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 .
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 1-18 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 1 recites “receiving” and “generating”, but it is unclear what components are performing the method. In order to proceed, the Office will interpret the claim such that a computer or processor is performing the intended method steps.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-9, 14, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Watterson et al (US 20110172059 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Watterson et al teaches a method for generating exercise programs, comprising: receiving a user input for a customized workout, the user input including at least one exercise parameter (Refer to Fig. 6 Paragraph [0089]:” [0089] As illustrated in FIG. 6, a user may indicate that he or she would like to select an exercise program. As described herein, such selection may be in the form of a user input selecting a predefined exercise program, an input requesting to create a user defined exercise program, or an input requesting downloading of an exercise program. In response to the user input, the user may be prompted to select the type of exercise program which will be selected or created. In FIG. 6, for instance, the programming may include parameter based exercises or real-world terrain exercises, although other exercise types, such as heart-rate based exercises, may also be selected in some embodiments.”); generating, based at least in part on the at least one exercise parameter, a plurality of exercise device controls, the plurality of exercise device controls configured to adjust at least one operating parameter of an exercise device; and generating an exercise program to be implemented on the exercise device, the exercise program comprising the plurality of exercise device controls (Refer to Fig. 6 Paragraph [0091] In the case of parameter based exercise programs, users optionally are allowed to define parameter based exercise programming. For instance, a user may access a computing program via exercise cycle 12, personal computer 16a, 16b, communication system 14, or any combination of the foregoing. The computing program may allow users to define programs. For instance, the user may be allowed to define intervals of a specific time or distance, and select the particular resistance, incline or other setting that should automatically occur during use of the exercise program”).
Regarding Claim 2, Watterson et al continues to teach further comprising: implementing the exercise program on the exercise device 12 (Refer to Paragraph [0108] Once communication system 14 has retrieved the desired information for the selected route, communication system 14 or another component can compile the gathered data and generate an exercise program. Communication system 14 may use the map, topographical, or other data to automatically and/or dynamically generate a sequence of control signals that control one or more operating parameters of the exercise cycle 12.”).
Regarding Claim 3, Watterson et al continues to teach wherein, while implementing the exercise program, the exercise device controls cause the at least one operating parameter of the exercise device to be adjusted (Refer to Paragraph [0108] Once communication system 14 has retrieved the desired information for the selected route, communication system 14 or another component can compile the gathered data and generate an exercise program. Communication system 14 may use the map, topographical, or other data to automatically and/or dynamically generate a sequence of control signals that control one or more operating parameters of the exercise cycle 12.”).
Regarding Claim 4, Watterson et al continues to teach wherein the at least one exercise parameter comprises a duration of a workout segment (Refer to Paragraph [0091] In the case of parameter based exercise programs, users optionally are allowed to define parameter based exercise programming. For instance, a user may access a computing program via exercise cycle 12, personal computer 16a, 16b, communication system 14, or any combination of the foregoing. The computing program may allow users to define programs. For instance, the user may be allowed to define intervals of a specific time or distance, and select the particular resistance, incline or other setting that should automatically occur during use of the exercise program.”).
Regarding Claim 5, Watterson et al continues to teach wherein the at least one exercise parameter comprises an intensity of a workout segment (Refer to Paragraph [0091] In the case of parameter based exercise programs, users optionally are allowed to define parameter based exercise programming. For instance, a user may access a computing program via exercise cycle 12, personal computer 16a, 16b, communication system 14, or any combination of the foregoing. The computing program may allow users to define programs. For instance, the user may be allowed to define intervals of a specific time or distance, and select the particular resistance, incline or other setting that should automatically occur during use of the exercise program.”).
Regarding Claim 6, Watterson et al continues to teach wherein the intensity of the workout segment is associated with a pace (Refer to Paragraph [0117]:”Speed display 246 may display a current speed or target speed for a user, while calorie display 248 may similarly display estimated calories expended during a current or loadable exercise routine.”.. The Office takes the position that the target speed is considered the pace).
Regarding Claim 7, Watterson et al continues to teach wherein the intensity of the workout segment is associated with an incline (Refer to Paragraph [0091] In the case of parameter based exercise programs, users optionally are allowed to define parameter based exercise programming. For instance, a user may access a computing program via exercise cycle 12, personal computer 16a, 16b, communication system 14, or any combination of the foregoing. The computing program may allow users to define programs. For instance, the user may be allowed to define intervals of a specific time or distance, and select the particular resistance, incline or other setting that should automatically occur during use of the exercise program.”).
