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 .
Amendment Entered
In response to the amendment filed on November 17th, 2025, amended claims 10, 17, 20, and new claim 21 are entered. Claim 19 has been canceled. Claims 1-18 and 20-21 are under examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's remarks and amendments with respect to the claim objections have been fully considered. The objections are withdrawn in view of the amendment.
Applicant's remarks and amendments with respect to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and 112(b) have been fully considered. The rejections are withdrawn in view of the amendment.
Applicant’s arguments, filed on November 17th, 2025, with respect to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but are not persuasive. The rejections have been maintained.
At Pgs. 7-8 of the Reply, Applicant argues that the “Office Action fails to establish a prima facie case of obviousness”. Applicant specifically argues that the Office Action fails to provide a rational motivation to modify Olsson's integrated micro sensor unit with the alleged teachings of Arumugam. Examiner respectfully disagrees. The addition of the sensor coating teachings of Arumugam would provide the improvement of chemical and electrical sensitivity that the invention of Olsson could benefit from. The prior art’s disclosure of more than one alternative does not constitute a teaching away from any of these alternatives. MPEP 2145 X. D. 1. Furthermore, it is well-settled that the suggestion to combine need not come from the reference itself. “The rationale to modify or combine the prior art does not have to be expressly stated in the prior art; the rationale may be expressly or impliedly contained in the prior art or it may be reasoned from knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art, established scientific principles, or legal precedent established by prior case law.” MPEP 2144 I.
At Pgs. 8-9 of the Reply, Applicant argues that the “proposed combination requires a complete redesign of Olsson's integrated micro sensor unit, unnecessarily complicating Olsson's integrated micro sensor or rendering Olsson's integrated micro sensor unit inoperable”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. The intended objective of Arumugam is for in vivo sensing, similar to the objective of Olsson’s invention as well as the objective of the instant application. Furthermore, “[i]t is not necessary that the prior art suggest the combination to achieve the same advantage or result discovered by applicant.” MPEP 2144 IV. All of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
At Pg. 9 of the Reply, Applicant presents two ways of understanding the previous Office Action. Examine would like to clarify that the previous Office Action intended to “add” instead of “move” the sensors. Therefore, the arguments on Pgs. 9-10 of the Reply regarding “moving” are considered moot and do not need to be addressed.
Examiner would like to emphasize that Arumugam teaches wherein the “microelectrode sensors according to embodiments of the invention are not limited to neurotransmitter sensing. Other analytes and conditions may be sensed, such as changes in pH or ferrocyanide/ferricyanide concentrations. If required, the diamond surface of the sensor areas may be modified to improve sensitivity and selectivity, e.g. by hydrogen or oxygen treatment or by functionalization of the surface with active species for the detection of certain chemicals or even for biosensing” (Paragraph 0101).
Further at Pg. 10 of the Reply, Applicant argues that if the sensors were to be “added”, they would be “disconnected from the electronic circuitry 105 and metallic contacts 109 of the Olsson's integrated micro sensor unit and would, therefore, be dummy sensors that only serve to unnecessarily complicate Olsson's integrated micro sensor unit.” Examiner would like to clarify that “metallic contacts 109” were never cited in the previous Office Action; therefore, it is unclear as to why they are being included in the current arguments. Furthermore, the “electronic circuitry 105” was never cited for the independent claims, which are currently being argued, in the previous Office Action. Therefore, these arguments are moot.
Regardless of the arguments, Arumugam teaches an apparatus (“micro-electrode sensor 800”) wherein the sensing element (Paragraph 0093: “UNCD sensor areas 815”; “first window 831”; “windows 731 to form diamond sensing areas 815”; Figure 8) is positioned on a surface of the tapered distal portion of the needle (Paragraph 0040: “The one or more sensor areas of the conductive diamond layer may be surface treated to chemically modify the conductive diamond surface, or the sensor areas may further comprise a coating, e.g. of a neuroactive substance, to improve chemical and electrical sensitivity and selectivity” and Paragraph 0113: “For a tapered or sharpened tip, the microwire is first tapered or shaped before coating with conductive diamond”), wherein the sensing element of the tapered distal portion is proximal (Examiner’s Note: As shown in Figure 8, UNCD sensor areas 815, specifically the first window 831, is located proximal of the insulated distal apex) of the insulated distal apex (Paragraph 0093: “the tip 811 is also coated with insulating material 110”; Figure 8).
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claims 1-18 and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Olsson et al (U.S. Publication No. 2016/0058342; cited by Applicant; previously cited) in view of Arumugam et al (U.S. Publication No. 2015/0250421; previously cited) and Watanabe et al (U.S. Patent No. 6,104,940; previously cited).
