Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/625,466

USER INTERFACES OF A HEARING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§DP
Filed
Apr 03, 2024
Examiner
DABNEY, PHYLESHA LARVINIA
Art Unit
2694
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Cochlear Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
604 granted / 793 resolved
+14.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+15.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
812
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
37.9%
-2.1% vs TC avg
§102
38.8%
-1.2% vs TC avg
§112
11.2%
-28.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 793 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §DP
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 21-40 are pending. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. Issue number not available (US Application No. 18739833). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the limitations of the claims in the present application are covered by the scope of the claims in the patent with obvious wording variations as shown by example in the table below. 18625466 18739833 21. A method comprising: determining whether an external component of an implantable medical device system is either in (i) a coupled state in which the external component is being worn by a recipient or (ii) a decoupled state in which the external component is not being worn by a recipient; providing, with at least one recipient-associated device linked with the external component, a first type of user-interaction when the determined state is the coupled state; and providing, with the at the one or more recipient-associated device, a second type of user- interaction when the determined state is the decoupled state. 1. (Previously Presented) A method, comprising: determining, by at least one processor, whether a state of an external unit of a hearing device is one of (i) a coupled state when the external unit and a stimulation unit of the hearing device are coupled or (ii) a decoupled state when the external unit and the stimulation unit are decoupled; when the determined state is the coupled state, providing, by the external unit via at least one visual-output component, an at least first visual display; and when the determined state is the decoupled state, providing, by the external unit via the at least one visual-output component, an at least second visual display, wherein the at least second visual display is different from the at least first visual display, and wherein the at least first visual display and the at least second visual display indicate different types of information to a user. Claim(s) 21-23 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim(s) 1, 4-5 of U.S. Patent No. 9643018 (US Application No. 14867741). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the limitations of the claims in the present application are covered by the scope of the claims in the patent with obvious wording variations as shown by example in the table below. 18625466 9643018 21. (Original) A method comprising: determining whether an external component of an implantable medical device system is either in (i) a coupled state in which the external component is being worn by a recipient or (ii) a decoupled state in which the external component is not being worn by a recipient; providing, with at least one recipient-associated device linked with the external component, a first type of user-interaction when the determined state is the coupled state; and providing, with the at the one or more recipient-associated device, a second type of user- interaction when the determined state is the decoupled state. 22. (Original) The method of claim 21, wherein providing the first type of user-interaction comprises providing, via a user interface component of the at least one recipient-associated device, a first user interface when the determined state is the coupled state; and wherein providing the second type of user-interaction comprises providing, via the user interface component of the at least one recipient-associated device, a second user interface when the determined state is the decoupled state, wherein the second user interface is different from the first user interface. 23. (Original) The method of claim 22, wherein the second user interface provides access to a greater number of hearing device functions than the first user interface. 1. (Original) A method comprising: determining whether a state of an external unit of a hearing device is one of (i) a coupled state when the external unit and a stimulation unit of the hearing device (para. 0026, defined as implanted in the recipient’s body) are coupled or (ii) a decoupled state when the external unit and the stimulation unit are decoupled; and providing by the external unit one of (i) a first user interface when the determined state is the coupled state or (ii) a second user interface when the determined state is the decoupled state, wherein the second user interface provides access to a greater number of functions of the hearing device than first user interface provides. 4. (Original) The method of claim 1, wherein providing the first user interface and the second user interface comprises: receiving at the external unit (recipient associated device) a user input that includes a change to a setting of a selected sound-processing parameter, wherein the sound-processing parameter is used by a sound processor of the hearing device to either process sounds or generate stimulation signals, and wherein more sound-processing parameters are selectable when the external unit provides the second user interface than when the external unit provides the first user interface; and processing the user input to apply the change to the selected sound-processing parameter. 5. (Original) The method of claim 4, wherein each sound-processing parameter that is selectable when the external unit provides the first user interface is selectable when the external unit provides the second user interface. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 – Claim(s) 21-22, 24 and 30-31, 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being ancitipated by Single (US Publication No. 20050078846). Regarding claims 21-22, 24, Single teaches a method comprising: determining whether an external component of an implantable medical device system is either in (i) a coupled state in which the external component is being worn by a recipient or (ii) a decoupled state in which the external component is not being worn by a recipient (abstract: monitoring means for determining the presence or absence of the implanted coil relative to the external antenna coil); providing, with at least one recipient-associated device linked with the external component, a first type of user-interaction when the determined state is the coupled state; and providing, with the at the one or more recipient-associated device, a second type of user- interaction when the determined state is the decoupled state (paragraph [0029, 0035, 0056] first interface processes sound and the second interface goes into idle). Regarding claim 30-31, 33, Single teaches an implantable medical device system, comprising: an external component; at least one processor (abstract: monitoring means for determining the presence or absence of the implanted coil relative to the external antenna coil); configured to determine whether the external component is either in (i) a coupled state in which the external component is being worn by a recipient or (ii) a decoupled state in which the external component is not being worn by a recipient; at least one recipient-associated device linked with the external component, wherein the at least one recipient-associated device is configured to provide a first type of user-interaction when the determined state is the coupled state, and provide a second type of user-interaction when the determined state is the decoupled state (paragraph [0029, 0035, 0056] first interface processes sound and the second interface goes into idle). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 25-29, 32, 34-40 is/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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHYLESHA DABNEY whose telephone number is (571)272-7494. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Wednesday and Friday 10:30-4:30PM. 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, Fan Tsang can be reached at 5712727547. 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. January 10, 2025 /PHYLESHA DABNEY/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2694 , -
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 03, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 11, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604142
Multifunctional Sounding Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598432
SIDE-BY-SIDE COMPARISON OF HEARING DEVICE OUTPUT BASED ON PHYSICAL COUPLING TO DEVICE UNDER SIMULATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593158
LISTENING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587797
METHOD FOR OPERATING A HEARING SYSTEM AND HEARING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12574688
METHOD FOR OPERATING A HEARING INSTRUMENT AND HEARING SYSTEM WITH SUCH A HEARING INSTRUMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+15.0%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 793 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month