Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The examiner acknowledges the amendments made to the claims 1-3, 5, 7-8, 10-13, 15-20 and 22-23, with claims 4, 6 and 14 cancelled in prosecution. Currently claims 1-3, 5, 7-13 and 15-23 are pending in the present application.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-8, 10-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Govari (US Patent No 20210307815) herein known as Govari R1 in view of Govari (US Patent No 20200129125) herein known as Govari R2 further in view of Smith (US Patent No 20130090651).
Regarding claim 1, Govari R1 teaches a medical probe (IRE system 20, [0026]), comprising: a shaft (insertion tube 28, [0026]) defining a longitudinal axis (longitudinal axis 27, seen in fig 2a), the shaft configured for insertion into a cavity of an organ of a patient (wherein the procedure may be used to insert the system into the heart of a patient, [0026]); a basket assembly (basket assembly 31, [0030]) which is connected at a distal end of the shaft and extending along the longitudinal axis (see in which the spines 30 are joined at the distal end 80 of the basket assembly, [0041]), the basket assembly comprising: multiple electrically-conductive spines (multiple conductive spine members 30, [0026]) that are electrically-connected to one another so as to form a distributed electrode (see from [0043], in which all of the spines 30a-30f may be connected to form and IRE ablation distributed electrode system) comprising exposed portions of a surface of each spine of the multiple electrically conductive spines that is configured to contact tissue in the cavity and apply ablative energy to the tissue (see in which the multiple conductive spine members 30 are configured to be activated with IRE ablation energy such that the exposed spines are configured to apply the energy to the treatment tissue, [0036]).
Govari R1 does not teach a plurality of spine mounted electrodes, which are disposed along the spines and are configured to (I) sense electrical activity in the cavity, and (ii) prevent the distributed electrode from indenting tissue in the cavity.
However, the analogous electrode basket sensing and ablation system of Govari R2 does teach a plurality of spine mounted electrodes (diagnostic electrodes 50, see fig 2A), which are disposed along the spines (see fig 2A for electrodes 50 disposed along the spines) and are configured to (I) sense electrical activity in the cavity (diagnostic electrode configured to sense electrical signals when in contact with the tissue, [0014]), and (ii) prevent the distributed electrode from indenting tissue in the cavity (diagnostic electrode 50 comes in contact with the surrounding tissue and blood wherein the splines 45 only come in contact with the surrounding blood, [0052], see also the gap between the electrode surface 50 and spline surface 45 in Fig 3, the electrodes come in contact with the tissue and the splines do not, therefore there is no indenting of the tissue).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the electrode basket ablation system of Govari R1 with the electrode basket sensing electrode of Govari R2 in order to provide electrical sensing to an ablation system to allow the sensing to result in ideal ablation and energy delivery to the spines, as disclosed by Govari R2, [0014].
The previous combination does not teach at least one of the spine mounted electrodes of the plurality of spine mounted electrodes comprising a through hole through which a spine of the multiple electrically-conductive spines is inserted into, the at least one spine mounted electrode being insulated from the spine of the multiple electrically conductive spines.
However, the analogous electrode spline medical device taught by Smith does disclose at least one of the spine mounted electrodes comprising a through hole through which a spine of the multiple electrically-conductive spines is inserted into (see Smith fig 2, as well as [0038] in which it is disclosed that the common electrode 30, or mounted electrode is joined as a separate member and attached through the strut electrode 28, or conductive spines. In which it can be seen in fig 2 that the common electrode 30 is mounted on the strut electrode 28 via a hole through the middle of the electrode 30), the at least one spine mounted electrode being insulated from the spine of the multiple electrically conductive spines (see in which a strip of insulating material 40 may be applied around the perimeter of the electrode member, which would insulate the mounted electrode from the multiple conductive spine members, [0044]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the basket catheter with conductive spines collectively taught by Govari R1 and Govari R2 with the specific electrode mounting configuration disclosed by Smith in order to allow the mounted electrode to maintain distance between the spines and the contact point, as well as differentiating the electrical connection between the conductive spines and the mounted electrode, as taught by Smith, [0038].
