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
2. This action is responsive to the amendments filed 11/26/2025. Claims 1, 6-7, 17, 32, and 42 have been amended. Claim 11 has been canceled.
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections under 35 USC 112(a) have been considered and are withdrawn in light of the amendments.
4. Applicant’s arguments filed on 11/26/2025 with respect to the art rejections have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In substance, applicant argues that A) One of ordinary skill in the art would not modify Gozani to generate electric stimulation signals sufficient to reduce tremor of the user and B) Gozani does not teach keying features to ensure the one or more electrical stimulation contacts are electrically coupled to a proper electrode and thereby a proper nerve.
5. In response to A) the examiner respectfully disagrees.Gozani is directed to providing symptomatic relief of painful diabetic neuropathy (e.g. paragraph 0005). One of the symptoms of diabetic neuropathy is tremors. This is evidenced by at least Pain & Spine Specialists (NPL Reference, “Identifying Symptoms of Diabetic Neuropathy”, published 4/12/2024; see page 6). Therefore, it is clear one would be motivated to modify Gozani to generate enough electrical stimulation signals sufficient to reduce tremors of the user.
6. In response to B) the examiner respectfully disagrees.
In support of Applicant’s assertion, Applicant states that Gozani does not disclose “keying features” that ensure a proper orientation of an enclosure when coupled to the band. The examiner notes that the term “keying features” is being interpreted as any suitable mechanical coupling mechanism that is used to attach the enclosure to the band. As such, Gozani clearly discloses “keying features” performing the function required by the claim. As illustrated in Figure 2 and described in paragraph 0066, Gozani discloses that the electrode array comprises electrical contacts that snap into mating ports provided on the underside of central stimulator compartment. When snapped together, stimulator and electrode array are mechanically and electrically connected. The snapping mechanism thereby ensures proper placement of the electrodes to ensure effective and consistent delivery of electrical stimulation therapy to the intended nerve.
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.
Claims 1-2, 6, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Gozani et al. (US Pub.: 2015/0148865 A1 – Previously Cited) and further in view of Wong et al. (International Publication No.: WO 2015/187712 A1 – Previously Cited).
Regarding claim 1, Gozani teaches a wearable neurostimulation device for transcutaneously stimulating one or more peripheral nerves of a user (e.g. Fig. 1 – Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) apparatus 100; paragraph 0064), the device comprising:
an enclosure housing circuitry configured to generate electric stimulation signals (e.g. Fig. 1 – stimulator 105 which comprises compartments 101, 102, and 103; paragraph 0065), the enclosure having a top surface and a bottom surface (e.g. Fig. 1 – top surfaces, bottom surfaces, and sidewalls of compartments 101, 102, and 103);
and an adjustable band configured to be worn on the user (e.g. Fig. 1 – strap 110; paragraphs 0064; 0070), the band having an inner side and an outer side (e.g. Fig. 1 – inner side of strap 110 which contacts the patient and opposing outer side), the inner side comprising at least one electrode for each nerve to be stimulated (e.g. Fig. 6 – electrodes 202 and 204; paragraphs 0074, 0076), wherein the enclosure is removably attachable from the adjustable band (e.g. paragraph 0070);
wherein the band comprises an electrical interface member configured to electrically couple to the enclosure (e.g. paragraphs 0066; 0070);
wherein the enclosure comprises one or more electrical stimulation contacts (e.g. Fig. 2; paragraph 0066), each electrical stimulation contact corresponding to a different electrode of the band (e.g. paragraph 0074), the electrical stimulation contacts configured to be electrically connected to the electrical interface member (e.g. paragraph 0074);
wherein the band comprises at least a first electrode and a second electrode (e.g. Fig. 6 – electrodes 202 and 204; paragraphs 0074, 0076),
wherein a top surface of the enclosure comprises one or more LEDs to display information to the user (e.g. Fig. 1 – LEDs 108; paragraph 0068),
wherein the enclosure comprises a stimulation button configured to start and stop delivery of the stimulation signals (e.g. Fig 1 – push button 106; paragraph 0068); and
wherein the enclosure and the electrical interface member comprise corresponding keying features configured to ensure the one or more electrical stimulation contacts are electrically coupled to a proper electrode and thereby a proper nerve (e.g. Fig. 2 – electrical contacts 210, 212 and mating ports 130 and 132; paragraphs 0066, 0074).
