Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/533,880

COORDINATED SYSTEM OF MULTIPLE TRANSDUCERS

Final Rejection §102§103§112
Filed
Nov 23, 2021
Examiner
MATTHEWS, CHRISTINE HOPKINS
Art Unit
3791
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Apollo Neuroscience, Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
753 granted / 1049 resolved
+1.8% vs TC avg
Strong +31% interview lift
Without
With
+31.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
59 currently pending
Career history
1108
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
5.1%
-34.9% vs TC avg
§103
29.4%
-10.6% vs TC avg
§102
28.4%
-11.6% vs TC avg
§112
29.3%
-10.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1049 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
DETAILED ACTION This Office Action is responsive to the Amendment filed 11 August 2025. Claims 1-28 are now pending. The Examiner acknowledges the amendments to claims 1, 20 and 23. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-28 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 at lines 9-10 and lines 14-15 recites that the processor is programmed to generate an output pattern “wherein the…transcutaneous vibratory output pattern is selected based on the target state”. Based on this recitation, it is unclear if the processor is programmed to also select the pattern based on the target state, in addition to generating the pattern, or if the recitation “is selected” is implying input via the recited user interface at line 5. Essentially, it is unclear how the “selection” is related to the processor programming. Claim 2 recites “the processor is programmed to generate the first transcutaneous vibratory output pattern and the second transcutaneous vibratory output pattern based on the target state” however it is unclear how claim 2 further limits claim 1 with this recitation as the most recent amendment to claim 1 appears to recite these limitations at lines 10 and lines 14-15 with the recitation the “output pattern is selected based on the target state”. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 6. 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. 7. 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)(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. 8. Claims 1-7 and 9-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chmelik (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0245931). Regarding claim 1, Chmelik discloses a system to deliver vibratory therapy to a user (Fig. 1, Abstract; [0039]) comprising: a first transducer 2 (one of the vibratable elements) adapted to emit a first transcutaneous vibratory output (bone conduction) ([0040], [0045], Figs. 1 and 9); a second transducer 4 (of headphones) adapted to emit a second transcutaneous vibratory output ([0060], Figs. 9-12); a processor in electronic communication with a user interface (smart phone as described in [0049]), the first transducer 2, and the second transducer 4 ([0040], [0046], [0049]; Figs. 2 and 9-12), wherein the user interface accepts a target state of the user (via touch pattern) ([0028]-[0029]), the processor programmed to: (i) generate a first transcutaneous vibratory output pattern comprising a first perceived pitch, a first perceived beat, and a first intensity (a first transcutaneous vibratory output pattern, or vibration rhythm/sequence is generated by the data processing unit [0041], [0044], and the first vibratory output is bone conduction [0045], which has a perceived pitch, beat and intensity), wherein the first transcutaneous vibratory output pattern includes a variation of the first perceived beat ([0041] teaches that calculated HRV values are used to generate a corresponding vibration rhythm/sequence and since measurements are continuous, a change in HRV will generate a corresponding change in vibration rhythm/sequence, which would result in a variation of the first perceived beat within an output pattern) and wherein the first transcutaneous vibratory output pattern is selected based on the target state ([0044]: “data processing means is programmed to select from a variety of rhythms from a data storage means and to manage the feedback process such that if a particular rhythm is not having a positive effect on the stress indication value, then an alternative rhythm will be selected, until a selected rhythm does have a positive effect in reducing the stress indicator value); (ii) generate a second transcutaneous vibratory output pattern (audible sound via headphones 4 [0046] and [0059]-[0061]) comprising a second perceived pitch, a second perceived beat, and a second intensity (audible sound has a perceived pitch, beat and intensity), wherein the second transcutaneous vibratory output pattern includes a variation of the second perceived pitch ([0046]: “data processing unit 26 then determines the sequence of vibration rhythm as well as infrasonic vibrations, audible sound frequencies, electrical or other stimulation may also be used to alter or maintain the currently measured biometrics. This is an ongoing process and the sequence of frequencies are changeable dependent of the measured state of the user) and wherein the second transcutaneous vibratory output pattern is selected based on the target state ([0044]: “data processing means is programmed to select from a variety of rhythms from a