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
Acknowledgment is made to the amendment received 5/20/2025.
Applicant' s amendments to the claims are sufficient to overcome the 35 USC § 112(a) rejections set forth in the previous office action.
Applicant' s amendments to the claims are sufficient to overcome the 35 USC § 112(b) rejections set forth in the previous office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/20/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Yamane does not disclose the claim language “a second edge of the airtight member where the cylindrical arm portion contacts the fixation member defines a minimum inner diameter of the cylindrical main body portion”. However, in combination with Baur, sealing element 34 of Baur would have the shape of sealing unit 64 of Yamane, and thus where sealing member 34 contacts fixation member, shaft 11, would have the shape of the narrowest portion of sealing unit 64 of Yamane, and thus would define a minimum inner diameter of the cylindrical main body portion, which is where inclined surfaces 72 and 74 meet at the middle of sealing unit 64. Thus, Baur in view of Yamane does disclose the claim language of claims 1 and 14, and thus the previous rejections of claims 1 and 14 stand.
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.
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 1-2, 4-7, 9, and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baur et al., US 20130096498, herein referred to as “Baur”, in view of Yamane, US 20130085335, herein referred to as “Yamane”.
Regarding claim 1, Baur discloses a treatment tool (Figure 1: surgical instrument 10) comprising: a handle (Figure 1: grip 18); an elongated fixation member (Figure 1: shaft 11), a proximal end side of the elongated fixation member being fixed to the handle (Figure 1: proximal end of shaft 11 is fixed to grip 11, also see Figure 4); a movable member that is provided coaxially with the fixation member (Figure 4: rod 31 is coaxial with shaft 11), the movable member being configured to move relative to the fixation member ([0033]: “In contrast, transmission mechanism 29 or 29a, i.e., wire 30 or rod 31, for example, are respectively arranged to be longitudinally movable. They extend parallel to the shaft middle line 36 and are moved back and forth in this direction.”); and an airtight member provided between the fixation member and the movable member (Figures 4-5: sealing element 34 is between rod 31 and shaft 11 and [0035] and [0039]), the airtight member having a first contact width that contacts the fixation member (Figures 4-5: sealing element 34 contacts interior wall 37 of shaft 11) and a second contact width that contacts the movable member (Figures 4-5: sealing element 34 contacts exterior wall of rod 31), the second contact width being smaller than the first contact width (On the bottom of page 27 of the specification, applicant defines contact width as contact area. Since the diameter of shaft 11 is greater than the diameter of rod 31 and the sealing element 34 contacts both for the same length, the contact area for rod 31 is smaller than the contact area for shaft 11. The equation for surface area along the length of a cylinder is diameter*height), the airtight member including (Figures 4-5: sealing element 34): a cylindrical main body portion (Figure 5: sealing element 34 has a cylindrical main body portion), a first arm portion that extends along a first incline in a direction away from the central axis of the main body ([0037]: “For example, one or more projections of the sealing element 34 may extend into one or more holes 23 and cure therein.”); and a second arm portion that extends along a second incline in a direction towards the central axis (Figure 5: the portion of sealing element 34 that surrounds rod 31 extends in a direction towards the central axis from the rest of sealing element 34). Baur does not explicitly disclose a treatment tool wherein the first arm portion and the second arm portion are provided on a distal end of the airtight member or wherein an outer diameter of the airtight member increases along the first incline in the direction away from the central axis such that a first edge of the airtight member where the first arm portion that contacts the movable member defines a maximum outer diameter of the airtight member that is greater than the outer diameter of the cylindrical main body portion, and an inner diameter of the airtight member decreases along the second incline in the direction towards the central axis such that a second edge of the airtight member where the second arm portion contacts the fixation member defines a minimum inner diameter of the cylindrical main body portion.
