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
The amendments and remarks, filed on 8/14/2025, has been entered. The previous prior art rejection has been withdrawn, and a new prior art rejection is applied to address the claim amendments.
The amendments and remarks, filed on 8/14/2025, has been entered. The claim amendments do not overcome the previous claim objection 16 and 20.
Claim Status
Claims 1-6, 8, 13, 15-16, and 19-20 are pending and being examined.
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claim 2 be found allowable, claim 3 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claims 3 and 4 are objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 3, the word “source” should read as “sources” in line 2; and in claim 4, the word “source” should read as “sources” in line 2. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 13 and 16 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.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the light source” in line 3. The limitation is unclear as to which light source the applicant is referring to, because claim 1 recites the first and second light source. The examiner interprets the light source to be the second light source which corresponds to the second portion of the at least one monitoring label.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “an NFC reader” in line 24. The limitation is unclear as the clause before reads that the near-field communication integrated circuit harvest energy from an NFC reader. Also, the user device includes “an NFC reader”. The limitation is unclear as to whether applicant is claiming an additional NFC reader or the same NFC reader. For purpose of prosecution, the examiner interprets that the NFC being claimed in the limitation is the same one powering the NFC integrated circuit.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-8, 13, 15-16, 19-24, and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kauer et al (US 20040106211 A1; hereinafter “Kauer”) in view of Brukalo et al (US 20140113553 A1; hereinafter “Brukalo”).
Regarding claim 1, Kauer teaches a monitoring device (Kauer; Abstract; a chemical sensor, sensing system and sensing method), comprising:
an electronic chip assembly (Kauer; Fig. 13a, 13b; para [144]; The configuration and relative orientation of LEDs, photodiodes, excitation filters and emission filters, sensors and sensor array substrate);
a first and second light sources (Kauer; Fig. 13a; para [144]; a plurality of LEDs);
at least one monitoring label comprising a chemical configured to absorb light depending upon at least one physical property (Kauer; Fig. 13a; para [146]; A plurality of sensor elements are applied either directly to a transparent sensor array substrate), the at least one monitoring label including a first portion on which the chemical is disposed and a second portion on which the chemical is not disposed (Kauer; Fig. 13a; para [68, 180]; Typically, for cross-reactive sensor arrays, it is preferable to provide sensor array elements formed from dye materials with different response spectra, different analyte sensitivities, and different analyte discrimination characteristics…Individual sensor elements and sensing channels may employ different sensing materials; examiner interprets the second portion to be one of the sensor arrays different from the first portion, thus the “chemical” in the first portion would be different as another material may be used to detect another analyte);
first and second photodiodes (Kauer; Fig. 13a; para [144]; A photodiode support with the same dimensions is used for mounting a plurality of eight photodiodes) configured to generate respective electrical signals that is proportional to amounts of light received (Kauer; para [119, 181]; The innovative device delivers analytes (odors) in a controlled, pulsatile manner (sniff) to fluorescence-based sensor array and detector array system that generates analog electrical signals… The changes in fluorescence as a result of the odor interacting with the sensing material is detected by a photodiode and current to voltage (I/V) converter), wherein the first photodiode is located over the first portion and is configured to collect light emitted by the first portion in response to light from the first light source, and wherein the second photodiode is located over the second portion and is configured to collect light emitted by the second portion in response to light from the second light source (Kauer; Fig. 3, 13a; para [147]; The LED and photodiode modules, or plurality of modules, are preferably aligned parallel to one another with spacing between the two modules adjusted to optimize illumination of the sensor array elements by the LED array); and
an integrated circuit (Kauer; para [182-192]) that provides power to the electronic chip assembly, the first and second light sources and the first and second photodiodes, wherein the power being obtained by the NFC integrated circuit via energy harvesting from an NFC reader (Kauer; Fig. 5; para [186, 199-217]; the circuits to control illumination of the LEDs; examiner notes that the NFC circuit is discussed in the paragraphs 199-217 about the use of the system),
wherein the at least one monitoring label is disposed between the light sources and the photodiodes such that the first light source, the first portion and the first photodiode are aligned along a first optical path and the second light source, the second portion, and the second photodiode are alighted along a second optical path different from the first optical path (Kauer; Fig. 3, 13a; para [147]; The LED and photodiode modules, or plurality of modules, are preferably aligned parallel to one another with spacing between the two modules adjusted to optimize illumination of the sensor array elements by the LED array; examiner notes that each photodiode module is parallel to the respective LED),
wherein the integrated circuit is configured to receive the electrical signals and to transmit a measurement of the at least one physical property based on a ratiometric calibration using a ratio of the light collected by the first photodiode to the light collected by the second photodiode (Kauer; para [354]; the unique sensitivity, detection, and discrimination capabilities of the sensor of the present invention, five vapor mixtures of analyte-saturated air were sampled with a nine element sensor array of the present invention and a sixteen element fiber optic sensor array for comparing the relative sensitivity and discriminating capability of the two sensing devices).