Regarding claim 2, the combination teaches the medical probe according to claim 1, wherein the multiple electrically conductive spines are electrically-connected to one another at a distal end of the basket assembly (see Govari R1 in which the spine members 30 are connected at the distal end of the basket assembly 80, [0041]).
Regarding claim 3, the combination teaches the medical probe according to claim 1, wherein the multiple electrically conductive spines are electrically-connected to one another at a proximal end of the basket assembly (see Govari R1 in which the spine members 30 are connected at the proximal end of the basket assembly 76, [0041]).
Regarding claim 5, the combination teaches the medical probe according to claim 1, wherein the at least one spine mounted electrode comprising the through hole (from Smith, mounted electrode 30, fig 2) protrude radially outward from the spines and away from the longitudinal axis so as to prevent the distributed electrode from indenting the tissue (Govari R2, diagnostic electrode 50 comes in contact with the surrounding tissue and blood wherein the splines 45 only come in contact with the surrounding blood, [0052], see also the gap between the electrode surface 50 and spline surface 45 in Fig 3, the electrodes come in contact with the tissue and the splines do not, therefore there is no indenting of the tissue).
Regarding claim 7, Govari R1 teaches an end effector (IRE system 20, [0026]) comprising: a tubular shaft (insertion tube 28, [0026]) extending along a longitudinal axis from a proximal portion to a distal portion (longitudinal axis 27, seen in fig 2a) a plurality of electrically conductive spines extending from the distal portion of the tubular shaft to define a basket (basket assembly 31 comprised of conductive spines 30, [0030]), the plurality of electrically conductive spines being electrically connected to each other (see in which the spines 30 are joined at the distal end 80 of the basket assembly, [0041]), each of the plurality of electrically conductive spines having exposed portions that are configured to contact tissue and apply ablative energy to the tissue of an organ (see in which the multiple conductive spine members 30 are configured to be activated with IRE ablation energy such that the exposed spines are configured to apply the energy to the treatment tissue, [0036]).
Govari R1 does not teach a plurality of spine mounted electrodes, which are disposed along the plurality of electrically conductive spines, wherein the electrode is offset and thicker in a direction away from the longitudinal axis.
However, the analogous electrode basket sensing and ablation system of Govari R2 does teach a plurality of spine mounted electrodes (diagnostic electrodes 50, see fig 2A), which are disposed along the spines (see fig 2A for electrodes 50 disposed along the spines), the electrode is offset and thicker in a direction away from the longitudinal axis (Govari R2 , see also the gap between the electrode surface 50 and spline surface 45 in Fig 3, the electrodes come in contact with the tissue and the splines do not as they protrude externally past the spines).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the electrode basket ablation system of Govari R1 with the electrode basket spine mounted electrode of Govari R2 in order to provide electrical sensing to an ablation system to allow the sensing to result in ideal ablation and energy delivery to the spines, as disclosed by Govari R2, [0014].
The previous combination does not teach at least one of the spine mounted electrodes of the plurality of spine mounted electrodes comprising a through hole through which an electrically conductive spine of the multiple electrically-conductive spines is inserted into, the at least one spine mounted electrode being insulated from the spine of the multiple electrically conductive spines.
However, the analogous electrode spline medical device taught by Smith does disclose at least one of the spine mounted electrodes comprising a through hole through which a spine of the multiple electrically-conductive spines is inserted into (see Smith fig 2, as well as [0038] in which it is disclosed that the common electrode 30, or mounted electrode is joined as a separate member and attached through the strut electrode 28, or conductive spines. In which it can be seen in fig 2 that the common electrode 30 is mounted on the strut electrode 28 via a hole through the middle of the electrode 30), the at least one spine mounted electrode being insulated from the spine of the multiple electrically conductive spines (see in which a strip of insulating material 40 may be applied around the perimeter of the electrode member, which would insulate the mounted electrode from the multiple conductive spine members, [0044]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the basket catheter with conductive spines collectively taught by Govari R1 and Govari R2 with the specific electrode mounting configuration disclosed by Smith in order to allow the mounted electrode to maintain distance between the spines and the contact point, as well as differentiating the electrical connection between the conductive spines and the mounted electrode, as taught by Smith, [0038].
