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 .
Response to Amendment
This action is in response to the remarks filed on 06/22/2026.
The amendments filed on 06/22/2026 have been entered. Applicant has canceled claims 4-6, 11-12, 14-15 and added new claims 25-28. Accordingly claims 1-3, 7-10, 13, 16-18, and 25-28 are pending. Claims 1-3, 10, and 13 are presently amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended independent claims 1 and 10, regarding the new limitation of the ultrasound being angled toward the palmar side between 10-50 degreed from the longitudinal axis have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Examiner notes that as shown in detail below, newly applied reference Koblish et al. is relied on to teach this new limitation.
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.
Claims 25-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. New claims 25-28 recite the limitations “further comprising a section that extends from the proximal end of the dorsal side of the housing, wherein the section is located above the single finger-receiving aperture when the wearable ultrasound probe is positioned for use”. However, neither the original claims, original drawings, nor the specification as originally filed provides support for this limitation. Although applicant has stated that support is allegedly found in Figures 7 and 7A and paragraphs [0055] and [0056] of applicant’s published specification, these sections do not provide adequate support for a particular section that extends from the proximal end of the dorsal side of side of the housing, wherein the section is located above the single finger-receiving aperture when the wearable ultrasound probe is positioned for use, as presently claimed. As such, claims 25-28 contain new matter.
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.
Claims 26 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 26 and 28 recite the limitation "the section" in line 1 of each claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Further clarification is required.
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.
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.
Claims 1-3, 10, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu et al. (US 2018/0360419, filed June 15, 2017) in view of Rubin et al. (US 2018/0335841, filed May 19, 2017), Shai (US 2011/0210931, September 1, 2011), Koblish et al. (US 2014/0081262, March 20, 2014, hereinafter “Koblish”), and Corbett, III et al. (US 2015/0257733, September 17, 2015, hereinafter “Corbett”).
Regarding claim 1, Zhu discloses a wearable ultrasound probe (“A single hand operation ultrasound probe array is provided. The single ultrasound probe array places individual transducers, each having different transducer characteristics, on sheaths that fit over fingers of a user.” abstract; Figs. 1-5 and corresponding descriptions) comprising:
a housing (finger sheath 106 in Figs. 1, 4 and corresponding description) having a dorsal side and a palmar side (see Fig. 3 and corresponding description; also see “back hand view of glove 110” in Fig. 4b and corresponding description and “palm view of glove 110” in Fig. 4a and corresponding description), a proximal end (“first end 106a” in Fig. 1 and corresponding description) and a distal end (“second end 106b” in Fig. 1 and corresponding description), and a longitudinal axis extending therebetween (see annotated Fig. 1, re-produced below, and corresponding description), wherein the proximal end comprises a single finger-receiving aperture that is configured to form a sleeve including a tubular wall member and defining an inner lumen (“each of the finger sheaths 106 is designed with a hollow cavity sized and dimensioned to fit over one or more fingers of a user. In particular, each of the finger sheaths 106 has a first end 106a and a second end 106b with the first end 106a including an opening sized and dimensioned to receive a finger of a user” [0023]; examiner notes that a singular finger sheath 106 comprises a single finger-receiving aperture);
PNG
media_image1.png
437
665
media_image1.png
Greyscale
an ultrasound array disposed adjacent to the distal end (“the plurality of transducers 104 are located proximate to the second end 106b of each of the plurality of finger sheaths 106 and are configured to fire and receive ultrasonic waves in an end firing orientation, as depicted in FIG. 1B and 3B.” [0024]).
Zhu fails to disclose the tubular wall member being formed from an elastomeric material.
However, Rubin teaches, in an analogous field of endeavor (e.g. finger wearable sensor, e.g., see Abstract), the tubular wall member being formed from an elastomeric material (“Tensile member 258 preferably comprises an elastic textile, such as Lycra, an elastomer, such as latex, or another suitable high strain material.” [0040]; also see [0039]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Zhu with the tubular wall member being formed from an elastomeric material as taught by Rubin in order to stretch to accommodate various finger sizes ([0040] of Rubin).
