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
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on May 01, 2025 (2) are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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, 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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.
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(s) 22-24, 26-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Victorian et al. (US 2005/0168396 A1) in view of Troelsen et al. (US 2020/0128336 A1).
As to claim 22, Victorian discloses a hearing device [FIG. 1] configured to be worn in an ear of a wearer to perform wireless communication, comprising:
a housing including a removal string [“The housing include a removal cord to assist in removing or inserting the device.” Paragraph 0006];
hearing electronics within the housing [“The hearing aid electronic is included in the housing.” Paragraph 0031];
an antenna having a single ended structure [“The rod antenna comprising a solid ferrite core around which conductor is wrapped. “Paragraph 0035]; and
a faceplate [Face plate 305 on FIG. 3] connected to the housing, wherein a portion of the antenna protrudes from the faceplate and is attached to the removal string [“The portion of the antenna wrapped with conductor is located between the face plate and the antenna flange.” Paragraph 0043].
Victorian fails to disclose an inverted F antenna configured for performing 2.4 GHz wireless communication.
However, Troelsen teaches an inverted F antenna configured for performing 2.4 GHz wireless communication [“The RF antenna is used as an inverted F antenna and performs the 2.4 GHz.” Paragraph 0008].
Victorian and Troelsen are analogous because they are all directed to hearing aid with antenna system. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found obvious to modify Victorian reference with the teaching of Troelsen, so that the inverted F antenna would include the solid antenna of Victorian, would have been combined into a 2.4 GHz signal, for the obvious purpose of providing the minimum distance in a small apparatus, by combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 23, Victorian discloses the hearing device of claim 22, wherein at least a portion of the antenna is embedded in the faceplate [“The portion of the antenna wrapped with conductor is located between the face plate and the antenna flange.” Paragraph 0043].
As to claim 24, Victorian discloses the hearing device of claim 22, but fails to disclose a battery contact.
However, Troelsen teaches wherein the faceplate includes a battery contact, and wherein the antenna is integrated in the battery contact [“The relatively electrically conductive surface provided the therewith electrically connected battery terminal.” Paragraph 0043].
Victorian and Troelsen are analogous because they are all directed to hearing aid with antenna system. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found obvious to modify Victorian reference with the teaching of Troelsen, so that the face plate would include the battery terminal in the hearing device of Victorian, would have been combined to power the hearing device, for the obvious purpose of providing the receiving and transmitting electromagnetic RF signals in the GHz range, by combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 26, Victorian discloses the hearing device of claim 22, further comprising a battery drawer configured to contain a battery, and wherein the antenna includes a portion embedded in the battery drawer [“The hearing aid space is increased to accommodate the battery.” Paragraph 0041].
As to claim 27, Victorian discloses the hearing device of claim 22, wherein the antenna includes a wire portion [“The communication signal is communicated with a wire antenna.” Paragraph 0069].
As to claim 28, Victorian discloses the hearing device of claim 22, wherein the antenna includes stamped metal portion [“The rod antenna includes a solid core (metal).” Paragraph 0054].
As to claim 29, Victorian discloses the hearing device of claim 22, wherein housing includes a housing for a hearing assistance device [“The present subject matter includes connecting the handle proximal to hearing aid housing.” Paragraph 0031].
As to claim 30, Victorian discloses the hearing device of claim 29, wherein the hearing assistance device includes an in-the-ear (ITE) hearing aid [“The hearing aid fits into the ear.” Paragraph 0033].
As to claim 31, Victorian discloses the hearing device of claim 29, wherein the hearing assistance device includes an in-the-canal (ITC) hearing aid [“The shell is molded to fit an individual ear canal.” Paragraph 0034].
As to claim 32, Victorian discloses the hearing device of claim 29, wherein the hearing assistance device includes a completely-in-the-canal (CIC) hearing aid [“The shell is molded to fit an individual ear canal.” Paragraph 0034].
As to claim 33, Victorian discloses the hearing device of claim 29, wherein the hearing assistance device includes an invisible-in-canal (IIC) hearing aid [“The shell is molded to fit an individual ear canal.” Paragraph 0034].