Kauer does not teach the integrated circuit being a near-field communication (NFC) integrated circuit.
However, Brukalo teaches an analogous art of a portable device (Brukalo; Abstract) comprising a near-field communication integrated circuit (Brukalo; para [109, 110]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the integrated circuit of Kauer to be the NFC circuit as taught by Brukalo, because Brukalo teaches that the NFC circuit powers the device when placed near an RFID tag (Brukalo; para [110]). The examiner notes that this would be an alternative method to power the device of Kauer which requires low power consumption (Kauer; para [177]).
Regarding claim 2, modified Kauer teaches the monitoring device of claim 1, wherein the at least one of the first and second light sources emits light within a visible wavelength range (Kauer; para [69, 173]; any dye that provides a detectable characteristic optical response signature to an analyte at ultraviolet, visible or infrared wavelengths may be employed…light emitting diodes (LEDs) of the correct wavelength for each sensor dye material).
Regarding claim 3, modified Kauer teaches the monitoring device of claim 1, wherein at least one of the first and second light sources emits light within a visible wavelength range (Kauer; para [69, 173]; any dye that provides a detectable characteristic optical response signature to an analyte at ultraviolet, visible or infrared wavelengths may be employed…light emitting diodes (LEDs) of the correct wavelength for each sensor dye material).
Regarding claim 4, modified Kauer teaches the monitoring device of claim 1, wherein at least one of the first and second light source emits light within an invisible wavelength range (Kauer; para [69, 173]; any dye that provides a detectable characteristic optical response signature to an analyte at ultraviolet, visible or infrared wavelengths may be employed…light emitting diodes (LEDs) of the correct wavelength for each sensor dye material).
Regarding claim 5, modified Kauer teaches the monitoring device of claim 4, wherein the invisible wavelength range is within an ultraviolet (UV) wavelength range (Kauer; para [69, 173]; any dye that provides a detectable characteristic optical response signature to an analyte at ultraviolet, visible or infrared wavelengths may be employed…light emitting diodes (LEDs) of the correct wavelength for each sensor dye material).
Regarding claim 6, modified Kauer teaches the monitoring device of claim 5, wherein: the at least one physical property is a biomarker binding with the chemical (); and the at least one photodiode is sensitive to light within a visible wavelength range Kauer; para [69, 173]; any dye that provides a detectable characteristic optical response signature to an analyte at ultraviolet, visible or infrared wavelengths may be employed…light emitting diodes (LEDs) of the correct wavelength for each sensor dye material).
Regarding claim 7, modified Kauer teaches the monitoring device of claim 6, wherein the at least one photodiode is sensitive to a visible green wavelength range and insensitive to light within the UV wavelength range (Kauer; para [69, 173]; any dye that provides a detectable characteristic optical response signature to an analyte at ultraviolet, visible or infrared wavelengths may be employed…light emitting diodes (LEDs) of the correct wavelength for each sensor dye material).
Regarding claim 8, modified Kauer teaches the monitoring device of claim 4, wherein the invisible wavelength range is within an infrared (IR) wavelength range (Kauer; para [69, 173]; any dye that provides a detectable characteristic optical response signature to an analyte at ultraviolet, visible or infrared wavelengths may be employed…light emitting diodes (LEDs) of the correct wavelength for each sensor dye material).
