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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Applicant should note that the large number of references in the attached IDS have been considered by the examiner in the same manner as other documents in Office search files are considered by the examiner while conducting a search of the prior art in a proper field of search. See MPEP 609.05(b). Applicant is requested to point out any particular reference in the IDS which they believe may be of particular relevance to the instant claimed invention in response to this office action.
Restriction/Election
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II and species 22 in the reply filed on 01/13/2026 is acknowledged.
Examiner notes that claims 96-97 are drawn to non-elected species 9 of figures 28-32 and claim 100 is drawn to non-elected species 10 of figures 34-35, and thus claims 96-97 and 100 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/13/2026.
Currently, claims 83-84, 92-95, 101-104 are being examined on the merits as being drawn to elected invention/species.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: figure 56 does not include the reference sign “510”mentioned in the description in at least page 23 line 14.
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 disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The following needs to be corrected:“ which are capable preventing magnet reorientation” in page 4 line 14,
“FIG. 6 is a top view the aspect of the cochlear implant” in page 8 line 15,
“Access to the implanted cochlear implant 10 may be obtained, for example, making an incision” page 17 lines 30-31,
“as will portions the top wall 44” in page 18 line 9,
“The base 106 may integral with the magnet housing 102” in page 20 line 18,
“The bone engagement surface 250g may threaded” in page 36 line 18,
“but a lacks the lip 274 and has a magnet aperture 50p ” in page 43 line 19-20,
“The scalpel blade 72 may then the inserted into one of the semi-circular cutout portions 310” in page 44 line 26,
“The scalpel blade 72 may then the inserted through the slot 336” in page 45 line 30,
“A variety of blades with ends having an overall circular may be employed” in page 46 line 19, and
“(as opposed to a larger MRI-compatible magnet apparatus). inventions include any combination of the elements ” in page 58 line 18 .
A suggested correction is -- which are capable of preventing magnet reorientation --, -- FIG. 6 is a top view of the aspect of the cochlear implant --, -- Access to the implanted cochlear implant 10 may be obtained, for example, by making an incision--, -- as will portions of the top wall 44--, -- The base 106 may be integral with the magnet housing 102--, -- The bone engagement surface 250g may be threaded--, -- but [[a]] lacks the lip 274 and has a magnet aperture 50p --, -- The scalpel blade 72 may then be [[the]] inserted into one of the semi-circular cutout portions 310 --, -- The scalpel blade 72 may then [[the]] be inserted through the slot 336-- , -- A variety of blades with ends having an overall circular shape may be employed--, -- (as opposed to a larger MRI-compatible magnet apparatus). [[i]]Inventions include any combination of the elements -- respectively.
Appropriate correction is required.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Following claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
In each of claims 84, 92-95, 101, 103-104 line 1 “A magnet apparatus” needs to be corrected. A suggested correction is – [[A]] The magnet apparatus -- in light of its antecedent in claim 1 line 1 “A magnet apparatus”.
Claim 102 “a magnet apparatus” in line 8 needs to be corrected. A suggested correction is – [[a]] the magnet apparatus-- in light of its antecedent in claim 1 line 1 “A magnet apparatus”.
Claim 102 “the cochlear implant lead” in line 7 needs to be corrected. A suggested correction is – a [[the]] cochlear implant lead -- in light of lack of any antecedent for this term in the present or preceding claims.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Claims terms where relevant are being interpreted in light of definitions enumerated in instant application specification as-filed page 4 lines 28-30, page 17 line 15-22, page 25 line 19, page 28 line 18, page 35 line 5, page 44 lines 2-3, page 58 lines 12-22.
Please note that USPTO personnel are to give claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the supporting disclosure. In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054-55, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027-28 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Limitations appearing in the specification but not recited in the claim should not be read into the claim. E-Pass Techs., Inc. v. 3Com Corp., 343 F.3d 1364, 1369, 67 USPQ2d 1947, 1950 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (claims must be interpreted "in view of the specification" without importing limitations from the specification into the claims unnecessarily). In re Prater, 415 F.2d 1393, 1404-05, 162 USPQ 541, 550-551 (CCPA 1969). See also In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319, 321-22, 13 USPQ2d 1320, 1322 (Fed. Cir. 1989) ("During patent examination the pending claims must be interpreted as broadly as their terms reasonably allow.... The reason is simply that during patent prosecution when claims can be amended, ambiguities should be recognized, scope and breadth of language explored, and clarification imposed.... An essential purpose of patent examination is to fashion claims that are precise, clear, correct, and unambiguous. Only in this way can uncertainties of claim scope be removed, as much as possible, during the administrative process.").
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 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.
(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 83-84, 95, 101, 103-104 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Nagl et al. (Pub. No.: US 20140012071 A1, hereinafter referred to as “Nagl”).