However, Yamane teaches a treatment tool (Figure 1) comprising an airtight member (Figures 2 and 4A: sealing unit 64) including a first arm portion and a second arm portion (Figure 2: inclined surfaces 72 and 74), wherein the first arm portion and the second arm portion are provided on a distal end of the airtight member (Figure 2: inclined surfaces 72 and 74 are on a distal end of sealing unit 64), wherein an outer diameter of the airtight member increases along the first incline in the direction away from the central axis such that a first edge of the airtight member where the first arm portion that contacts the movable member defines a maximum outer diameter of the airtight member that is greater than the outer diameter of the cylindrical main body portion (Figure 2: inclined surface 72 increases in the direction away from the central axis in a direction from the bottom of the figure to the top of the figure to a maximum outer diameter), and an inner diameter of the airtight member decreases along the second incline in the direction towards the central axis such that a second edge of the airtight member where the second arm portion contacts the fixation member defines a minimum inner diameter of the cylindrical main body portion (Figure 2: inclined surface 74 decreases in the direction away from the central axis in a direction from the top of the figure to the bottom of the figure to a minimum inner diameter of the cylindrical main body portion, which is where inclined surfaces 72 and 74 meet and form a cylinder). In combination with Baur, sealing element 34 of Baur would have the shape of sealing unit 64 of Yamane, and thus where sealing member 34 contacts fixation member, shaft 11, would have the shape of the narrowest portion of sealing unit 64 of Yamane, and thus would define a minimum inner diameter of the cylindrical main body portion, which is where inclined surfaces 72 and 74 meet at the middle of sealing unit 64 of Yamane. Therefore, in combination, Baur in view of Yamane discloses the claim language “a second edge of the airtight member where the second arm portion contacts the fixation member defines a minimum inner diameter of the cylindrical main body portion”.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the treatment tool disclosed by Baur so that the first arm portion and the second arm portion are provided on a distal end of the airtight member as taught by Yamane to prevent leakage of fluid (Yamane [0052]).
Regarding claim 2, Baur in view of Yamane discloses the treatment tool according to claim 1, and Baur further discloses a treatment tool wherein the first arm portion contacts the fixation member ([0037]: “For example, one or more projections of the sealing element 34 may extend into one or more holes 23 and cure therein. A form-fitting toothing may form between the sealing element 34 in the shaft 11 so that the sealing element 34 is secured in a longitudinal position in the shaft 11, said sealing element having been foamed in said longitudinal position.”), and the second arm portion contacts the movable member ([0040]: “then a curable plastic material that is disposed to form the sealing element 34 is injected into the shaft 11 such that the material encloses the actuating element 30, 31 along a length that is desirably greater than the inside diameter and smaller than its length.”).
Regarding claim 4, Baur in view of Yamane discloses the treatment tool according to claim 1, and Baur further discloses a treatment tool wherein each of the fixation member (Figure 1: shaft 11) and the movable member (Figure 4: rod 31) has a pipe shape (Figure 4: shaft 11 and rode 31 have a pipe shape).
Regarding claim 5, Baur in view of Yamane discloses the treatment tool according to claim 4, and Baur further discloses a treatment tool wherein the movable member (Figure 4: rod 31) is inserted into an inside of the fixation member (Figures 4-5 and [0033]: “In contrast, transmission mechanism 29 or 29a, i.e., wire 30 or rod 31, for example, are respectively arranged to be longitudinally movable. They extend parallel to the shaft middle line 36 and are moved back and forth in this direction. Consequently, they are movably arranged in the sealing element 34.”).
Regarding claim 6, Baur in view of Yamane discloses the treatment tool according to claim 4, and Baur further discloses a treatment tool further comprising a gripping member (Figure 2: movable part 14) configured to be inserted into the movable member ([0031]: “One end of the rod 31 may be connected to the knife 16.” Which is connected to movable part 14), the gripping member being configured to protrude from a distal end of the movable member (Figure 2: movable part 14protrudes from a distal end of rod 31), and a jaw (Figure 1: movable part 15) that is attached to a distal end side of the fixation member (Figure 1: movable part 15 is attached a distal end 12 of shaft 11) and a distal end side of the movable member (Figure 2 and [0031]: “One end of the rod 31 may be connected to the knife 16.”), the jaw being configured to grip a body tissue with the gripping member ([0026]: “The knife 16 that normally is in a retracted position as schematically indicated in FIG. 2, can be used, e.g., for severing a closed vessel held between the parts 14, 15, said vessel having been closed by coagulation,”) and rotate about a predetermined central axis (Figure 1: rotary chuck 22), wherein the jaw is configured to rotate in conjunction with movement of the movable member ([0028]).
Regarding claim 7, Baur in view of Yamane discloses the treatment tool according to claim 1, and Baur further discloses a treatment tool wherein the handle (Figure 1: grip 18) has an operation knob configured to rotate with respect to the handle (Figure 1: actuating device 24 and hand lever 25 rotate towards lower grip part 20 and away from lower grip part 20), and the movable member is configured to move relative to the fixation member in conjunction with the rotation of the operation knob ([0031]: “Another end of the rod 31 may be connected to a separate actuating mechanism 32 or also to a locking and coupling device that is controlled e.g., by the actuating device 24.”).
Regarding claim 9, Baur in view of Yamane discloses the treatment tool according to claim 6, and Baur further discloses a treatment tool wherein a high-frequency current flows in the gripping member (Figure 2: movable part 14 and [0032]), and the gripping member and the jaw form a pair of electrodes to conduct the high-frequency current (Figure 2: movable parts 14 and 15 and [0032]).