data storage means and to manage the feedback process such that if a particular rhythm is not having a positive effect on the stress indication value, then an alternative rhythm will be selected, until a selected rhythm does have a positive effect in reducing the stress indicator value); (iii) cause the first transducer to emit the first transcutaneous vibratory output (bone conduction) based on the first transcutaneous vibratory output pattern ([0045], [0047]); and (iv) cause the second transducer to emit the second transcutaneous vibratory output (audible sound) based on the second transcutaneous vibratory output pattern ([0046], [0060]-[0061]). Regarding claim 2, the processor is programmed to generate the first transcutaneous vibratory output pattern and the second transcutaneous vibratory output pattern based on the target state ([0041], [0043], [0044], [0046]). Regarding claim 3, the first transducer 2 is adapted to be worn on a first part of a body of the user (Abstract, [0045], Figs. 1 and 9). Regarding claim 4, the second transducer 4 (headphones) is adapted to be worn on a second part of a body of the user ([0060], Figs. 9-12). Regarding claim 5, the first transcutaneous vibratory output pattern and the second transcutaneous vibratory output pattern can be emitted simultaneously ([0046]: “ongoing process”; Abstract: “continuous real time feedback loop”; [0041]: “calculated values are used to generate a correspond vibration rhythm and are continuously being generated as the measurements are continuously made to form a feedback loop”). Regarding claim 6, the first transcutaneous vibratory output pattern and the second transcutaneous vibratory output pattern can be emitted sequentially ([0041], [0046] disclose sequential emission). Regarding claim 7, the first transcutaneous vibratory output pattern and the second transcutaneous vibratory output pattern can be emitted in an alternating pattern (alternating being construed as switching between a variety of rhythms until a selected rhythm has a positive effect in reducing the stress indicator value - [0044]). Regarding claim 9, the processor is further programmed to modify the first transcutaneous vibratory output pattern by varying the first perceived pitch ([0041] teaches that calculated HRV values are used to generate a corresponding vibration rhythm/sequence and since measurements are continuous, a change in HRV will generate a corresponding change in vibration rhythm/sequence, which would result in a variation of the first perceived pitch within an output pattern). Regarding claim 10, the processor is further programmed to modify the second transcutaneous vibratory output pattern by varying the second perceived pitch ([0046]: “data processing unit 26 then determines the sequence of vibration rhythm as well as infrasonic vibrations, audible sound frequencies, electrical or other stimulation may also be used to alter or maintain the currently measured biometrics. This is an ongoing process and the sequence of frequencies are changeable dependent of the measured state of the user). Regarding claim 11, the processor is further programmed to modify the first transcutaneous vibratory output pattern by varying the first perceived beat (([0041] teaches that calculated HRV values are used to generate a corresponding vibration rhythm/sequence and since measurements are continuous, a change in HRV will generate a corresponding change in vibration rhythm/sequence, which would result in a variation of the first perceived beat within an output pattern). Regarding claim 12, the processor is further programmed to modify the second transcutaneous vibratory output pattern by varying the second perceived beat ([0046]: “data processing unit 26 then determines the sequence of vibration rhythm as well as infrasonic vibrations, audible sound frequencies, electrical or other stimulation may also be used to alter or maintain the currently measured biometrics. This is an ongoing process and the sequence of frequencies are changeable dependent of the measured state of the user). Regarding claim 13, the processor is further programmed to modify the vibratory therapy by varying at least one of the first intensity and the second intensity (frequencies) ([0039], [0041], [0042], [0046], [0049]). Regarding claim 14, the first transcutaneous vibratory output pattern and the second transcutaneous vibratory output pattern can be coordinated with one another ([0046]: “ongoing process”; Abstract: “continuous real time feedback loop”; [0041]: “calculated values are used to generate a correspond vibration rhythm and are continuously being generated as the measurements are continuously made to form a feedback loop”). Regarding claim 15, the first transducer is considered to be in electronic communication with the second transducer via data processing unit 26 of the mobile device, which can be connected to the transducers through wireless or wired communications ([0046] and [0049]). Regarding claim 16, at least one of the first transducer and the second transducer comprise a processor ([0052] – first transducer (one of the vibratable elements) as shown in Fig. 3, comprises a processor). Regarding claim 17, the processor of the first transducer is programmed to modify the first transcutaneous vibratory output pattern based on data received from a sensor 1 