However, Gozani does not explicitly teach stimulation signals sufficient to reduce tremor of the user, and an adjustable band configured to be worn on a wrist of the user and the first electrode being configured to stimulate a median nerve of the user and the second electrode being configured to stimulate a radial nerve or an ulnar nerve of the user.
Wong, in a same field of endeavor of wearable stimulation devices, discloses stimulation signals sufficient to reduce tremor of the user (e.g. paragraph 000170), and an adjustable band configured to be worn on a wrist of the user and the first electrode being configured to stimulate a median nerve of the user and the second electrode being configured to stimulate a radial nerve or an ulnar nerve of the user (e.g. paragraphs 000175, 000182).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the neurostimulation system of Gozani to include stimulation signals sufficient to reduce tremor of the user, as well as having the adjustable band configured to be worn on a wrist of the user and have the first electrode being configured to stimulate a median nerve of the user and the second electrode being configured to stimulate a radial nerve or an ulnar nerve of the user, as taught and suggested by Wong, in order to provide customized stimulation and more effective therapy to treat ailments (i.e., reduce tremor) affecting other anatomical structures such as the wrist (Wong, paragraph 000170).
Regarding claim 2, Gozani in view of Wong teaches the neurostimulation device of claim 1 as discussed above, and Gozani further teaches wherein the stimulation button is positioned on the top surface of the enclosure (e.g. Fig. 1 – push button 106).
Regarding claim 6, Gozani in view of Wong teaches the neurostimulation device of claim 1 as discussed above, and Gozani further teaches wherein the enclosure comprises a rechargeable battery (e.g. paragraph 0067).
Regarding claim 17, Gozani in view of Wong teaches a wearable neurostimulation system, the neurostimulation system comprising the neurostimulation device of claim 1 as discussed above, and Gozani further teaches wherein the enclosure comprises a sidewall joining the top surface and the bottom surface (e.g. Fig. 1 – top surfaces, bottom surfaces, and sidewalls of compartments 101, 102, and 103), wherein the sidewall comprises a first surface and a second surface opposing the first surface (e.g. Fig. 1).
Additionally, Wong discloses wherein the sidewall comprises a first surface and a second surface opposing the first surface, wherein the second surface is configured to be a bracing surface (e.g. Fig. 42A-42D; paragraph 000275).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Gozani and Wong to include a bracing surface, as taught and suggested by Wong, in order to improve usability of the device for a wearer with tremor that have difficulty with targeting tasks (Wong, paragraph 000275).
Regarding claim 19, Gozani in view of Wong teaches a wearable neurostimulation system, the neurostimulation system comprising the neurostimulation device of claim 1 as discussed above, and Gozani further teaches that the device has USB port for charging (e.g. paragraph 0067).
Additionally, Wong discloses the neurostimulation system further comprising a charger configured to electrically charge the rechargeable battery of the enclosure (e.g. paragraph 000282; Fig. 46 – element 4600), the charger comprising: a top surface, a bottom surface, and a sidewall extending between the top surface and the bottom surface (e.g. Fig. 46); a charging pocket formed in the top surface (e.g. Fig. 46 – element 4602), the pocket configured to receive at least a portion of the enclosure, the charging pocket comprising one or more charging contacts at the bottom of the charging pocket configured to electrically couple to and transfer power to the enclosure (e.g. paragraph 000282; Fig. 46); and a charging cable configured to be coupled to an external power source for drawing power through the charger (e.g. paragraph 000282, – this feature is inherent to wireless charging pads because they are required to draw power from an external power source such as an outlet).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Gozani and Wong to include a charger with a charging pocket, as taught and suggested by Wong, for the purpose of making it easier for patients with tremors to charge the device (Wong, paragraph 000282).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Gozani and further in view of Wong further in view of Vescovi et al. (US Pub.: 2015/0277559 A1, – Previously Cited).
Regarding claim 3, Gozani in view of Wong teaches the neurostimulation device of claim 2 as discussed above. However, Gozani in view of Wong does not explicitly teach wherein the stimulation button is biased upward by a bracket spring feature, the bracket spring feature comprising a generally flat surface and a plurality of spring fingers cut from the flat surface, the spring fingers configured to press upward on the stimulation button.
