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 .
Claims filed 09-18-24
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09-18-24 was filed after the mailing date of the 09-18-24. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 2-16 objected to because of the following informalities: each claim is based preamble, should be rewritten as “The hearing aid of claim…” to be consistent.
Claim 18-29 objected to because of the following informalities: each claim is based on the preamble, should be rewritten as “The hearing aid of claim…” to be consistent.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. Claim 13 recites “the electric charge contact has a corrosion performance, under ASTM B799-95, of at least 6 years without degradation”, however, fails to provide sufficient guidance to enable a person of ordinary skill in the art to make and use a hearing aid charge contact that achieves this specific corrosion performance standard.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the corrosion-resistant layer" in line 6 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Based on the Applicant’s specification [Page 5 L10-15], examiner will interpret “the corrosion-resistant layer” as “first layer” which contain gold material.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the standard set forth by the inventor. Claim 13 recites the limitation “a corrosion performance, under ASTM B799-95, of at least 6 years without degradation”, While the applicant references ASTM B799-95 as the standard, this does not resolve the indefiniteness of the claim. ASTM B799-95 a standard test method for determining the porosity of gold and palladium coatings, particularly on electrical contacts and related metallic surfaces. This test standard outputs results based quantitative results (i.e. porosity level), not in a time table. Based on the claim language, “at least 6 years without degradation” has meaning within the framework of the ASTM B799-95. A person of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to understand how to measure degradation based off time.
Claim 14 recites the limitation " the corrosion-resistant layer " in line 16 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Based on the Applicant’s specification [Page 5 L10-15], examiner will interpret “the corrosion-resistant layer” as “first layer” which contain gold material.
Claim 15 recites the limitation " the corrosion-resistant layer " in line 18-19 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Based on the Applicant’s specification [Page 5 L10-15], examiner will interpret “the corrosion-resistant layer” as “first layer” which contain gold material.
Claim 16 recites the limitation " the corrosion-resistant layer" in line 22 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Based on the Applicant’s specification [Page 5 L10-15], examiner will interpret “the corrosion-resistant layer” as “first layer” which contain gold material.
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.
Claim 1-2, 4-16, 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brendel (US Publication) 20230403519 A1 in view of Barnstead (US Publication) 20190103693 A1
Regarding claim 1, Brendel teaches A hearing aid (Fig 1 [2], hearing device) comprising a hearing aid housing having a processing unit (Fig 1 [12], controller, within the controller unit is a microprocessor Fig 3 [52]), a battery unit (Fig 1 [16]), and an electric charge contact (Fig 1 [28]), wherein the electric charge contact (In Fig 1, the hearing device [2] is placed within the charger [6], where the battery [16] make an electrical charging connection [28] with charger through a interface, see para 35) comprises:
Brendel does not explicitly teach a metallic component configured to provide electrical conduction; and a coating at least partially covering the metallic component, the coating comprising: a first layer at least partially located on the metallic component, wherein the first layer comprises gold; and a second layer at least partially located on the first layer, wherein the second layer comprises palladium.
Barnstead discloses a metallic component (Fig 3 [370], substrate, para 51) configured to provide electrical conduction (In Fig 3, the electric contact uses a multiple materials, metals and alloys, that have electrical conductivity, para 43- 50. Also see para 22);
and a coating at least partially covering the metallic component, the coating comprising: a first layer at least partially located on the metallic component, wherein the first layer comprises gold (In Fig 3, each layer [320-370] is plated, see para 51, and layer [360] can be either gold, copper, or other material upon choice. See para 49);
and a second layer at least partially located on the first layer, wherein the second layer comprises palladium (In Fig 3, layer [330] may be formed of palladium or other material, see para 46). (Note: One or more layers can either be add or omitted if need be, in this or other embodiment of the present invention. Also, each layer is plated to each other. In this case, layers 4th, 5th, 6th [340,350, 360] can be omitted. See para 51)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of a metallic component configured to provide electrical conduction; and a coating at least partially covering the metallic component, the coating comprising: a first layer at least partially located on the metallic component, wherein the first layer comprises gold; and a second layer at least partially located on the first layer, wherein the second layer comprises palladium as taught by Barnstead in Brendel’s invention. The motivation would have been to improve corrosion resistance of the present invention and other structures. In para 21, in Barnstead.
Regarding claim 2, Brendel does not explicitly teach wherein the metallic component is stainless steel.
Barnstead discloses wherein the metallic component is stainless steel (Fig 3 [370], 6th layer, the contact surface may be formed of stainless steel or other materials, see para 18, 50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of the metallic component is stainless steel as taught by Barnstead in Brendel’s invention. The motivation would have been having good electrical conductivity and a good availability. In para 50, in Barnstead.
Regarding claim 4, Brendel does not explicitly teach wherein the second layer has a thickness greater than a thickness of the first layer.
Barnstead discloses wherein the second layer has a thickness greater than a thickness of the first layer (In Fig 3, the 3rd (or second) layer [330], which contain palladium and other material has multiple ranges of thickness of about 0.5 to 5 micros depending on choice of range, para 46. The 6th layer [360], which contains gold and other materials has multiple ranges of thickness of about less than 0.1 – 05 micrometer or less depending on choice of range, para 49).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of the second layer has a thickness greater than a thickness of the first layer as taught by Barnstead in Brendel’s invention. The motivation would have been to avoid stress. In para 46, in Barnstead.
Regarding claim 5, Brendel does not explicitly teach wherein the first layer has a thickness of between 0.1-0.5 µm, preferably between 0.14 and 0.26 µm.
Barnstead discloses wherein the first layer (Fig 3 [360]) has a thickness of between 0.1-0.5 µm, preferably between 0.14 and 0.26 µm (In Fig 3, the 6th layer [360] has thickness ranges that may be less than 0.01 micrometers, between 0.01 and 0.05 micrometers, between 0.05 and 0.1 micrometers, between 0.0.5 and 0.15 micrometers, more than 0.1 micrometers, para 49).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of the first layer has a thickness of between 0.1-0.5 µm, preferably between 0.14 and 0.26 µm as taught by Barnstead in Brendel’s invention. The motivation would have been help to cover defects in the substrate. In para 49, in Barnstead.
Regarding claim 6, Brendel does not explicitly teach wherein the second layer has a thickness of between 0.5-1.0µm, preferably between 0.5-0.8 µm.
Barnstead discloses wherein the second layer has a thickness of between 0.5-1.0µm, preferably between 0.5-0.8 µm (Fig 3 [330], a layer formed with palladium, or other material, and have a thickness between 0.5 and 2 microns, see para 46).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of the second layer has a thickness of between 0.5-1.0µm, preferably between 0.5-0.8 µm as taught by Barnstead in Brendel’s invention. The motivation would have been to avoid stress, which may form cracks in the third layer and provide a downward pathway for corrosion. In para 46, in Barnstead
Regarding claim 7, Brendel does not explicitly teach wherein the coating has a thickness of between 0.8-0.9 µm.
Barnstead discloses wherein the coating has a thickness of between 0.8-0.9 µm. (Though not explicitly calculated, the ranges of thickness set for both the first [360] and second [330] layers. The range of thickness for the first layer may be less that 0.01 microns, or higher, para 49. The range of thickness for the second layer may be 0.5 to 2 microns, para 45. A person with ordinary skill would determine the desire thickness for the coating).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of wherein the coating has a thickness of between 0.8-0.9 µm as taught by Barnstead in Brendel’s invention. The motivation would have been help to cover defects in the substrate. In para 49, in Barnstead.
Regarding claim 8, Brendel does not explicitly teach wherein the second layer is pure palladium.
Barnstead discloses wherein the second layer (Fig 3 [330]) is pure palladium. (The third layer may be formed of palladium or other materials, para 46. Though it does not give a percentage, it does contrast will other layers that suggest layers formed from alloys like layer the top layer using gold-palladium [para 42] or the 5th layer using nickel-palladium [para 48].)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of the second layer is pure palladium as taught by Barnstead in Brendel’s invention. The motivation would have been avoiding stress. In para 46, in Barnstead.
Regarding claim 9, Brendel does not explicitly teach wherein the coating does not include nickel.
Barnstead discloses wherein the second layer (Fig 3 [330]) is pure palladium. (The third layer may be formed of palladium or other materials, para 46. Though it does not give a percentage, it does contrast will other layers that suggest layers formed from alloys like layer the top layer using gold-palladium [para 42] or the 5th layer using nickel-palladium [para 48].)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of the second layer is pure palladium as taught by Barnstead in Brendel’s invention. The motivation would have been avoiding stress. In para 46, in Barnstead.
Regarding claim 10, Brendel does not explicitly teach wherein the first layer fully covers the metallic component.
Barnstead discloses wherein the first layer (Fig 3 [360]) fully covers the metallic component. (In Fig 3, the 6th layer [360] is plated on top of the substrate [370], para 51. Also, this plated covering corrosive resistance can be applied other structures as well, para 60).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of wherein the first layer fully covers the metallic component as taught by Barnstead in Brendel’s invention. The motivation would have been help to cover defects in the substrate. In para 49, in Barnstead.
Regarding claim 11, Brendel does not explicitly teach wherein the second layer fully covers the corrosion-resistant layer.
Barnstead discloses wherein the second layer (Fig 3 [330], 3rd layer) fully covers the corrosion-resistant layer. (It is established that different layers can be added or omitted, specifically the 4th, 5th ,6th layers [340, 350, 360, respectively], para 51. Each layer is plated to one another, para 51. The 3rd layer may form of palladium, para 46).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of the second layer fully covers the corrosion-resistant layer as taught by Barnstead in Brendel’s invention. The motivation would have been help to cover defects in the substrate. In para 49, in Barnstead.
Regarding Claim 12, Brendel teaches wherein comprises a charging interface (Fig 1 [20], charging interface, the hearing device [2] has a connection [28] through the interface to the charger [6], see para 35).
Brendel does not explicitly teach the metallic component
Barnstead discloses the metallic component (In Fig 3, establishes the electrical contact comprising of different metals, and metal alloys, and a substrate; plated together, see para 40 -51.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of the metallic component as taught by Barnstead in Brendel’s invention. The motivation would have been to improve corrosion resistance of the present invention and other structures. In para 21, in Barnstead.
Regarding claim 13, Brendel does not explicitly teach wherein the electric charge contact has a corrosion performance, under ASTM B799-95, of at least 6 years without degradation.
Barnstead discloses wherein the electric charge contact has a corrosion performance, under ASTM B799-95, of at least 6 years without degradation. (In Fig 5 of the Applicant’s drawing, shows how the combination gold and palladium resist corrosive degradation. In Fig 3, the electrical contact has the same combination. In para 51, layer can be added or omitted if need be and the 3rd layer [330, palladium] and the 6th layer [360, gold] are plated to each other, see para 46, 49.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of the electric charge contact has a corrosion performance, under ASTM B799-95, of at least 6 years without degradation as taught by Barnstead in Brendel’s invention. The motivation would have been to improve corrosion resistance of the present invention and other structures. In para 21, in Barnstead.
Regarding claim 14, Brendel does not explicitly teach wherein the second layer fully covers the corrosion-resistant layer.
Barnstead discloses wherein the second layer (Fig 3 [330], 3rd layer) fully covers the corrosion-resistant layer. (It is established that different layers can be added or omitted, specifically the 4th, 5th ,6th layers [340, 350, 360, respectively], para 51. Each layer is plated to one another, para 51. The 3rd layer may form of palladium, para 46).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of the second layer fully covers the corrosion-resistant layer as taught by Barnstead in Brendel’s invention. The motivation would have been avoiding stress. In para 46, in Barnstead.
Regarding claim 15, Brendel does not explicitly teach wherein the second layer is plated on the corrosion-resistant layer.
Barnstead discloses wherein the second layer (Fig 3 [330], 3rd layer) is plated on the corrosion-resistant layer.
(In para 51, different layers can be added or omitted, specifically the 4th, 5th ,6th layers [340, 350, 360, respectively], and placed in any order. Each layer is plated to one another, para 51. The 3rd layer may form of palladium, para 46).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of the second layer is plated on the corrosion-resistant layer as taught by Barnstead in Brendel’s invention. The motivation would have been avoiding stress. In para 46, in Barnstead.
Regarding claim 16, Brendel does not explicitly teach wherein the first layer is plated on the metallic component and the second layer is plated on the corrosion-resistant layer.
Barnstead discloses wherein the first layer (Fig 3 [360], 3rd layer) is plated on the metallic component (Fig 3 [310 -370], electrical contact, para 40) and the second layer (Fig 3 [330], 3rd layer) is plated on the corrosion-resistant layer.
(In para 51, different layers can be added or omitted, specifically the 4th, 5th ,6th layers [340, 350, 360, respectively], and placed in any order. Each layer is plated to one another, para 51. The 3rd layer may form of palladium, para 46)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of the first layer is plated on the metallic component and the second layer is plated on the corrosion-resistant layer as taught by Barnstead in Brendel’s invention. The motivation would have been to improve corrosion resistance of the present invention and other structures. In para 21, in Barnstead.
Regarding claim 17, Brendel teaches a hearing aid (Fig 1 [2]) comprising an electric charge contact (Fig 1 [28]), the method comprising: forming
Brendel does not explicitly teach A method of manufacturing a metallic component configured to provide electrical conduction; applying a first layer at least partially located on the metallic component, wherein the first layer comprises gold; and applying a second layer at least partially located on the first layer, wherein the second layer comprises palladium.
Barnstead discloses a method of manufacturing (In Fig 3, different layers of materials are being stacked upon each other to improve corrosion resistance of the present invention and other structures) a metallic component (Fig 3 [370], substrate, para 51) configured to provide electrical conduction (In Fig 3, the electric contact uses a multiple materials, metals and alloys, that have electrical conductivity, para 43- 50. Also see para 22);
applying a first layer at least partially located on the metallic component, wherein the first layer comprises gold (In Fig 3, each layer [320-370] is plated, see para 51, and layer [360] can be either gold, copper, or other material upon choice. See para 49);
and applying a second layer at least partially located on the first layer, wherein the second layer comprises palladium (In Fig 3, layer [330] may be formed of palladium or other material, see para 46). (Note: One or more layers can either be add or omitted if need be in this or other embodiment of the present invention. In this case, layers 4th, 5th, 6th [340,350, 360] can be omitted. See para 51)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of a method of manufacturing a metallic component configured to provide electrical conduction; applying a first layer at least partially located on the metallic component, wherein the first layer comprises gold; and applying a second layer at least partially located on the first layer, wherein the second layer comprises palladium as taught by Barnstead in Brendel’s invention. The motivation would have been to improve corrosion resistance of the present invention and other structures. In para 21, in Barnstead.
Regarding claim 18, Brendel does not explicitly teach wherein forming the metallic component comprises attaching the metallic component to substrate.
Barnstead discloses wherein forming the metallic component comprises attaching the metallic component to substrate (Fig 3 [370], substrate. In Fig 3, each layer comprises of a metal or metal alloy, that are plated with each other, including the substrate, para 51).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of wherein forming the metallic component comprises attaching the metallic component to substrate as taught by Barnstead in Brendel’s invention. The motivation would have been to improve corrosion resistance of the present invention and other structures. In para 21, in Barnstead.
Claim 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brendel (US Publication) 20230403519 A1 in view of Barnstead (US Publication) 20190103693 A1, in further view Rustomji (US Publication) 20200266007 A1.
Regarding claim 3, Brendel does not explicitly teach wherein the stainless steel is stainless steel 316.
Rustomji discloses wherein the stainless steel is stainless steel 316. (Stainless steel 316 was chosen due to being resistant to corrosive elements, para 100).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of the stainless steel is stainless steel 316 as taught by Rustomji in Brendel’s invention. The motivation would have been to avoid corrosion issues. In para 100, in Rustomji.
Claims 19 - 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brendel (US Publication) 20230403519 A1 in view of Barnstead (US Publication) 20190103693 A1, in further view of Weber (US Patent) 9004960 B2.
Regarding claim 19, Brendel and Barnstead teach wherein applying first layer
Brendel and Barnstead does not explicitly teach comprises electro-plating.
Weber discloses comprises electro-plating. (Depending on the embodiment, there are two plating methods that can be employed, electroloss and electrolytic plating. In this instance, electrolytic plating is used deposit both gold and palladium as the outer layer. A person with ordinary knowledge in the art would apply that either electroplating method could be used. See Col 6 L45-49). (Note: though nickel is used as a intermediate, the methodology is appliable without it)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of comprises electro-plating as taught by B in Brendel’s invention. The motivation would have been to provide corrosion resistance and durability. In Col 5 L54-57, in Weber.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
disclosure.
Solum (US Publication) 20190268680 A1 – charging contacts in a hearing device
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCUS A BARBOZA whose telephone number is (571)272-9626. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 am to 5 pm, Alternate Fridays: off.
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.
/MARCUS A BARBOZA/Examiner, Art Unit 2692
/CAROLYN R EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2692
Prosecution Insights