DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 29 June 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
3. According to the Amendment, filed 29 June 2026, the status of the claims is as follows:
Claim 1 is currently amended;
Claim 5 is previously presented; and
Claims 2-4, 6, and 7 are as originally filed.
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, pp. 14-16, filed 29 June 2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-7 under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Mann et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0055761 A1 (“Mann”), in view of Sormann et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0161225 A1 (“Sormann”), have been fully considered, and are persuasive in view of the Amendment, filed 29 June 2026. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection, which was necessitated by amendment, is discussed below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
5. 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.
6. Claims 2 and 5 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 2 recites the limitation "the received RF signal" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the electrical circuit" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
7. 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.
8. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 –
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
9. Claims 1-5 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Bellamkonda et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0211172 A1 (“Bellamkonda”).
As to Claim 1, Bellamkonda teaches the following:
A method for the use of an electronic device implantable in the muscle of an animal (see “Provided are implantable devices for communicating with biological tissue and methods and systems for using the devices. For example, the devices are implanted in a subject and used to communicate with regenerated neural tissue.” in Abstract), comprising:
implanting an electrode assembly (“implantable device”) 100 into muscles about an arm of a transradial amputee or a long transradial amputee (see “The implantable device is also useful in an amputee to provide closed-loop control of a prosthetic limb. The nerve stump, in either case, can be sutured into the implantable device and allowed to grow for several weeks to months. Axons grow along the substrate surface and into operative communication with one or more interfacing units. The electrodes can detect motor commands that previously controlled the amputated arm. These detected signals can be transmitted percutaneously, wirelessly or otherwise to the prosthetic limb.” in para. [0053]) including a pair of spaced-apart electrodes (“one or more electrodes”) 108 each adapted and configured to be in electrical communication with a nerve in the muscle of the animal (see “The interfacing unit can be positioned relative to the substrate surface 105 such that tissue grown along the surface is topographically directed into operative communication with the interfacing unit. Optionally, the tissue grown along the surface 105 can be directed into operative communication with an interfacing unit that comprises one or more electrodes 108.” in para. [0056]; and see “Where the regenerating tissue 202 has grown over the interfacing unit, portions of the tissue, including axons, subsets of axons, or all axons or a neural tissue, are brought into operative communication with electrodes 108 or other interfacing units.” in para. [0077]), a controller (“processor”) 1018 (see “The converted digital signals can be processed by the processor 1018.” in para. [0095]), an electrical storage device (“battery”) 1032, an antenna (“inductive power receiver”) 1030 (see “For example, an inductive power receiver 1030 can be located within implantable device 1008 that can charge a battery 1032 for powering the processor and other portions of the implantable device from an external energy source 1034.” in para. [0101]), and a transmitter (“integrate circuit (IC) chip”, not labeled), the electrode assembly 100 having a cross sectional diameter of 3 mm or less (see “For example, in the case of neural tissue regenerating or growing through a tubular conduit with a diameter of 1.6 mm, the transverse cross-sectional area within the conduit available for regeneration is 2.01 mm.sup.2.” in para. [0044]);
storing electrical energy via electric field coupling by the antenna 1030 at a first predetermined frequency (see “For example, an inductive power receiver 1030 can be located within implantable device 1008 that can charge a battery 1032 for powering the processor and other portions of the implantable device from an external energy source 1034.” in para. [0101]);
detecting electromyogram (EMG) signals at source of the EMG signals (see “By contrast, the TA muscle, normally innervated by the common peroneal nerve branch, exhibited no visible contractions, and the electrode measuring its EMG signal recorded only a small residual signal matching those from surrounding muscles. When the regenerating tibial nerve was crushed just distal to the stimulating electrode near the end of the electrophysiological measurements, EMG recording from all muscles disappeared.” in para. [0169]);
transmitting by the antenna 1020 a processed version of the detected EMG signals (see “Information directed to the wireless transmitter 1020 can be transmitted to wireless receiver 1036 for further processing by a second processor unit 1038. Processor unit 1038 can decode the pattern of spiking and determine through classification algorithms what the subject's original intention was, based on the mapping performed and stored in memory 1044.” in para. [0098]); and
utilizing the transmitted EMG signals to operate a prosthetic arm (see “The processor uses algorithms to compare the received spikes with previously mapped pattern definitions to determine what the received spike patterns represent. Having identified a spike pattern with the previous mapped patterns, the prosthetic device 1004 can be controlled using the controller module 1046 that is in communication with actuators or motors 1052 of the prosthetic device.” in para. [0098]).
