DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
The restriction requirement between invention groups I-IV, as set forth in the Office action mailed on 5/14/2026, has been reconsidered in view of applicants 7/10/2026 amendment to cancel claims 21-40 and add new claims 41-60, all of which require an “active pelvis orthosis”. In view of the withdrawal of this portion of the restriction requirement, applicants are advised that the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable such that a subsequently filed continuation or divisional may be subject to double patenting rejection. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01. Applicant is further advised that any continuation of this application having claims drawn to inventions that could have been finally rejected on the grounds and art of record of the current application may receive a first action on the merits that is final. See MPEP § 706.07(b). Accordingly, applicant should ensure that any subsequently filed continuation contain claims that are carefully drafted to avoid application of prior art grounds of rejection applied during the prosecution of the current application. However, the species portion of the restriction is maintained as follows.
Applicant's election with traverse of Species 5 (figs. 8A-8C) in the reply filed on 7/10/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the grounds that the claims have been amended to avoid the prior art reference Ihrke US8443693 and thus now have unity of invention. This is not persuasive. Those features of the claims that are common between species are suggested by newly found prior art (see 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection using Hu CN109620652). Accordingly, the species still lack unity of invention.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Section 33(a) of the America Invents Act reads as follows:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no patent may issue on a claim directed to or encompassing a human organism.
Claim 42 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 and section 33(a) of the America Invents Act as being directed to or encompassing a human organism. See also Animals - Patentability, 1077 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 24 (April 21, 1987) (indicating that human organisms are excluded from the scope of patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101).
Claim 42 recites “the assistive unit transmits assistive torque to a leg of the user”. This reasonably encompasses parts of a human being.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claims 41-60 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 41 recites “a gearbox based on a harmonic drive”, which is unclear as to what manner the gearbox is “based on” a harmonic drive, e.g., comprise a harmonic drive, consist of a harmonic drive, connected to a harmonic drive, be similar to a harmonic drive in some specific way, etc.
Claim 44 is unclear since it recites “a connection element coupling the assistive unit to the active pelvis orthosis” as though the element, unit and orthosis are distinct parts; whereas claim 41 previously recites “active pelvis orthosis comprising: at least one assistive unit” as though the unit is part of the orthosis rather than distinctly connectable thereto.
Claim 46 recites “an angular position of the second axis” which is unclear as to how an axis can have an angular position. If applicant means to recite an angle of some element about the second axis then it is unclear what unspecified element that would be.
Claim 48 recites “the first torsional spring and a load being on opposing ends of the actuation unit” as though the spring is distinct from the unit, whereas claim 41 states that the unit comprises the spring. Accordingly, it is unclear whether the unit comprises the spring or is distinct therefrom.
Claim 48 recites “the motor and the gearbox being between the first torsional spring and the load” however elected figures 8A-C show motor 230 and gearbox 232 to be radially within spring 236 and load 250 to be axially offset from all of the preceding. Thus, the claim is contrary to the disclosure which shows that the motor/gearbox are not radially between, nor axially between, the spring and load. See MPEP 2173.03 which states that a claim may be "indefinite when a conflict or inconsistency between the claimed subject matter and the specification disclosure renders the scope of the claim uncertain as inconsistency with the specification disclosure or prior art teachings may make an otherwise definite claim take on an unreasonable degree of uncertainty."
Claim 49 is unclear as to what manner of “interaction” is to limit the claims, e.g., torque, speed, size, distance, etc. Further, it is unclear what disclosed interaction might define “two orders of magnitude smaller” since there is no disclosure of anything in particular being 100 times smaller than anything else.
Claim 56 recites “the first torsional spring and the second torsional spring are connected through fasteners” which is unclear as to what element or elements the springs are connected to through the fasteners, e.g., each other or some other element or elements.
The remaining claims depend from the above and are thus similarly unclear/rejected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 41-46 and 48-60 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by Hu CN109620652.
Claim 41. Hu discloses an active pelvis orthosis comprising: at least one assistive unit configured to generate torque for a user's hip flexion- extension motion, the assistive unit comprising: a housing (housing of 2 and/or 9); a transmission unit (17 and/or 32) within the housing configured to transfer motion and torque between a first axis corresponding to an output axis of the assistive unit and a second axis corresponding to a user's hip flexion-extension joint; and an actuation unit (29, 21, 24 and frame of fig.1) within the housing, the actuation unit comprising: a frame (frame of fig.1) rigidly supporting components of the actuation unit; a gearbox (29) based on a harmonic drive (29, see 35 USC 112[b] rejection); a motor (21) for transmitting rotation and torque through the gearbox; and a first torsional spring (24, see figs.4 and 5) connecting the motor and the gearbox to the frame.
Claim 42. The active pelvis orthosis of claim 41, wherein the assistive unit transmits assistive torque to a leg of the user through a thigh link (12).
Claim 43. The active pelvis orthosis of claim 42, wherein the thigh link is rotatably attached to the housing by a link attachment (11).
