Detailed Action
I. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This Office Action addresses U.S. Application No. 18/424522 (“’522 Application” or “instant application”). Based upon a review of the instant application, the actual filing date of the instant application is January 26, 2024. For reissue applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, all references to 35 U.S.C. 251 and 37 CFR 1.172, 1.175, and 3.73 are to the current provisions.
The instant application is a reissue application of US Patent 9,561,382 (“382 Patent”), which was filed as application 14/931736 (the ‘736 application) on November 3, 2015 and is entitled “SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR LOW POWER COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN IMPLANTABLE DEVICES.”
Based upon Applicant’s statements as set forth in the instant application and after the Examiner's independent review of the ‘382 Patent itself and its prosecution history, the Examiner finds that he cannot locate any ongoing proceeding before the Office or current ongoing litigation involving the ‘382 Patent. Also based upon the Examiner's independent review of the ‘382 Patent itself and the prosecution history, the Examiner cannot locate any previous reexaminations, supplemental examinations.
This action is being issued following Applicant’s response of 6/26/2026, which included 1) claim amendments and 2) arguments .
II. STATUS OF CLAIMS
The ‘382 Patent issued with claims 1-25 (“Patented Claims”). The preliminary amendment filed with this application amended claims 1-11 an 14-24 and added claims 26-29. The amendment of 5/1/2026 amends claims 1-3, 6-11, 14-16, 21, and 23 and cancels claims 12 and 24. The amendment of 6/26/2026 amends claims 1-8, 10, 11, 14-22, 23, and 25. As such, as of the date of this Office Action, the status of the claims is:
a. Claims 1-11, 13-23, and 25-29 (“Pending Claims”).
b. Claims 1-11, 13-23, and 25-29 examined on the merits below (“Examined Claims”)
III. CONTINUING DATA AND PRIORITY
This application is a reissue of application 14/931736, filed 083344, filed 11/3/2015, which claims priority to provisional applications 62/084476, filed 11/25/2014 and 62/074541, filed 11/3/2014. Because the earliest possible effective filing date of this instant application is after March 16, 2013, the AIA first to file provisions of 35 USC 102, 103, and 112 apply to this application.
In accordance with MPEP §609.02 A. 2 and MPEP §2001.06(b) (last paragraph), the Examiner has reviewed and considered the prior art cited in the prior applications. Also in accordance with MPEP §2001.06(b) (last paragraph), all documents cited or considered ‘of record in the prior applications are now considered cited or ‘of record’ in this application. Additionally, Applicant(s) are reminded that a listing of the information cited or ‘of record’ in the prior applications need not be resubmitted in this application unless Applicant(s) desire the information to be printed on a patent issuing from this application. See MPEP §609.02 A. 2. Finally, Applicant(s) are reminded that the prosecution histories of the prior applications are relevant in this application.
IV. AMENDMENT OF 6/26/2026
The Examiner notes that the claim amendments of 6/26/2026 have been entered.
V. REJECTIONS UNDER 35 USC 251
Claims 1-11, 13-23, and 25-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 251 as being broadened in a reissue application filed outside the two year statutory period. A claim is broader in scope than the original claims if it contains within its scope any conceivable product or process which would not have infringed the original patent. A claim is broadened if it is broader in any one respect even though it may be narrower in other respects.
Specifically, original claim 1 stated that when an incoming signal received at the first IMD over the first channel corresponds to the message trigger pattern, activating the second channel at the SECOND IMD. Now, claim 1 states when an incoming signal received at the first IMD over the first channel corresponds to the message trigger pattern, activating the second channel at the FIRST IMD. This change allows for products to infringe the claims that did not previously infringe the claims. As such, the limitation has been broadened. Claims 14 is broader for the same reasons as claim 1. Hence, the claims are being broadened and this reissue is filed more than two years after the issuance of the ‘382 patent.
VI. REISSUE DECLARATION
The reissue oath/declaration filed with this application is defective (see 37 CFR 1.175 and MPEP § 1414) because of the following:
The claims of the current reissue are actually broader than the patented claims as discussed above. As per MPEP 1414, when a reissue application has been broadened, the specific claim and specific language that rendered the claim too narrow must be identified in the declaration. Applicant has not done so, and hence the declaration is defective.
Claims 1-11, 13-23, and 25-29 are rejected as being based upon a defective reissue declaration under 35 U.S.C. 251 as set forth above. See 37 CFR 1.175.
The nature of the defect(s) in the declaration are set forth in the discussion above in this Office action.
VII. ALLOWABLE SUBJECT MATTER
Claims 1-11, 13-23, and 25-29 would be allowable if the rejections under 35 USC 251 above were overcome. Claims 1-11, 13-23, and 25-29 define over the art in that none of the art has first channel that is active when the second channel is inactive, detecting a trigger pattern on the first channel, activating the second channel when the trigger pattern is detected, and receiving the event message on the second channel, where the second channel is at a higher frequency range than the first channel. As Applicant pointed out in the arguments of 5/1/2026, the channel used when the wake up signal is detected in Wang is a subset of the channels scanned to detect the trigger pattern. As such, the second channel is not inactive when the first channel is active.
VIII. ANSWER TO ARGUMENTS
Applicant's arguments filed 6/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant has asserted that after the claim amendments, the claims are not broadened. Specifically, Applicant has argued that the claims now recite that the second IMD, when the incoming signal received at the second IMD over the first channel corresponds to the message trigger pattern, activating the second channel at the at the second IMD and receiving an event message at the second IMD over the first channel from the first IMD. Applicant has asserted that the claims are no longer broadened. However, as discussed above, the original claims activate the second channel at the second IMD when the first IMD received an incoming signal that having the message trigger pattern. The current claims recite that the second channel is activated at the first IMD when the first IMD receives a signal having the message trigger pattern. As noted above, the claims are still therefore, broadened.
IX. 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 ROBERT L NASSER whose telephone number is (571)272-4731. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-6.
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, Alexander Kosowski can be reached at (571) 272-3744. 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.
/ROBERT L NASSER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
Conferee:
/ADAM L BASEHOAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
/ALEXANDER J KOSOWSKI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3992
Prosecution Insights