As to claim 34, Victorian discloses a method of forming a hearing device configured to be worn in an ear of a wearer to perform wireless communication [Paragraph 0001], the method comprising:
connecting an antenna to hearing electronics within a housing of the hearing device, the antenna disposed at least partially in the housing [“The rod antenna comprising a solid ferrite core around which conductor is wrapped. “Paragraph 0035]; and
connecting a faceplate to the housing, wherein a portion of the antenna protrudes from the faceplate and is attached to a removal string [“The portion of the antenna wrapped with conductor is located between the face plate and the antenna flange.” Paragraph 0043].
Victorian fails to disclose an inverted F antenna configured for performing 2.4 GHz wireless communication.
However, Troelsen teaches an inverted F antenna configured for performing 2.4 GHz wireless communication, and having a single ended structure [“The RF antenna is used as an inverted F antenna and performs the 2.4 GHz.” Paragraph 0008].
Victorian and Troelsen are analogous because they are all directed to hearing aid with antenna system. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found obvious to modify Victorian reference with the teaching of Troelsen, so that the inverted F antenna would include the solid antenna of Victorian, would have been combined into a 2.4 GHz signal, for the obvious purpose of providing the minimum distance in a small apparatus, by combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 35, Victorian discloses the method of claim 34, wherein at least a portion of the antenna is molded within a faceplate of the housing [“The portion of the antenna wrapped with conductor is located between the face plate and the antenna flange.” Paragraph 0043].
As to claim 36, Victorian discloses the method of claim 34, wherein the faceplate includes a sport lock, and a portion of the antenna is included in a portion of the sport lock [“The portion of the antenna wrapped with conductor is located between the face plate and the antenna flange.” Paragraph 0043].
As to claim 37, Victorian discloses the method of claim 34, wherein the housing includes a sport lock, and a portion of the antenna is included in a portion of the sport lock [“The portion of the antenna wrapped with conductor is located between the face plate and the antenna flange.” Paragraph 0043].
As to claim 38, Victorian discloses the method of claim 34, wherein the portion of the antenna protrudes approximately perpendicularly from the faceplate [“The antenna protrudes from outside the hearing aid.” Paragraph 0003].
As to claim 39, Victorian discloses the method of claim 34, wherein the antenna is configured for use in radio frequency communications to assist in programming the hearing device [“The electronic programs the hearing device.” Paragraph 0070].
As to claim 40, Victorian discloses the method of claim 34, wherein the antenna is configured for use in streaming audio to the hearing device [“The antenna controlling the communications for both transmission and reception.” Paragraph 0071].
Claim(s) 25 and 41 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Victorian and Troelsen as applied to claim 22 above, and further in view of Irazoqui et al. (US 20140296687 A1).
As to claim 25, Victorian and Troelsen disclose the hearing device of claim 22, but fail to disclose the faceplate includes Nitinol.
However, Irazoqui teaches wherein the portion of the antenna that protrudes from the faceplate includes Nitinol [“A capacitive pressure sensor is integrated with a self-expandable Nitinol antenna.” Paragraph 0109].
Victorian, Troelsen and Irazoqui are analogous because they are all directed to hearing aid with antenna system. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found obvious to modify Victorian and Troelsen references with the teaching of Irazoqui, so that the face plate would include the Nitinol antenna in the hearing device of Victorian, would have been combined to power the hearing device, for the obvious purpose to a novel packaging approach, by combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 41, Victorian and Troelsen disclose the method of claim 34 but fail to disclose the faceplate includes Nitinol.
However, Irazoqui teaches wherein the portion of the antenna that protrudes from the faceplate includes Nitinol [“A capacitive pressure sensor is integrated with a self-expandable Nitinol antenna.” Paragraph 0109].
Victorian, Troelsen and Irazoqui are analogous because they are all directed to hearing aid with antenna system. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found obvious to modify Victorian and Troelsen references with the teaching of Irazoqui, so that the face plate would include the Nitinol antenna in the hearing device of Victorian, would have been combined to power the hearing device, for the obvious purpose to a novel packaging approach, by combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 form.
Pinto et al. (US 20170171676 A1) discloses a hearing aid includes: a wireless communication element for wireless communication; a signal processing element for providing an audio signal.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GERALD GAUTHIER whose telephone number is (571)272-7539. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM to 4:30 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, CAROLYN R EDWARDS can be reached at (571) 270-7136. 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.
/GERALD GAUTHIER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2692
February 6, 2026
/CAROLYN R EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2692