Regarding claim 8, the combination teaches the end effector of claim 7, further comprising basket actuator extending from the tubular shaft to a distal end of the basket and connected to the multiple electrically conductive spines so that movement of the actuator along the longitudinal axis causes a change in shape of the basket (see from Govari R1, [0038]-[0039], in which the insertion tube 28 is inserted into the treatment area and then longitudinally actuated as to deploy or expand the basket assembly 31, thereby changing its shape).
Regarding claim 10, the combination teaches the end effector of claim 7, further comprising a reference electrode (Govari R2 , reference electrode 55, [0046]) disposed on a member extending from the tubular shaft disposed within the multiple electrically conductive spines and about the longitudinal axis (Govari R2 , see fig 2A in which the reference electrode is disposed within the interior edge of the spine 45 which extends from the tubular shaft 22).
Regarding claim 11, Govari R1 teaches a method of ablating tissues (IRE ablation system 20, [0026]) comprising: inserting, into a cavity of an organ of a patient (wherein the procedure may be used to insert the system into the heart of a patient, [0026]), a medical probe comprising a shaft (insertion tube 28, [0026]) and a basket assembly connected at a distal end of the shaft (basket assembly 31, [0030]), the basket assembly comprising (I) multiple electrically-conductive spines (multiple conductive spine members 30, [0026]) that are electrically-connected to one another with exposed portions of the multiple electrically conductive spines so as to form a distributed electrode (see from [0043], in which all of the spines 30a-30f may be connected to form and IRE ablation distributed electrode system) configured to contact tissue in the cavity and apply an ablation signal via the distributed electrode (see in which the multiple conductive spine members 30 are configured to be activated with IRE ablation energy such that the exposed spines are configured to apply the energy to the treatment tissue, [0036]).
Govari R1 does not teach a plurality of spine mounted electrodes, which are disposed along the spines and are configured to (I) sense electrical activity in the cavity, and (ii) prevent the distributed electrode from indenting tissue in the cavity.
However, the analogous electrode basket sensing and ablation system of Govari R2 does teach a plurality of spine mounted electrodes (diagnostic electrodes 50, see fig 2A), which are disposed along the spines (see fig 2A for electrodes 50 disposed along the spines) and are configured to (I) sense electrical activity in the cavity (diagnostic electrode configured to sense electrical signals when in contact with the tissue, [0014]), and (ii) prevent the distributed electrode from indenting tissue in the cavity (diagnostic electrode 50 comes in contact with the surrounding tissue and blood wherein the splines 45 only come in contact with the surrounding blood, [0052], see also the gap between the electrode surface 50 and spline surface 45 in Fig 3, the electrodes come in contact with the tissue and the splines do not, therefore there is no indenting of the tissue).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the electrode basket ablation system of Govari R1 with the electrode basket sensing electrode of Govari R2 in order to provide electrical sensing to an ablation system to allow the sensing to result in ideal ablation and energy delivery to the spines, as disclosed by Govari R2, [0014].
The previous combination does not teach at least one of the spine mounted electrodes of the plurality of spine mounted electrodes comprising a through hole through which a spine of the multiple electrically-conductive spines is inserted into, the at least one spine mounted electrode being insulated from the spine of the multiple electrically conductive spines.
However, the analogous electrode spline medical device taught by Smith does disclose at least one of the spine mounted electrodes comprising a through hole through which a spine of the multiple electrically-conductive spines is inserted into (see Smith fig 2, as well as [0038] in which it is disclosed that the common electrode 30, or mounted electrode is joined as a separate member and attached through the strut electrode 28, or conductive spines. In which it can be seen in fig 2 that the common electrode 30 is mounted on the strut electrode 28 via a hole through the middle of the electrode 30), the at least one spine mounted electrode being insulated from the spine of the multiple electrically conductive spines (see in which a strip of insulating material 40 may be applied around the perimeter of the electrode member, which would insulate the mounted electrode from the multiple conductive spine members, [0044]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the basket catheter with conductive spines collectively taught by Govari R1 and Govari R2 with the specific electrode mounting configuration disclosed by Smith in order to allow the mounted electrode to maintain distance between the spines and the contact point, as well as differentiating the electrical connection between the conductive spines and the mounted electrode, as taught by Smith, [0038].
