user devices, paragraph 0058) communicates with (Mesko, “Fitness activity and exercises may be communicated to the user device to track progress, exercises, monitor goals, or the like”, paragraph 0058) the exercise device (straight bar) wirelessly (Mesko, “wireless (e.g., cellular, Wi-Fi, NFC, etc.) communications, paragraph 0063); and wherein the external device is selected from a computer, mobile phone (Mesko, smartphones, paragraph 0058), laptop (Mesko, laptop computers, paragraph 0058), and tablet.
Regarding claim 20, Mesko shows the foot plate of claim 19, wherein the foot plate communicates with a third-party application on the external device (Mesko, “the “In FIG. 12 As the “smart platform” 1200 could be connected to sensors that would give both the resistance lifted and acceleration to the top of a lift, an instructor could remotely monitor and advise on the performance of a user when connected through the internet. An application that would connect to a screen could show both the user and the instructor the rate of change in the resistance, thus giving explicit data whether the user is tiring out or needs to reduce or increase resistance”, paragraph 0056, and “the smart platform 1200 may communicate with various user devices such as smartphones, laptop computers, wearable devices,… or the like. Fitness activity and exercises may be communicated to the user device to track progress, exercises, monitor goals, or the like”, paragraph 0058; The third-party application of the claimed invention is shown by the application of Mesko).
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jaquish (PG Patent Publication No. US20230106092A1), in view of Luckadue (PG Patent Publication No. US20080287272A1).
Regarding claim 5, Jaquish shows the exercise device of claim 1, including the elongated shaft (Jaquish, exercise bar 100).
Jaquish fails to show a cover around the elongated shaft.
However, Luckadue, from the same field of endeavor, teaches the cover (Luckadue, handles 104, paragraph 0020).
PNG
media_image7.png
474
652
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Luckadue
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the elongated shaft shown by Jaquish to include the cover taught by Luckadue in order to cushion the grip of the user around the exercise bar of Jaquish. Furthermore, it is well known in the art to include a cover or pad or cushion or handles to relieve the stress of the grip of the user around an exercise bar.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jaquish (PG Patent Publication No. US20230106092A1), in view of Li (European Patent Publication No. EP3893129A1).
Regarding claim 10, Jaquish shows the exercise device (exercise system 200) of claim 1, including the control module (processor 272).
Jaquish fails to show a cooling unit located within the control module for reducing the temperature of the exercise device.
However, Li, from the same field of endeavor, teaches the cooling unit (Li, “The temperature sensor 180J is configured to detect a temperature. In some embodiments, the mobile phone 100 executes a temperature processing policy based on the temperature detected by the temperature sensor 180J. For example, when the temperature reported by the temperature sensor 180J exceeds a threshold, the mobile phone 100 lowers performance of a processor near the temperature sensor 180J, to reduce power consumption for thermal protection. In some other embodiments, when the temperature is less than another threshold, the mobile phone 100 heats the battery 142 to prevent the mobile phone 100 from being shut down abnormally because of a low temperature”, paragraph 0075; In the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim, the mobile phone of Li executing a temperature processing policy based on the temperature detected by the temperature sensor teaches the corresponding structure of the cooling unit as the controller including the set of performance circuitry with sensor(s), see the claim interpretation above).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the exercise system of Jaquish to include the cooling unit shown by Li in order to prevent the electrical components and the exercise bar of Jaquish to overheat. It is well known in the art to include cooling mechanisms into devices with electrical components that are constantly running throughout use of the device.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mesko (PG Patent Publication No. US20210060377A1), in view of over Jaquish (PG Patent Publication No. US20230106092A1).
Regarding claim 14, Mesko shows the foot plate of claim 13, including the at least one force sensor (Mesko, at least one sensor).
Mesko fails to show the at least one force sensor is a load cell.
However, Jaquish, from the same field of endeavor, teaches the load cell (Jaquish, strain sensor, paragraph 0191). Jaquish also discloses the strain sensor “measures a spatial deformation in the exercise bar 100 that causes the strain sensor 180 to experience a change in electrical load, such as resistance, that is proportional to the spatial deformation” (Jaquish, paragraph 0191)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have specified the sensor being a load cell as load cells are well known to be used for determining the amount of force applied by a user with an exercise device. Furthermore, both Mesko and Jaquish teach the same purpose and function for sensors.
Claims 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mesko (PG Patent Publication No. US20210060377A1), in view of Rubin (U.S. Patent No. US11123609B2).
Regarding claim 17, Mesko shows the foot plate of claim 13, including the control module (Mesko, processing unit(s) 1404) and the at least one force sensor (Mesko, at least one sensor).
Mesko fails to show a power source coupled to the control module for powering the control module and the at least one force sensor.
However, Rubin, from the same field of endeavor, teaches the power source (Rubin, “When attached to the base 102, one or more electrical connectors of the separable top 104 may electrically couple with corresponding connectors of the base 102. When so coupled, data and power may be exchanged between the base 102 and the separable top 104. For example, coupling the separable top 104 to the base 102 may cause the separable top 104 to download collected data to the base 102. When connected, the separable top 104 may also recharge via the power system of the base 102”, col. 14, lines 16-24).
PNG
media_image8.png
391
465
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Rubin
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the foot plate of Mesko to include a power source in order for the sensor to be able to function and collect data. Furthermore, Mesko and Rubin teach a foot plate and platform, respectively, with similar functions, therefore, this modification is obvious.
Regarding claim 18, Mesko, in view of Rubin, shows the foot plate of claim 17, wherein the power source is charged wirelessly or through a wired connection (Rubin, “power system (including a separate battery)”, col. 13, line 61).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to J NICOLE LOBERIZA whose telephone number is (571)272-4741. The examiner can normally be reached 8am - 5:30pm.
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.
/JACQUELINE N L LOBERIZA/Examiner, Art Unit 3784
/LOAN B JIMENEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3784