DETAILED ACTION
This action is pursuant to the claims filed on 01/20/2026. Claims 1-12 and 14-20 are pending. Claims 17-20 are withdrawn. A final action on the merits of claims 1-12 and 14-16 is as follows.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment to the claims are acknowledged and entered accordingly. As a result, the claim objections and 35 USC 112 rejections of the previous office action are withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (Chen, Sanyuan “A fiber-based implantable multi-optrode array with contiguous optical and electrical sites”, Journal of Neural Engineering, 2013) in view of Seymour (U.S. PGPub No. 2013/0030353), and in further view of Gilson (U.S. PGPub No. 2022/0109327).
Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches A flexible implantable electrode array comprising: a shank formed from a flexible polymer material (Fig 2, parylene shanks), the shank comprising: a waveguide (Figs 2-3, each shank a modified optical fiber (i.e., waveguide)); and a number of chipsets disposed in the shank along the length of the shank (Figs 2-3 conducting site), wherein each chipset is configured to measure neural activity in tissue surrounding the shank near the respective chipset (Fig 2, recording sites are configured to record neural activity), and to communicate signals representative of the measured neural activity via the waveguide (Pg 2, “The electrophysiological recording elements were integrated on optical fibers using a metal deposition method to realize a ‘zero distance’ between the two parts. The evoked signal can be recorded at the same point where the neurons are optically stimulated”; Section 2.1 and Conclusion 4 both disclose the recording pathway being integrated with the waveguide).
Chen fails to teach the chipset is a plurality of chipsets.
In related prior art, Seymour teaches a similar implantable electrode array comprising a waveguide and a plurality of chipsets (Fig 2 electrodes 120 positioned along length of shank). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the shank of Chen in view of Zhang and Seymour to incorporate a plurality of chipsets. Doing so would advantageously provide the shank with more than one electrode site for recording and/or stimulating neural tissue as is known in the art.
Chen fails to teach wherein each chipset is configured to receive power wirelessly via the waveguide
In related prior art, Gilson teaches a waveguide for providing wireless power ([0033] waveguides are capable of providing wireless power to individual elements). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Chen in view of Seymour and Gilson to incorporate the waveguide as a wireless power delivery to the chipsets to arrive at claim 1. Doing so would advantageously allow for the life of the implantable device to not be limited by the life of a battery or the ability to hold a charge as it is known waveguides can provide power to devices ([0033]).
Regarding claim 2, Chen further teaches wherein the flexible polymer material is Parylene C (Pg 2 section 2.1 disclosing parylene-C).
Regarding claim 3, Chen further teaches a backplane (See Fig 2), and wherein: the shank is attached to the backplane (see Fig 2); the chipsets are configured to receive commands from the backplane (Fig 5a, pins of backplane connect to circuitry and processor such that recording sites receive commands from backplane to process neural signals); and the chipsets are configured to provide a data signal to the backplane via the waveguide, the data signal representative of the measured neural activity (Pg 4 section 2.6).
Chen fails to teach the chipsets are configured to be powered wirelessly from the backplane via the waveguide.
In related prior art, Gilson teaches a waveguide for providing wireless power ([0033] waveguides are capable of providing wireless power to individual elements). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Chen in view of Seymour and Gilson to incorporate the waveguide as a wireless power delivery to the chipsets to arrive at claim 3. Doing so would advantageously allow for the life of the implantable device to not be limited by the life of a battery or the ability to hold a charge as it is known waveguides can provide power to devices ([0033]).
Regarding claim 4, Chen further teaches wherein the shank comprises the waveguide and an outer-layer surrounding the waveguide (Fig 3 insulation layer is surrounding the waveguide; Fig 5b also shows this structure).
Regarding claim 5, Chen further teaches wherein a waveguide material is interposed between the waveguide and the outer-layer surrounding the waveguide (Fig 3 cladding is interposed between waveguide core and insulation).
Regarding claim 10, Chen further teaches wherein one or more of the number of chipsets comprise an electrode site that is exposed along the shank (Figs 3 and 5b, conducting site is exposed along the shank).
Claim(s) 6-7 and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Seymour, Gilson, and Zhang (Zhang, Jiayi, “Integrated device for optical stimulation and spatiotemporal electrical recording of neural activity in light-sensitized brain tissue”, Journal of Neural Engineering, 2009).
Regarding claims 6-7, the Chen/Seymour/Gilson combination teaches the device of claim 5 as stated above.
Chen is silent to the material selection of the waveguide material.
In related prior art, Zhang teaches a similar device wherein the waveguide material is formed from a metallic material; wherein the metallic material is gold (Fig 1, Au cladding; Section 2.1, disclosing gold metallization cladding). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cladding of Chen in view of Zhang to incorporate a gold cladding as the waveguide material to arrive at claims 6-7. Doing so would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as the use of gold cladding is well-known in the art to yield predictable results therein (Section 2.1 of Zhang disclosing gold cladding).
