DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendments
The amendments filed with the written response received on 24 December 2025 have been considered and an action on the merits follows. As directed by the amendment, claim(s) 1-13 and 15-20 has/have been amended and claim(s) 14 is/are canceled. Accordingly, claim(s) 1-13 and 15-20 is/are pending in this application with an action on the merits to follow.
Because of the applicant's amendment, the following in the office action filed 24 December 2025, are hereby withdrawn:
Objections to the Specification
Objections to the Claims
Rejections under 35 USC § 112(b)
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 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) 1-7, 10-11, and 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chou US 20220408872.
Regarding Independent Claim 1, Chou discloses smart gait analysis system (Figs. 1A-3) comprising: a mobile device (¶0015); a left insole (Fig. 1A-E #10) including pressures sensor (Fig. 1A-E #12a) and a left inertia sensor (Fig. 2 #36) configured for obtaining left foot information (¶0029-0034), a left wireless transmission module (Fig. 2 #32) being connected to said pressure sensors and said left inertia sensor to transmit said left foot information to said mobile device (Fig. 3 #40; ¶0033, 0038); a right insole (Fig. 1A-E #10) including pressure sensors (Figs. 1A-E #12a) and a right inertia sensor (Fig. 2 #36) configured for obtaining right foot information (¶0029-0034), a right wireless transmission module (Fig. 2 #32) being connected to said pressure sensors and said right inertia sensor to transmit said right foot information to said mobile device (Fig. 3 #40; ¶0033, 0038); wherein said mobile device is configured to analyze said left foot information and said right foot information to obtain a foot pressure, a gait, a cadence, a center of pressure information or any combination thereof (¶0037); wherein each of said left insole and said right insole includes a sensing array (Fig. 1A #12; ¶0030), wherein said sensing array includes: longitudinal conductive lines (Fig. 1A shows #12a sensors have longitudinal and transverse conductive lines), including vertical conductive lines and inclined conductive lines connected to said vertical conductive lines (Fig. 1A), wherein said inclined conductive lines include curve lines; and transverse conductive lines (Fig. 1A shows #12a sensors have longitudinal and transverse conductive lines), wherein intersection points of said longitudinal conductive lines and said transverse conductive lines (Fig. 1A at corners of pressure sensors #12a) serve as said pressure sensors (Fig. 1A; ¶0030).
Regarding Claim 2, Chou discloses the smart gait analysis system of claim 1, wherein each of said left insole and said right insole includes a wireless charging coils (¶0033).
Regarding Claim 3, Chou discloses the smart gait analysis system of claim 1, wherein each of said left insole and said right insole includes a infrared light sensors (Figs. 1A-E #39; ¶0031, 0033).
Regarding Claim 4, Chou discloses the smart gait analysis system of claim 1, wherein each of said left insole and said right insole includes a Global Positioning System (GPS) (¶0033-0034).
Regarding Claim 5, Chou discloses the smart gait analysis system of claim 1, wherein each of said left insole and said right insole include includes a sensing module (Figs. 1A-E #16) configured for receiving data measured by said pressure sensors (¶0028-0031, 0033-0037).
Regarding Claim 6, Chou discloses the smart gait analysis system of claim 1, wherein said left foot information is displayed by said mobile device (¶0031-0034).
Regarding Claim 7, Chou discloses the smart gait analysis system of claim 6, further comprising a big data database (¶0043), wherein said left foot information is uploaded to a big data database through said mobile device (¶0043).
Regarding Claim 10, Chou discloses the smart gait analysis system of claim 1, wherein said right foot information is displayed by said mobile device (¶0036-0038).
Regarding Claim 11, Chou discloses the smart gait analysis system of claim 10, further comprising a big data database (¶0043), wherein said right foot information is uploaded to said big data database through said mobile device (¶0043).
Regarding Claim 15, Chou discloses the smart gait analysis system of claim 1, wherein said longitudinal conductive lines and said transverse conductive lines divide each of said left insole and said right insoles into at least 10-120 sections (Fig. 1A).