Regarding claim 12, Baur in view of Yamane discloses the treatment tool according to claim 2, and Baur further discloses a treatment tool wherein when separation is performed by a line segment that passes through a boundary between the first arm portion and the second arm portion and that is parallel to the central axis (Figure 5: this corresponds to wire 30), and when a length between the line segment and an outer periphery of the first arm portion is t1 (Figure 5: a line from the bottom of wire 30 to the hole at the bottom of Figure 5 which is perpendicular to the central axis) and a length between the line segment and an outer periphery of the second arm portion is t2 (Figure 5: a line from the bottom of wire 30 to the top of rod 31 which is perpendicular to the central axis), a relationship of t1 < t2 is satisfied (Figure 5: t1 is less than t2 because the diameter of rod 31 is larger than the width of the outer wall 37 of shaft 11).
Regarding claim 13, Baur in view of Yamane discloses the treatment tool according to claim 2, and Baur further discloses a treatment tool wherein a contact load between the first arm portion and the fixation member ([0037]: “In doing so, a material-bonded adhesion is established between the sealing element 34 and the interior wall 37 of the shaft 11. Furthermore, when curing, the sealing element 34 may come into form-fitted engagement with one or more structures of the shaft 11. For example, one or more projections of the sealing element 34 may extend into one or more holes 23 and cure therein. A form-fitting toothing may form between the sealing element 34 in the shaft 11 so that the sealing element 34 is secured in a longitudinal position in the shaft 11, said sealing element having been foamed in said longitudinal position.”) is larger than a contact load between the second arm portion and the movable member ([0040]: “then a curable plastic material that is disposed to form the sealing element 34 is injected into the shaft 11 such that the material encloses the actuating element 30, 31 along a length that is desirably greater than the inside diameter and smaller than its length.” And [0033]: “In contrast, transmission mechanism 29 or 29a, i.e., wire 30 or rod 31, for example, are respectively arranged to be longitudinally movable. They extend parallel to the shaft middle line 36 and are moved back and forth in this direction. Consequently, they are movably arranged in the sealing element 34.”; there is a greater contact load for the fixation member than the movable member).
Regarding claim 14, Baur discloses a treatment tool airtight member (Figures 2 and 4-5: sealing element 34) that is provided between a fixation member and a movable member (Figures 4-5: sealing element 34 is between rod 31 and shaft 11 and [0035] and [0039]), the treatment tool airtight member being configured to create an airtight seal around the fixation member and the movable member ([0035] and [0039]), a proximal end side of the fixation member being fixed to a handle (Figure 1: proximal end of shaft 11 is fixed to grip 11, also see Figure 4), the movable member being provided coaxially with the fixation member (Figure 4: rod 31 is coaxial with shaft 11) and moving relative to the fixation member ([0033]: “In contrast, transmission mechanism 29 or 29a, i.e., wire 30 or rod 31, for example, are respectively arranged to be longitudinally movable. They extend parallel to the shaft middle line 36 and are moved back and forth in this direction.”), wherein the airtight member includes a second contact width that contacts the movable member (Figures 4-5: sealing element 34 contacts exterior wall of rod 31) and a first contact width that contacts the fixation member (Figures 4-5: sealing element 34 contacts interior wall 37 of shaft 11), the second contact width being smaller than the first contact width (On the bottom of page 27 of the specification, applicant defines contact width as contact area. Since the diameter of shaft 11 is greater than the diameter of rod 31 and the sealing element 34 contacts both for the same length, the contact area for rod 31 is smaller than the contact area for shaft 11. The equation for surface area along the length of a cylinder is diameter*height), a first arm portion extends along a first incline in a direction away from the central axis of the main body ([0037]: “For example, one or more projections of the sealing element 34 may extend into one or more holes 23 and cure therein.”); and a second arm portion extends along a second incline in a direction towards the central axis (Figure 5: the portion of sealing element 34 that surrounds rod 31 extends in a direction towards the central axis from the rest of sealing element 34). Baur does not explicitly disclose a treatment tool wherein the first arm portion and the second arm portion are provided on a distal end of the airtight member or wherein an outer diameter of the airtight member increases along the first incline in the direction away from the central axis such that a first edge of the airtight member where the first arm portion that contacts the movable member defines a maximum outer diameter of the airtight member that is greater than the outer diameter of the cylindrical main body portion, and an inner diameter of the airtight member decreases along the second incline in the direction towards the central axis such that a second edge of the airtight member where the second arm portion contacts the fixation member defines a minimum inner diameter of the cylindrical main body portion.