Regarding Claim 8, Watterson et al continues to teach wherein the intensity of the workout segment is associated with a target heartrate range of the workout segment (Refer to Paragraph [0089]:” In FIG. 6, for instance, the programming may include parameter based exercises or real-world terrain exercises, although other exercise types, such as heart-rate based exercises, may also be selected in some embodiments.”..The Office takes the position that a target heart-rate is determined by the user when making the heart-rate selection).
Regarding Claim 9, Watterson et al continues to teach wherein the at least one exercise parameter includes a duration, a pace, an incline of a workout segment, or any combination thereof (Refer to Paragraph [0091] In the case of parameter based exercise programs, users optionally are allowed to define parameter based exercise programming. For instance, a user may access a computing program via exercise cycle 12, personal computer 16a, 16b, communication system 14, or any combination of the foregoing. The computing program may allow users to define programs. For instance, the user may be allowed to define intervals of a specific time or distance, and select the particular resistance, incline or other setting that should automatically occur during use of the exercise program.”).
Regarding Claim 14, Watterson et al continues to teach wherein the at least one operating parameter of the exercise device comprises a resistance of a flywheel of the exercise device (Refer to Paragraph [0116]:” The exercise programming may include exercise routines that vary the resistance applied to flywheel 114 (FIG. 2) and/or the incline/tilt of the exercise cycle 12 at various time or distance intervals during the routine.”).
Regarding Claim 15, Watterson et al continues to teach wherein the at least one exercise parameter includes a target heartrate, and wherein generating the plurality of exercise device controls comprises: determining the plurality of exercise device controls based at least in part on the target heartrate and a fitness level of a user (Refer to Paragraph [0089]:” In FIG. 6, for instance, the programming may include parameter based exercises or real-world terrain exercises, although other exercise types, such as heart-rate based exercises, may also be selected in some embodiments.” …[0091]:” For instance, the user may be allowed to define intervals of a specific time or distance, and select the particular resistance, incline or other setting that should automatically occur during use of the exercise program.“..The Office takes the position that a fitness level may be the specific distance or time a user is considered the fitness level).
Claim(s) 1, 5, 9-13, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lannon et al (US 20180353812 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Lannon et al teaches a method for generating exercise programs, comprising: receiving a user input for a customized workout, the user input including at least one exercise parameter (Refer to Paragraph [0049]:”A user interface 218 (e.g., aspect of module 90 or 152) receives the operator input and feeds the operator input to the processor 210.”); generating, based at least in part on the at least one exercise parameter, a plurality of exercise device controls, the plurality of exercise device controls configured to adjust at least one operating parameter of an exercise device; and generating an exercise program to be implemented on the exercise device, the exercise program comprising the plurality of exercise device controls (Refer to Fig. 6 & Abstract:” The computing system receives an operator selection of a selected predefined workout regimen, and operator data including at least operator gender, operator height and operator age and the computing system retrieves parameter data to configure an exercise instruction that is part of the selected workout regimen. The parameter data is retrieved from a database that stores at least range of motion data and maximum weight data searchable by a cohort, e.g., gender/height cohorts or gender/age cohorts and converts the retrieved parameter data into settings data to configure corresponding portions of the exercise apparatus according to the configured exercise instruction.”).
Regarding Claim 5, Lannon et al continues to teach wherein the at least one exercise parameter comprises an intensity of a workout segment (Refer to Paragraph [0070]:”With this implementation, the databases of FIG. 5A can be configured either to store plural parameter values for each cohort, the correct one be used based on the operator's intensity selection or different databases could be used for each intensity level. These techniques give the operator the ability to choose what type of workout they want to do and the intensity level (low, moderate, medium, advanced, etc.) each time they workout. This arrangement is in contrast to the exercise machine pre-determining for the operator what the workout will be and the intensity level based on a pre-determined plan derived from prior sessions….[0071] The machine provides exercise guidance and instruction via a combination of on-machine messaging, automatic machine control of speed, incline, intensity, etc. via the CSAFE protocol or other proprietary protocols, and audio-based coaching and content.”)
Regarding Claim 9, Lannon et al continues to teach wherein the at least one exercise parameter includes a duration, a pace, an incline of a workout segment, or any combination thereof (Refer to Paragraph [0071] The machine provides exercise guidance and instruction via a combination of on-machine messaging, automatic machine control of speed, incline, intensity, etc. via the CSAFE protocol or other proprietary protocols, and audio-based coaching and content.”).