Regarding Independent Claim 16, Chou discloses smart analysis insoles (Figs. 1A-3) comprising: a left insole (Fig. 1A-E #10) including a pressure sensor (Fig. 1A-E #12a) and a left inertia sensor (Fig. 2 #36) configured for obtaining left foot information (¶0029-0034), a left wireless transmission module (Fig. 2 #32) being connected to said pressure sensors and said left inertia sensor to transmit said left foot information to a mobile device (Fig. 3 #40; ¶0033, 0038); and a right insole (Fig. 1A-E #10) including pressure sensors (Figs. 1A-E #12a) and a right inertia sensor (Fig. 2 #36) configured for obtaining right foot information (¶0029-0034), a right wireless transmission module (Fig. 2 #32) being connected to said pressure sensor and said right inertia sensor to transmit said right foot information to said mobile device (Fig. 3 #40; ¶0033, 0038); wherein said left foot information and said right foot information are configured for being analyzed by said mobile device to obtain a foot pressure, a gait, a cadence, a center of pressure information or any combination thereof (¶0037); wherein each of said left insole and said right insole includes a sensing array (Fig. 1A #12; ¶0030), wherein said sensing array includes: longitudinal conductive lines (Fig. 1A shows #12a sensors have longitudinal and transverse conductive lines), including vertical conductive lines and inclined conductive lines connected to said vertical conductive lines (Fig. 1A), wherein said inclined conductive lines include curve lines; and transverse conductive lines (Fig. 1A shows #12a sensors have longitudinal and transverse conductive lines), wherein intersection points of said longitudinal conductive lines and said transverse conductive lines (Fig. 1A at corners of pressure sensors #12a) serve as said pressure sensors (Fig. 1A; ¶0030).
Regarding Claim 17, Chou discloses the insoles of claim 16, wherein an area of said pressure sensors occupies 3-50% of a total insole bottom surface area (Fig. 1A) of each of said left insole and right insole (Fig. 1A).
Regarding Claim 18, Chou discloses the insoles of claim 17, wherein said area of said pressure sensors occupies 10-40% of said total insole bottom surface area (Fig. 1A).
Regarding Claim 19, Chou discloses the insoles of claim 16, wherein each of said left insole and said right insole includes a wireless charging coils (¶0033).
Regarding Claim 20, Chou discloses the insoles of claim 16, wherein said left insole and said right insole includes an infrared light sensor, a GPS, or the combination thereof (¶0033).
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(s) 8-9 and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou as applied to claims 1, 6, and 10-11 above, and further in view of Paravastu US 20220301718.
Regarding Claim 8, Chou discloses the smart gait analysis system of claim 7, but does not expressly disclose wherein said big data database employs blockchain as a communication structure.
Paravastu teaches a system for insole analysis (Figs. 1-30) where a database employs blockchain as the communication structure (¶0200).
Both Chou and Paravastu teach analogous inventions in the art of data analysis systems for footwear. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to modify Chou with the teachings of Paravastu such that the database employed blockchain as the communication structure as, “This configuration provides a very efficient and a suitable way to store the large data structures,” (Paravastu ¶0201) and, “Since the images (radiological or non-radiological; X-Ray images, or non-X-Ray photographs) are considered electronic health records (EHRs), some embodiments may implement an attribute-based signature scheme with multiple authorities to guarantee the validity of the images. With a de-centralized system, peer-to-peer transactions make it impossible for third parties to steal image privacy information during the retrieval process. Secondly, each node in the network has a copy of the transaction record, which avoids single points of failure. Thirdly, making the transaction information on the blockchain publicly available allows the users to conduct image retrieval over a collection of images shared by either different medical image providers or even by millions of patients worldwide. This scale in images renders higher accuracy while protecting the information from unnecessary privacy disclosure to unintended parties, data tampering by non-essential personnel, and data forgery by random players,” (Paravastu ¶0209).
Regarding Claim 9, Chou discloses the smart gait analysis system of claim 7, but does not expressly disclose further comprising an artificial intelligence (AI) computing module, wherein said big data database is coupled to the AI computing module.
Paravastu teaches a system for insole analysis (Figs. 1-30) with an artificial intelligence (AI) computing module (¶0039) and where a database is coupled to an AI computing module (¶0039).