Zhu also fails to disclose a portion of the tubular wall member configured to extend or project into the inner lumen to form a deformable gripping member for gripping a finger, wherein the extension or projection of a bottom side of the tubular wall member into the inner lumen is configured to retain relatively small diameter fingers while the extension or projection of the bottom side of the tubular wall member is configured to distend outward from the inner lumen to accommodate relatively large diameter fingers.
However, Shai teaches, in the same field of endeavor, a portion of the tubular wall member configured to extend or project into the inner lumen to form a deformable gripping member for gripping a finger, wherein the extension or projection of a bottom side of the tubular wall member into the inner lumen is configured to retain relatively small diameter fingers while the extension or projection of the bottom side of the tubular wall member is configured to distend outward from the inner lumen to accommodate relatively large diameter fingers (“sections 804a,b may be dynamic (also "changeable", or specifically "moveable") to generally influence or control the size of cavity 803 (or otherwise "to generally change the size of the cavity"). In other words, sections 804a,b may be dynamic (i.e. may be changed or moved) to facilitate cavity 803 accommodating different sizes of a human finger (so that fingers of different sizes may be inserted into the cavity). Specifically, sections 804a,b may be moved (also "relocated", or "repositioned") or changed, for increasing and decreasing the size of cavity 803, such that larger sized fingers and smaller sized fingers, respectively, may fit into the cavity and be properly gripped in the cavity (to prevent device 800 from slipping off). More specifically, in some embodiments, sections 804a,b may be generally extended from section 802 towards cavity 803, or retracted into section 802. In other words, 804a,b may generally protrude into cavity 803 or recede from cavity 803, such as suggested by directions illustrated in FIGS. 8A and 8B.” [0267]; also see Figs. 8A-D and corresponding descriptions).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Zhu with a portion of the tubular wall member configured to extend or project into the inner lumen to form a deformable gripping member for gripping a finger, wherein the extension or projection of a bottom side of the tubular wall member into the inner lumen is configured to retain relatively small diameter fingers while the extension or projection of the bottom side of the tubular wall member is configured to distend outward from the inner lumen to accommodate relatively large diameter fingers as taught by Shai in order to accommodate different sizes of a human finger ([0267] of Shai).
Zhu fails to disclose wherein the ultrasound array is angled toward the palmar side between 10-50 degrees from the longitudinal axis.
However, Koblish teaches, in the same field of endeavor, a catheter 110 in Fig. 1, reproduced in part below, with three ultrasound arrays at the distal end of the catheter (see ultrasound transducers 117-119 in Fig. 1 and corresponding description). Koblish further teaches wherein an ultrasound array is angled toward the palmar side between 10-50 degrees from the longitudinal axis (ultrasound transducer 119 in Fig. 1 and corresponding description).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Zhu with wherein the ultrasound array is angled toward the palmar side between 10-50 degrees from the longitudinal axis as taught by Koblish in order to provide the ultrasound transducers facing in a direction according to the are required to be scanned ([0041] of Koblish).
Although Zhu discloses wherein the ultrasound array comprises a phased array or a linear array (“the probe array 102 can be implemented as a linear probe, a convex probe, a phased probe, a single probe, a 2D matrix probe, etc.” [0027]), Zhu fails to explicitly disclose wherein the ultrasound array comprises a phased array or a linear array configured for imaging in a non-near field over a wide field of view or a near field over a narrow field of view. Examiner notes that Zhu does disclose the ultrasound array being a phased array or a linear array which are presumably capable of imaging the claimed fields of view, Zhu merely fails to explicitly state as such.
However, Corbett teaches, in the same field of endeavor, wherein the ultrasound array comprises a phased array or a linear array configured for imaging in a non-near field over a wide field of view or a near field over a narrow field of view (“A phased array transducer permits imaging over a wide field of view at some distance from the array, while allowing imaging through a narrow access. A linear array permits imaging over a narrower field of view but provides good imaging of structures near the surface of the array. This is frequently the type of imagery that is highly desirable in surgical situations.” [0019]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Zhu with wherein the ultrasound array comprises a phased array or a linear array configured for imaging in a non-near field over a wide field of view or a near field over a narrow field of view as taught by Corbett in order to provide an appropriate field of view for a particular usage, e.g., good imaging of nearby structures in a narrow field of view for surgical situations ([0019] of Corbett).
