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 .
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
paragraph [0001], line 2, --now U.S. Patent No. 12,248,887 B2 issued on Mar. 11, 2025,-- should be inserted after “May 19, 2023,”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 6-20 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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. According to the original specification and drawings filed on 04/03/2019, the recited limitation such as “The wearable device of claim 2, wherein the processing unit dynamically updates the race profile classification every predetermined distance to refine the accuracy of race time predictions” (emphasis added) is not properly described in the application as to possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing. Therefore, that limitation is seen as a new matter which is not supported by the original disclosure. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. According to the original specification and drawings filed on 04/03/2019, the recited limitation such as “The wearable device of claim 2, further comprising a haptic feedback module configured to provide real-time vibration alerts when the athlete exceeds or falls below an optimal pace range.” (emphasis added) is not properly described in the application as to possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing. Therefore, that limitation is seen as a new matter which is not supported by the original disclosure. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the classification of an athlete's current race pattern" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. According to the original specification and drawings filed on 04/03/2019, the recited limitation such as “The method of claim 1, wherein past training performance of the athlete is used as an additional input to refine race time prediction.” (emphasis added) is not properly described in the application as to possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing. Therefore, that limitation is seen as a new matter which is not supported by the original disclosure. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. According to the original specification and drawings filed on 04/03/2019, the recited limitation such as “The method of claim 3, wherein the athlete is prompted to input a subjective fatigue level during the race, and this input is factored into the prediction model.” (emphasis added) is not properly described in the application as to possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing. Therefore, that limitation is seen as a new matter which is not supported by the original disclosure. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. According to the original specification and drawings filed on 04/03/2019, the recited limitation such as “The wearable device of claim 2, wherein the display interface provides color-coded pacing alerts to indicate whether the athlete is on track, exceeding, or lagging behind an optimal pace.” (emphasis added) is not properly described in the application as to possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing. Therefore, that limitation is seen as a new matter which is not supported by the original disclosure. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. According to the original specification and drawings filed on 04/03/2019, the recited limitation such as “The method of claim 1, further comprising the step of transmitting intermediate time data to a remote server for real-time performance tracking by coaches or trainers.” (emphasis added) is not properly described in the application as to possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing. Therefore, that limitation is seen as a new matter which is not supported by the original disclosure. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. According to the original specification and drawings filed on 04/03/2019, the recited limitation such as “The method of claim 1, wherein the race profile selection process is adjusted based on race-specific factors, such as course elevation, expected weather conditions, or starting congestion.” (emphasis added) is not properly described in the application as to possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing. Therefore, that limitation is seen as a new matter which is not supported by the original disclosure. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. According to the original specification and drawings filed on 04/03/2019, the recited limitation such as “The method of claim 3, wherein the optimal race strategy is adjusted based on detected fatigue indicators, including heart rate variability, declining stride efficiency, or cadence irregularities.” (emphasis added) is not properly described in the application as to possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing. Therefore, that limitation is seen as a new matter which is not supported by the original disclosure. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. According to the original specification and drawings filed on 04/03/2019, the recited limitation such as “The wearable device of claim 2, further comprising a voice assistant module that provides real-time audio updates on race performance and strategy adjustments.” (emphasis added) is not properly described in the application as to possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing. Therefore, that limitation is seen as a new matter which is not supported by the original disclosure. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. According to the original specification and drawings filed on 04/03/2019, the recited limitation such as “The method of claim 1, further comprising storing race data post-race for analysis and generating improved race profiles for future use.” (emphasis added) is not properly described in the application as to possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing. Therefore, that limitation is seen as a new matter which is not supported by the original disclosure. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. According to the original specification and drawings filed on 04/03/2019, the recited limitation such as “The method of claim 3, further comprising dynamically adjusting the probability calculation model using reinforcement learning to improve accuracy over time.” (emphasis added) is not properly described in the application as to possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing. Therefore, that limitation is seen as a new matter which is not supported by the original disclosure. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. According to the original specification and drawings filed on 04/03/2019, the recited limitation such as “The method of claim 1, wherein the recommended pace adjustment is displayed as a real-time range of speeds, with an optimal range highlighted for the athlete.” (emphasis added) is not properly described in the application as to possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing. Therefore, that limitation is seen as a new matter which is not supported by the original disclosure. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. According to the original specification and drawings filed on 04/03/2019, the recited limitation such as “The method of claim 3, further comprising detecting and categorizing athlete stress levels based on heart rate trends and stride fluctuations.” (emphasis added) is not properly described in the application as to possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing. Therefore, that limitation is seen as a new matter which is not supported by the original disclosure. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. According to the original specification and drawings filed on 04/03/2019, the recited limitation such as “The method of claim 1, wherein the wearable device is configured to recommend pre-race warm-up intensity based on historical training data of the athlete.” (emphasis added) is not properly described in the application as to possession of the claimed invention at the time of filing. Therefore, that limitation is seen as a new matter which is not supported by the original disclosure. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claims 2, 6, 7, 11 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted elements are the elements must be included in a wearable device for predicting performance of an athlete such as the element(s) that determines a race time prediction, calculates a probability of meeting a target time and determines a recommended pace adjustment. Without the omitted elements above a display interface cannot displays real-time feedback, including race time prediction, probability of meeting a target time, and pace adjustment recommendations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cribar (US 7,572,205).
With regard to Claim 1, Cribar discloses in Figs. 1-6 an associated method for method for predicting and optimizing race performance of an athlete using a wearable device, the method comprising measuring intermediate times at predetermined distances using an inertial sensor and/or positional sensor in the wearable device (PDAs); retrieving a race profile, defined as a non-linear function of time over distance, based on stored historical data of previous races by multiple athletes; determining a race time prediction based on the retrieved race profile and current intermediate times; calculating a probability score indicating a likelihood of achieving a pre-set target time (see ABSTRACT and Column 3, lines 35 through Column 4, line 39); and displaying on the wearable device at least one of: (i) the predicted race time, (ii) a probability of achieving a target time, or (iii) a pace adjustment recommendation (see Column 1, lines 18-27).
With regard to Claim 4, wherein the race profile retrieval is based on machine learning classification, using historical race data to predict a most likely performance pattern for the athlete (see Column 3, lines 30-57).
With regard to Claim 5, the method further comprising automatically adjusting the recommended pace based on detected environmental factors such as temperature, humidity, or altitude (see Column 1, lines 31-54).
With regard to Claim 9, wherein past training performance of the athlete is used as an additional input to refine race time prediction (see Column 1, lines 31-38 and Column 5, lines 3-26).
With regard to Claim 2, Cribar discloses in Figs. 1-6 a wearable device for predicting performance of an athlete, comprising an inertial sensor and/or a positional sensor for detecting intermediate times during a race (see ABSTRACT); a processing unit configured to retrieve a race profile as a non-linear function of time over distance; a memory module storing predefined race profiles derived from previous athletes' performance data (see ABSTRACT and Memory in Fig. 1); and a display interface configured to provide real-time feedback, including race time prediction, probability of meeting a target time, and pace adjustment recommendations (see Column 1, lines 18-27).
With regard to Claim 6, wherein the processing unit dynamically updates the race profile classification every predetermined distance to refine the accuracy of race time predictions (see Column 3, lines 35-64).
.
With regard to Claim 7, the wearable device further comprising a haptic feedback module configured to provide real-time vibration alerts when the athlete exceeds or falls below an optimal pace range (see Column 3, lines 35-64).
With regard to Claim 3, Cribar discloses in Figs. 1-6 an associated method for dynamically adjusting an athlete's race strategy based on real time data, comprising continuously measuring real-time physiological and positional data of an athlete during a race, including speed, heart rate, and stride length (see ABSTRACT and Column 1, lines 31-56); classifying a race pattern of the athlete as one of multiple predefined race profiles (see ABSTRACT); adjusting a recommended pace for the athlete and effort distribution based on deviations from the predefined race profile (see ABSTRACT); and displaying an updated race time prediction based on the adjusted pace and real time environmental conditions (see Column 1, lines 18-27).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cribar.
With regard to claim 8, as discussed above with respect to claim 3, Cribar anticipates the claimed method for dynamically adjusting an athlete’s race strategy based on real-time data, except that Cribar does not disclose that the training computer system uses a neural network model, as recited in claim 8. However, it is notoriously well known in the art that neural network system is training computer system comprising interconnected nodes that function similarly to neurons in the human brain. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the training computer system of Cribar to employ a well-known neural network model in order to continuously learn from data and improve its performance over time. By utilizing neural network algorithms, the system is capable of recognizing hidden patterns and correlations in raw data, as well as clustering and classifying the data, thereby improving the effectiveness of the training computer system.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory 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 timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory 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 nonstatutory 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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-4 and 9 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5, 9-11, 13, 15, 20 and 21 of U.S. Patent No. 11,687,809. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they can be interpreted to describe substantially identical, very similar claimed limitations, or being obvious which are shown below:
Instant application 19/075,674
U.S. Patent No. 11,687,809
Claim 1: A method for predicting and optimizing race performance of an athlete using a wearable device, the method comprising: measuring intermediate times at predetermined distances using an inertial sensor and/or positional sensor in the wearable device; (1)
retrieving a race profile, defined as a non-linear function of time over distance, based on stored historical data of previous races by multiple athletes; (2)
determining a race time prediction based on the retrieved race profile and current intermediate times; calculating a probability score indicating a likelihood of achieving a pre-set target time; and (3)
displaying on the wearable device at least one of: (i) the predicted race time, (ii) a probability of achieving a target time, or (iii) a pace adjustment recommendation. (4)
Claim 4: The method of claim 1, wherein the race profile retrieval is based on machine learning classification, using historical race data to predict a most likely performance pattern for the athlete. (5)
Claim 9: The method of claim 1, wherein past training performance of the athlete is used as an additional input to refine race time prediction. (1)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Claim 1: A method for predicting and optimizing race performance of an athlete using a wearable device, the method comprising: measuring intermediate times at predetermined distances using an inertial sensor and/or positional sensor in the wearable device; (1)
retrieving a race profile, defined as a non-linear function of time over distance, based on stored historical data of previous races by multiple athletes; (2)
determining a race time prediction based on the retrieved race profile and current intermediate times; calculating a probability score indicating a likelihood of achieving a pre-set target time; and (3)
displaying on the wearable device at least one of: (i) the predicted race time, (ii) a probability of achieving a target time, or (iii) a pace adjustment recommendation. (4)
---------------------------------------------------------
Claim 2: A wearable device for predicting performance of an athlete, comprising: an inertial sensor and/or a positional sensor for detecting intermediate times during a race; (1)
a processing unit configured to retrieve a race profile as a non-linear function of time over distance; (2)
a memory module storing predefined race profiles derived from previous athletes' performance data; (3) and
a display interface configured to provide real-time feedback, including race time prediction, probability of meeting a target time, and pace adjustment recommendations. (4)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Claim 3: A method for dynamically adjusting an athlete's race strategy based on real time data, comprising continuously measuring real-time physiological and positional data of an athlete during a race, including speed, heart rate, and stride length; (1)
classifying a race pattern of the athlete as one of multiple predefined race profiles; (2)
adjusting a recommended pace for the athlete and effort distribution based on deviations from the predefined race profile; and displaying an updated race time prediction based on the adjusted pace and real time environmental conditions. (3)
Claim 1: A method for providing to an athlete during a race such as a running or a cycling race, at least one of: a race time prediction; a probability to achieve a target time at the end of the race; and/or an indication whether the pace followed by the athlete is too fast, adequate or too slow in order to achieve the target time, (4) said method comprising measuring during said race a plurality of intermediate times or speeds with an inertial sensor and/or a positional sensor in a wearable device; (1)
causing a processing unit in said wearable device to retrieve a race profile as a non-linear function of time over distance (t=f(d)); (2)
using the retrieved race profile for determining said information; wherein said step of retrieving the race profile comprises selecting the race profile from among a plurality of standardized race profiles, said plurality of standardized race profiles comprising: a first starter race profile wherein said non-linear function represents a more rapid pace during an initial section than during a last section of the race; and/or a second starter race profile wherein said non-linear function represents a more rapid pace during a last section than during an initial section of the race. (3)
Claim 2: The method of claim 1, comprising: said plurality of intermediate times being measured at predetermined distances determined with said inertial sensor and/or said positional sensor. (1)
Claim 3: The method of claim 1, wherein said retrieved race profile is an optimal race profile for the athlete. (3)
Claim 4: The method of claim 1, wherein said race profile is based on said intermediate times and on previous races of other athletes. (2)
Claim 5: The method of claim 4, wherein said race profile is determined by selecting among a plurality of standardized race profiles determined from previous races of other athletes the race profile that best corresponds to the race profile determined from said intermediate times. (2)
Claim 9: The method of claim 1, wherein said indication comprises an indication of a recommended pace range and a current pace.(4)
Claim 10: The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining a current value of at least one race parameter, other than the pace; displaying the current value of said race parameter along with a recommended range in order to achieve a recommended pace range.(4)
Claim 11: The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining a current value of stride length and cadence; displaying the current value of said stride length and of said cadence, along with a recommended range for those two parameters in order to achieve a recommended pace range.(4)
Claim 15: The method of claim 1, said step of retrieving a race profile comprising feeding a neuronal network or another self-learning structure with said intermediate times, and outputting said race profile and/or said information. (5)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Claim 20: A wearable device arranged for providing to an athlete during a race such as a running or a cycling race, at least one of: a race time prediction; a probability to achieve a target time at the end of the race; and/or an indication whether the pace followed by the athlete is too fast, adequate or too slow in order to achieve a target time,(4)
said apparatus comprising an inertial sensor and/or a positional sensor for measuring a plurality of intermediate times during said race;(1)
a processing unit arranged for retrieving, based on said intermediate time and on previous races of other athletes, a race profile as non-linear function of time over distance (t=f(d)), and for determining said information based on said race profile;(2)
a memory for storing a plurality of predefined race profiles;(3)
wherein the processing unit is also configured to select among said plurality of predefined race profiles the race profile that best corresponds to the race profile determined from said intermediate times; said plurality of predefined race profiles comprising: a first starter race profile wherein said non-linear function represents a more rapid pace during an initial section than during a last section of the race; and/or a second starter race profile wherein said non-linear function represents a more rapid pace during a last section than during an initial section of the race.(2)
Claim 23: The device of claim 20, wherein said indication comprises an indication of a recommended pace range and a current pace.(4)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Claim 20: A wearable device arranged for providing to an athlete during a race such as a running or a cycling race, at least one of: a race time prediction; a probability to achieve a target time at the end of the race; and/or an indication whether the pace followed by the athlete is too fast, adequate or too slow in order to achieve a target time, (4)
said apparatus comprising an inertial sensor and/or a positional sensor for measuring a plurality of intermediate times during said race; (1)
a processing unit arranged for retrieving, based on said intermediate time and on previous races of other athletes, a race profile as non-linear function of time over distance (t=f(d)), and for determining said information based on said race profile; (2)
a memory for storing a plurality of predefined race profiles; (3)
wherein the processing unit is also configured to select among said plurality of predefined race profiles the race profile that best corresponds to the race profile determined from said intermediate times; said plurality of predefined race profiles comprising: a first starter race profile wherein said non-linear function represents a more rapid pace during an initial section than during a last section of the race; and/or a second starter race profile wherein said non-linear function represents a more rapid pace during a last section than during an initial section of the race. (2)
Claim 21: A The device of claim 20, further comprising: a memory for storing a plurality of predefined race profiles.(3)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Claim 1: A method for providing to an athlete during a race such as a running or a cycling race, at least one of: a race time prediction; a probability to achieve a target time at the end of the race; and/or an indication whether the pace followed by the athlete is too fast, adequate or too slow in order to achieve the target time, (4)
said method comprising measuring during said race a plurality of intermediate times or speeds with an inertial sensor and/or a positional sensor in a wearable device; (1)
causing a processing unit in said wearable device to retrieve a race profile as a non-linear function of time over distance (t=f(d)); (2)
using the retrieved race profile for determining said information; wherein said step of retrieving the race profile comprises selecting the race profile from among a plurality of standardized race profiles, said plurality of standardized race profiles comprising: a first starter race profile wherein said non-linear function represents a more rapid pace during an initial section than during a last section of the race; and/or a second starter race profile wherein said non-linear function represents a more rapid pace during a last section than during an initial section of the race. (3)
Claim 4: The method of claim 1, wherein said race profile is based on said intermediate times
and on previous races of other athletes. (2)
Claim 5: The method of claim 4, wherein said race profile is determined by selecting among a plurality of standardized race profiles determined from previous races of other athletes the race profile that best corresponds to the race profile determined from said intermediate times. (2)
Claim 10: The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining a current value of at least one race parameter, other than the pace; displaying the current value of said race parameter along with a recommended range in order to achieve a recommended pace range. (3)
Claim 11: The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining a current value of stride length and cadence; displaying the current value of said stride length and of said cadence, along with a recommended range for those two parameters in order to achieve a recommended pace range. (3)
Claim 13: The method of claim 1, further comprising: during said race, measuring a plurality of physiological parameters of said athlete; using at least some of said parameters for selecting or adapting the retrieved race profile. (1)
Claims 1-4 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 9-11, 13 and 15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,224,887. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they can be interpreted to describe substantially identical, very similar claimed limitations, or being obvious which are shown below:
Instant application 19/075,674
U.S. Patent No. 12,224,887
Claim 1: A method for predicting and optimizing race performance of an athlete using a wearable device, the method comprising:
measuring intermediate times at predetermined distances using an inertial sensor and/or positional sensor in the wearable device;(1)
retrieving a race profile, defined as a non-linear function of time over distance, based on stored historical data of previous races by multiple athletes;(2)
determining a race time prediction based on the retrieved race profile and current intermediate times; calculating a probability score indicating a likelihood of achieving a pre-set target time; and (3)
displaying on the wearable device at least one of: (i) the predicted race time, (ii) a probability of achieving a target time, or (iii) a pace adjustment recommendation.(4)
Claim 4: The method of claim 1, wherein the race profile retrieval is based on machine learning classification, using historical race data to predict a most likely performance pattern for the athlete. (5)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Claim 2: A wearable device for predicting performance of an athlete, comprising: an inertial sensor and/or a positional sensor for detecting intermediate times during a race; (1)
a processing unit configured to retrieve a race profile as a non-linear function of time over distance; (2)
a memory module storing predefined race profiles derived from previous athletes' performance data; (3) and
a display interface configured to provide real-time feedback, including race time prediction, probability of meeting a target time, and pace adjustment recommendations. (4)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Claim 3: A method for dynamically adjusting an athlete's race strategy based on real time data, comprising:
continuously measuring real-time physiological and positional data of an athlete during a race, including speed, heart rate, and stride length;(1)
classifying a race pattern of the athlete as one of multiple predefined race profiles;(2)
adjusting a recommended pace for the athlete and effort distribution based on deviations from the predefined race profile;(3) and
displaying an updated race time prediction based on the adjusted pace and real time environmental conditions.(4)
Claim 1: A method for monitoring performance of an athlete during a race the method comprising:
generating a plurality of race profiles by clustering data from a plurality of other athletes according to level;(2)
determining a level of the athlete from previous races or trainings of the athlete;(3)
receiving data from a sensor in a wearable device, wherein the data is collected by the sensor during the race;(1)
retrieving a race profile from among the plurality of race profiles based on the level of the athlete; applying the race profile to the data to generate a projected time for the race;(3) and
displaying the projected time for the race on the wearable device.(4)
Claim 2: The method of claim 1, wherein the data includes a plurality of intermediate times being measured at predetermined distances.(1)
Claim 4: The method of claim 1, wherein the race profile is retrieved is further based on additional data collected from plurality of the other athletes.(2)
Claim 9: The method of claim 1, wherein the method further comprises: displaying an indication of a recommended pace range and a current pace based on the projected time.(4)
Claim 10: The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining a current value of at least one race parameter based on the data; displaying the current value of the race parameter along with a recommended range based on the projected time.(4)
Claim 11: The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining a current value of stride length and cadence; displaying the current value of said stride length and of said cadence, along with a recommended range for those two parameters based on the projected time.(4)
Claim 5: The method of claim 4, wherein the race profile is determined by selecting among a plurality of standardized race profiles determined from previous races of the plurality of the other athletes, wherein the race profile is selected that best corresponds to the race profile determined.(5)
Claim 15: The method of claim 1 wherein the retrieving utilizes a neuronal network or another self-learning structure.(5)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Claim 1: A method for monitoring performance of an athlete during a race the method comprising:
generating a plurality of race profiles by clustering data from a plurality of other athletes according to level;(2)
determining a level of the athlete from previous races or trainings of the athlete;(3)
receiving data from a sensor in a wearable device, wherein the data is collected by the sensor during the race;(1)
retrieving a race profile from among the plurality of race profiles based on the level of the athlete; applying the race profile to the data to generate a projected time for the race;(3) and
displaying the projected time for the race on the wearable device.(4)
Claim 4: The method of claim 1, wherein the race profile is retrieved is further based on additional data collected from plurality of the other athletes.(3)
Claim 9: The method of claim 1, wherein the method further comprises: displaying an indication of a recommended pace range and a current pace based on the projected time.(4)
Claim 10: The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining a current value of at least one race parameter based on the data; displaying the current value of the race parameter along with a recommended range based on the projected time.(4)
Claim 11: The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining a current value of stride length and cadence; displaying the current value of said stride length and of said cadence, along with a recommended range for those two parameters based on the projected time.(4)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Claim 1: A method for monitoring performance of an athlete during a race the method comprising:
generating a plurality of race profiles by clustering data from a plurality of other athletes according to level;(2)
determining a level of the athlete from previous races or trainings of the athlete;(3)
receiving data from a sensor in a wearable device, wherein the data is collected by the sensor during the race; (1)
retrieving a race profile from among the plurality of race profiles based on the level of the athlete;(2)
applying the race profile to the data to generate a projected time for the race;(3) and
displaying the projected time for the race on the wearable device.(4)
Claim 4: The method of claim 1, wherein the race profile is retrieved is further based on additional data collected from plurality of the other athletes.
Claim 5: The method of claim 4, wherein the race profile is determined by selecting among a plurality of standardized race profiles determined from previous races of the plurality of the other athletes, wherein the race profile is selected that best corresponds to the race profile determined.(2)
Claim 13: The method of claim 1, wherein the data includes a plurality of physiological parameters of the athlete.(1)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAI L NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1747. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 09:00am to 06:00pm Eastern time.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Regis Betsch can be reached on 571-27. 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.
/HAI L NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836 July 20, 2026
Prosecution Insights