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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment, filed 22 January 2026, are acknowledged. Claims 1-13 are amended. Claims 14 and 15 are cancelled.
Claims 1-13 and pending in the instant application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 22 January 2026, with respect to the objections to the specification, the objections to claims 1-15, and the 35 USC 112(b) rejection of claims 1-15, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objections to the specification, the objections to claims 1-15, and the 35 USC 112(b) rejection of claims 1-15 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, with respect to the 35 USC 102 rejection(s) of claims 1-9, have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the amendment. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Bengt (SE543180C2) and further in view of Faltys (US20050251225A1). Examiner disagrees that Bengt does not teach of suggest a middle loop conductor path. The use of path does not require different sections and can be broadly interpreted and defined. See annotated figure 3B below.
PNG
media_image1.png
446
574
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner also disagrees that Bengt fails to teach or suggest that the transformer core is configured to be implanted fully or partially within a part of an ear of the user, as Bengt discloses the transformer core is configured to be implanted in skin (Page 3, lines 24-25), so it is configured to be implanted in an ear. Examiner agrees Bengt fails to teach or suggest that the external unit is a Behind-The-Ear hearing aid, an In-The-Ear hearing aid, or an earhook hearing aid as claimed, and therefore relies on the combination of Bengt and Faltys.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bengt (SE543180C2) in view of Faltys (US20050251225A1).
Regarding claim 1, Bengt discloses an implantable hearing system (Fig. 1, ref. 100; Page 4, line 24 to Page 5 line 12) comprising: an implantable unit (Fig.1, ref. 102; page 12, line 26) configured to be at least partly implanted in the body of a user; a transformer core (Fig. 1, ref. 1 06; page 12, line 27) configured to be arranged at least partly under the skin of the user (Page 3, lines 24-25), wherein the transformer core is configured to be implanted fully or partially within a part of an ear of the user (As user’s ear comprises skin, the transformer core is configured to be implanted in a part of an ear, Page 3, lines 24-25), an internal cabling configured to connect the implantable unit to the transformer core, wherein the internal cabling comprises a first winding around the transformer core (Fig. 1, ref. 107; page 12, lines 28-30); and an external unit (Fig. 1, ref. 101; page 12, line 30) configured to be at least partly arranged outside the body of the user, the external unit comprising: a power supply circuitry (Fig. 1, ref. 103: page 12, lines 31 /32) and a connector coupled to the power supply circuitry configured to supply power from the power supply circuitry to the implantable unit via the transformer core (Fig. 3B, ref. 301; page 13, lines 30-33), wherein the connector comprises a first connector part (See annotated Fig. 3B below) and a second connector part (See annotated Fig. 3B below); wherein a first conductor path conductively connects the power supply circuitry and the first connector part (See annotated Fig. 3B below), a middle loop conductor path (See annotated Fig. 3B below) conductively connects a first section of the second connector part and a second section of the second connector part (See annotated Fig. 3B below), wherein the middle loop conductor path preferably at least partly extends in the first connector part (See annotated Fig. 3B below); a final conductor path conductively connecting the first connector part (See annotated Fig. 3B below) and the power supply circuitry (Figure 3B, where connected both the first and second connector parts are conductively connected to the power supply); wherein the first connector part and the second connector part are joinable to conductively connect the first conductor path and the final conductor path via the middle loop conductor path in series (page 14, lines 10-12) and, wherein a second winding is formable around the transformer core by joining the first connector part and the second connector part (page 14, lines 13/14).
PNG
media_image1.png
446
574
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Bengt discloses the medical device is an implantable hearing aid system (Pages 4-5) and the external unit further comprises a housing (Figure 1). Bengt does not disclose the external unit is an earhook hearing aid. Faltys discloses a cochlear implant system wherein the external housing comprises an earhook (Figure 4, Paragraph [0015]). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the implantable hearing system as taught by Bengt, with the external housing comprising an earhook as taught by Faltys, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of allowing the device to remain close to the transformer core without relying on the core for support.
Regarding claims 2 and 3, Bengt, in figured 5A, 5B, 6A and 6B discloses additional loops to increase the number of windings in the external cabling, wherein the additional loops are connected in series when the first and second connector parts are joined.
Regarding claims 4 and 5, Bengt discloses the first loop conductor path and the final loop conductor path solely extend in the first connector (The loops in Fig. 3B and 5A-6B can be openly interpreted to read on the final loop connector, further figures 4B and 4C discloses a loop external to the first connector, wherein the internal loops can be interpreted as the first and final loops).
Regarding claim 6, Bengt discloses the first connector part and/or the second connector part are joinable via a plug connection (Figures 6A and 6B).
Regarding claim 7, Bengt discloses the portions of the conductor path extending in between the first connector part and the second connector part are enclosed at least partially by a protective housing (Figures 6A and 6B).
Regarding claim 8, Bengt discloses the transformer core is substantially circular and/or comprises a through hole (Figure 8).
Regarding claim 9, Bengt discloses the implantable unit is configured to generate an output (Page 3, lines 20-21) and can used for one or more of a cochlear implant, an auditory transmodiolar implant, an auditory brainstem implant, a bone conduction hearing aid, and a middle ear implant (Claim 8).
Regarding claim 10, Bengt, as modified by Faltys in claim 1, previously disclosed the implantable hearing system comprises an external unit that further comprises a housing and an earhook attached to the housing (See claim 1 supra, Faltys, Figure 4, Paragraph [0015]).
Regarding claim 11, Bengt, as modified in claim 10, does not disclose the power supply circuity is arranged inside the housing. Faltys discloses the power supply circuity arranged inside the housing (Paragraph [0011]). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the implantable hearing system as taught by modified Bengt, with the power supply circuity arranged inside the housing as taught by Faltys, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of allowing the weight of the power supply in the housing to be supported by the earhook.
Regarding claim 12, Bengt, as modified in claim 10, discloses the first connector part is at least partly arranged inside the earhook (Bengt discloses the first connector is internal to the housing (Figure 1) and Faltys discloses the device is an earhook (Figure 4) so the first connector would be internal to the earhook, at least partially). Modified Bengt discloses the device has a plug port (Figure 6) and as Faltys discloses the device is an earhook, the earhook would have to comprise the port.
Regarding claim 13, Bengt, as disclosed in claim 10, discloses the connector part is at least partly arranged inside a housing (Figure 6A and 6B) and wherein the housing comprises a port (Figure 6A and 6B), in particular a plug port, to connect the first connector part and the second connector part (Figure 6A and 6B), and wherein the second connector part is at least partly arranged inside the housing (Figure 6A and 6B) and wherein at least a part of the housing is configured to be inserted through the through hole of the transformer core (Figure 6A and 6B, the external cable can be interpreted as part of the housing and that goes through the core, Figure 1). Bengt does not disclose the housing comprises an earhook. Faltys discloses a cochlear implant system wherein the external housing comprises an earhook (Figure 4, Paragraph [0015]). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the implantable hearing system as taught by Bengt, with the external housing comprising an earhook as taught by Faltys, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of allow the device to remain close to the transformer core without relying on the core for support.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ayre (US 20060259096 A1) discloses a device for communicating electric signals across the skin layer of a patient, wherein the device includes an implantable electrically conductive core capable of forming an EMF flux loop.
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 Marc D Honrath whose telephone number is (571)272-6219. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Charles A Marmor II can be reached at (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.
/CHARLES A MARMOR II/Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3791
/M.D.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3791