in communication with the system ([0052] and [0049]). Regarding claim 18, the user interface is on a mobile device [0049]. Regarding claims 19 and 20, the claim is interpreted as the first transcutaneous vibratory output capable of being produced by multiplicatively combining a sine wave-shaped envelope based on the first perceived beat with a wave pattern based on the first perceived pitch as the claim does not limit the production to the system/processor/user interface as being configured to generate such a step (or “relationship”) of “multiplicatively combining…”. Regarding claim 21, the claim is interpreted as the first transcutaneous vibratory output capable of being generated in part by a first oscillation at a first frequency, and a second oscillation at a second frequency that differs from the first frequency by less than 10 Hz ([0039]-[0042]). Regarding claims 22 and 23, the claim is interpreted as the second transcutaneous vibratory output capable of being produced by multiplicatively combining a sine wave-shaped envelope based on the second perceived beat with a wave pattern based on the second perceived pitch as the claim does not limit the production to the system/processor/user interface as being configured to generate such a step (or “relationship”) of “multiplicatively combining…”. Regarding claim 24, the claim is interpreted as the second transcutaneous vibratory output capable of being generated in part by a first oscillation at a first frequency, and a second oscillation at a second frequency that differs from the first frequency by less than 10 Hz ([0039]-[0042]). Regarding claim 25, the first transducer (one of the vibratable elements) as shown in Fig. 3) is located in a first portion of an object (portion of “object” around the neck as shown in Fig. 9) and the second transducer (of head phones) is located in a second portion of the object (“second portion” of the object being the ear-wrapped portion 4 as shown in Fig. 9). Regarding claim 26, the object is at least one of a collar or a harness structured to fit a non-human animal (as indicated above with respect to claim 25, the object could be considered a collar as it does wrap around the neck as shown in Fig. 9 and it could fit a non-human animal, such as a dog). Regarding claim 27, the system further comprises one or more additional transducers, wherein the one or more additional transducers are structured to emit a transcutaneous vibratory output in coordination with the first transducer and the second transducer (“further vibrators”) adapted to emit a first transcutaneous vibratory output (bone conduction) ([0045], Figs. 1, 9 and 10). Regarding claim 28, the processor is programmed to modify the first transcutaneous vibratory output pattern based on data received from a sensor 1 in communication with the system ([0052] and [0049]). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chmelik (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0245931). Regarding claim 8, while Chmelik does not disclose explicitly that the processor is further programmed to cause the second transcutaneous vibratory output to stop while the first transcutaneous vibratory output is emitted. However, Chmelik teaches the use of a smart phone which is programmed to control a set of smart head phones (which causes the second transcutaneous vibratory output) ([0049] and [0061]), and as such, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in that art that a smart phone, paired with a set of smart head phones, would retain the programming ability to stop the delivery of audible stimulation at any time during the vibration therapy session, including during emission of the first transcutaneous vibratory output. Response to Arguments 12. Applicant’s arguments filed 11 August 2025 with respect to the rejection of claims 1-28 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) citing Choudhury (‘163) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINE HOPKINS MATTHEWS whose telephone number is (571)272-9058. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:30 am - 4:00 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, Charles A Marmor, II can be reached on (571) 272-4730. 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. /CHRISTINE H MATTHEWS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 23, 2021
Application Filed
Feb 08, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Aug 11, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 25, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599776
MAGNETIC STIMULATION COILS AND FERROMAGNETIC COMPONENTS FOR TREATMENT AND DIAGNOSTIC PROCEDURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12576003
DEVICE FOR STIMULATING A HUMAN EROGENOUS ZONE USING A VARIABLE PRESSURE FIELD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12558560
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR IMPROVING DELIVERY OF THERAPEUTICS TO THE SPINAL CORD
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12515064
WIRELESS NEURAL STIMULATOR WITH INJECTABLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Patent 12508446
MACHINE LEARNING BASED DOSE GUIDED REAL-TIME ADAPTIVE RADIOTHERAPY
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+31.0%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1049 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month