However, Yamane teaches a treatment tool (Figure 1) comprising an airtight member (Figures 2 and 4A: sealing unit 64) including a first arm portion and a second arm portion (Figure 2: inclined surfaces 72 and 74), wherein the first arm portion and the second arm portion are provided on a distal end of the airtight member (Figure 2: inclined surfaces 72 and 74 are on a distal end of sealing unit 64), wherein an outer diameter of the airtight member increases along the first incline in the direction away from the central axis such that a first edge of the airtight member where the first arm portion that contacts the movable member defines a maximum outer diameter of the airtight member that is greater than the outer diameter of the cylindrical main body portion (Figure 2: inclined surface 72 increases in the direction away from the central axis in a direction from the bottom of the figure to the top of the figure to a maximum outer diameter), and an inner diameter of the airtight member decreases along the second incline in the direction towards the central axis such that a second edge of the airtight member where the second arm portion contacts the fixation member defines a minimum inner diameter of the cylindrical main body portion (Figure 2: inclined surface 74 decreases in the direction away from the central axis in a direction from the top of the figure to the bottom of the figure to a minimum inner diameter of the cylindrical main body portion, which is where inclined surfaces 72 and 74 meet and form a cylinder). In combination with Baur, sealing element 34 of Baur would have the shape of sealing unit 64 of Yamane, and thus where sealing member 34 contacts fixation member, shaft 11, would have the shape of the narrowest portion of sealing unit 64 of Yamane, and thus would define a minimum inner diameter of the cylindrical main body portion, which is where inclined surfaces 72 and 74 meet at the middle of sealing unit 64 of Yamane. Therefore, in combination, Baur in view of Yamane discloses the claim language “a second edge of the airtight member where the second arm portion contacts the fixation member defines a minimum inner diameter of the cylindrical main body portion”.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the treatment tool disclosed by Baur so that the first arm portion and the second arm portion are provided on a distal end of the airtight member as taught by Yamane to prevent leakage of fluid (Yamane [0052]).
Regarding claim 15, Baur discloses the treatment tool airtight member according to claim 14, comprising a cylindrical main body portion (Figure 5: sealing element 34 has a cylindrical main body portion), wherein: the first arm portion contacts the fixation member ([0037]: “For example, one or more projections of the sealing element 34 may extend into one or more holes 23 and cure therein. A form-fitting toothing may form between the sealing element 34 in the shaft 11 so that the sealing element 34 is secured in a longitudinal position in the shaft 11, said sealing element having been foamed in said longitudinal position.”), and the second arm portion contacts the movable member ([0040]: “then a curable plastic material that is disposed to form the sealing element 34 is injected into the shaft 11 such that the material encloses the actuating element 30, 31 along a length that is desirably greater than the inside diameter and smaller than its length.”).
Claims 3, 8, 11, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baur in view Yamane, further in view of Kawaguchi et al., US 20170196584, herein referred to as “Kawaguchi”.
Regarding claim 3, Baur in view of Yamane discloses the treatment tool according to claim 2, but does not explicitly disclose a treatment tool wherein the second arm portion includes a protrusion portion at a contact portion at which the second arm portion contacts the movable member, and the protrusion portion contacts the movable member.
However, Kawaguchi teaches a treatment tool (Figure 1: surgical treatment instrument 2) wherein the second arm portion includes a protrusion portion (Figure 8: inner projection portion 66B) at a contact portion at which the second arm portion contacts the movable member (Figure 8: inner projection portion 66B contacts sheath component 61A, which is a part of sheath 11), and the protrusion portion contacts the movable member (Figure 8: sheath 11).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the treatment tool of Baur so that the second arm portion includes a protrusion portion at a contact portion at which the second arm portion contacts the movable member as taught by Kawaguchi to prevent both the flow of liquid and the re-flow of liquid (Kawaguchi [0079]-[0080]), which protects the inner workings of the tool from water damage.
Regarding claim 8, Baur in view of Yamane discloses the treatment tool according to claim 6, but does not explicitly disclose a treatment tool further comprising an ultrasound transducer configured to generate an ultrasound vibration, wherein the gripping member is configured to vibrate in a longitudinal direction due to the ultrasound vibration generated by the ultrasound transducer.
However, Kawaguchi teaches a treatment tool (Figure 1: surgical treatment instrument 2) comprising an ultrasound transducer (Figure 1: transducer unit 3 and Figure 4: ultrasonic transducer 33) configured to generate an ultrasound vibration ([0041]: “The ultrasonic transducer 33 is provided with piezoelectric elements which convert an electric current to ultrasonic vibration.”), wherein the gripping member is configured to vibrate in a longitudinal direction due to the ultrasound vibration generated by the ultrasound transducer ([0042]: “Thereby, electric current is converted to ultrasonic vibration by the ultrasonic transducer 33, and the ultrasonic vibration is generated. Then, the generated ultrasonic vibration is transmitted to the probe 13 through the rod-shaped member 32. Further, in the probe 13, the ultrasonic vibration is transmitted to the probe treatment portion 25 from the proximal side toward the distal side.”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the treatment tool of Baur so that it includes an ultrasound transducer configured to generate an ultrasound vibration, wherein the gripping member is configured to vibrate in a longitudinal direction due to the ultrasound vibration generated by the ultrasound transducer as taught by Kawaguchi so that biological tissue is coagulated and, at the same time, cut and opened by frictional heat (Kawaguchi [0042]).
Regarding claim 11, Baur in view of Yamane discloses the treatment tool according to claim 2, but does not explicitly disclose a treatment tool wherein a first contact area in which the fixation member contacts the first arm portion is larger than a second contact area in which the movable member contacts the second arm portion.
However, Kawaguchi teaches a treatment tool (Figure 1: surgical treatment instrument 2) wherein a first contact area in which the fixation member contacts the first arm portion (Figure 8: contact area between outer projection portion 72B and outer tube 55) is larger than a second contact area in which the movable member contacts the second arm portion (Figure 8: contact area between inner projection portion 66B and sheath 11 is smaller because the diameter of the sheath is smaller).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the treatment tool of Baur so that the first contact area in which the fixation member contacts the first arm portion is larger than a second contact area in which the movable member contacts the second arm portion as taught by Kawaguchi to prevent both the flow of liquid and the re-flow of liquid (Kawaguchi [0079]-[0080]), which protects the inner workings of the tool from water damage.
Regarding claim 16, Baur in view of Yamane discloses the treatment tool according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose a treatment tool wherein the airtight member has a recess between the first arm portion and the second arm portion.
However, Kawaguchi teaches a treatment tool (Figure 1: surgical treatment instrument 2) wherein the airtight member (Figure 7: seal portion 75B) has a recess between the first arm portion (Figure 7: outer projection portion 72B) and the second arm portion (Figure 7: inner projection 66B; there is a recess between 72B and 66B that is attached to sheath 11).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the treatment tool of Baur so that the airtight member has a recess between the first arm portion and the second arm portion as taught by Kawaguchi to prevent both the flow of liquid and the re-flow of liquid (Kawaguchi [0079]-[0080]), which protects the inner workings of the tool from water damage.
Regarding claim 17, Baur in view of Yamane and Kawaguchi discloses the treatment tool according to claim 3, and Yamane further discloses a treatment tool wherein the protrusion is configured to contact an inner surface of the movable member such that the protrusion inclines at a non-zero angle relative to the inner surface of the movable member (Figure 2: coupling flange 84 inclines at a 90 degree angle relative to the inner surface of housing sleeve 66).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the treatment tool disclosed by Baur so that the protrusion is configured to contact an inner surface of the movable member such that the protrusion inclines at a non-zero angle relative to the inner surface of the movable member as taught by Yamane to prevent leakage of fluid (Yamane [0052]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baur in view of Yamane, further in view of Adelman et al., US 6641604, herein referred to as “Adelman”.
Regarding claim 10, Baur in view of Yamane discloses the treatment tool according to claim 2, but does not explicitly disclose a treatment tool wherein the airtight member is configured to be deformed in a direction in which the first arm portion and the second arm portion are separated from each other when abdominal air pressure is applied to the first arm portion and the second arm portion.
However, Adelman teaches a treatment tool (Figure 1: device 10) wherein the airtight member (Figures 25-27b: seal member 288) is configured to be deformed (Col. 2, lines 64-65) in a direction in which the first arm portion and the second arm portion (Figures 27a-b: two arm portions of seal member 288) are separated from each other when abdominal air pressure is applied to the first arm portion and the second arm portion (Figures 27a-b: based on how the arms are separated from each other air pressure applied between the two arms would separate the arms).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the treatment tool of Baur so that the airtight member is configured to be deformed in a direction in which the first arm portion and the second arm portion are separated from each other when abdominal air pressure is applied to the first arm portion and the second arm portion as taught by Adelman to ensure structural integrity of the airtight member while still ensuring no leakage occurs (Adelman Col. 3, lines 30-32 and Col. 4, lines 17-21).
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 Nora W Rhodes whose telephone number is (571)272-8126. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am-6pm 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, Joanne Rodden can be reached on 3032974276. 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.
/N.W.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3794
/SEAN W COLLINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794