Regarding claim 12, the combination teaches the method according to claim 11, wherein the multiple electrically conductive spines are electrically-connected to one another at a distal end of the basket assembly (see Govari R1 in which the spine members 30 are connected at the distal end of the basket assembly 80, [0041]).
Regarding claim 13, the combination teaches the method according to claim 11, wherein the multiple electrically conductive spines are electrically-connected to one another at a proximal end of the basket assembly (see Govari R1 in which the spine members 30 are connected at the proximal end of the basket assembly 76, [0041]).
Regarding claim 15, the combination teaches the method according to claim 11, wherein at least one spine mounted electrode comprising a through hole (from Smith, see mounted electrode 30 with through hole, fig 2) protrudes radially outward from the spines so as to prevent the distributed electrode from indenting the tissue (Govari R2 , diagnostic electrode 50 comes in contact with the surrounding tissue and blood wherein the splines 45 only come in contact with the surrounding blood, [0052], see also the gap between the electrode surface 50 and spline surface 45 in Fig 3, the electrodes come in contact with the tissue and the splines do not, therefore there is no indenting of the tissue).
Regarding claim 16, the combination teaches the method according to claim 11, wherein at least one spine mounted electrode comprises (Govari R2 , see electrodes 50 mounted on the surface of the spines 45 in fig 2A) a given thickness protruding externally to the spines greater than a thickness protruding internally to the spines (Govari R2 , see also the gap between the electrode surface 50 and spline surface 45 in Fig 3, the electrodes come in contact with the tissue and the splines do not as they protrude externally past the spines).
Regarding claim 17, Govari R1 teaches a method of operating a probe (IRE ablation system 20, [0026]) comprising: inserting, into a cavity of an organ of a patient (wherein the procedure may be used to insert the system into the heart of a patient, [0026]), a medical probe comprising a shaft (insertion tube 28, [0026]) and a basket assembly connected at a distal end of the shaft (basket assembly 31, [0030]), the basket assembly comprising (I) multiple electrically-conductive spines (multiple conductive spine members 30, [0026]) that are electrically-connected to one another with exposed portions of the multiple electrically conductive spines so as to form a distributed electrode (see from [0043], in which all of the spines 30a-30f may be connected to form and IRE ablation distributed electrode system) configured to contact tissue in the cavity and apply an ablation signal via the distributed electrode (see in which the multiple conductive spine members 30 are configured to be activated with IRE ablation energy such that the exposed spines are configured to apply the energy to the treatment tissue, [0036]).
Govari R1 does not teach a plurality of spine mounted electrodes, which are disposed along the spines and are configured to (I) sense electrical activity in the cavity, and (ii) prevent the distributed electrode from indenting tissue in the cavity.
However, the analogous electrode basket sensing and ablation system of Govari R2 does teach a plurality of spine mounted electrodes (diagnostic electrodes 50, see fig 2A), which are disposed along the spines (see fig 2A for electrodes 50 disposed along the spines) and are configured to (I) sense electrical activity in the cavity (diagnostic electrode configured to sense electrical signals when in contact with the tissue, [0014]), and (ii) prevent the distributed electrode from indenting tissue in the cavity (diagnostic electrode 50 comes in contact with the surrounding tissue and blood wherein the splines 45 only come in contact with the surrounding blood, [0052], see also the gap between the electrode surface 50 and spline surface 45 in Fig 3, the electrodes come in contact with the tissue and the splines do not, therefore there is no indenting of the tissue).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the electrode basket ablation system of Govari R1 with the electrode basket sensing electrode of Govari R2 in order to provide electrical sensing to an ablation system to allow the sensing to result in ideal ablation and energy delivery to the spines, as disclosed by Govari R2, [0014].
