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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 14-21 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected method, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/5/2026. Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-13 and 22-25 in the reply filed on 6/5/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 10-13, and 22-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pinto(US 20230007409 A1) in view of Meskens(US 20150202438 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Pinto discloses an apparatus comprising: at least one implantable housing containing circuitry and configured to be implanted on and substantially parallel to a bone surface within a recipient(The in the ear canal type of hearing aid have an elongated housing shaped to fit in the ear canal. The longitudinal axis of in the ear canal type of hearing aid is then parallel to the ear to ear axis, whereas the face plate of in the ear canal type of hearing aid is in a plane orthogonal to the ear axis[0054].FIG. 5 is a cross-section of a user's ear having an exemplary hearing device 200A partly inserted in the ear canal 40 of the ear according to the disclosure. The ear canal 40 leads to the ear drum or tympanic membrane 42. The hearing device 200A is an in-the-ear hearing device. The hearing device 200A comprises a housing 31[0091]); at least one electrical conduit in electrical communication with the circuitry and extending from the at least one implantable housing to a region within the recipient; and at least one magnetic induction antenna in electrical communication with the at least one electrical conduit and spaced from the at least one implantable housing, the at least one magnetic induction antenna extending around an antenna axis, the at least one magnetic induction antenna configured to be affixed within the region with the antenna axis substantially non-parallel and substantially non-orthogonal to the bone surface(The hearing device comprises a plurality of antennas. The hearing device comprises electronic components including a first electronic component. The plurality of antennas comprises a first antenna and a second antenna. The first antenna may comprise a coil part coiled along a first antenna axis. The first antenna may be configured for magnetic induction communication. Magnetic induction communication provides communication in a range of frequencies between 3 MHz and 30 MHz. The first antenna provides the electro-magnetic radiation that propagates through and around the human head and body of the user without significant losses in the tissue. The first antenna configured for magnetic induction communication operating in the range of frequencies can be susceptible to electro-magnetic interference, such as noise, originating from the electric components[0027]). Pinto fails to explicitly state “at least one electrical conduit in electrical communication with the circuitry and extending from the at least one implantable housing to a region within the recipient”.
However, Meskens teaches “A prosthesis including an external device and an implantable component. The external device includes a first inductive communication component. The implantable component includes a second inductive communication component, wherein the implantable component is configured to be implanted under skin of a recipient. The external device is configured to transmit power via magnetic induction transcutaneoulsy to the implantable component via the second inductive communication component.[abtract]. In an embodiment, the coil located external to the recipient (e.g., the coil that is part of the external device 204) is in electrical communication with a power supply (e.g., a battery), and that coil induces a current in the coil implanted in the recipient (e.g., the coil that is part of the internal component 208). The external coil and the internal coil are collectively referred to herein as the inductance communication component system.[0083]”.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to configure the hearing device of Pinto with the electrical communication of the cochlear prosthesis of Meskens. Doing so would specify communication between the internal and external elements of the hearing device.
Regarding claim 2, Pinto in view of Meskens teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one magnetic induction antenna comprises a single substantially cylindrical wire coil wound around and extending along the antenna axis(The hearing device comprises electronic components including a first electronic component. The plurality of antennas comprises a first antenna and a second antenna. The first antenna may comprise a coil part coiled along a first antenna axis. The first antenna may be configured for magnetic induction communication[abstract]).
Regarding claim 3, Pinto in view of Meskens teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one magnetic induction antenna comprises a single substantially planar wire spiral wound around and substantially orthogonal to the antenna axis(The hearing device 200 comprises a first antenna 4 configured for magnetic induction communication. The first antenna 4 may comprise a coil part, e.g. coiled along a first antenna axis, as illustrated in FIG. 3[0062]).
Regarding claim 4, Pinto in view of Meskens teaches the apparatus of claim 2, wherein the antenna axis is at an angle greater than or equal to 10 degrees relative to the bone surface(In one or more example hearing devices, the shielding axis is configured to form an angle less than 30 degrees with an ear-to-ear axis of the user, e.g. when the hearing device is arranged in or at the ear of the user. For example, the first antenna axis forms an angle less than 30 degrees with an ear-to-ear axis of the user when the hearing device is arranged in or at the ear of the user[0037]).
Regarding claim 10, Pinto in view of Meskens teaches the apparatus of claim 1, but Pinto fails to disclose wherein the at least one magnetic induction antenna is configured to be in operative communication with at least one external magnetic induction antenna of a device, the at least one magnetic induction antenna bounding an antenna region through which magnetic flux from the at least one external magnetic induction antenna extends.
However, Meskens teaches the “FIG. 5 depicts magnetic inductive flux, .phi., between the external coil 516 (coil L1) and the implantable coil 542 (coil L2). In FIG. 5, external coil 515 and implantable coil 542 have mutual coupling factors here represented as k.sub.21 and k.sub.12.[0085]”.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to configure the hearing device of Pinto with the magnetic flux of the cochlear prosthesis of Meskens. Doing so would specify the magnetic flux between the internal and external components of the hearing device.
Regarding claim 11, Pinto in view of Meskens teaches the apparatus of claim 10, but Pinto fails to disclose wherein the at least one magnetic induction antenna comprises a wire coil and the antenna region comprises a substantially cylindrical volume, at least a portion of the magnetic flux extending through the volume in a direction substantially parallel to an axis of the substantially cylindrical volume.
However, Meskens teaches the “As may be seen in FIG. 5, the area A.sub.1 of the external coil 516 is less than the area A.sub.2 of the implantable coil 542. In the inductance communication component system of FIG. 5, the two coils are aligned substantially parallel to each other (i.e., the plane in which the looped wires of the coils substantially lie are substantially parallel to one another), concentric with each other, and are separated by a distance D (taken from the planes in which the loop wires of the coils substantially lie). The distance D typically includes the thickness of the tissue between the two coils, the thickness of casing walls located between the two coils, if the coils are encased in a plastic material or the like, and hair and/or clothing or any other material that may be interposed between the two coils. The areas enclosed by the coils may be calculated by calculating the mean diameter of the wire loops of the coils (e.g., if the coil includes three loops, the diameter of each of the loops is summed and the result is divided by three), and using this mean diameter in calculating the area[0084]. FIG. 5 depicts magnetic inductive flux, .phi., between the external coil 516 (coil L1) and the implantable coil 542 (coil L2)[0085]”.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to configure the hearing device of Pinto with the magnetic flux of the cochlear prosthesis of Meskens. Doing so would specify the magnetic flux between the internal and external components of the hearing device.
Regarding claim 12, Pinto in view of Meskens teaches the apparatus of claim 10, wherein the at least one magnetic induction antenna comprises a wire spiral and the antenna region comprises a substantially planar area, at least a portion of the magnetic flux extending through the area in a direction substantially non-parallel to an axis of the area(In this regard, FIG. 5 depicts a functional schematic of an inductance communication component system 501 including external coil 516, designated L.sub.1, and implantable coil 542, designated L.sub.2, in FIG. 5. As may be seen in FIG. 5, the area A.sub.1 of the external coil 516 is less than the area A.sub.2 of the implantable coil 542).
PNG
media_image1.png
348
509
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to configure the hearing device of Pinto with the magnetic flux of the cochlear prosthesis of Meskens. Doing so would specify the magnetic flux between the internal and external components of the hearing device.
Regarding claim 13, Pinto in view of Meskens teaches the apparatus of claim 10, but Pinto fails to explicitly disclose wherein the bone surface comprises a skull surface, the region comprises a mastoid cavity, and the device is on and/or behind a pinna of the recipient, wherein the apparatus is an implanted portion of an acoustic prosthesis system and the device is an external portion of the acoustic prosthesis system.
However, Meskens teaches “Stimulating lead assembly 118 has a proximal end connected to stimulator unit 120, and a distal end implanted in cochlea 140. Stimulating lead assembly 118 extends from stimulator unit 120 to cochlea 140 through mastoid bone 119[0045]. As illustrated, an external device 704 of a cochlear implant prosthesis comprises, included in headpiece 701, an external inductive communication component 716 configured to vary the effective coil area of the component.[0111]. FIG. 1 is perspective view of a cochlear implant, referred to as cochlear implant system 100 implanted in a recipient. The recipient has an outer ear 101, a middle ear 105 and an inner ear 107. Components of outer ear 101, middle ear 105 and inner ear 107 are described below, followed by a description of cochlear implant 100.[0042]. Cochlear implant system 100 comprises an external component 142 which is directly or indirectly attached to the body of the recipient, and an internal component 144 which is temporarily or permanently implanted in the recipient[0044]”.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to configure the hearing device of Pinto with the bone specifications of the cochlear prosthesis of Meskens. Doing so would specify the anatomical placement and connection of the hearing device.
Regarding claim 22, Pinto discloses the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising: at least one external device configured to be worn by a recipient, the at least one external device comprising at least one external magnetic induction antenna, the first and second magnetic induction antennas affixed to one another, the first magnetic induction antenna having a first antenna axis and the second magnetic induction antenna having a second antenna axis substantially non-parallel to the first antenna axis(The in the ear canal type of hearing aid have an elongated housing shaped to fit in the ear canal. The longitudinal axis of in the ear canal type of hearing aid is then parallel to the ear to ear axis, whereas the face plate of in the ear canal type of hearing aid is in a plane orthogonal to the ear axis.[0054].FIG. 5 is a cross-section of a user's ear having an exemplary hearing device 200A partly inserted in the ear canal 40 of the ear according to the disclosure. The ear canal 40 leads to the ear drum or tympanic membrane 42. The hearing device 200A is an in-the-ear hearing device. The hearing device 200A comprises a housing 31.[0091]. The hearing device comprises a plurality of antennas. The hearing device comprises electronic components including a first electronic component. The plurality of antennas comprises a first antenna and a second antenna. The first antenna may comprise a coil part coiled along a first antenna axis. The first antenna may be configured for magnetic induction communication. Magnetic induction communication provides communication in a range of frequencies between 3 MHz and 30 MHz. The first antenna provides the electro-magnetic radiation that propagates through and around the human head and body of the user without significant losses in the tissue. The first antenna configured for magnetic induction communication operating in the range of frequencies can be susceptible to electro-magnetic interference, such as noise, originating from the electric components[0027]). Pinto fails to disclose “configured to generate a magnetic flux; and wherein the at least one magnetic induction antenna comprises at least a first magnetic induction antenna and a second magnetic induction antenna in electrical communication with the circuitry”.
However, Meskens teaches “A prosthesis including an external device and an implantable component. The external device includes a first inductive communication component. The implantable component includes a second inductive communication component, wherein the implantable component is configured to be implanted under skin of a recipient. The external device is configured to transmit power via magnetic induction transcutaneoulsy to the implantable component via the second inductive communication component[abtract]. In an embodiment, the coil located external to the recipient (e.g., the coil that is part of the external device 204) is in electrical communication with a power supply (e.g., a battery), and that coil induces a current in the coil implanted in the recipient (e.g., the coil that is part of the internal component 208). The external coil and the internal coil are collectively referred to herein as the inductance communication component system[0083]. FIG. 5 is a simplified schematic diagram depicting flux in an inductance communication component system;[0025]”.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to configure the hearing device of Pinto with the electrical communication of the cochlear prosthesis of Meskens. Doing so would specify communication between the internal and external elements of the hearing device.
Regarding claim 23, Pinto in view of Meskens teaches the apparatus of claim 22, wherein the first magnetic induction antenna comprises a substantially cylindrical wire coil wound around and extending along the first antenna axis(The hearing device comprises electronic components including a first electronic component. The plurality of antennas comprises a first antenna and a second antenna. The first antenna may comprise a coil part coiled along a first antenna axis. The first antenna may be configured for magnetic induction communication[abstract].The hearing device 200 comprises a first antenna 4 configured for magnetic induction communication. The first antenna 4 may comprise a coil part, e.g. coiled along a first antenna axis, as illustrated in FIG. 3[0062])
Regarding claim 24, Pinto in view of Meskens teaches the apparatus of claim 22, wherein of the first magnetic induction antenna comprises a substantially planar first wire spiral wound around and substantially orthogonal to the first antenna axis(The hearing device comprises electronic components including a first electronic component. The plurality of antennas comprises a first antenna and a second antenna. The first antenna may comprise a coil part coiled along a first antenna axis. The first antenna may be configured for magnetic induction communication[abstract].The hearing device 200 comprises a first antenna 4 configured for magnetic induction communication. The first antenna 4 may comprise a coil part, e.g. coiled along a first antenna axis, as illustrated in FIG. 3[0062]).
Regarding claim 25, Pinto in view of Meskens teaches the apparatus of claim 22, wherein the first antenna axis is substantially orthogonal to the second antenna axis(The hearing device 200A comprises a first conductor 30 that connects the first antenna 4 and the first part 6a of the second antenna 6[0099][FIG. 8]).
Claim(s) 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pinto(US 20230007409 A1) in view of Meskens(US 20150202438 A1) and further in view of Ruaro(EP 3122071 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Pinto in view of Meskens teaches apparatus of claim 1, but fails to explicitly state wherein the at least one magnetic induction antenna comprises a first magnetic induction antenna comprising a first electrically conductive wire extending around a first antenna axis and a second magnetic induction antenna comprising a second electrically conductive wire extending around a second antenna axis, the second antenna axis at an angle greater than or equal to 45 degrees relative to the first antenna axis.
However, Ruaro teaches “The angle between the first antenna element 15a and the second antenna element 15b may be about 90 degrees, thus the first antenna element 15a and the second antenna element 15b may be perpendicular to each other(see attached copy, page 9, paragraph 9). A magnetic antenna, such as a magnetic loop antenna, may comprise a coil of electrically conductive material wound around a core of magnetic material. Thus, the longitudinal axis may extend along a core of magnetic material of the second antenna. The longitudinal axis may extend in the center of the loops of the second antenna, and/or extend in the coil of the second antenna(see attached copy, page 5, paragraph 2)”.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to configure the hearing device of Pinto with the angled connection of the antennas of the hearing aid of Ruaro. Doing so would a degree that the first and second antennas are relative to each other.
Regarding claim 6, Pinto in view of Meskens and Ruaro teaches the apparatus of claim 5, wherein the first wire comprises a substantially cylindrical first wire coil wound around and extending along the first antenna axis or a substantially planar first wire spiral wound around and substantially orthogonal to the first antenna axis(In general, various parts of the first antenna 4 and/or of the second antenna 6 can be formed with many different geometries (such as, wires or patches, bend or straight, long or short) as long as the shielding part 20 follows the disclosed configuration with respect to first antenna 4 and the second antenna 6[0085]. The first antenna may comprise a coil part coiled along a first antenna axis[0007]).
Regarding claim 7, Pinto in view of Meskens and Ruaro teaches the apparatus of claim 6, but Pinto fails to disclose wherein the second wire comprises a substantially cylindrical second wire coil wound around and extending along the second antenna axis or a substantially planar second wire spiral wound around and substantially orthogonal to the second antenna axis.
However, Ruaro teaches “In one or more embodiments the second antenna comprises a number of turns around a longitudinal axis. The longitudinal axis may be an axis of the second antenna. The second antenna may be a magnetic antenna for establishing an inductive connection. The second antenna may be a loop antenna, such as a magnetic loop antenna, a coil antenna, etc. A magnetic antenna, such as a magnetic loop antenna, may comprise a coil of electrically conductive material wound around a core of magnetic material. Thus, the longitudinal axis may extend along a core of magnetic material of the second antenna. The longitudinal axis may extend in the center of the loops of the second antenna, and/or extend in the coil of the second antenna(see attached copy, page 5, paragraph 2). The second antenna 17 may be provided so that the rod 38 of magnetic material is provided longitudinal in the hearing aid shell 18, thus so that the second antenna 17 has a longitudinal direction orthogonal to first end 24 and/or the second end 26 of the hearing aid shell 18(see attached copy, page 10, paragraph 2).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to configure the hearing device of Pinto with the second antenna coil of the hearing aid of Ruaro. Doing so would specify a coil wound around the second antenna to ensure electrical conductivity and connection in the hearing device.
Regarding claim 8, Pinto in view of Meskens and Ruaro teach the apparatus of claim 5, wherein the second antenna axis is substantially orthogonal to the first antenna axis(The hearing device 200A comprises a first conductor 30 that connects the first antenna 4 and the first part 6a of the second antenna 6[0099][FIG. 8]).
Claim(s) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pinto in view of Meskens and Ruaro and further in view of Burwinkel(WO 2021096671 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Pinto in view of Meskens and Ruaro teach the apparatus of claim 5, but fails to disclose wherein the at least one magnetic induction antenna further comprises a third magnetic induction antenna comprising a third electrically conductive wire extending around a third antenna axis, the third antenna axis at an angle greater than or equal to 45 degrees relative to the first antenna axis and at an angle greater than or equal to 45 degrees relative to the second antenna axis.
However, Burwinkel teaches “Telecoils Tl, T2, T3 have longitudinal axes 413 oriented at different angles relative to a plane parallel to a direction of gravity. For example, the longitudinal axes 413 can be oriented at different angles ranging between 0 and 90° relative to the plane parallel to the direction of gravity(see attachec copy, page 12, paragraph 2)”.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to configure the hearing device of Pinto with the third coil antenna of the hearing device of Burwinkel. Doing so would specify a third coil in the system with its axis at a different angle relative to the first two coils.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIA CATHERINE ANTHONY whose telephone number is (703)756-4514. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 am - 4:30 pm, EST, M-F.
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, CARL LAYNO can be reached at (571) 272-4949. 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.
/MARIA CATHERINE ANTHONY/Examiner, Art Unit 3796
/CARL H LAYNO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Prosecution Insights