Regarding claim 2, Zhu modified by Rubin, Shai, Koblish, and Corbett discloses the limitations of claim 1 as stated above, specifically Koblish was relied on to teach the angling of the ultrasound array. Koblish further teaches, in the same field of endeavor, wherein the ultrasound array is angled between 20-40 degrees from the longitudinal axis (ultrasound transducer 110 in Fig. 1 and corresponding description).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Zhu with wherein the ultrasound array is angled between 20-40 degrees from the longitudinal axis as taught by Koblish in order to provide the ultrasound transducers facing in a direction according to the are required to be scanned ([0041] of Koblish).
Regarding claim 3, Zhu modified by Rubin, Shai, Koblish, and Corbett discloses the limitations of claim 1 as stated above, specifically Koblish was relied on to teach the angling of the ultrasound array. Koblish further teaches, in the same field of endeavor, wherein the ultrasound array is angled between 20-30 degrees from the longitudinal axis (ultrasound transducer 110 in Fig. 1 and corresponding description).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Zhu with wherein the ultrasound array is angled between 20-30 degrees from the longitudinal axis as taught by Koblish in order to provide the ultrasound transducers facing in a direction according to the are required to be scanned ([0041] of Koblish).
Regarding claim 10, Zhu discloses a wearable ultrasound probe (“A single hand operation ultrasound probe array is provided. The single ultrasound probe array places individual transducers, each having different transducer characteristics, on sheaths that fit over fingers of a user.” abstract; Figs. 1-5 and corresponding descriptions) comprising:
a housing (finger sheath 106 in Figs. 1, 4 and corresponding description) having a dorsal side and a palmar side (see Fig. 3 and corresponding description; also see “back hand view of glove 110” in Fig. 4b and corresponding description and “palm view of glove 110” in Fig. 4a and corresponding description), a proximal end (“first end 106a” in Fig. 1 and corresponding description) and a distal end (“second end 106b” in Fig. 1 and corresponding description), and a longitudinal axis extending therebetween (see annotated Fig. 1, re-produced below, and corresponding description), wherein the proximal end comprises a finger-receiving aperture that is configured to form a sleeve including a tubular wall member defining an inner lumen(“each of the finger sheaths 106 is designed with a hollow cavity sized and dimensioned to fit over one or more fingers of a user. In particular, each of the finger sheaths 106 has a first end 106a and a second end 106b with the first end 106a including an opening sized and dimensioned to receive a finger of a user” [0023]; examiner notes that a singular finger sheath 106 comprises a single finger-receiving aperture);
PNG
media_image1.png
437
665
media_image1.png
Greyscale
an ultrasound array disposed adjacent to the distal end of the housing (“the plurality of transducers 104 are located proximate to the second end 106b of each of the plurality of finger sheaths 106 and are configured to fire and receive ultrasonic waves in an end firing orientation, as depicted in FIG. 1B and 3B.” [0024]).
Zhu fails to disclose the tubular wall member being formed from an elastomeric material.
However, Rubin teaches, in an analogous field of endeavor (e.g. finger wearable sensor, e.g., see Abstract), the tubular wall member being formed from an elastomeric material (“Tensile member 258 preferably comprises an elastic textile, such as Lycra, an elastomer, such as latex, or another suitable high strain material.” [0040]; also see [0039]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Zhu with the tubular wall member being formed from an elastomeric material as taught by Rubin in order to stretch to accommodate various finger sizes ([0040] of Rubin).
Zhu also fails to disclose a portion of the tubular wall member configured to extend or project into the inner lumen to form a deformable gripping member for gripping a finger, wherein the extension or projection of a bottom side of the tubular wall member into the inner lumen is configured to retain relatively small diameter fingers while the extension or projection of the bottom side of the tubular wall member is configured to distend outward from the inner lumen to accommodate relatively large diameter fingers.