Vescovi, in a same field of endeavor of wearable devices, discloses wherein the stimulation button is biased upward by a bracket spring feature, the bracket spring feature comprising a generally flat surface and a plurality of spring fingers cut from the flat surface, the spring fingers configured to press upward on the stimulation button (e.g. paragraph 0035).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Gozani and Wong to include a spring feature to bias the button, as taught and suggested by Vescovi, for the purpose of having the button react to a user press mechanically and make it easier for a user to turn the functionality a specific button provides on/off.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Gozani and further in view of Wong and further in view of Arrow et al. (US Patent No.: 9,581,972, – Previously Cited).
Regarding claim 7, Gozani in view of Wong teaches the neurostimulation device of claim 6 as discussed above and Gozani further teaches wherein the enclosure comprises a sidewall joining the top surface and the bottom surface (e.g. Fig. 1 – top surfaces, bottom surfaces, and sidewalls of compartments 101, 102, and 103). However, Gozani in view of Wong does not explicitly teach wherein one or more charging ports are positioned on the sidewall.
Arrow, in a same field of endeavor of wearable devices, discloses wherein one or more charging ports are positioned on the sidewall (e.g. Fig. 21-A – element 44; column 44, lines 7-12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Gozani and Wong to include having one or more charging ports positioned on the sidewall, as taught and suggested by Arrow, for the purpose of making it more convenient for the user to charge the device.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Gozani and further in view of Wong and further in view of Hallman et al. (US Patent No.: 4,103,808, – Previously Cited).
Regarding claim 16, Gozani in view of Wong teaches the neurostimulation device of claim 1 as discussed above, and Gozani further teaches wherein the band comprises an aperture on a first end of the band through which a second end of the band is inserted to form a closed loop, wherein the second end of the band comprises a hook and loop fastener for securing the band to itself in an adjustable length manner (e.g. Fig. 1; paragraph 0070).
However, Gozani in view of Wong does not explicitly teach and wherein a locking flap extends from the hook and loop fastener to prevent the second end of the band from retreating through the aperture to open the closed loop.
Hallman, in a same field of endeavor of wearable bands, discloses and wherein a locking flap extends from the hook and loop fastener to prevent the second end of the band from retreating through the aperture to open the closed loop (e.g. abstract, column 1, lines 20-32).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combination of Gozani and Wong to include a locking flap, as taught and suggested by Hallman, for the purpose of keeping the device more secured.
Claims 18 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Gozani and further in view of Wong and further in view of Rosenbluth et al. (International Publication No.: WO 2016/201366 A1 – Previously Cited).
Regarding claim 18, Gozani in view of Wong teaches the neurostimulation device of claim 1 as discussed above and Gozani further teaches wherein the electrical stimulation contacts are configured to directly interface with the electrical interface member via a snap-fit connection (e.g. paragraph 0066).
However, Gozani in view of Wong does not explicitly teach wherein the electrical stimulation contacts are configured to directly interface with the electrical interface member via a rotatable connection.
Rosenbluth, in a same field of endeavor of stimulation systems, discloses wherein the electrical stimulation contacts are configured to directly interface with the electrical interface member via a rotatable connection (e.g. paragraphs 00012, 00019-00020, – twist fit mechanism).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Gozani and Wong to include wherein the electrical stimulation contacts are configured to directly interface with the electrical interface member via a rotatable connection, as taught and suggested by Rosenbluth, for the purpose of making the connection more secure.
Regarding claim 31, Gozani in view of Wong teaches the neurostimulation system of claim 19 as discussed above. However, Gozani in view of Wong does not explicitly teach wherein the charger is configured to receive data from the enclosure when the enclosure is positioned in the charger, and wirelessly transmit the data to an external device.
Rosenbluth in a same field of endeavor of stimulation systems discloses wherein the charger is configured to receive data from the enclosure when the enclosure is positioned in the charger, and wirelessly transmit the data to an external device (e.g. Fig. 10 – elements 900, 1000, 1002, 1006; paragraphs 00097, 00099).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Gozani and Wong to include wherein the charger is configured to receive data from the enclosure when the enclosure is positioned in the charger, and wirelessly transmit the data to an external device, as taught and suggested by Rosenbluth, in order to securely transmit/store data as well making it easier for a physician to prescribe and/or modify therapy (Rosenbluth, paragraph 00097).
Claims 28 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Gozani and further in view of Wong and further in view of Weast et al. (US Pub.: 2013/0106684 A1, – Previously Cited) and further in view of Dacquay et al. (US Pub.: 2008/0030170 A1, – Previously Cited).
