Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/739,842

USER INTERFACES OF A HEARING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Jun 11, 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

§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 1-20 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 1, 7-9 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim(s) 32, 34, 35, 38 of U.S. Patent No. not issued yet (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 anticipated by the scope of the claims in the patent with obvious wording variations as shown by the example in the table below. 18739842 18739833 1.An external unit configured to be worn by a recipient, comprising: one or more visual-output components; and circuitry configured to: determine that the external unit is coupled with a stimulation unit configured to be implanted in the body of the recipient; in response to determining that the external unit is coupled with the stimulation unit, configure the one or more visual-output components to provide a first visual display; determine that the external unit is decoupled from the stimulation unit; in response to determining that the external unit is decoupled from the stimulation unit, configure the one or more visual-output components to provide a second visual display that is different from the first visual display. 32. (New) An external unit configured to be worn by a recipient, comprising: a plurality of visual-output components;a capacitive touch interface; and at least one processor configured to: determine whether the external unit is coupled with a stimulation unit configured to be implanted in the recipient or decoupled from the stimulation unit, configure at least one of the plurality of visual-output components to provide a first visual display when the external unit is coupled with the stimulation unit and to provide a second visual display when the external unit is coupled with the stimulation unit, and in response receiving at least one user input via the capacitive touch interface, change at least one operation of the external unit and activate one or more of the plurality of visual-output components to indicate the change in the at least one operation of the external unit. Allowable Subject Matter Claim(s) 2-6, 10 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. Claims 11-20 is/are allowed. 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, 2026 /PHYLESHA DABNEY/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2694
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 11, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §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