However, Shai teaches, in the same field of endeavor, a portion of the tubular wall member configured to extend or project into the inner lumen to form a deformable gripping member for gripping a finger, wherein the extension or projection of a bottom side of the tubular wall member into the inner lumen is configured to retain relatively small diameter fingers while the extension or projection of the bottom side of the tubular wall member is configured to distend outward from the inner lumen to accommodate relatively large diameter fingers (“sections 804a,b may be dynamic (also "changeable", or specifically "moveable") to generally influence or control the size of cavity 803 (or otherwise "to generally change the size of the cavity"). In other words, sections 804a,b may be dynamic (i.e. may be changed or moved) to facilitate cavity 803 accommodating different sizes of a human finger (so that fingers of different sizes may be inserted into the cavity). Specifically, sections 804a,b may be moved (also "relocated", or "repositioned") or changed, for increasing and decreasing the size of cavity 803, such that larger sized fingers and smaller sized fingers, respectively, may fit into the cavity and be properly gripped in the cavity (to prevent device 800 from slipping off). More specifically, in some embodiments, sections 804a,b may be generally extended from section 802 towards cavity 803, or retracted into section 802. In other words, 804a,b may generally protrude into cavity 803 or recede from cavity 803, such as suggested by directions illustrated in FIGS. 8A and 8B.” [0267]; also see Figs. 8A-D and corresponding descriptions).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Zhu with a portion of the tubular wall member configured to extend or project into the inner lumen to form a deformable gripping member for gripping a finger, wherein the extension or projection of a bottom side of the tubular wall member into the inner lumen is configured to retain relatively small diameter fingers while the extension or projection of the bottom side of the tubular wall member is configured to distend outward from the inner lumen to accommodate relatively large diameter fingers as taught by Shai in order to accommodate different sizes of a human finger ([0267] of Shai).
Zhu fails to disclose wherein the ultrasound array is angled toward the palmar side between 10-50 degrees from the longitudinal axis.
However, Koblish teaches, in the same field of endeavor, a catheter 110 in Fig. 1, reproduced in part below, with three ultrasound arrays at the distal end of the catheter (see ultrasound transducers 117-119 in Fig. 1 and corresponding description). Koblish further teaches wherein an ultrasound array is angled toward the palmar side between 10-50 degrees from the longitudinal axis (ultrasound transducer 119 in Fig. 1 and corresponding description).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Zhu with wherein the ultrasound array is angled toward the palmar side between 10-50 degrees from the longitudinal axis as taught by Koblish in order to provide the ultrasound transducers facing in a direction according to the are required to be scanned ([0041] of Koblish).
Although Zhu discloses wherein the ultrasound array comprises a phased array or a linear array (“the probe array 102 can be implemented as a linear probe, a convex probe, a phased probe, a single probe, a 2D matrix probe, etc.” [0027]), Zhu fails to explicitly disclose wherein the ultrasound array comprises a phased array or a linear array configured for imaging in a non-near field over a wide field of view or a near field over a narrow field of view. Examiner notes that Zhu does disclose the ultrasound array being a phased array or a linear array which are presumably capable of imaging the claimed fields of view, Zhu merely fails to explicitly state as such.
However, Corbett teaches, in the same field of endeavor, wherein the ultrasound array comprises a phased array or a linear array configured for imaging in a non-near field over a wide field of view or a near field over a narrow field of view (“A phased array transducer permits imaging over a wide field of view at some distance from the array, while allowing imaging through a narrow access. A linear array permits imaging over a narrower field of view but provides good imaging of structures near the surface of the array. This is frequently the type of imagery that is highly desirable in surgical situations.” [0019]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Zhu with wherein the ultrasound array comprises a phased array or a linear array configured for imaging in a non-near field over a wide field of view or a near field over a narrow field of view as taught by Corbett in order to provide an appropriate field of view for a particular usage, e.g., good imaging of nearby structures in a narrow field of view for surgical situations ([0019] of Corbett).