Regarding Claim 1, Olsson teaches a method for measuring an analyte (Paragraph 0014: “This invention provides processes and methods that enable and make practical the integration of micro-needles with biochemical micro-sensors and other associated or useful elements like reference electrodes, pH, and temperature sensors” and Paragraph 0026: “In an embodiment of the present invention, as illustrated in FIG. 1, an integrated system capable of transdermal and cell interstitial fluid examination, sensing of analytes, biomarkers and drug concentrations is described”), the method comprising:
positioning an analyte measurement device on a skin of a wearer (Paragraph 0026: “applicator” and Paragraph 0027: “In the case of transdermal sensing lengths between 25 micrometers and 500 micrometers can be considered to ensure perforation of the Stratum Corneum’) such that a microneedle (Paragraph 0027: “array of micro-needles 106”) of the analyte measurement device penetrates a stratum corneum of the skin and becomes positioned in a viable epidermis or dermis of the wearer (Paragraph 0026: “applicator” and Paragraph 0027: “In the case of transdermal sensing lengths between 25 micrometers and 500 micrometers can be considered to ensure perforation of the Stratum Corneum and perform the testing without any significant pain or bleeding”),
wherein the microneedle comprises a tapered distal portion comprising an insulated (Examiner’s Note: There are multiple definitions of “insulated”. If “insulated” is interpreted as “covered in nonconducting material to prevent the passage of electricity”, the microneedle is already insulated because of the material that it is composed of, as described in [0027-0028] “silicon…ceramic, polymer, carbon or plastic”) distal apex (Examiner’s Note: Figures 2a, 2b, 2d, 3b, 4b, 4c, 5 all show a tapered distal portion comprising a distal apex of the microneedles 106);
a sensing element proximal of the insulated distal apex (Paragraph 0027: “micro-sensors 108”; Figure 2b); and
measuring the analyte with the sensing element (Paragraph 0027: “micro-sensors 108 designed to measure presence or concentration of the ion or biomolecule of interest”) such that the measuring occurs no greater than 500 micrometers from a plexus of the dermis of the wearer (Paragraph 0027: “In the case of transdermal sensing lengths between 25 micrometers and 500 micrometers can be considered to ensure perforation of the Stratum Corneum and perform the testing without any significant pain or bleeding”).
Olsson fails to disclose wherein the sensing element is positioned on a surface of the tapered distal portion, wherein the sensing element of the tapered distal portion is proximal of the insulated distal apex.
In a similar technical field, Arumugam discloses a micro-electrode sensor for in-vivo chemical sensing (Abstract), comprising an apparatus (“micro-electrode sensor 800”) wherein the sensing element (Paragraph 0093: “UNCD sensor areas 815”; “first window 831”; “windows 731 to form diamond sensing areas 815”; Figure 8) is positioned on a surface of the tapered distal portion of the needle (Paragraph 0040: “The one or more sensor areas of the conductive diamond layer may be surface treated to chemically modify the conductive diamond surface, or the sensor areas may further comprise a coating, e.g. of a neuroactive substance, to improve chemical and electrical sensitivity and selectivity” and Paragraph 0113: “For a tapered or sharpened tip, the microwire is first tapered or shaped before coating with conductive diamond”), wherein the sensing element of the tapered distal portion is proximal (Examiner’s Note: As shown in Figure 8, UNCD sensor areas 815, specifically the first window 831, is located proximal of the insulated distal apex) of the insulated distal apex (Paragraph 0093: “the tip 811 is also coated with insulating material 110”; Figure 8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated the sensor coating teachings of Arumugam into the invention of Olsson in order to improve the chemical and electrical sensitivity and selectivity of the device (Arumugam Paragraphs 0040 and 0093).
Although Olsson suggests that micro-sensors are designed to measure presence or concentration of the ion or biomolecule of interest, a reference electrode, electronic circuitry designed to power and control them (Paragraph 0027), Olsson and Arumugam fail to specifically teach applying a voltage or current at the sensing element.
In a similar technical field, Watanabe teaches an electrode probe (Abstract), wherein a voltage or current is applied at the sensing element (a body fluid examination equipment using the electrode probe as noted above, comprising means for applying a voltage across the electrode system of the electrode probe and obtaining analyte information from the electrode system in the form of electric signal, means for determining the measurement value of an analyte based on the electric signal; Column 1 Lines 60-66; In measuring the concentration of analyte 21…the electron mediator is oxidized on the working electrode by applying a voltage across working electrode 26 and counter electrode 27. At that time, the current across the two electrodes is measured. The current value depends on the concentration of reduced form electron mediator 25 whose concentration depends on the concentration of analyte 21. Therefore, the concentration of analyte can be obtained by simple measurement of the current across the working electrode and the counter electrode; Column 4 Lines 50-62; a circuit system applies a voltage across the working and counter electrodes (both not shown) after a predetermined time and inputs information about the analyte into the equipment in the form of electric signal; Column 6 Lines 29-33).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated the voltage teachings of Watanabe into those of Olsson and Arumugam as the concentration of analyte can be obtained by simple measurement of the current across the electrodes to determine the analyte measurement values (Watanabe Column 4 Lines 50-62).
Regarding Claim 2, Olsson further teaches wherein the analyte is an endogenous analyte (Paragraph 0026: “capable of transdermal and cell interstitial fluid examination, sensing of analytes”).
Regarding Claim 3, Olsson further teaches wherein the analyte is a biomolecule, biomarker (Paragraph 0026: “capable of transdermal and cell interstitial fluid examination, sensing of analytes, biomarkers and drug concentrations is described”), metabolite, electrolyte, ion, hormone, neurotransmitter, protein, enzyme, co-enzyme, co-factor, vitamin, or mineral.
Regarding Claim 4, Olsson further teaches wherein the analyte measurement device is an electrochemical sensor (Paragraph 0027: “micro-sensors for one or multiple analytes or bio-chemical species of interest, a reference electrode and integrating them into a unit that is suitable for low cost manufacturing and easy to handle by non-specialized personnel…formation of micro-sensors 108 designed to measure presence or concentration of the ion or biomolecule of interest, a reference electrode 107, electronic circuitry 105 designed to power and control them…micro-sensors 108 can be formed in a manner that is optimized for the specific ion species, biomarker or drug and could be based on Ion Sensitive Field Effect Transistors, especially modified thin films whose conductivity is modulated by the concentration of the chemical species to be tested or optimized”).
Regarding Claim 5, Olsson further teaches wherein the analyte measurement device comprises a microneedle array including the microneedle (Paragraph 0025: “Methods of forming transdermal and cell interstitial body fluid sensing and data transmission systems (i.e. the integration of micro-needles, micro-sensors, reference electrodes, applicators, wireless communication and data processing capabilities) and associated structures are described. Those methods comprise forming a micro -needle unit that can pierce the Stratum Corneum portion of the skin, forming a micro-sensor unit for the ion or molecule species of interest”).
Regarding Claim 6, Olsson further teaches wherein a height of the microneedle is between 200 and 2000 μm (Paragraph 0027: “In the case of transdermal sensing lengths between 25 micrometers and 500 micrometers can be considered to ensure perforation of the Stratum Corneum”).
Regarding Claim 7, Olsson further teaches wherein the sensing element is an electrode (Paragraph 0027: “formation of micro-sensors 108 designed to measure presence or concentration of the ion or biomolecule of interest, a reference electrode 107, electronic circuitry 105 designed to power and control them”), transducer, or detector.
Regarding Claim 8, Olsson further teaches wherein the sensing element is confined to a region between 1 and 1500 μm from the distal apex of the microneedle (Paragraph 0026: “applicator” and Paragraph 0027: “In the case of transdermal sensing lengths between 25 micrometers and 500 micrometers can be considered to ensure perforation of the Stratum Corneum”).
Regarding Claim 9, Olsson further teaches wherein the plexus of the dermis is the papillary loop, superficial plexus, subpapillary plexus, papillary plexus (Paragraph 0026: “applicator” and Paragraph 0027: “In the case of transdermal sensing lengths between 25 micrometers and 500 micrometers can be considered to ensure perforation of the Stratum Corneum”; Examiner’s Note: papillary plexus has a depth around 300-400 micrometers which is within sensing length), or dermal plexus.
Regarding Claim 10, Olsson teaches an analyte measurement device (Paragraph 0014: “This invention provides processes and methods that enable and make practical the integration of micro-needles with biochemical micro-sensors and other associated or useful elements like reference electrodes, pH, and temperature sensors” and Paragraph 0026: “In an embodiment of the present invention, as illustrated in FIG. 1, an integrated system capable of transdermal and cell interstitial fluid examination, sensing of analytes, biomarkers and drug concentrations is described”) comprising:
a microneedle (Paragraph 0027: “array of micro-needles 106”) configured to penetrate a stratum corneum of skin and become positioned in a viable epidermis or dermis of a wearer (Paragraph 0026: “applicator” and Paragraph 0027: “In the case of transdermal sensing lengths between 25 micrometers and 500 micrometers can be considered to ensure perforation of the Stratum Corneum”),
wherein the microneedle comprises a tapered distal portion comprising an insulated (Examiner’s Note: There are multiple definitions of “insulated”. If “insulated” is interpreted as “covered in nonconducting material to prevent the passage of electricity”, the microneedle is already insulated because of the material that it is composed of, as described in [0027-0028] “silicon…ceramic, polymer, carbon or plastic”) distal apex (Examiner’s Note: Figures 2a, 2b, 2d, 3b, 4b, 4c, 5 all show a tapered distal portion comprising a distal apex of the microneedles 106) and a sensing element proximal of the insulated distal apex (Paragraph 0027: “micro-sensors 108”; Figure 2b), and wherein the microneedle is further configured to position the sensing element no greater than 500 micrometers from the plexus of the dermis when the microneedle is positioned in the viable epidermis or dermis of the wearer (Paragraph 0026: “applicator” and Paragraph 0027: “In the case of transdermal sensing lengths between 25 micrometers and 500 micrometers can be considered to ensure perforation of the Stratum Corneum and perform the testing without any significant pain or bleeding”).
Olsson fails to disclose wherein the sensing element is positioned on a surface of the tapered distal portion, wherein the sensing element of the tapered distal portion is proximal of the insulated distal apex.
In a similar technical field, Arumugam discloses a micro-electrode sensor for in-vivo chemical sensing (Abstract), comprising an apparatus (“micro-electrode sensor 800”) wherein the sensing element (Paragraph 0093: “UNCD sensor areas 815”; “first window 831”; “windows 731 to form diamond sensing areas 815”; Figure 8) is positioned on a surface of the tapered distal portion of the needle (Paragraph 0040: “The one or more sensor areas of the conductive diamond layer may be surface treated to chemically modify the conductive diamond surface, or the sensor areas may further comprise a coating, e.g. of a neuroactive substance, to improve chemical and electrical sensitivity and selectivity” and Paragraph 0113: “For a tapered or sharpened tip, the microwire is first tapered or shaped before coating with conductive diamond”), wherein the sensing element of the tapered distal portion is proximal (Examiner’s Note: As shown in Figure 8, UNCD sensor areas 815, specifically the first window 831, is located proximal of the insulated distal apex) of the insulated distal apex (Paragraph 0093: “the tip 811 is also coated with insulating material 110” and Figure 8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated the sensor coating teachings of Arumugam into the invention of Olsson in order to improve the chemical and electrical sensitivity and selectivity of the device (Arumugam Paragraphs 0040 and 0093).
Olsson and Arumugam fail to disclose wherein the analyte measurement device is configured to apply a voltage or current at the sensing element to measure the analyte with the sensing element.
In a similar technical field, Watanabe teaches an electrode probe (Abstract), comprising an electronic device configured to apply a voltage or current at the sensing element (electrodes) to measure the analyte with the sensing element (a body fluid examination equipment using the electrode probe as noted above, comprising means for applying a voltage across the electrode system of the electrode probe and obtaining analyte information from the electrode system in the form of electric signal, means for determining the measurement value of an analyte based on the electric signal; Column 1 Lines 60-66; In measuring the concentration of analyte 21…the electron mediator is oxidized on the working electrode by applying a voltage across working electrode 26 and counter electrode 27. At that time, the current across the two electrodes is measured. The current value depends on the concentration of reduced form electron mediator 25 whose concentration depends on the concentration of analyte 21. Therefore, the concentration of analyte can be obtained by simple measurement of the current across the working electrode and the counter electrode; Column 4 Lines 50-62; a circuit system applies a voltage across the working and counter electrodes (both not shown) after a predetermined time and inputs information about the analyte into the equipment in the form of electric signal; Column 6 Lines 29-33).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated the voltage teachings of Watanabe into those of Olsson and Arumugam as the concentration of analyte can be obtained by simple measurement of the current across the electrodes to determine the analyte measurement values (Watanabe Column 4 Lines 50-62).
Regarding Claim 11, Olsson further teaches wherein the analyte is an endogenous analyte (Paragraph 0026: “capable of transdermal and cell interstitial fluid examination, sensing of analytes”).
Regarding Claim 12, Olsson further teaches wherein the analyte is a biomolecule, biomarker (Paragraph 0026: “capable of transdermal and cell interstitial fluid examination, sensing of analytes, biomarkers and drug concentrations is described”), metabolite, electrolyte, ion, hormone, neurotransmitter, protein, enzyme, co-enzyme, co-factor, vitamin, or mineral.