Regarding claim 13, modified Kauer teaches the monitoring device of claim 1, wherein the second portion of the at least one monitoring label is not exposed to the light emitted by the light source (Kauer; Fig. 3, 13a; para [147]; The LED and photodiode modules, or plurality of modules, are preferably aligned parallel to one another with spacing between the two modules adjusted to optimize illumination of the sensor array elements by the LED array; examiner interprets the second portion to be one of the sensor arrays different from the first portion, thus the “chemical” in the first portion would not be exposed by the second light source);
Regarding claim 15, modified Kauer teaches the monitoring device of claim 1, wherein the at least one physical property is one or more of temperature, humidity, a presence of one or more bacteria, or a presence of one or more molecules (Kauer; para [63]; Light energy excitation of the sensor elements in the presence of the odors produces a detectable optical response signal due to emitted light produced by analyte interaction with the dyes or dye-polymer compounds in the sensor elements).
Regarding claim 16, Kauer teaches a system (examiner notes Kauer teaches all structures of the system as discussed below), comprising:
a monitoring device (Kauer; Abstract; a chemical sensor, sensing system and sensing method) comprising:
an electronic chip assembly (Kauer; Fig. 13a, 13b; para [144]; The configuration and relative orientation of LEDs, photodiodes, excitation filters and emission filters, sensors and sensor array substrate);
a first and second light sources (Kauer; Fig. 13a; para [144]; a plurality of LEDs);
at least one monitoring label comprising a chemical configured to absorb light depending upon at least one physical property (Kauer; Fig. 13a; para [146]; A plurality of sensor elements are applied either directly to a transparent sensor array substrate), the at least one monitoring label including a first portion on which the chemical is disposed and a second portion on which the chemical is not disposed (Kauer; Fig. 13a; para [68, 180]; Typically, for cross-reactive sensor arrays, it is preferable to provide sensor array elements formed from dye materials with different response spectra, different analyte sensitivities, and different analyte discrimination characteristics…Individual sensor elements and sensing channels may employ different sensing materials; examiner interprets the second portion to be one of the sensor arrays different from the first portion, thus the “chemical” in the first portion would be different as another material may be used to detect another analyte);
a first and second photodiodes (Kauer; Fig. 13a; para [144]; A photodiode support with the same dimensions is used for mounting a plurality of eight photodiodes) configured to generate respective electrical signals that is proportional to amounts of light received (Kauer; para [119, 181]; The innovative device delivers analytes (odors) in a controlled, pulsatile manner (sniff) to fluorescence-based sensor array and detector array system that generates analog electrical signals… The changes in fluorescence as a result of the odor interacting with the sensing material is detected by a photodiode and current to voltage (I/V) converter), wherein the first photodiode is located over the first portion and is configured to collect light emitted by the first portion in response to light from the first light source, and wherein the second photodiode is located over the second portion and is configured to collect light emitted by the second portion in response to light from the second light source (Kauer; Fig. 3, 13a; para [147]; The LED and photodiode modules, or plurality of modules, are preferably aligned parallel to one another with spacing between the two modules adjusted to optimize illumination of the sensor array elements by the LED array); and
an integrated circuit (Kauer; para [182-192]) that provides power to the electronic chip assembly, the first and second light sources and the first and second photodiodes, wherein the power being obtained by the NFC integrated circuit via energy harvesting from an NFC reader (Kauer; Fig. 5; para [186, 199-217]; the circuits to control illumination of the LEDs; examiner notes that the NFC circuit is discussed in the paragraphs 199-217 about the use of the system); and
a user device communicatively coupled to the monitoring device, wherein the user device includes a reader to receive a measurement of the at least one-physical property from the integrated circuit (Kauer; Fig. 3; computer and display),
wherein the at least one monitoring label is disposed between the light sources and the photodiodes such that the first light source, the first portion and the first photodiode are aligned along a first optical path and the second light source, the second portion, and the second photodiode are alighted along a second optical path different from the first optical path (Kauer; Fig. 3, 13a; para [147]; The LED and photodiode modules, or plurality of modules, are preferably aligned parallel to one another with spacing between the two modules adjusted to optimize illumination of the sensor array elements by the LED array; examiner notes that each photodiode module is parallel to the respective LED), and
wherein the measurement is based on a ratiometric calibration using a ratio of the light collected by the first photodiode to the light collected by the second photodiode (Kauer; para [354]; the unique sensitivity, detection, and discrimination capabilities of the sensor of the present invention, five vapor mixtures of analyte-saturated air were sampled with a nine element sensor array of the present invention and a sixteen element fiber optic sensor array for comparing the relative sensitivity and discriminating capability of the two sensing devices).