Both Chou and Paravastu teach analogous inventions in the art of data analysis systems for footwear. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to modify Chou with the teachings of Paravastu such that there is an artificial intelligence (AI) computing module and the database is coupled to the AI computing module so that AI, “may be used for these processes, as increasingly complex diagnosis can be automated to not miss the intricate details,” (Paravastu ¶0048).
Regarding Claim 12, Chou discloses the smart gait analysis system of claim 11, but does not expressly disclose wherein said big data database employs blockchain as the communication structure.
Paravastu teaches a system for insole analysis (Figs. 1-30) where a database employs blockchain as the communication structure (¶0200).
Both Chou and Paravastu teach analogous inventions in the art of data analysis systems for footwear. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to modify Chou with the teachings of Paravastu such that the database employed blockchain as the communication structure as, “This configuration provides a very efficient and a suitable way to store the large data structures,” (Paravastu ¶0201) and, “Since the images (radiological or non-radiological; X-Ray images, or non-X-Ray photographs) are considered electronic health records (EHRs), some embodiments may implement an attribute-based signature scheme with multiple authorities to guarantee the validity of the images. With a de-centralized system, peer-to-peer transactions make it impossible for third parties to steal image privacy information during the retrieval process. Secondly, each node in the network has a copy of the transaction record, which avoids single points of failure. Thirdly, making the transaction information on the blockchain publicly available allows the users to conduct image retrieval over a collection of images shared by either different medical image providers or even by millions of patients worldwide. This scale in images renders higher accuracy while protecting the information from unnecessary privacy disclosure to unintended parties, data tampering by non-essential personnel, and data forgery by random players,” (Paravastu ¶0209).
Regarding Claim 13, Chou discloses the smart gait analysis system of claim 11, but does not expressly disclose an artificial intelligence (AI) computing module, and wherein said big data database is coupled to an AI computing module.
Paravastu teaches a system for insole analysis (Figs. 1-30) with an artificial intelligence (AI) computing module (¶0039) and where a database is coupled to an AI computing module (¶0039).
Both Chou and Paravastu teach analogous inventions in the art of data analysis systems for footwear. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to modify Chou with the teachings of Paravastu such that the database is coupled to an AI computing module so that AI, “may be used for these processes, as increasingly complex diagnosis can be automated to not miss the intricate details,” (Paravastu ¶0048).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 24 December 2025, with respect to the 35 USC 102 rejection of claims 1-7, 10-11, and 15-20 and the 35 USC 103 of claims 8-9 and 12-13 have been considered but are not persuasive.
Regarding the 35 USC 102 rejection of claims 1 and 16, Applicant argues:
The amendments of, “wherein each of said left insole and said right insole includes a sensing array, wherein said sensing array includes: longitudinal conductive lines, including vertical conductive lines and inclined conductive lines connected to said vertical conductive lines, wherein said inclined conductive lines include curve lines; and transverse conductive lines, wherein intersection points of said longitudinal conductive lines and said transverse conductive lines serve as said pressure sensors” overcomes the prior art of record.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Chou Fig. 1A and ¶0030 discuss the sensing array #12 with conductive lines going in the longitudinal, transverse, vertical, and inclined directions (Fig. 1A). These lines touch to create the hexagonal shapes seen. See 35 USC 102 rejection above. To overcome this rejection, the Examiner suggest amending the claim language to describe the conductive lines such that they extend the entire length and width of the insole (describe which line type does this), and that the lines create a rectangular grid pattern.
Applicant submits that the dependent claims are patentable based on their dependencies from claim(s) 1 and 16; however, as discussed in the rejection and in the arguments above, claim(s) 1 and 16 are not allowable over the prior art. Therefore, these arguments have not been found convincing and the rejections of the independent claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 and/or 103 have been maintained.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAQUEL M. WEIS whose telephone number is 571-272-6804. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 0800-1700.
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, ALISSA J. TOMPKINS can be reached on 571-272-3425. 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.
/RAQUEL M. WEIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3732
/HEATHER MANGINE, Ph.D./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights