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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “drive”, “photoelectric barrier” and “camera” in claim 1, “a seat/backrest force/contact detection device…provided in or on at least one of the seat or the backrest” in claim 6, “haptic user guidance device” in claim 8 and “at least one of an acoustic or haptic user guidance device…connected to the drive” in claim 9 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are also objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: “16” in Fig. 5. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are further objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “4” has been used to designate both “computer” in ¶ [0041], [0046] and [0061] and “processing and control unit” in ¶ [0037], [0053], [0056]-[0058] and [0063], and reference character “5” has been used to designate both “motor measuring unit” in ¶ [0041] and “speed controller” in ¶ [0053], [0057] and [0064]. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: “wherein the image display device is connected to the drive via a control input in such a way that…load signal output by the drive is incorporated in the synchronization of the image display” in claim 4, and “wherein the at least one of an acoustic or haptic user guidance device is connected to…the drive” in claim 9.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
the term “which” in line 8, needs to be changed to “wherein”,
the term “standing;” in line 9, needs to be changed to “standing,”,
the term “frame;” in line 12, needs to be changed to “frame,”, and
the term “feet;” in line 16, needs to be changed to “feet, and”.
Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
the term “com-prising” in line 1, needs to be changed to “comprising”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities:
the term “exercise -” in line 2, needs to be changed to “exercise”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities:
the term “com-prising” in line 1, needs to be changed to “comprising”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities:
the term “con-tact” in line 3, needs to be changed to “contact”, and
the phrase “detected and” in line 7, needs to be changed to “additionally detected and”.
Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
the term “com-prising” in line 1, needs to be changed to “comprising”, and
the term “out-put” in line 3, needs to be changed to “output”.
Appropriate corrections are 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 1-9 are 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.
Claim 1 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. Claim 1 recites: “when a change in the movement state or the change in the position of the user’s legs or feet towards the rear part is detected, a belt speed of the endless belt is reduced or the endless belt is stopped”. However, support for such limitations of claim 1, is not provided in the original specification. This limitation of claim 1, implies that when a change in the movement state, including from sitting to standing or walking to running, is detected, a belt speed of the endless belt is reduced or the endless belt is stopped. However, according to the original specification, when a change in motion state from running or walking to standing is detected, the belt speed is reduced, but the endless belt is only stopped when it is additionally detected that the user is sitting or leaning, and when a change in movement state from sitting or standing to running or walking is detected, the belt speed is increased or the belt speed is started (see ¶ [0014] and [0028] of the original specification). As such, reduction in the speed of the endless belt occurs when a change in the motion state from walking or running to standing is detected and stopping the endless belt occurs when it is additionally detected that the motion state has (further) changed to sitting or leaning. As a result, the above cited limitations of claim 1, are considered New Matter. Further clarification, appropriate corrections and specific citations of the pertinent portions of the specification, where support for such limitation is found, are respectfully requested. Claims 2-9 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, by virtue of dependency upon claim 1.
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 1-9 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 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for the following reasons. Claim 1 recites: “a motion state detection device…configured to distinguish running or walking from sitting or standing”. However, it is not clear how a motion state detection device, which comprises a photoelectric barrier or a camera device distinguishes running or walking from sitting or standing (i.e., without use of a processing unit). Although a motion state detection device (including any of the above cited structures) can detect a change in a motion state, from walking or running to sitting or standing or vice versa, it is unclear how it can distinguish walking or running from sitting or standing. Furthermore, claim 1, in line 8, recites: “motion state detection device is arranged adjacent the seat or the backrest”, while in lines 13-14, recites: “wherein the motion detection device comprises at least one photoelectric barrier or camera device arranged above the walking or running surface”. Thereby, it is unclear whether the motion detection device is arranged “adjacent the seat or the backrest”, “above the walking or running surface” or both. As such, claim 1 has been examined “as best understood”, whereby a processing or control unit distinguishes running or walking from sitting or standing based on data from the motion detection device, and whereby the motion detection device is arranged above the walking or running surface (which would be adjacent the seat or the backrest). Further clarification and appropriate corrections are respectfully requested. Claims 2-9 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, by virtue of dependency to claim 1.
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 1-2 and 5-7 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 3-4 of U.S. Patent No. 12,324,953 B2 in view of Kim (KR200324272Y1, a copy of the original document and its translation has been attached to this Office Action). Claims 1-2 and 5-7 of the instant application and claims 1and 3-4 of U.S. Patent No. 12,324,953 B2 are directed towards similar treadmill arrangements with similar components and functions but for the motion state detection device comprising at least one photoelectric barrier or camera device arranged above the walking or running surface of the treadmill for optically detecting the movement state or change in position of at least one of the user’s legs or feet, which is taught by Kim. Kim teaches a treadmill arrangement comprising a motion state detection device comprising at least one photoelectric barrier (i.e. 19ar-19lr, 19as-19ls, Fig. 1) or camera device arranged above a walking or running surface of the treadmill (Fig. 1) for optically detecting a movement state or change in position of at least one of the user's legs or feet (Figs. 1-2, ¶ [27]-[32], [42]-[47], [49] of the translation copy, please note that upon modification of the invention claimed in claims 1 and 3-4 of U.S. Patent No. 12,324,953 B2 with features of Kim, the motion detection device that is arranged above the walking or running surface would also be arrange adjacent the seat or the backrest). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of U.S. Patent No. 12,324,953 B2 as claimed in claims 1 and 3-4, with features of Kim in order in order to enable controlling the speed of the belt more accurately based on the user’s position on the belt and his/her fatigue/fitness level while preventing the user from potential fall or injuries. Table below provides a mapping between claims 1-2 and 5-7 of the instant application and claims 1 and 3-4 of U.S. Patent No. 12,324,953 B2.
Claims of Instant Application
Claims of U.S. Patent No. 12,324,953 B2
1. A treadmill arrangement, comprising:
a treadmill frame;
an endless belt running over rollers supported in the treadmill frame and driven by a drive, one surface of the endless belt serving as a walking or running surface;
at least one of a seat or a backrest is attached to projecting side parts or a rear part of the treadmill frame; and
a motion state detection device configured for obtaining a control signal for the drive, which motion state detection device is arranged adjacent the seat or the backrest and is configured to distinguish running or walking from sitting or standing;
wherein the motion state detection device is configured for detecting a movement state or a change in position of at least one of a user's legs or feet relative to the treadmill frame;
wherein the motion state detection device comprises at least one photoelectric barrier or camera device arranged above the walking or running surface for optically detecting the movement state or change in position of at least one of the user's legs or feet;
the treadmill arrangement further comprising a drive control device connected on an input side to the motion state detection device and configured such that, when a change in the movement state or the change in the position of the user's legs or feet towards the rear part is detected, a belt speed of the endless belt is reduced or the endless belt is stopped.
NOTE: the motion state detection device being arranged adjacent the seat or the backrest, wherein the motion state detection device comprises at least one photoelectric barrier or camera device arranged above the walking or running surface for optically detecting the movement state or change in position of at least one of the user's legs or feet, is taught by Kim (see above for details).
5. The treadmill arrangement according to claim 1, wherein the motion state detection device is configured to detect at least one time-dependent sensor signal and to discriminate between a time-varying and a time-constant or disappearing sensor signal.
2. The treadmill arrangement according to claim 1, further comprising an image display device for displaying an image of a virtual running environment, wherein the image display device is connected to the motion state detection device via a synchronization input.
6. The treadmill arrangement according to claim 2, further comprising a seat/backrest contact detection device provided in or on at least one of the seat or the backrest, which generates at least one of a further control signal for the drive or a synchronization signal for the image display device upon detection that the user is sitting on the seat or leaning against the backrest.
7. The treadmill arrangement according to claim 6, wherein the drive control device is configured for combined processing of output signals from the motion state detection device and the seat/back con-tact detection device, such that:
when a change in motion state from walking or running to standing is detected, the belt speed is reduced, and
when a change in motion state from walking or running to standing is detected and it is detected that the user is sitting on the seat or leaning against the backrest, the endless belt is stopped.
1. A treadmill arrangement, comprising:
a treadmill frame;
an endless belt running over rollers supported in the treadmill frame and driven by a drive, one surface of the endless belt serving as a walking or running surface;
at least one of a seat or a backrest attached to projecting side parts or a rear part of the treadmill frame;
a processing and control unit, connected to the drive, configured to distinguish walking or running from sitting or standing and vice versa, and in response thereto, control the drive;
a motion state detection device connected to the processing and control unit, the motion state detection device configured to (i) detect a motion state of a user on the endless belt, by detecting at least one time-dependent sensor signal and discriminating between a time-varying and a time-constant or disappearing sensor signal, and (ii) generate a detection signal for the processing and control unit; and
a seat/backrest contact detection device provided in or on the seat and/or the backrest and connected to the processing and control unit, the seat/backrest contact detection device configured to (i) detect when the user is sitting on the seat or leaning against the backrest and (ii) generate a detection signal for the processing and control unit;
wherein the processing and control unit is configured for combined processing of the detection signals from said motion state detection device and said seat/backrest contact detection device and control the drive such that:
(a) upon detecting a change in the motion state from at least one of sitting or standing to walking or running, the endless belt starts running or a running speed of the endless belt is increased, and
(b) upon detecting a change in motion state from walking or running to standing, the running speed of the endless belt is reduced, and upon additionally detecting that the user is sitting on the seat or leaning against the backrest, the endless belt is stopped.
3. A treadmill arrangement, comprising:
a treadmill frame;
an endless belt running over rollers supported in the treadmill frame and driven by a drive, one surface of the endless belt serving as a walking or running surface;
at least one of a seat or a backrest attached to projecting side parts or a rear part of the treadmill frame;
a processing and control unit, connected to the drive, configured to distinguish walking or running from sitting or standing and vice versa, and in response thereto, control the drive;
a motion state detection device connected to the processing and control unit, the motion state detection device configured to (i) detect a motion state of a user on the endless belt, and (ii) generate a detection signal for the processing and control unit;
a seat/backrest contact detection device provided in or on the seat and/or the backrest and connected to the processing and control unit, the seat/backrest contact detection device configured to (i) detect when the user is sitting on the seat or leaning against the backrest and (ii) generate a detection signal for the processing and control unit;
wherein the processing and control unit is configured for combined processing of the detection signals from said motion state detection device and said seat/backrest contact detection device and control the drive such that:
(a) upon detecting a change in the motion state from at least one of sitting or standing to walking or running, the endless belt starts running or a running speed of the endless belt is increased, and
(b) upon detecting a change in motion state from walking or running to standing, the running speed of the endless belt is reduced, and upon additionally detecting that the user is sitting on the seat or leaning against the backrest, the endless belt is stopped.
4. The treadmill arrangement of claim 3, wherein the seat/backrest contact detection device is further configured to generate a synchronization signal for an image display device upon detecting that the user is sitting on the seat or leaning against the backrest.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZEBRIS MEDICAL GMBH (DE 202015101590 U1, hereinafter referred to as “Zebris”, a copy of the original document and its translation has been attached to this Office Action), in view of Kim (KR200324272Y1, a copy of the original document and its translation has been attached to this Office Action) and Choi et al. (KR 101805354 B1, a copy of the original document and its translation has been attached to this Office Action).
Regarding claim 1, (claim 1 “as best understood”) Zebris teaches a treadmill arrangement (¶ [1]), comprising:
a treadmill frame (10, Figs. 1-2, ¶ [45]);
an endless belt (2b) running over rollers (2a) supported in the treadmill frame and driven by a drive (¶ [1]), one surface of the endless belt serving as a walking or running surface (2c, Figs. 1-2, ¶ [1], [32]);
at least one of a seat or a backrest (11’, Fig. 2) is attached to projecting side parts (10a) or a rear part of the treadmill frame (¶ [44]); and
a motion state detection device (¶ [38]), wherein the motion state detection device is configured for detecting a movement state or a change in position of at least one of a user's legs or feet relative to the treadmill frame (¶ [38]);
wherein the motion state detection device comprises at least one photoelectric barrier or camera device for optically detecting the movement state or change in position of at least one of the user's legs or feet (¶ [38]);
the treadmill arrangement further comprising a processing and control unit (i.e., 4 along with foot pressure evaluation unit, ¶ [21]-[22], [32], [38]-[39], [41], claim 19).
Zebris is silent about the motion state detection device configured for obtaining a control signal for the drive, which motion state detection device (comprises at least one photoelectric barrier or camera device) is arranged above the walking or running surface (adjacent the seat or the backrest), and the treadmill arrangement further comprising a drive control device connected on an input side to the motion state detection device and configured such that, when a change in the movement state or the change in the position of the user's legs or feet towards the rear part is detected, a belt speed of the endless belt is reduced or the endless belt is stopped.
Regarding claim 1, (claim 1 “as best understood”) Kim teaches a treadmill arrangement (10), comprising:
a treadmill frame (Fig. 1);
an endless belt (11) supported in the treadmill frame and driven by a drive (39), one surface of the endless belt serving as a walking or running surface (Fig. 1, ¶ [25]);
a motion state detection device (i.e. 19ar-19lr, 19as-19ls, Fig. 1, ¶ [27]) configured for obtaining a control signal for the drive (¶ [27]-[32], [42]-[47], [49]), wherein the motion state detection device comprises at least one photoelectric barrier (i.e. 19ar-19lr, 19as-19ls, Fig. 1) or camera device arranged above the walking or running surface (Fig. 1) for optically detecting the movement state or change in position of at least one of the user's legs or feet (Figs. 1-2, ¶ [27]-[32], [42]-[47], [49], please note that upon modification of Zebris’ invention with features of Kim, the motion detection device that is arranged above the walking or running surface would also be arrange adjacent the seat or the backrest); the treadmill arrangement further comprising a drive control device (control unit 30) connected on an input side to the motion state detection device and configured such that, when a change in the movement state or the change in the position of the user's legs or feet towards the rear part is detected, a belt speed of the endless belt is reduced or the endless belt is stopped (¶ [31], [46]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zebris’ invention such that the motion state detection device is configured for obtaining a control signal for the drive, which motion state detection device (comprises at least one photoelectric barrier or camera device) is arranged above the walking or running surface (adjacent the seat or the backrest), and the treadmill arrangement further comprising a drive control device connected on an input side to the motion state detection device and configured such that, when a change in the movement state or the change in the position of the user's legs or feet towards the rear part is detected, a belt speed of the endless belt is reduced or the endless belt is stopped, as taught by Kim in order to enable controlling the speed of the belt based on the user’s position on the belt and his/her fatigue/fitness level while preventing the user from potential fall or injuries.
Zebris in view of Kim teaches the invention as substantially claimed. See above. Zebris further teaches a motion detection device comprising sensors on plate 3, that is arranged near the seat or the backrest and is connected to a processing and control unit (i.e. 4 along with foot pressure evaluation unit, ¶ [21]-[22], [32], [39], [41], claim 19), which is configured to distinguish running or walking from sitting or standing (¶ [9], [14]-[16], [45], [48], the processing and control unit can determine, based on the direction and the amount of force detected by a force sensor system 12 (which may be part of the seat), whether the user is walking/running or falling which may be based on the user leaning (a form of sitting/standing) on the seat or armrest), wherein such motion state detection device is configured for detecting a movement state or a change in position of at least one of a user's legs or feet relative to the treadmill frame (¶ [21], [32], [38]-[39], [41], claim 19). However, Zebris in view of Kim is silent about the motion detection device, comprising the at least one photoelectric barrier or camera device, being configured to distinguish running or walking from sitting or standing.
Regarding claim 1, (claim 1 “as best understood”) Choi teaches a treadmill arrangement (10), comprising: a treadmill frame (Fig. 1), a motion state detection device (20) configured to distinguish running or walking from sitting or standing (i.e. camera, infrared or optical tracking sensor, ¶ [107]-[108]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zebris’ invention in view of Kim such that the motion detection device (comprising the at least one photoelectric barrier or camera device) is configured to distinguish running or walking from sitting or standing as taught by Choi in order to adjust various operational parameters of the device based on the user’s motion and thereby provide for an overall safer apparatus.
Regarding claim 2, Zebris in view of Kim and Choi teaches the treadmill arrangement further comprising an image display device for displaying an image of a virtual running environment, wherein the image display device is connected to the motion state detection device via a synchronization input (Zebris: ¶ [23], [34]-[36], [47], claim 21; Choi: 30, Fig. 14, ¶ [31], [33], [35], [111]).
Regarding claim 3, Zebris in view of Kim and Choi teaches wherein the image display device comprises at least one text or digit display area for displaying at least one of exercise related instructions, data, or a light signal generator (Zebris: ¶ [23]).
Regarding claim 4, Zebris in view of Kim and Choi teaches wherein the image display device is connected to the drive via a control input such that at least one of a speed or load signal output by the drive is incorporated in the synchronization of the image display device (Zebris: ¶ [34]-[35]).
Regarding claim 8, Zebris in view of Kim and Choi teaches the treadmill arrangement further comprising at least one of an acoustic or haptic user guidance device connected to the movement state detection device and configured to output signals or instructions for action accompanying the image display device to the user (Zebris: ¶ [23], [36]).
Regarding claim 9, Zebris in view of Kim and Choi teaches wherein at least one of the acoustic or haptic user guidance device is connected to the movement state detection device and the drive, and is configured to output signals or instructions for action accompanying the image display device to the user (Zebris: Fig. 1, ¶ [23], [36], as much as applicant has shown the at least one of an acoustic user guidance device being connected to the drive, Zebris is also showing such).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zebris in view of Kim and Choi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of WU (GB 2421806 A).
Zebris in view of Kim and Choi is silent about wherein the motion state detection device is configured to detect at least one time-dependent sensor signal and to discriminate between a time-varying and a time-constant or disappearing sensor signal.
Regarding claim 5, Wu teaches a treadmill arrangement comprising: a treadmill frame (please note that a treadmill inherently has a frame), an endless belt driven by a drive/motor, a surface of the belt serving as a walking or running surface (pg. 3 line 18-23, a surface of the treadmill belt inherently serves as a walking or running surface), a motion state detection device (15) configured for obtaining a control signal for the drive, the motion state detection device being adapted in particular to distinguish walking or running from sitting or standing (Fig. 2, pg. 3 line 18-23, pg. 4 lines 13 – pg. 5 line 18), wherein the motion state detection device is configured to detect at least one time-dependent sensor signal and to discriminate between a time-varying and a time-constant or disappearing sensor signal (Fig. 2, pg. 3 line 18-23, pg. 4 lines 8 – pg. 5 line 18).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zebris’ invention in view of Kim and Choi wherein the motion state detection device is configured to detect at least one time-dependent sensor signal and to discriminate between a time-varying and a time-constant or disappearing sensor signal as taught by Wu in order to provide a more accurate determination of the user’s motion state and a more accurate control of the treadmill.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zebris in view of Kim and Choi as applied to claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of Rice (US 2010/0261579 A1).
Zebris in view of Kim and Choi is silent about the treadmill arrangement further comprising a seat/backrest contact detection device provided in or on at least one of the seat or the backrest, which generates at least one of a further control signal for the drive or a synchronization signal for the image display device upon detection that the user is sitting on the seat or leaning against the backrest.
Regarding claim 6, Rice teaches an exercise apparatus (1) comprising: a motion state detection device (i.e. 400), a seat/backrest force/contact detection device provided in or on a seat which generates at least one of a further control signal for the drive or a synchronization signal for an image display device upon detection that the user is sitting on the seat (¶ [13], [33], [62], [74]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zebris’ invention in view of Kim and Choi with a seat/backrest contact detection device provided in or on at least one of the seat or the backrest, which generates at least one of a further control signal for the drive or a synchronization signal for the image display device upon detection that the user is sitting on the seat or leaning against the backrest as taught by Rice in order to provide for a better and more realistic simulation of the user’s various motions during exercise.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHILA JALALZADEH ABYANEH whose telephone number is (571)270-7403. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30 am - 3:00 pm.
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.
/SHILA JALALZADEH ABYANEH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784
Prosecution Insights