PNG
media_image1.png
472
721
media_image1.png
Greyscale
As per independent Claim 83, Nagl discloses a magnet apparatus for use with an implantable medical device (Nagl in at least abstract, [0002], [0007], [0009-0010], [0012-0013], [0020], [0022], [0024], [0026], [0028], [0032] for example discloses relevant subject-matter. More pertinently, Nagl in at least fig. 7A, abstract, [0013], [0020], [0022], [0029] for example discloses magnet apparatus (fig. 7A, 701) for use with an implantable medical device such as hearing implant. See Nagl at least [0022] “implant magnet arrangement (e.g., radially symmetric) for a medical implant system including without limitation hearing implants (cochlear implant, middle ear implant, bone conduction implant, or vestibular implant)”), the magnet apparatus comprising:
a case (Nagl, fig. 7A);
at least one magnetic element within the case that is rotatable relative to the case (Nagl, fig. 7A, [0028-0029] for example discloses at least one magnetic element 703 within the case that is rotatable relative to the case. See at least Nagl [0028] “the implant magnet may have radial symmetry as with a circular disk…Such shapes may be either freely rotatable about the radial center …within the implantable housing”); and
a bone anchor associated with the case that is configured to anchor the case to bone (Nagl in at least fig. 7A see bone screws flanking the case).
As per dependent Claim 84, Nagl further discloses a magnet apparatus as claimed in claim 83, wherein the bone anchor comprises a bone screw(Nagl in at least fig. 7A see bone screws flanking the case).
As per dependent Claim 95, Nagl further discloses a magnet apparatus as claimed in claim 83, further comprising: a projection for mechanically interconnecting the case to a portion of the implantable medical device (Nagl in at least fig. 7A discloses a projection/screw head for mechanically interconnecting the case to a portion of the implantable medical device).
As per dependent Claim 101, Nagl further discloses a magnet apparatus wherein at least one magnetic element comprises a diametrically magnetized disk-shaped magnet (Nagl in at least fig. 7A discloses wherein at least one magnetic element 703 comprises a diametrically magnetized disk-shaped magnet. See at least Nagl [0028] “the implant magnet may have radial symmetry as with a circular disk…Such shapes may be either freely rotatable about the radial center …within the implantable housing”).
As per dependent Claim 103, Nagl further discloses a magnet apparatus wherein the projection has a semi-circular shape (Nagl in at least fig. 7A disclose projection/screw head which has semicircular shape).
As per dependent Claim 104, Nagl further discloses a magnet apparatus wherein the projection is not sharp (Nagl in at least fig. 7A disclose projection/screw head which is not sharp).
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.
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 102 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagl.
As per dependent Claim 102, Nagl in light of Applicant admitted prior art (see instant application specification as-filed Fig. 1 and page 2 line 3 to page 3 line 16), discloses and provides evidentiary support for the conventional and well-known elements as now explicitly, positively and specifically recited by the Applicants in claim 102. More specifically, Nagl in light of Applicant admitted prior art (see instant application specification as-filed Fig. 1 and page 2 line 3 to page 3 line 16) discloses and provides evidentiary support for a cochlear implant (Examiner notes that the Applicants disclose these limitation as well-known prior art as evidenced in instant application specification as-filed Fig. 1 and page 2 line 3 to page 3 line 16 (see at least instant application specification as-filed under “related art” section page 2 line 3- page 3 line 3 “ICS systems include an implantable cochlear stimulator (or “cochlear implant”), a sound processor unit … and a microphone … implant magnet may, for example, be located within a pocket in the cochlear implant housing… a conventional cochlear implant (or “implantable cochlear stimulator”) is the cochlear implant 10 illustrated in FIGS. 1 and 2. The cochlear implant 10 includes a flexible housing 12 formed from a silicone elastomer or other suitable material, a processor assembly 14, a cochlear lead 16, and an antenna 18 that may be used to receive data and power by way of an external antenna that is associated with, for example, a sound processor unit. The cochlear lead 16 may include a flexible body 20, an electrode array 22 at one end of the flexible body, and a plurality of wires (not shown) that extend through the flexible body from the electrodes 24 (e.g., platinum electrodes) in the array 22 to the other end of the flexible body. The antenna 18 is located within an antenna portion 26 of the housing 12. A cylindrical magnet 28, with north and south magnetic dipoles that are aligned in the axial direction, is located within a pocket 30 in the housing antenna portion 26. The magnet 28 is used to maintain the position of a headpiece transmitter over the antenna 18, and includes magnetic material 32 and a hermetically sealed case 34. The exemplary processor assembly 14, which is connected to the electrode array 22 and antenna 18, includes a printed circuit board 36 with a stimulation processor 38 that is located within a hermetically sealed case 40. The stimulation processor 38 converts the stimulation data into stimulation signals that stimulate the electrodes 24 of the electrode array 22.”). Also see Nagl in [0013] “the medical implant system may be a hearing implant system such as a cochlear implant system”), comprising:
a cochlear implant housing, formed from a resilient elastomer, including an antenna portion and an aperture within the antenna portion that extends through the cochlear implant housing (Examiner notes that the Applicants disclose this limitation as well-known prior art in instant application specification as-filed Fig. 1 and page 2 line 3 to page 3 line 16 (see at least page 2 line 3- page 3 line 3 “a conventional cochlear implant (or “implantable cochlear stimulator”) is the cochlear implant 10 illustrated in FIGS. 1 and 2. The cochlear implant 10 includes a flexible housing 12 formed from a silicone elastomer or other suitable material, a processor assembly 14, a cochlear lead 16, and an antenna 18 that may be used to receive data and power by way of an external antenna that is associated with, for example, a sound processor unit”. Also, see Nagl in [0003] discloses a cochlear implant housing including an antenna portion 102 and an aperture within the antenna portion that extends through the cochlear implant housing. See Nagl [0003] “Implanted under the patient's skin is a corresponding receiver assembly 102 having similar receiving coils 108 and an implanted internal magnet 106”);
an antenna within the antenna portion (Nagl in [0003] discloses an antenna 108 within the antenna portion. Examiner notes that the Applicants disclose this limitation as well-known prior art in instant application specification as-filed Fig. 1 and page 2 line 3 to page 3 line 16 (page 2 lines 26-27 “The antenna 18 is located within an antenna portion 26 of the housing 12”). Also See Nagl [0003] “Implanted under the patient's skin is a corresponding receiver assembly 102 having similar receiving coils 108 and an implanted internal magnet 106”);
a stimulation processor within the cochlear implant housing operably connected to the antenna and to the cochlear lead (Examiner notes that the Applicants disclose this limitation as well-known prior art in instant application specification as-filed Fig. 1 and page 2 line 3 to page 3 line 16 (page 2 line 32- page 3 line 3 “processor assembly 14, which is connected to the electrode array 22 and antenna 18, includes a printed circuit board 36 with a stimulation processor 38 that is located within a hermetically sealed case 40. The stimulation processor 38 converts the stimulation data into stimulation signals that stimulate the electrodes 24 of the electrode array 22.”). Nagl in at [0003] discloses a stimulation processor/implanted processor module within the cochlear implant housing operably connected to the antenna and to the cochlear lead. See at least [0003] “Rf signals from the transmitter coils 107 couple data and/or power to the receiving coil 108 which is in communication with an implanted processor module”); and
a magnet apparatus as claimed in claim 83 (see claim 83 analysis above) at least partially within the cylindrical aperture (Nagl in fig. 7A).
Claims 92-94 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagl in view of Bewley Michael (Pub. No.: US 20130216078 A1, hereinafter referred to as “Bewley”).
As per dependent Claim 92, Nagl discloses magnet apparatus as claimed in claim 83 (see claim 83).
Nagl does not explicitly disclose a stiff strap features i.e. a stiff strap with an anchor aperture secured to the case.
However, in an analogous hearing prostheses field of endeavor, Bewley discloses medical apparatus (Bewley in fig. 1, fig. 5 discloses a medical apparatus) comprising a stiff strap with an anchor aperture secured to the case (Bewley in fig. 5, [0060] discloses a strap 512 with an anchor aperture 514 secured to the case/housing of medical device component 510 which assumes a stiff configuration via ratchet system tension adjustment).
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 anchoring elements of the device as taught by Nagl, by further including strap anchoring elements as taught by Bewley. A person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to do so, with a reasonable expectation of success, for the advantage of influence the quality of the coupling between the internal and external hearing aid components via additional robust fail proof anchoring mechanisms.
As per dependent Claim 93, the combination of Nagl and Bewley as a whole further discloses a magnet apparatus wherein the case includes a top; and the stiff strap is secured to the top of the case (Bewley in fig. 5, [0060] discloses a strap 512 secured to the case/housing of medical device component 510 at top as seen in right hand side figure in fig. 5).
As per dependent Claim 94, the combination of Nagl and Bewley as a whole further discloses a magnet apparatus wherein the case includes a bottom; and the stiff strap is secured to the bottom of the case (Bewley in fig. 5, [0060] discloses a strap 512 which would be secured to the case/housing of medical device component 510 at bottom when anchored to clasp 514a).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and/or the claims.
Prior art US 20110224756 A1 to Zimmerling et al. for disclosing an implantable magnet that can freely turn in response to an external magnetic field, thus avoiding torque and demagnetization on the implantable magnet similar to that disclosed and claimed.
Prior art US 20110178364 A1 to Ball et al. for disclosing implant straps (see fig. 4A).
Prior art US 20190239007 A1 to Kennes et al. for disclosing an external portion of an auditory prosthesis includes an external magnet that interacts with an implantable magnet to hold the external portion against the skin. The technologies described herein utilize additional magnets disposed within portions of the auditory prosthesis to redirect stray magnetic flux that can disturb the operation of a vibrating element of the auditory prosthesis, which allows the vibrating element to be disposed more closely to the magnets, reducing the overall height profile of the prosthesis.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUNITA REDDY whose telephone number is (571)270-5151. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Thu 10-4 EST.
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
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) Form at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
/SUNITA REDDY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791