Regarding claim 28, Gozani in view of Wong teaches the neurostimulation
system of claim 19 as discussed above. However, Gozani in view of Wong does not explicitly teach wherein the band comprises an RFID tag and the charger comprises an RFID antenna.
Weast, in a same field of endeavor of wearable devices, discloses wherein the band comprises an RFID tag (e.g. paragraphs 0204, 0250). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Gozani and Wong to include an RFID tag for the band, as taught and suggested by Weast, in order to allow the device to receive or provide information to other devices within a predefined proximity more effectively as well as securely (Weast, paragraph 0250).
However, Gozani in view of Wong in view of Weast does not explicitly teach that the charger comprises an RFID antenna.
Dacquay, in a same field of endeavor of electrically powered medical devices, discloses that the charger comprises an RFID antenna (e.g. Fig. 3; paragraphs 0008, 0039).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Gozani, Wong, and Weast to include an RFID antenna for the charger, as taught and suggested by Dacquay, for the purpose of having the device be able to communicate its battery information to the charger more effectively.
Regarding claim 29, Gozani in view of Wong in view of Weast in view of
Dacquay teaches the neurostimulation system of Claim 28 as discussed above and Dacquay further teaches wherein the RFID tag is configured to communicate an age of the band to the charger and the charger is configured not to charge the enclosure if the age of the band exceeds a threshold age (e.g. paragraphs 0010, 0031).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Gozani, Wong, Weast, and Dacquay to include having the RFID tag communicate the battery info to the charger to determine whether or not to charge, as taught and suggested by Dacquay, for the purpose of ensuring safe charging (Dacquay, paragraph 0031).
14. Claims 32-33 and 42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Gozani and further in view of Wong and further in view of Skahan et al. (US Pub.: 2014/0155799 A1).
Regarding claim 32, Gozani teaches a wearable neurostimulation device for transcutaneously stimulating one or more peripheral nerves of a user (e.g. Fig. 1 – Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) apparatus 100; paragraph 0064), the device comprising: an enclosure housing circuitry configured to generate electric stimulation signals (e.g. Fig. 1 – stimulator 105 which comprises elements 101, 102, 103; paragraph 0065);
and an adjustable band configured to be worn on the user (e.g. Fig. 1 – strap 110; paragraphs 0064, 0070), the band having an inner side and an outer side (e.g. Fig. 1 – inner side of strap 110 which contacts the patient and opposing outer side), the inner side comprising at least one electrode corresponding to each nerve to be stimulated (e.g. Fig. 6 – electrodes 202, 204; paragraphs 0074, 0076); wherein the band comprises an electrical interface member configured to electrically couple to the enclosure (e.g. paragraph 0066; 0070); wherein a surface of the enclosure that is hidden from a user when assembled comprises one or more electrical stimulation contacts (e.g. Figs. 1, 2; paragraph 0066; 0070), each electrical stimulation contact corresponding to a different electrode of the band (e.g. paragraph 0074), the electrical stimulation contacts configured to be electrically connected to the electrical interface member (e.g. paragraph 0074); wherein the enclosure comprises a rechargeable battery (e.g. Fig. 1, 2; paragraph 0067).
However, Gozani does not explicitly teach stimulation signals sufficient to reduce tremor of the user, an adjustable band configured to be worn on a wrist of the user, the enclosure comprising an inductive coil, wherein the enclosure and the electrical interface member comprise corresponding keying features configured to prevent the neurostimulation device from being worn on a wrong wrist; and wherein the enclosure comprises a rechargeable battery configured to be wirelessly powered by the inductive coil.
Wong, in a same field of endeavor of wearable stimulation devices, discloses stimulation signals sufficient to reduce tremor of the user (e.g. paragraph 000170), an adjustable band configured to be worn on a wrist of the user (e.g. paragraphs 000175, 000182), the enclosure comprising an inductive coil (e.g. paragraphs 00041, 000172), and wherein the enclosure comprises a rechargeable battery configured to be wirelessly powered by the inductive coil (e.g. paragraphs 00041, 000172).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the neurostimulation system of Gozani to include stimulation signals sufficient to reduce tremor of the user, having the adjustable band configured to be worn on a wrist of the user, an inductive coil, and wherein the enclosure comprises a rechargeable battery configured to be wirelessly powered by the inductive coil, as taught and suggested by Wong, in order to provide customized stimulation and more effective therapy to treat ailments (i.e., reduce tremor) affecting other anatomical structures such as the wrist as well as making it more convenient for the user to charge the device (Wong, paragraph 000170).