Regarding claim 13, Zhu modified by Rubin, Shai, Koblish, and Corbett discloses the limitations of claim 1 as stated above, specifically Koblish was relied on to teach the angling of the ultrasound array. Koblish further teaches, in the same field of endeavor, wherein the ultrasound array is angled between 20-40 degrees from the longitudinal axis (ultrasound transducer 110 in Fig. 1 and corresponding description).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Zhu with wherein the ultrasound array is angled between 20-40 degrees from the longitudinal axis as taught by Koblish in order to provide the ultrasound transducers facing in a direction according to the are required to be scanned ([0041] of Koblish).
Claims 7 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Rubin, Shai, Koblish, and Corbett as applied to claims 1 and 10 above and further in view of Sliwa (US 2009/0163807, June 25, 2009).
Regarding claims 7 and 16, Zhu modified by Rubin, Shai, and Corbett discloses the limitations of claims 1 and 10, respectively, as stated above but fails to disclose wherein the finger-receiving aperture comprises a finger-retention element.
However, Sliwa teaches, in the same field of endeavor, wherein the finger-receiving aperture (mounting body 12 in Fig. 3, re-produced below, and corresponding description) comprises a finger-retention element (band 17 in Fig. 3 and corresponding description, e.g. “a band 17 that may bridge the partial cylinder and be configured to retain mounting body 12 on a finger.” [0018]).
PNG
media_image2.png
232
168
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Zhu with wherein the finger-receiving aperture comprises a finger-retention element as taught by Sliwa in order to secure the device to the finger ([0018] of Sliwa).
Claims 8-9, 17-18, and 25-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Rubin, Shai, Koblish, and Corbett as applied to claims 1 and 10 above and further in view of Takano et al. (US 4,898,177, February 6, 1990, hereinafter “Takano”).
Regarding claims 8-9 and 17-18, Zhu modified by Rubin, Shai, and Corbett discloses the limitations of claims 1 and 10, respectively, as stated above but fails to disclose wherein the housing further comprises a left side and a right side, and wherein the left and right sides each comprises a gripping element, wherein the gripping elements are positioned adjacent the distal end.
However, Takano teaches, in the same field of endeavor, wherein the housing (adapter 50 in Fig. 3, re-produced below with annotations, and corresponding description) further comprises a left side and a right side (see annotated Fig. 3 below), and wherein the left and right sides each comprises a gripping element (grip portions 52 in Fig. 3 and corresponding description), wherein the gripping elements are positioned adjacent the distal end (e.g. see Figs. 3 and 8 and corresponding description).
PNG
media_image3.png
322
400
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Zhu with wherein the housing further comprises a left side and a right side, and wherein the left and right sides each comprises a gripping element, wherein the gripping elements are positioned adjacent the distal end as taught by Takano in order to allow a user to hold the device with a relatively large number of support points (col. 8, ll. 47-62 of Takano).
Regarding claims 25-28, Zhu modified by Rubin, Shai, Koblish, and Corbett discloses the limitations of claims 1, 10, respectively, as stated above but fails to disclose further comprising a section that extends from the proximal end of the dorsal side of the housing, wherein the section is located above the single finger-receiving aperture when the wearable ultrasound probe is positioned for use.
However, Takano teaches, in the same field of endeavor, a section that extends from the proximal end of the dorsal side of the housing, wherein the section is located above the single finger-receiving aperture when the wearable ultrasound probe is positioned for use (grip portions 52 in Fig. 3 and corresponding description).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Zhu with further comprising a section that extends from the proximal end of the dorsal side of the housing, wherein the section is located above the single finger-receiving aperture when the wearable ultrasound probe is positioned for use as taught by Takano in order to allow a user to hold the device with a relatively large number of support points (col. 8, ll. 47-62 of Takano).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMINAH ASGHAR whose telephone number is (571)272-0527. The examiner can normally be reached M-W, F 9am-5pm EST.
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, Christopher Koharski can be reached at (571) 272-7230. 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.
/A.A./Examiner, Art Unit 3797
/SHAHDEEP MOHAMMED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797