Regarding Claim 10, Lannon et al continues to teach wherein the at least one operating parameter of the exercise device includes a belt speed of a tread belt of the exercise device, the belt speed associated with the pace, a deck incline of a deck of the exercise device, the deck incline associated with the incline, or any combination thereof (Refer to Paragraph [0040]:” The machine applies the calculated settings to either strength training machine 10 or treadmill 150, either by modifying operation of the strength training machine 10 or treadmill 150 or by instructing the user to perform certain actions that modify the operation of the strength training machine 10 or treadmill 150. During operation the computer causes the strength training machine 10 or treadmill 150 to render workout results on the display…. [0071] The machine provides exercise guidance and instruction via a combination of on-machine messaging, automatic machine control of speed, incline, intensity, etc. via the CSAFE protocol or other proprietary protocols, and audio-based coaching and content.”).
Regarding Claim 11, Lannon et al continues to teach further comprising: implementing the exercise program, wherein implementing the exercise program comprises: maintaining the belt speed and the deck incline for the duration of the workout segment (Refer to Paragraph [0072]:” Otherwise if the calculated performance is within the range, no changes are made and the process continues 358b. Changes are either applied during the operation of the machine or made as a suggestion to the operator.”..The Office takes the position that when no changes are made to the operation of the treadmill the incline and speed are maintained through the workout).
Regarding Claim 12, Lannon et al continues to teach wherein the at least one operating parameter of the exercise device comprises a belt speed of a tread belt of the exercise device (Refer to Fig. 2 Paragraph [0071]:” The machine provides exercise guidance and instruction via a combination of on-machine messaging, automatic machine control of speed, incline, intensity, etc. via the CSAFE protocol or other proprietary protocols, and audio-based coaching and content.”..The Office takes the position that the treadmill inherently has a belt/tread and therefore such modification in speed is considered the belt speed of the treadbelt).
Regarding Claim 13, Lannon et al continues to teach wherein the at least one operating parameter of the exercise device comprises a deck incline of a deck of the exercise device (Refer to Fig. 2 Paragraph [0071]:” The machine provides exercise guidance and instruction via a combination of on-machine messaging, automatic machine control of speed, incline, intensity, etc. via the CSAFE protocol or other proprietary protocols, and audio-based coaching and content.”.).
Regarding Claim 19, Lannon et al teaches an exercise system, comprising: an exercise device 150; one or more memories comprising instructions; and one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories (Refer to Paragraph [0007]:” According to an addition aspect, an exercise machine includes a computing system including a processor and memory, exercise apparatus that is controlled and configured at least in part by the computer system to operate according to a predefined workout regimen “)and configured to execute the instructions to cause the exercise system to: receive a user input for a customized workout, the user input including at least one exercise parameter (Refer to Paragraph [0049]:”A user interface 218 (e.g., aspect of module 90 or 152) receives the operator input and feeds the operator input to the processor 210.”); generate, based at least in part on the at least one exercise parameter, a plurality of exercise device controls, the plurality of exercise device controls configured to adjust at least one operating parameter of the exercise device; and generate an exercise program to be implemented on the exercise device, the exercise program comprising the plurality of exercise device controls (Refer to Fig. 6 & Abstract:” The computing system receives an operator selection of a selected predefined workout regimen, and operator data including at least operator gender, operator height and operator age and the computing system retrieves parameter data to configure an exercise instruction that is part of the selected workout regimen. The parameter data is retrieved from a database that stores at least range of motion data and maximum weight data searchable by a cohort, e.g., gender/height cohorts or gender/age cohorts and converts the retrieved parameter data into settings data to configure corresponding portions of the exercise apparatus according to the configured exercise instruction.”).