As to Claim 2, Bellamkonda teaches the following:
wherein said storing is performed by rectifying (receiving and charging the batter) the received RF signal (see “For example, an inductive power receiver 1030 can be located within implantable device 1008 that can charge a battery 1032 for powering the processor and other portions of the implantable device from an external energy source 1034.” in para. [0101]).
As to Claim 3, Bellamkonda teaches the following:
wherein the electrodes 108 are spaced apart by less than about fifteen millimeters (see “The spacer can provide sufficient openings to permit cells to infiltrate the substrate and attach to the oriented fibers. The spacer can be water soluble or water insoluble, porous or non-porous. Optionally, the spacer is biocompatible, and can be bioerodible/biodegradable. The spacer can have a thickness between about 25 and about 800 .mu.m. Optionally, each spacer layer in the stack has a thickness of about 50 to about 250 .mu.m.” in para. [0066]).
As to Claim 4, Bellamkonda teaches the following:
wherein the electrodes 108 are spaced apart by more than about one millimeter (see “The spacer can provide sufficient openings to permit cells to infiltrate the substrate and attach to the oriented fibers. The spacer can be water soluble or water insoluble, porous or non-porous. Optionally, the spacer is biocompatible, and can be bioerodible/biodegradable. The spacer can have a thickness between about 25 and about 800 .mu.m. Optionally, each spacer layer in the stack has a thickness of about 50 to about 250 .mu.m.” in para. [0066]).
As to Claim 5, Mann teaches the following:
which further comprises powering the [controller] (“processor”) 1018 by the electrical storage device (“battery”) 1032 (see “For example, an inductive power receiver 1030 can be located within implantable device 1008 that can charge a battery 1032 for powering the processor and other portions of the implantable device from an external energy source 1034.” in para. [0101]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
10. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter 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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
11. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
12. Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Bellamkonda, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mann.
As to Claims 6 and 7, Bellamkonda teaches the subject matter of claim 1 above. Bellamkonda does not teach the following:
wherein the electrical storage device includes an ion absorption-type supercapacitor; and
wherein the electrical storage device includes a dielectric effect supercapacitor.
However, Mann teaches the following:
an electrical storage device (“power source and/or power storage device”) 15 includes an ion absorption-type supercapacitor and a dielectric effect supercapacitor (see “Possible power options for a stimulation device(s) of the present invention, described in more detail below, include but are not limited to an external power source coupled to the stimulation device, e.g., via an RF link, a self-contained power source utilizing any means of generation or storage of energy (e.g., a primary battery, a replenishable or rechargeable battery such as a lithium ion battery, an electrolytic capacitor, or a super- or ultra-capacitor), and if the self-contained power source is replenishable or rechargeable, means of replenishable or recharging the power source (e.g., an RF link).” in para. [0092]).
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the present application was effectively filed to modify Bellamkonda’s electrical storage device (“battery”) 1032 to include an ion absorption-type supercapacitor and a dielectric effect supercapacitor because it is a simple substitution of one known rechargeable power source, i.e. Bellamkonda’s “battery 1032”, for another, i.e. Mann’s “replenishable or rechargeable battery such as a lithium ion battery, an electrolytic capacitor, or a super- or ultra-capacitor”, to obtain predictable results, i.e. means of recharging a power source for an implantable device.
Conclusion
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAVIN NATNITHITHADHA whose telephone number is (571)272-4732. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 8:00 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, Jason M Sims can be reached at 571-272-7540. 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.
/NAVIN NATNITHITHADHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791 09/30/2026
Prosecution Insights