Regarding Claim 13, Olsson further teaches wherein the analyte measurement device is an electrochemical sensor (Paragraph 0027: “micro-sensors for one or multiple analytes or bio-chemical species of interest, a reference electrode and integrating them into a unit that is suitable for low cost manufacturing and easy to handle by non-specialized personnel…formation of micro-sensors 108 designed to measure presence or concentration of the ion or biomolecule of interest, a reference electrode 107, electronic circuitry 105 designed to power and control them…micro-sensors 108 can be formed in a manner that is optimized for the specific ion species, biomarker or drug and could be based on Ion Sensitive Field Effect Transistors, especially modified thin films whose conductivity is modulated by the concentration of the chemical species to be tested or optimized”).
Regarding Claim 14, Olsson further teaches wherein the analyte measurement device comprises a microneedle array including the microneedle (Paragraph 0025: “Methods of forming transdermal and cell interstitial body fluid sensing and data transmission systems (i.e. the integration of micro-needles, micro-sensors, reference electrodes, applicators, wireless communication and data processing capabilities) and associated structures are described. Those methods comprise forming a micro -needle unit that can pierce the Stratum Corneum portion of the skin, forming a micro-sensor unit for the ion or molecule species of interest”).
Regarding Claim 15, Olsson further teaches wherein a height of the microneedle is between 200 and 2000 μm (Paragraph 0027: “In the case of transdermal sensing lengths between 25 micrometers and 500 micrometers can be considered to ensure perforation of the Stratum Corneum”).
Regarding Claim 16, Olsson further teaches wherein the sensing element is an electrode (Paragraph 0027: “formation of micro-sensors 108 designed to measure presence or concentration of the ion or biomolecule of interest, a reference electrode 107, electronic circuitry 105 designed to power and control them”), transducer, or detector.
Regarding Claim 17, Olsson further teaches wherein the sensing element is confined to a region between 1 and 1500 μm from the distal apex of the microneedle (Paragraph 0026: “applicator” and Paragraph 0027: “In the case of transdermal sensing lengths between 25 micrometers and 500 micrometers can be considered to ensure perforation of the Stratum Corneum”: sensing length so sensing element is present).
Regarding Claim 18, Olsson further teaches wherein the plexus of the dermis is the papillary loop, subpapillary plexus, papillary plexus (Paragraph 0026: “applicator” and Paragraph 0027: “In the case of transdermal sensing lengths between 25 micrometers and 500 micrometers can be considered to ensure perforation of the Stratum Corneum”; Examiner’s Note: papillary plexus has a depth around 300-400 micrometers which is within sensing length), or dermal plexus.
Regarding Claim 20, Olsson further teaches wherein the microneedle is solid (micro-needles 106 are formed in a material different that silicon such as metal, ceramic, polymer, carbon or plastic; [0028]; Examiner’s Note: Any of the listed materials can be considered a solid, as they are not liquids or gases).
Regarding Claim 21, Olsson further teaches wherein the sensing element is a metal contact (The same FIG. 2 b illustrates the formation of specially designed electronic circuits 105 and metallic contacts 109 on the same surface than the micro-sensors 108 whose function is to power the micro-sensors, read the sensing results, and prepare the data for transmission to the electronic circuits in the applicator through the metallic contacts 109 and which are formed by standard processing techniques used to fabricate semiconductor devices; [0027]).
Olsson fails to teach wherein the sensing element is on only a segment of the tapered distal portion.
Arumugam discloses wherein the sensing element (Paragraph 0093: “UNCD sensor areas 815”; “first window 831”; “windows 731 to form diamond sensing areas 815”; Figure 8) is on only a segment of the tapered distal portion (Paragraph 0040: “The one or more sensor areas of the conductive diamond layer may be surface treated to chemically modify the conductive diamond surface, or the sensor areas may further comprise a coating, e.g. of a neuroactive substance”; Paragraph 0093: “the tip 811 is also coated with insulating material 110” and Figure 8; Paragraph 0113: “For a tapered or sharpened tip, the microwire is first tapered or shaped before coating with conductive diamond”; Examiner’s Note: As shown in Figure 8, UNCD sensor areas 815, specifically the first window 831, is located proximal of the insulated distal apex).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated the sensor placement teachings of Arumugam into the invention of Olsson because leaving the insulating material at the very end of the tip provides additional strength, reducing the potential of tip damage (Arumugam Paragraph 0093).
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 CHANEL J JHIN whose telephone number is (571) 272-2695. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 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, Alexander Valvis can be reached on 571-272-4233. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CHANEL J JHIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3791 /ALEX M VALVIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791