However, Gozani in view of Wong does not explicitly teach wherein the enclosure and the electrical interface member comprise corresponding keying features configured to prevent the neurostimulation device from being worn on a wrong wrist.
Skahan, in a same field of endeavor of wearable stimulation devices, discloses wherein the enclosure and the electrical interface member comprise corresponding keying features configured to prevent the neurostimulation device from being worn on a wrong wrist (e.g. Fig. 5; paragraphs 0054,0060).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Gozani and Wong to include wherein the enclosure and the electrical interface member comprise corresponding keying features configured to prevent the neurostimulation device from being worn on a wrong wrist, as taught and suggested by Skahan, in order to further tailor and maximize the effect of the therapy for the user (Skahan, paragraph 0060).
Regarding claim 33, Gozani in view of Wong in view of Skahan teaches the neurostimulation device of claim 32 as discussed above, and Gozani further teaches wherein the enclosure is removably and directly attachable to the band without a cable connector therebetween (e.g. paragraph 0070).
Regarding claim 42, Gozani in view of Wong in view of Skahan teaches the neurostimulation device of claim 32 as discussed above, and Wong further teaches wherein the neurostimulation device is configured for either left-handed or right-handed wear (e.g. paragraphs 000171, 000175).
Claims 34-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Gozani and further in view of Wong and further in view of Skahan and further in view of Rosenbluth et al. (International Publication No.: WO 2016/201366 A1 – Previously Cited).
Regarding claim 34, Gozani in view of Wong in view of Skahan teaches the neurostimulation device of claim 32 as discussed above. However, Gozani in view of Wong in view of Skahan does not explicitly teach wherein the enclosure is secured to the band via a snap fit.
Rosenbluth, in a same field of endeavor of stimulation systems, discloses wherein the enclosure is secured to the band via a snap fit (e.g. paragraph 00088).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Gozani, Wong, and Skahan to include wherein the enclosure is secured to the band via a snap fit, as taught and suggested by Rosenbluth, for the purpose of making it more convenient for a user or physician to insert the enclosure into the band as well as removing it from the band when necessary.
Regarding claim 35, Gozani in view of Wong in view of Skahan teaches the neurostimulation device of claim 32 as discussed above. However, Gozani in view of Wong in view of Skahan does not explicitly teach wherein the enclosure is secured to the band via a rotatable connection.
Rosenbluth, in a same field of endeavor of stimulation systems, discloses wherein the enclosure is secured to the band via a rotatable connection (e.g. paragraph 00088).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Gozani, Wong, and Skahan to include wherein the enclosure is secured to the band via a rotatable connection, as taught and suggested by Rosenbluth, for the purpose of making it more convenient for a user or physician to insert the enclosure into the band as well as removing it from the band when necessary.
Claim 37 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Gozani and further in view of Wong and further in view of Skahan and further in view of Hallman et al. (US Patent No.: 4,103,808, – Previously Cited).
Regarding claim 37, Gozani in view of Wong in view of Skahan teaches the neurostimulation device of claim 32 as discussed above, and Gozani further teaches wherein the band comprises an aperture on a first end of the band through which a second end of the band is inserted to form a closed loop, wherein the second end of the band comprises a hook and loop fastener for securing the band to itself in an adjustable length manner (e.g. Fig. 1; paragraph 0070).
However, Gozani in view of Wong in view of Skahan does not explicitly teach and wherein a locking flap extends from the hook and loop fastener to prevent the second end of the band from retreating through the aperture to open the closed loop.
Hallman, in a same field of endeavor of wearable bands, discloses and wherein a locking flap extends from the hook and loop fastener to prevent the second end of the band from retreating through the aperture to open the closed loop (e.g. abstract, column 1, lines 20-32).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Gozani, Wong, and Skahan to include a locking flap, as taught and suggested by Hallman, for the purpose of keeping the device more secured.
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 DANIEL TEHRANI whose telephone number is (571)270-0697. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Benjamin Klein can be reached at 571-270-5213. 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.
/D.T./Examiner, Art Unit 3792
/Benjamin J Klein/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3792