Regarding claim 11, Chen teaches a flexible implantable electrode array for receiving and communicating neuronal information comprising: a shank formed from a flexible polymer material and having a length greater than a width (Fig 2, parylene shanks), wherein the shank comprises a waveguide and a sheath surrounding the waveguide (Fig 3 core and insulation layer); a waveguide liner disposed in the shank and interposed between the waveguide and the sheath (Fig 3 cladding), the waveguide liner extending along a length of the waveguide (see Fig 3 cladding); and an array of chipsets comprising a number of chipsets positioned serially along the length of the shank, wherein each chipset includes an electrode site that is exposed along a surface of the shank (Fig 3 conducting site), wherein each chipset communicates signals measured at the electrode site via the waveguide (Pg 2, “The electrophysiological recording elements were integrated on optical fibers using a metal deposition method to realize a ‘zero distance’ between the two parts. The evoked signal can be recorded at the same point where the neurons are optically stimulated”; Section 2.1 and Conclusion 4 both disclose the recording pathway being integrated with the waveguide).
Chen fails to teach the waveguide liner formed from a metallic material.
In related prior art, Zhang teaches a similar device wherein the waveguide material is formed from a metallic material (Fig 1, Au cladding; Section 2.1, disclosing gold metallization cladding). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cladding of Chen in view of Zhang to incorporate a gold cladding as the waveguide material. Doing so would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as the use of gold cladding is well-known in the art to yield predictable results therein (Section 2.1 of Zhang disclosing gold cladding).
Chen fails to teach the chipset being an array of chipsets comprising a number of chipsets positioned serially along the length of the shank.
In related prior art, Seymour teaches a similar device comprising an array of chipsets comprising a number of chipsets positioned serially along the length of the shank (Fig 2 electrodes 120 positioned along length of shank). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Chen in view of Zhang and Seymour to incorporate an array of chipsets positioned serially along the length of the shank to arrive at claim 11. Doing so would advantageously provide the shank with more than one electrode site for recording and/or stimulating neural tissue as is known in the art.
Chen fails to teach wherein each chipset is configured to receive power wirelessly via the waveguide
In related prior art, Gilson teaches a waveguide for providing wireless power ([0033] waveguides are capable of providing wireless power to individual elements). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Chen in view of Seymour and Gilson to incorporate the waveguide as a wireless power delivery to the chipsets to arrive at claim 1. Doing so would advantageously allow for the life of the implantable device to not be limited by the life of a battery or the ability to hold a charge as it is known waveguides can provide power to devices ([0033]).
Regarding claim 12, Chen further teaches wherein the polymer shank is formed from Parylene C (Pg 2 section 2.1 disclosing parylene-C).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen, Seymour, Gilson, and in view of Howard (U.S. PGPub No. 2018/0093092).
Regarding claim 8, Chen/Seymour/Gilson combination teaches the device of claim 1 as stated above.
Chen fails to teach wherein one or more of the number of chipsets comprises complementary metal oxide semiconductor (CMOS) integrated circuits for power harvesting, radio frequency backscatter communication, and multiplexing, amplifying, and recording neuron signals.
In related prior art, Howard teaches complementary metal oxide semiconductor (CMOS) integrated circuits for power harvesting, radio frequency backscatter communication, and multiplexing, amplifying, and recording neuron signals ([0066]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the number of chipsets of Chen in view of Howard to incorporate the CMOS integrated circuits as claimed to arrive at claim 8. Doing so would advantageously provide the neural device with a CMOS integrated circuit as is known in the art to yield the predictable results of providing circuitry capable of use for amplification, multiplexing, power harvesting, recording, wirelessly communicating ([0066]).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Gilson, Zhang, Seymour, and in further view of Howard.
Regarding claim 14, Chen//Gilson/Zhang/Seymour teach the combination of claim 11 as stated above.
Chen fails to teach the number of chipsets comprises complementary metal oxide semiconductor (CMOS) integrated circuits for power harvesting, radio frequency backscatter communication, and multiplexing, amplifying, and recording neuron signals.
In related prior art, Howard teaches complementary metal oxide semiconductor (CMOS) integrated circuits for power harvesting, radio frequency backscatter communication, and multiplexing, amplifying, and recording neuron signals ([0066]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Chen in view of Gilson, Zhang, Seymour, and Howard to incorporate the CMOS integrated circuits as claimed to arrive at claim 14. Doing so would advantageously provide the neural device with a CMOS integrated circuit as is known in the art to yield the predictable results of providing circuitry capable of use for amplification, multiplexing, power harvesting, recording, wirelessly communicating ([0066]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 15-16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claims 9 and 15-16, the references fail to explicitly teach a chipset comprising a chipset transceiver that is attached back to back with a chipset electrode when viewed in light of the remaining limitations of the claim(s). No other pertinent prior art reference were found that would overcome the above deficiencies. Therefore, there is no motivation (either in these references or elsewhere in the art) for making such specific and significant modifications thereto to arrive at claim(s) 9 and 15-16.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 01/20/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-12 and 14-16 under 35 USC 102 and 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in further view of the Gilson reference.
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 Adam Z Minchella whose telephone number is (571)272-8644. The examiner can normally be reached M-Fri 7-3 EST.
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, Joseph Stoklosa can be reached at (571) 272-1213. 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.
/ADAM Z MINCHELLA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794