Kauer does not teach the integrated circuit being a near-field communication (NFC) integrated circuit and the reader being an NFC reader.
However, Brukalo teaches an analogous art of a portable device (Brukalo; Abstract) comprising a near-field communication integrated circuit (Brukalo; para [109, 110]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the integrated circuit of Kauer to be the NFC circuit as taught by Brukalo, because Brukalo teaches that the NFC circuit powers the device when placed near an RFID tag (Brukalo; para [110]). The examiner notes that this would be an alternative method to power the device of Kauer which requires low power consumption (Kauer; para [177]).
Regarding claim 19, Kauer teaches a method for monitoring at least one physical property (Kauer; Abstract; a chemical sensor, sensing system and sensing method), comprising:
harvesting, by an integrated circuit, power from a reader (Kauer; Fig. 5; para [186, 199-217]; the circuits to control illumination of the LEDs; examiner notes that the circuit is discussed in the paragraphs 199-217 about the use of the system),
powering, by the integrated circuit, a first and second light sources and a first and second photodiodes with the power harvested by the reader (Kauer; Fig. 5; para [186, 199-217]; the circuits to control illumination of the LEDs; examiner notes that the circuit is discussed in the paragraphs 199-217 about the use of the system)
emitting light via the first light source adjacent to a first portion of at least one monitoring label, on which a chemical is disposed, and via the second light source adjacent to a second portion of the at least one monitoring label on which the chemical is not disposed (Kauer; Fig. 13a; para [68, 180]; Typically, for cross-reactive sensor arrays, it is preferable to provide sensor array elements formed from dye materials with different response spectra, different analyte sensitivities, and different analyte discrimination characteristics…Individual sensor elements and sensing channels may employ different sensing materials; examiner interprets the second portion to be one of the sensor arrays different from the first portion, thus the “chemical” in the first portion would be different as another material may be used to detect another analyte);
absorbing, via the chemical disposed on the first portion of the at least one monitoring label, the light emitted by the first light source (Kauer; para 67]; For optical Sensors which rely on light excitation, absorption and emission, the selection of analyte detection and discriminating dye indicators);
generating, by the first photodiode located over the first portion, a first electrical signal proportional to light emitted by the first portion in response to light from the first light source generating, by the second photodiode located over the second portion, a second electrical signal proportional to light emitted by the second portion in response to light from the second light source (Kauer; Fig. 3, 13a; para [147]; The LED and photodiode modules, or plurality of modules, are preferably aligned parallel to one another with spacing between the two modules adjusted to optimize illumination of the sensor array elements by the LED array);
determining a measurement of the at least one physical property by performing a ratiometric calibration using a ratio of the first electrical signal to the second electrical signal (Kauer; para [354]; the unique sensitivity, detection, and discrimination capabilities of the sensor of the present invention, five vapor mixtures of analyte-saturated air were sampled with a nine element sensor array of the present invention and a sixteen element fiber optic sensor array for comparing the relative sensitivity and discriminating capability of the two sensing devices);
transmitting, by the integrated circuit, the measurement of the at least one physical property to a user device (Kauer; Fig. 3; computer and display; para [63]; Light energy excitation of the sensor elements in the presence of the odors produces a detectable optical response signal due to emitted light produced by analyte interaction with the dyes or dye-polymer compounds in the sensor elements).
Kauer does not teach the integrated circuit being a near-field communication (NFC) integrated circuit and the reader being an NFC reader.
However, Brukalo teaches an analogous art of a portable device (Brukalo; Abstract) comprising a near-field communication integrated circuit (Brukalo; para [109, 110]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the integrated circuit of Kauer to be the NFC circuit as taught by Brukalo, because Brukalo teaches that the NFC circuit powers the device when placed near an RFID tag (Brukalo; para [110]). The examiner notes that this would be an alternative method to power the device of Kauer which requires low power consumption (Kauer; para [177]).
Regarding claim 20, modified Kauer teaches the method of claim 19, wherein the transmitting occurs automatically when an NFC reader is within an electrical field of an NFC antenna or on demand when commanded by an input (Kauer; para [121, 199-217]; The sensing system provides output results in a variety formats including, but not limited to screen displays). The transmission occurs after the series of commands by the controller.
