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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on October 30, 2025, has been entered.
Response to Amendment
According to the amendment filed October 30, 2025, claims 1, 9, 10, 14 and 15 have been amended, and claim 11 has been canceled. Claims 1-10 and 12-21 are currently pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed October 30, 2025, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 7-9 of Remarks, regarding the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Faugeras (EP 2255721 A1) in view of Cranton (US 7,128,710 B1), Applicant asserts that Faugeras does not disclose “the distal end portion of the light guide having a longitudinal axis oriented parallel to the longitudinal centerline of the spatula and laterally offset from the longitudinal centerline of the spatula” as recited in claim 1. Applicant alleges that Faugeras is not concerned with the specific orientation of the light guide, stating that the inventive aspect of Faugeras’s device is focused on other features, and concluding that the Office has solely relied on the drawings and improper hindsight in the rejection.
Examiner respectfully disagrees, noting that a similar argument was presented in the Remarks filed June 9, 2025. Faugeras discloses a light guide in the form of lighting device 29 (see Fig. 4) which is shown to extend parallel to optical fiber 19 having a distal end 20, as determined based on multiple perspective views illustrated in at least Figs. 1-2, 4, 6 and 9. Faugeras also recites that “optical fiber 19 […] is arranged in a direction parallel to a main axis A-A’ of the blade 11” (in para. 0026 of the English translation provided with the Office Action mailed January 8, 2025). Where Faugeras further teaches that the optical fiber is centered on the axis of the blade (described in para. 0017, 0035 and 0037), Examiner maintains that the light guide 29, running parallel to the centered optical fiber 19, has a distal end portion with an axis oriented parallel to the centerline A-A’ of the spatula and laterally offset from the centerline and the optical fiber, thus satisfying the claim limitation.
Regarding the new limitation added by amendment to claim 1, i.e. the light guide housing having “an outlet opening and a retainer wall at the distal region of the spatula configured to position the distal end portion of the light guide to extend straight toward a tip of the spatula”, it is noted that claims 9 and 10 previously presented these features, which were also rejected by the combination of Faugeras and Cranton. Faugeras discloses these structures and satisfies the claim limitation, as described in the rejection below.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 10 of Remarks, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Fayyaz (GB 2537118 A), Pecherer (US 2016/0220106 A1) and Cranton (US 7,128,710 B1), have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
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.
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.
Claims 1-3, 8-10, 12 and 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Faugeras (EP 2255721 A1) in view of Cranton (US 7,128,710 B1).
Regarding claim 1 (Currently Amended), Faugeras teaches a laryngoscope blade (blade 11 of laryngoscope 1; Figs. 1-2; para. 0012) configured to be inserted into a patient's airway, the laryngoscope blade comprising:
a spatula (identified in Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 below, as the curved main upper surface of blade 11) having a top surface (top surface visible in Fig. 1, and in Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 below), a proximal region, a distal region (identified in Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 9 below, the proximal region having a portion of heel 10 of blade 11 arranged thereon, with a distal region at the opposite end, including the distal tip of blade 11), and a longitudinal centerline extending from the proximal region to the distal region (longitudinal centerline defined by main axis A-A’ of blade 11, shown in Fig. 2; para. 0014);
a connector base (defined by hook member 16 and notch 17 of the heel 10 of blade 11; Figs. 1-2 and 6; para. 0020-0023) provided at the proximal region of the spatula (as shown; Figs. 1 and 6) and configured to removably couple the laryngoscope blade to a laryngoscope handle (as shown in Figs. 1-2 and 6, and described in para. 000-0023, for removably coupling the blade 11 to handle 2);
a light guide (lighting device 29; Figs. 1-2, 4, 6 and 9; para. 0041) having a first end and a second end (first end of light guide 29, provided at the proximal end of the heel 10, in the region of hook member 16 as viewed in Fig. 6 and 9, and a second end disposed at the distal end face of heel 11, visible in Fig. 1), and the second end defining a distal end portion configured to illuminate the patient's airway (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 below, where a distal end portion of light guide 29, including the identified distal end, is positioned to illuminate a patient’s airway); and
a light guide housing adjacent the top surface of the spatula (light guide housing defined by the main body of heel 10 and the upright sidewall extending distally therefrom along a side the spatula, shown adjacent top surface of spatula identified in Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 below), the light guide housing having:
a side wall (identified in Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 below) extending from the top surface of the spatula and defining a space configured to receive a portion of the light guide (as shown, forming a space for light guide 29 in conjunction with the top surface of the spatula and the top wall of the housing; see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 below); and
an outlet opening (shown on end wall of housing identified in Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 below, providing a light outlet at the distal end of light guide 29) and a retainer wall at the distal region of the spatula configured to position the distal end portion of the light guide to extend straight toward a tip of the spatula (identified in Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 below, the retainer wall positioning the light guide 29, in conjunction with the other structures of heel 10 the spatula, so that the light guide extends straight toward the tip); and
the distal end portion of the light guide having a longitudinal axis oriented parallel to the longitudinal centerline of the spatula and laterally offset from the longitudinal centerline of the spatula (see distal end of light guide 29 identified in Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 below, the end face of the light guide defining a longitudinal axis thereof that is shown to be parallel and laterally offset from a longitudinal centerline of the identified spatula) such that the distal end portion of the light guide extends straight toward the distal region of the spatula in a direction parallel to, and laterally offset from, the longitudinal centerline of the spatula, and such that light emitted from the second distal end portion of the light guide is oriented directly toward a tip of the spatula (the distal end portion of light guide 29, including the distal end identified in Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 below, has a longitudinal axis understood to be parallel to the longitudinal centerline axis A-A’ identified in Fig. 2, and laterally offset from the centerline as shown in Fig. 1, noting that and para. 0026 describes an optical fiber 19 “arranged in a direction parallel to a main axis A-A’ of the blade” and Figs. 1, 4 and 9 appear to show the optical fiber 19 running parallel to the light guide 29).
Faugeras also discloses wherein the light guide is connected at the heel of the blade when it is in position on the handle (see para. 0041 and Figs. 4 and 6, showing the proximal/first end of light guide 29 connected in heel 10, i.e. at the connector base).
However, Faugeras does not disclose wherein first end of the light guide, i.e. the proximal end, is attached to the connector base by a resilient fastener.
Cranton is considered analogous to the claimed invention because it is directed towards a laryngoscope blade (10; Figs. 1, 10) with a light guide (34; Fig. 10), and teaches a resilient fastener (36; Fig. 10) for attaching a proximal end of the light guide to a connector base (proximal end 35 is fittingly and securely received within a resilient fastener defined by annular polypropylene fastener 36, which is then securely received in slot-like opening 38 formed in heel portion 28 of the connector base to secure light guide 34 thereto; Fig. 10; column 2, line 51 – column 3, line 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the laryngoscope blade of Faugeras so that the proximal end of the light guide is attached in the connector base by a resilient fastener as taught by Cranton, e.g. by modifying Faugeras’s connector base to include an elongate slot at a bottom end thereof for receiving a resilient annular fastener and the proximal end of the light guide is received in the resilient fastener for attachment to the connector base, as claimed, because Cranton recognizes that a resilient fastener is suitable for securely receiving and attaching a light guide in a connector base or heel portion of a laryngoscope blade the claimed manner (see Cranton, Figs. 1, 10 and column 2, line 51 – column 3, line 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
633
665
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 of Faugeras
PNG
media_image2.png
464
667
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 9 of Faugeras
Regarding claim 2, Faugeras and Cranton, in combination, teach the laryngoscope blade of claim 1, and Faugeras discloses wherein the light guide housing has a stepped configuration including the side wall extending generally vertically from the top surface of the spatula, and a top wall extending laterally from an edge of the side wall (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 of Faugeras above, side wall of heel 10 extending upward from spatula top surface with top wall extending laterally from an edge of the side wall).
Regarding claim 3, Faugeras and Cranton, in combination, disclose the laryngoscope blade of claim 2, and Faugeras discloses wherein the side wall, a first portion of the top wall, and a portion of the top surface of the spatula cooperate to define a cavity configured to receive and retain a portion of the light guide in a secure position (as shown in Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 of Faugeras above and Figs. 2-4 and 6).
Regarding claim 8, Faugeras and Cranton, in combination, teach the laryngoscope blade of claim 1, and Faugeras discloses wherein the side wall of the housing and the top surface of the spatula cooperate to form a longitudinal channel configured to enable a practitioner to see along the length of the blade and into a patient’s larynx, and also to provide a passage for intubation of an endotracheal tube (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 above, where a channel is defined on the side of the top surface of the identified spatula, to the right of heel portion 10, the channel defined by the housing side wall and the top surface of the spatula, where the channel is configured to enable a practitioner to see along the length of the blade and provide a passage for intubation of an endotracheal tube; see para. 0003).
Regarding claim 9 (Currently Amended), Faugeras and Cranton, in combination, teach the laryngoscope blade of claim 8, and Faugeras discloses wherein the light guide housing further includes an end wall (identified in Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 above) comprising the outlet opening further defining a light guide passage through which the distal end of the light guide extends for providing illumination to the distal region of the spatula (see Figs. 1-4 and Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 above, where the identified end wall of the housing provides an outlet opening for the distal end of light guide 29 to provide illumination at the distal end region of the spatula).
Regarding claim 10 (Currently Amended), Faugeras and Cranton, in combination, teach the laryngoscope blade of claim 9, and Faugeras discloses wherein the retainer wall (identified in Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 above) extends from the top surface of the spatula at the distal region and connected to both the end wall and a portion of a top wall (as shown, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 above).
Regarding claim 12 (Currently Amended), Faugeras and Cranton, in combination, teach the laryngoscope blade of claim 10, and Faugeras discloses wherein the end wall, the outlet opening, and the retainer wall are configured to position the distal end of the light guide to extend straight toward the distal region of the spatula in a direction parallel to the longitudinal centerline of the spatula in order to illuminate an oropharyngeal space during laryngoscopy or during an intubation procedure (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 above, where the end wall, the outlet opening for the distal end of the light guide 29, and the retainer wall are shown to position the distal end of light guide 29 so as to extend straight toward the distal region, i.e. the distal tip of the spatula of blade 11, shown and understood to extend in a direction parallel to the longitudinal centerline axis A-A’ of the spatula identified in Fig. 2 for illuminating an oropharyngeal space; as noted above, the light guide distal portion longitudinal axis is understood to be parallel to the longitudinal centerline axis A-A’ identified in Fig. 2, based on the views of Figs. 1-4 and 9, where an optical fiber 19 is also shown to run parallel to the light guide 29 in at least Figs. 1, 4 and 9, and para. 0026 describes the optical fiber 19 “arranged in a direction parallel to a main axis A-A’ of the blade”).
Regarding claim 16, Faugeras and Cranton, in combination, teach the laryngoscope blade of claim 1, and Faugeras discloses wherein the connector base (16, 17; Figs. 9-10) includes a rear heel portion (notch 17; Figs. 6, 10) and a front claw portion (hook 16; Figs. 1, 6, 9-10) configured to detachably engage a portion of the laryngoscope handle (as shown in Figs. 1, 6, 9-10 and described in para. 0023-0025 for detachably engaging with handle 2).
Regarding claim 17 (Currently Amended), Faugeras and Cranton, in combination, teach the laryngoscope blade of claim 16, and Faugeras discloses wherein the light guide is configured to fit within the housing (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 above, where light guide 29 is positioned within the housing defined by at least a side wall, top wall, end wall and retainer wall) and extends from the distal region of the spatula to the proximal region of the spatula and to a bottom of the heel portion (see distal and proximal regions of the spatula identified in Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 9 above, where the end wall of the light guide housing is located in the distal region, so that the light guide 29 extends from the distal region of the spatula of blade 11 to the proximal region and to a bottom of the heel portion 17, as shown in Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 18, Faugeras and Cranton, in combination, teach the laryngoscope blade of claim 17, wherein the fastener is configured to fittingly and securely receive the proximal end of the light guide therein (where Faugeras’s laryngoscope is modified as described above with respect to claim 1 so that the proximal end of the light guide 29 is attached to the connector base via Cranton’s configuration using annular elastomeric fastener 36 shown in Fig. 10 of Cranton, the fastener is understood to securely receive the proximal end of Faugeras’s light guide 29 for securing it within the connector base).
Regarding claim 19, Faugeras and Cranton, in combination, teach the laryngoscope blade of claim 18, wherein the fastener includes a lip that extends from a bottom surface of the heel portion so that the proximal end of the light guide likewise extends from the bottom surface of the heel portion (in the modification described above, where Faugeras’s light guide 29 is attached to the connector base via Cranton’s annular elastomeric fastener 36 shown in Fig. 10, with Faugeras’s connector base modified to include a corresponding slot at a bottom/heel portion thereof to receive the modified fastener, the fastener includes a lower lip, as shown in Fig. 10 of Cranton, that extends from a bottom surface of the connector base, i.e. the heel portion at Faugeras’s notch/heel 17 shown in Fig. 6, and the proximal end of the light guide received in the fastener also extends from the bottom surface of the heel portion).
Regarding claim 20, Faugeras and Cranton, in combination, teach the laryngoscope blade of claim 19, wherein the lip of the fastener has a frustoconical shape (in the modification described above, it is understood that the lower lip portion of Cranton’s fastener 36 shown in Fig. 10 has a circular cross-sectional shape corresponding to a frustoconical cross-sectional shape).
Regarding claim 21, Faugeras and Cranton, in combination, teach the laryngoscope blade of claim 1, and Faugeras disclose the blade further comprising a retainer wall (identified in Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 above) extending from the top surface of the spatula and configured to retain the distal end portion of the light guide (as shown in Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 above, the retainer wall, in conjunction with the end wall of the housing, are configured for retaining the distal end portion of light guide 29), the retainer wall being distal of the side wall and transversely spaced apart from the side wall such that a first distance between the side wall and the longitudinal centerline of the spatula is less than a second distance between the retainer wall and the longitudinal centerline of the spatula (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 above, and longitudinal centerline axis A-A’ in Fig. 2 extending along blade 11, so that retainer wall is spaced from side wall and a distance between the side wall and the centerline, i.e. the center of the spatula of blade identified in the annotated figure, is less than a distance between the retainer wall and the centerline).
Claims 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Faugeras (EP 2255721 A1) and Cranton (US 7,128,710 B1), as applied to claim 3 above, further in view of Swift (US 2017/0150878 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Faugeras and Cranton, in combination, disclose the laryngoscope blade of claim 3.
Neither Faugeras nor Cranton disclose the blade further comprising a cover removably attached to the housing and configured to seal the cavity for protecting the portion of the light guide retained therein. See open side of Faugeras’s laryngoscope blade cavity in Fig. 2.
Swift teaches a laryngoscope blade having a cavity for a lighting device (see housing cavity 13 illustrated in Fig. 4, for lighting system with source 31; para. 0037), and discloses a cover (14; Fig. 1; para. 0035) removably attached to the housing to seal the cavity for protecting the portion of the lighting device retained therein (cover 14 removably attached via a plurality of snap latches 21 to housing cavity 13 to prevent access to the lighting system; Figs. 1-4; para. 0035-0036).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Faugeras’s housing to include Swift’s cover for sealing the cavity as claimed (i.e., by removably attaching the cover to the exposed side viewed in Fig. 2 of Faugeras, via a plurality of snap latches as taught by Swift), because Swift recognizes that providing a cover to seal the cavity prevents access to the lighting system (see Swift, para. 0035), thereby providing improved protection for the light guide and other components of Faugeras’s laryngoscope.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Faugeras, Cranton and Swift teach the laryngoscope blade of claim 4, wherein the cover is configured to be removably snap-fitted onto a portion of the laryngoscope blade to prevent access to the portion of the light guide retained within the housing (where Faugeras is modified to include Swift’s cover as described above, the cover is snap-fitted onto a portion of the blade, i.e. on the open side as viewed in Fig. 2 of Faugeras, via Swift’s snap-latches 21 described in para. 0036 of Swift, thereby preventing access to Faugeras’s light guide 29).
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Faugeras (EP 2255721 A1), Cranton (US 7,128,710 B1) and Swift (US 2017/0150878 A1), as applied to claim 3 above, further in view of Dragisic (US 5,776,053 A).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Faugeras, Cranton and Swift teach the laryngoscope blade of claim 4.
In the combination, Faugeras’s laryngoscope blade is modified to include Swift’s cover removably snap-fitted thereto (i.e. on the open side as viewed in Fig. 2 of Faugeras, via Swift’s snap-latches 21 described in para. 0036 of Swift, thereby preventing access to Faugeras’s light guide 29).
However, the cited references in the combination fail to explicitly disclose wherein the cover includes snap-fit lugs configured to fit in and engage corresponding mounting holes located within the cavity.
Dragisic is considered analogous to the claimed invention because it is directed towards attaching a cover (44; Figs. 1A-2) to a portion of a laryngoscope blade (20, as shown; Fig. 1A), and teaches wherein the cover (44; Figs. 1A-2) includes snap-fit lugs (52, 54; Figs. 1A-2) configured to fit in and engage corresponding mounting holes (62, 64; Figs. 1A-2; column 6, lines 30-54).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to secure the snap-fit cover to Faugeras’s modified laryngoscope blade via snap-fit lugs engaging corresponding mounting holes in the cavity, in the manner taught by Dragisic, because Dragisic recognizes this as a suitable connection mechanism for attaching a cover to a laryngoscope blade and the removability of the cover can facilitate sterilization of components of the laryngoscope blade (see Dragisic, column 6, lines 30-35).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Faugeras, Cranton and Swift teach the laryngoscope blade of claim 4.
In the combination, Faugeras’s laryngoscope blade is modified to include Swift’s cover removably snap-fitted thereto (i.e. on the open side as viewed in Fig. 2 of Faugeras, via Swift’s snap-latches 21 described in para. 0036 of Swift, thereby preventing access to Faugeras’s light guide 29).
However, the cited references in the combination fail to explicitly disclose wherein the cover further includes a flexible tab configured to engage the housing to maintain the cover in a position securely mounted over the cavity.
Dragisic is considered analogous to the claimed invention because it is directed towards attaching a cover (44; Figs. 1A-2) to a portion of a laryngoscope blade (20, as shown; Fig. 1A), and teaches wherein the cover (44; Figs. 1A-2) includes a flexible tab configured to engage the housing to maintain the cover in a position securely mounted over the cavity (one of snaps 52/54 on cover 44, for being received in holes 62/64 as shown in Figs. 1A-2, can have the configuration shown in Figs 16g-h, i.e. having a flexible, elastically deformable snap/tab 52g configured to fit in and engage corresponding mounting hole 62g to maintain the cover 44 in position; column 6, lines 30-54 and column 7, lines 63-67).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to secure the snap-fit cover to Faugeras’s modified laryngoscope blade via a flexible tab/snap for engaging corresponding mounting holes located within the housing/cavity portion of the laryngoscope blade for removably attaching the cover securely over the cavity portion of the housing, in the manner taught by Dragisic, because Dragisic recognizes this as a suitable connection mechanism for attaching a cover to a laryngoscope blade and the removability of the cover can facilitate sterilization of components of the laryngoscope blade (see Dragisic, column 6, lines 30-35).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 13 in the instant application has not been rejected using prior art because no references, or reasonable combination thereof, could be found which disclose, or suggest, the claimed combination of limitations. In particular, none of the cited references teach or suggest wherein the side wall extending from a longitudinal edge of the spatula “defines a semi-circular cross-sectional channel configured to stably receive and retain a portion of the light guide therein”.
The most relevant prior art of record includes Faugeras (GB 2537118 A), which teaches a sidewall extending from a top surface of the spatula (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 1 of Faugeras above), but the sidewall does not receive or retain the light guide therein as required by the claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANNA VICTORIA LITTLE whose telephone number is (571)272-6630. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-6p EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Eduardo Robert can be reached at (571)272-4719. 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.
/ANNA V. LITTLE/Examiner, Art Unit 3773 /JACQUELINE T JOHANAS/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3773