Regarding Claim 20, Lannon et al teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing code comprising instructions which (Refer to Paragraph [0009]:”Other aspects include computing systems and computer program products tangible stored on non-transitory computer readable media.”}, when executed by one or more processors of an exercise device (Refer to Paragraph [0008]:” According to an addition aspect, an exercise machine includes a computing system including a processor and memory, exercise apparatus that is configured at least in part by the computer system to operate according to a predefined workout regimen,”), cause the exercise device to: receive a user input for a customized workout, the user input including at least one exercise parameter (Refer to Paragraph [0049]:”A user interface 218 (e.g., aspect of module 90 or 152) receives the operator input and feeds the operator input to the processor 210.”); generate, based at least in part on the at least one exercise parameter, a plurality of exercise device controls, the plurality of exercise device controls configured to adjust at least one operating parameter of the exercise device; and generate an exercise program to be implemented on the exercise device, the exercise program comprising the plurality of exercise device controls (Refer to Fig. 6 & Abstract:” The computing system receives an operator selection of a selected predefined workout regimen, and operator data including at least operator gender, operator height and operator age and the computing system retrieves parameter data to configure an exercise instruction that is part of the selected workout regimen. The parameter data is retrieved from a database that stores at least range of motion data and maximum weight data searchable by a cohort, e.g., gender/height cohorts or gender/age cohorts and converts the retrieved parameter data into settings data to configure corresponding portions of the exercise apparatus according to the configured exercise instruction.”).
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.
Claim(s) 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lannon et al (US 20180353812 A1) in view of Dalebout et al (US 20160206922 A1).
Regarding Claim 16, Lannon et al teaches the claimed invention as noted above but fails to teach wherein the at least one exercise parameter comprises an on-device parameter and an off-device parameter, the on-device parameter comprising an on-device exercise activity completable through operation of the exercise device, the off-device parameter comprising an off-device exercise activity completable separate from the exercise device. Dalebout et al teaches a control system for an exercise device comprising an on-device parameter and an off-device parameter, the on-device parameter comprising an on-device exercise activity completable through operation of the exercise device, the off-device parameter comprising an off-device exercise activity completable separate from the exercise device (Refer to Paragraph [0169]:” For example, in situations where the user is performing a workout that includes both exercises on the exercise machine 100 and off of the exercise machine 100, the user can use the stop mechanism 132 to stop the power to the tread belt's motor when getting off of the exercise machine and use the recall mechanism 140 to instruct the motor to resume the speed at which the tread belt 122 was previously moving prior to stopping the motor when the user resumes training on the exercise machine 100”….[0186]:” Further, if the programmed exercise routine instructs the user to perform push-ups off of the exercise machine, the accelerometer 450 may confirm that the user actually performed the push-ups as instructed by recording the user's movements as the user performs the exercises. Such physiological sensors and/or the accelerometer may be integrated into the exercise machine 100, the console 106, the arm rests 108, 110, the lower section 138 of the arm rests 108, 110, a mobile device 438, a device carried by the user, a remote device, or combinations thereof.”). Dalebout et al is analogous with Applicants invention in that they both teach exercise controls and therefore it would have been obvious to modify the device of Lannon et al to comprise an on-device parameter and an off-device parameter, the on-device parameter comprising an on-device exercise activity completable through operation of the exercise device, the off-device parameter comprising an off-device exercise activity completable separate from the exercise device, further the purpose of allowing a user to perform exercises off a device as part of a exercise routine established by the control system to provide the user with an increased customized exercise and therefore does not patentably distinguish the invention over prior arts.
Regarding Claim 17, Lannon et al in view of Dalebout et al continues to teach wherein generating the plurality of exercise device controls comprises: generating a stop-device control configured to stop operation of the exercise device based at least in part on the off-device exercise activity (Refer to Dalebout et al Paragraph [0163]:” The stop mechanism 132 may be used to cause at least one of the operating parameters to stop. For example, activation of the stop mechanism 132 may cause an immediate stop of power to the motor driving the tread belt 122. In such an example, a user may activate the stop mechanism 132 in an emergency. In other examples, the user may activate the stop mechanism when the user desires to get off or leave the exercise machine 10. … The user may cause the power to the tread belt's motor to be cut each time he or she gets off of the exercise machine 100 to perform these other exercises. “).
Regarding Claim 18, Lannon et al in view of Dalebout et al continues to teach wherein generating the plurality of exercise device controls comprises: generating a start-device control configured to start operation of the exercise device after completion of the off-device exercise activity (Refer to Paragraph [0169]:” For example, in situations where the user is performing a workout that includes both exercises on the exercise machine 100 and off of the exercise machine 100, the user can use the stop mechanism 132 to stop the power to the tread belt's motor when getting off of the exercise machine and use the recall mechanism 140 to instruct the motor to resume the speed at which the tread belt 122 was previously moving prior to stopping the motor when the user resumes training on the exercise machine 100.”).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to attach list of references cited for prior arts pertinent to claimed and unclaimed subject matter.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NYCA T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-7168. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:00.
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.
/NYCA T NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784