The previous combination does not teach at least one of the spine mounted electrodes of the plurality of spine mounted electrodes comprising a through hole through which a spine of the multiple electrically-conductive spines is inserted into, the at least one spine mounted electrode being insulated from the spine of the multiple electrically conductive spines.
However, the analogous electrode spline medical device taught by Smith does disclose at least one of the spine mounted electrodes comprising a through hole through which a spine of the multiple electrically-conductive spines is inserted into (see Smith fig 2, as well as [0038] in which it is disclosed that the common electrode 30, or mounted electrode is joined as a separate member and attached through the strut electrode 28, or conductive spines. In which it can be seen in fig 2 that the common electrode 30 is mounted on the strut electrode 28 via a hole through the middle of the electrode 30), the at least one spine mounted electrode being insulated from the spine of the multiple electrically conductive spines (see in which a strip of insulating material 40 may be applied around the perimeter of the electrode member, which would insulate the mounted electrode from the multiple conductive spine members, [0044]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the basket catheter with conductive spines collectively taught by Govari R1 and Govari R2 with the specific electrode mounting configuration disclosed by Smith in order to allow the mounted electrode to maintain distance between the spines and the contact point, as well as differentiating the electrical connection between the conductive spines and the mounted electrode, as taught by Smith, [0038].
Regarding claim 18, the combination teaches the method of claim 17, wherein the delivering of ablative energy to the at least one spine mounted electrode includes configuring the distributed electrode as a return electrode (from Govari R1, see in which the multiple conductive spines may take the form of multiple electrode pairs during IRE ablation treatment, in which a return electrode may be present, [0035]-[0036]).
Regarding claim 19, the combination teaches the method of claim 17, wherein the delivering of the ablative energy to distributed electrode includes configuring at least one spine mounted electrode disposed on each spine of the multiple electrically conductive spines as return electrodes (from Govari R1, see in which the multiple conductive spines may take the form of multiple electrode pairs during IRE ablation treatment, in which a return electrode may be present, [0035]-[0036]).
Regarding claim 20, the combination teaches the method of claim 17, further comprising delivering ablative energy via a central electrode mounted on a member disposed inside the multiple electrically conductive spines along a longitudinal axis of the distributed electrode (see from Smith, [0038], see also fig 3A, in which there is a centralized ablation electrode 30 present and mounted on a member disposed within the tines used for delivering ablative energy to the ablation system 12).
Regarding claim 21, the combination teaches the method according to claim 17, wherein the ablative energy comprises a pulsed field (see Govari R1, in which the IRE ablation energy generator is a dedicated pulse generator 36, [0027]).
Regarding claim 22, the combination teaches the method according to claim 17, wherein the ablative energy to the spine mounted electrodes (Govari R2 , see [0061], in which it states that the PCB electrodes used in the disclosure as the diagnostic electrodes 50 can also be used for ablating tissue cells) and comprises pulsed field delivered to a plurality of spine mounted electrodes in sequence (see Govari R1, in which the IRE ablation energy generator is a dedicated pulse generator 36, [0027], which is capable of delivering the pulses in sequence, [0036]).
Regarding claim 23, the combination teaches the medical probe according to claim 5, wherein a portion of the at least one spine mounted electrode comprising the through hole (from Smith, mounted electrode 30, fig 2) protrudes radially inward toward the longitudinal axis with a first thickness and radially outward away from the longitudinal axis with a second thickness, the second thickness being greater than the first thickness (see Smith, wherein the spacer struts 26 which are part of the mounted electrode assembly extend out further radially outward than they do inwardly in order to keep the electrode a predetermined distance from the treatment wall, [0039]).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Govari (US Patent No 20210307815) herein known as Govari R1 in view of Govari (US Patent No 20200129125) herein known as Govari R2 further in view of Smith (US Patent No 20130090651) further in view of Olson (US Patent No 20190282116).
Regarding claim 9, the previous combination of Govari R1, Govari R2 and Smith teaches the end effector of claim 7.
The combination does not teach further comprising an irrigation member extending from the distal portion of the tubular shaft.
However, irrigation members are commonly known in the art when using ablation techniques as seen in the analogous sensing and ablation basket catheter of Olson which does teach an irrigation member extending from the distal portion of the tubular shaft (the shaft 109 includes a lumen 135 for delivering wiring and irrigation members while in use, [0069]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date to combine the sensing and ablation basket catheter defined by Govari R1, Govari R2, and Smith to contain an irrigation member as to distribute waste and keep the cavity from piling up waste as disclosed by Olson, [0084].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/31/2026 have been fully considered and they have been found to be partially persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 7, 11 and 17 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Specifically, the examiner agrees with the applicant that the newly amended claim limitation in claims 1, 7, 11 and 17 which states that the multiple electrically conductive spines that form a distributed electrode which contain exposed portions of the surface of each spine to come in contact with the tissue to apply ablative energy, is not explicitly taught by the previous prior art of record of Viswanathan. However, upon further search and consideration necessitated by the amended claim limitation, it has been found that the new prior art of record of Govari R1 does reasonably teach and disclose the limitation as presently amended. Specifically, Govair R1 does teach he basket assembly comprising: multiple electrically-conductive spines (multiple conductive spine members 30, [0026]) that are electrically-connected to one another so as to form a distributed electrode (see from [0043], in which all of the spines 30a-30f may be connected to form and IRE ablation distributed electrode system) comprising exposed portions of a surface of each spine of the multiple electrically conductive spines that is configured to contact tissue in the cavity and apply ablative energy to the tissue (see in which the multiple conductive spine members 30 are configured to be activated with IRE ablation energy such that the exposed spines are configured to apply the energy to the treatment tissue, [0036]). Therefore, as the new prior art of record of Govari R1 does disclose the newly amended claim limitations, the amended claims 1, 7, 11 and 17 remain rejected under the new prior art of record rejection of Govari R1 in view of Govari R2 further in view of Smith set forth in the present office action.
Furthermore, with regards to the argument presented that the prior art of record of Olson does not teach the irrigation member as claimed in dependent claim 9, has been considered but ultimately falls unpersuasive. Regarding the remark that the incorrect reference numerals were relied upon, it has been taken into consideration but is ultimately an incorrect statement. Upon further review of the relied upon reference numerals used from Olson in the previous prior art of record rejection, it has been confirmed that Olson does teach a shaft member, reference numeral 109 which includes a lumen 135 for delivering wiring and irrigation members while in use, found in specification paragraph [0069]. The examiner realizes that Olson does call upon a different shaft member 105 as the main outer shaft for the device, however there is a presence of an interior shaft member 109 which contains an irrigation lumen 135. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language of the dependent claim 9, the prior art must only teach an irrigation member extending from the distal portion of the tubular shaft. The prior art of Olson does teach and irrigation member 135 which is capable of extending from the proximal and distal ends of a tubular catheter member 109 as found in paragraph [0069]. Nowhere in the claim language of the present application is claimed that the tubular catheter member must be the outer-most shaft, and therefore the Olson shaft member 109 is the correct and analogous shaft member, not outer shaft member 105 as the applicant is arguing. As the previous prior art of Olson does reasonably teach and disclose an irrigation member extending from the distal portion of the tubular shaft as analyzed under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim, the dependent claim 9 remains rejected under the previous prior art of record of Olson set forth in the present office action.
All other claims remain rejected under the previous prior art of record rejection set forth due to their dependency on the independent claims 1, 7, 11 and 17.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE M BROWN whose telephone number is (703)756-4534. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00pm EST, Mon-Fri, alternating Fridays off.
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, Joseph Stoklosa can be reached at 571-272-1213. 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.
/KYLE M. BROWN/Examiner, Art Unit 3794
/JOSEPH A STOKLOSA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3794
Prosecution Insights