Claim 44. The active pelvis orthosis of claim 41, further comprising a connection element (any connection element of figure 1, see 35 USC 112[b] rejection) coupling the assistive unit to the active pelvis orthosis.
Claim 45. The active pelvis orthosis of claim 41, wherein the transmission unit transfers the motion and torque between the first axis and the second axis (see fig.4).
Claim 46. The active pelvis orthosis of claim 41, further comprising a joint encoder (25) configured to determine an angular position of the second axis (see 35 USC 112[b] rejection).
Claim 48. The active pelvis orthosis of claim 41, wherein the first torsional spring, the motor, and the gearbox are aligned along an output axis of rotation (i.e., respectively aligned with each of their own output axis or rotation), the first torsional spring and a load (load of 17) being on opposing ends of the actuation unit, and the motor and the gearbox being between the first torsional spring and the load (in as much as applicant’s own invention is best understood, see 35 USC 112[b] rejection).
Claim 49. The active pelvis orthosis of claim 41, wherein interaction (a small portion of size or distance interaction, see 35 USC 112[b] rejection) between the motor and the first torsional spring is two orders of magnitude smaller than interaction (a large portion of size or distance interaction 100 times larger than the small portion, e.g., 0.01mm vs. 0.0001mm, see 35 USC 112[b]) between the gearbox and the first torsional spring.
Claim 50. The active pelvis orthosis of claim 41, wherein the transmission unit is disposed between the actuation unit and the second axis (see fig.4).
Claim 51. The active pelvis orthosis of claim 41, wherein the actuation unit further comprises: a second torsional spring (radially outer spring as seen in marked-up fig.5 below) connected in series with the first torsional spring (radially inner spring as seen in marked-up fig.5 below) to connect the motor and the gearbox to the frame; and an encoder module (25).
PNG
media_image1.png
529
532
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 52. The active pelvis orthosis of claim 51, wherein the encoder module directly reads relative rotation of a second flange (flange of 24 as seen in fig.5) of the second torsional spring without using the frame (i.e. frame of figure 1 not directly connected to encoder 25) as an angular reference point.
Claim 53. The active pelvis orthosis of claim 51, wherein the second torsional spring has at least two opposing arcuate segments (arcuate segments as seen in market-up fig.5 below) that partially and circumferentially extend about the first torsional spring (first spring as seen in marked-up fig.5 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
529
539
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 54. The active pelvis orthosis of claim 51, wherein the first torsional spring, the second torsional spring, the motor, and the gearbox are aligned along an output axis of rotation (e.g., respectively about each of their own output axis of rotation).
Claim 55. The active pelvis orthosis of claim 51, wherein the first and second torsional springs are disposed opposite a load (load of 17) from the gearbox.
Claim 56. The active pelvis orthosis of claim 51, wherein the first torsional spring and the second torsional spring are connected (to a hub and ring respectively as seen in marked-up figure 5 below, see 35 USC 112[b] rejection) through fasteners (fasteners seen in marked-up figure 5 below) oriented along a radial dimension of the actuation unit.
PNG
media_image3.png
451
456
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claim 57. The active pelvis orthosis of claim 51, wherein the first torsional spring comprises linear segments (any segments of first spring of 24 in the thickness direction thereof, i.e., horizontal direction in fig.4) extending parallel to the output axis of rotation.
Claim 58. The active pelvis orthosis of claim 51, wherein the second torsional spring comprises linear segments (any segments of second spring of 24 in the thickness direction thereof, i.e., horizontal direction in fig.4) extending parallel to the output axis of rotation.
Claim 59. The active pelvis orthosis of claim 51, wherein the second torsional spring has a greater radial distance to the output axis of rotation than the first torsional spring (in that the second spring is radially outward/bigger than the first, see marked-up figure 5 given in the explanation of claim 51 above).
Claim 60. The active pelvis orthosis of claim 51, wherein the second torsional spring partially and circumferentially extends about the first torsional spring, (see second spring arcuate segments extending as such in marked-up figure 5 given in the explanation of claim 53 above).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 47 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hu CN109620652 and Vitiello WO2016128877.
Claim 47. The active pelvis orthosis of claim 41, wherein the Hu transmission unit comprises gears (32 and 17) rather than the belt and pulleys claimed. However, Vitiello teaches that belt/pulleys (See copy of the English translation of Vitiello attached to this Office action, e.g., “a first preferred embodiment of the transmission device… based on one or more flexible elongated elements, for example cables, chains, belts, which engage a plurality of pulleys or equivalent components”) were known to be desirable in the transmission unit art. One of ordinary skill would have found belt/pulleys to be quieter than gears and less prone to gear tooth breakage when over loaded (belt slip acts as a non-destructive clutch). 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 Hu as such.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTOR L MACARTHUR whose telephone number is (571)272-7085.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/VICTOR L MACARTHUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618
Prosecution Insights