Regarding claim 21, modified Kauer teaches the monitoring device of claim 1, wherein the NFC integrated circuit includes an analog-to-digital converter configured to digitize the electrical signals prior to the ratiometric calibration (Kauer; para [62]; The photodiode preamplifiers mimic an olfactory Sensory neuron by con Verting the optical Signal to an electrical Voltage Signal (“Transduction') which amplified, manipulated and trans ported via electrical circuits (“Transmission”) to an analog digital (“A/D”) converter).
Regarding claim 22, modified Kauer teaches the monitoring device of claim 1, wherein the NFC integrated circuit is configured to store calibration data (Kauer; para [223]; Table 4.1; The data are filtered, smoothed, statistically evaluated, compared with libraries of stored templates for odor identification, and/or operated on by any of the algorithms discussed below).
Regarding claim 23, modified Kauer teaches the monitoring device of claim 1, wherein the first and second light sources, the at least one monitoring label, and the first and second photodiodes are arranged in a planar stack with the at least one monitoring label disposed between the light sources and the photodiodes (Kauer; Fig. 3, 13a; para [147]; The LED and photodiode modules, or plurality of modules, are preferably aligned parallel to one another with spacing between the two modules adjusted to optimize illumination of the sensor array elements by the LED array).
Regarding claim 24, modified Kauer teaches the monitoring device of claim 1, wherein the first portion and the second portion are spatially separated to reduce optical crosstalk between the first and second optical paths (Kauer; Fig. 3, 13a, 13b; para [147]; The LED and photodiode modules, or plurality of modules, are preferably aligned parallel to one another with spacing between the two modules adjusted to optimize illumination of the sensor array elements by the LED array). The separate sections are depicted in Figure 13a and 13b.
Regarding claim 26, modified Kauer teaches the monitoring device of claim 1, wherein the first and second light sources are elements of a light-emitting array and the first and second photodiodes are elements of a photodiode array (Kauer; Fig. 3, 13a, 13b; para [147]; The LED and photodiode modules, or plurality of modules, are preferably aligned parallel to one another with spacing between the two modules adjusted to optimize illumination of the sensor array elements by the LED array).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kauer in view of Brukalo, and in further view of Park (KR 20170136249 A; hereinafter “Park”; English translation attached; already of record).
Regarding claim 9, modified Kauer teaches the monitoring device of claim 1, with the light source.
Modified Kauer does not teach wherein the light source is an organic LED or the at least one photodiode is an organic photodiode.
However, Park teaches an analogous art of a sensor platform (Park; Abstract) comprising a light source, wherein the light source is an organic LED or the at least one photodiode is an organic photodiode (Park; pp 7, para [5]; The light source layer 20 may be an organic light emitting diode (OLED) or an organic light emitting diode (OLED) or a combination thereof). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the light source of modified Kauer to be an OLED as taught by Park, because Park teaches different/alternative light sources (Park; pp 17, para [6]). Modified Kauer achieves the desired purpose of irradicating the fluorescent film from different light sources with a reasonable expectation of success. MPEP § 2143(I)(E).
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kauer in view of Brukalo, and in further view of Atkinson et al (US 20190219514 A1; hereinafter “Atkinson”).
Regarding claim 25, modified Kauer teaches the monitoring device of claim 1, with the electronic chip assembly.
Modified Kauer does not teach wherein the electronic chip assembly comprises a flexible printed circuit board.
However, Atkinson teaches an analogous art of an optical state monitor (Abstract) comprising an electronic chip assembly (Atkinson; Fig. 1), wherein the electronic chip assembly comprises a flexible printed circuit board (Atkinson para [78, 144]; where the display layer, light detection layer and light source layer, as well as, the assembled device, are flexible…the photo sensitive layer, such as photosensitive transistor or diode structures, or even use discrete photo sensitive components mounted on a flex board). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified the electronic chip assembly of modified Kauer to be flexible as taught by Atkinson, because Atkinson teaches that the flexible board is inexpensive to produce and easily attached to surfaces (Atkinson; para [215]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed, 8/14/2025, 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.
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 Austin Q Le whose telephone number is (571)272-7556. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am - 5pm.
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, Elizabeth Robinson can be reached at (571)272-7129. 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.Q.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1796
/ELIZABETH A ROBINSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1796