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 Arguments
35 USC 103
Applicant’s arguments, see pp. 7-11, filed 16 October 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-9, 11-12, 14, 16, and 19-20 under 35 USC 103 over the combination of Rosenberg and Keilhauer not teaching “and the outer faces are substantially parallel” have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of US 20080282474 A1 to Hsin, which teaches the claimed limitation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20170013978 A1 to Rosenberg in view of US 5727267 to Keilhauer and further in view of US 20080282474 A1 to Hsin.
Re Claim 1, Rosenberg teaches:
A therapeutic pillow for promoting sleep of a user in a supine position (at least [Abstract] “orthopedic pillow are provided for supporting the head of a sleeper in a supine position”), the therapeutic pillow having a generally rectangular foot print, the pillow comprising: parallel front (at least Fig. 2 element 22 and [0012] “proximal edge 22”.) and rear edges (at least Fig. 2 element 20 and [0012] “distal edge 20”.), parallel right and left lateral edges (at least Fig. 2 elements 36),
a central section comprising a head support surface each comprising an outer face and configured to accommodate a back of the user’s head (at least Figs. 1-6 element 30 and [0014] “head support surface 30, which serves as the primary source of support for the back of the sleeper's head when using supine head pillow 10”.),
a pair of upwardly projecting laterally spaced bolster segments configured to maintain the user’s head in an upwardly facing position, wherein the bolster segments extend between the front and rear edges (at least Figs. 1-6 element 36 and [0015] “Laterally-opposed side rails 36 can assume the form of any upwardly-extending projections or features suitable for helping to maintain a sleeper's head in a neutral position when the backside of the sleeper's head rests upon head support surface 30”.),
a buttress underlying the central section (at least Fig. 4 element 12 and [0012] “base 12”.), the buttress having a pair of laterally spaced bolster stiffeners (at least Figs. 1-3 element 40 and [0020] “second piece 52 extends and wraps around relatively soft center piece 50 to form or define a lower, base portion of neck pad 42 and outer portions 40 of laterally-opposed side rails 36 not typically contacted by a sleeper's head during usage of pillow 10. As also described below, second piece 52 is composed a material having a greater firmness, a greater density, and/or a decreased flexibility relative to the material from which head support piece 50 is produced. Second piece 52 thus serves to reinforce laterally-opposed side rails 36, as well as to enhance the physical support offered by neck pad 42”.),
the central section and the buttress both having a generally "U" shaped transverse cross section (at least Fig. 3), the central section being nested within the bolster segments with the bolster stiffeners abutting the outer faces of the bolster segments (at least Figs. 1-3 and [0020] “second piece 52 extends and wraps around relatively soft center piece 50 to form or define a lower, base portion of neck pad 42 and outer portions 40 of laterally-opposed side rails 36 not typically contacted by a sleeper's head during usage of pillow 10”.), and
a neck gradient ramp positioned between the bolster segments and projecting forwardly of the front edge (at least Figs. 1-6 element 42 and [0017] “Neck pad 42 further extends laterally between the inner edges of laterally-opposed side rails 36 and may have a width substantially equivalent to that of head support surface 30”.).
Rosenberg does not explicitly teach:
the outer faces are substantially parallel,
wherein a width of the neck gradient ramp is less than a distance between the bolster segments.
However, Keilhauer teaches:
wherein a width of the neck gradient ramp is less than a distance between (at least Figs. 3-5 element 17 and [Col 5 lines 46-55] “a generally rectangular shaped section 16 which is integrally moulded with a generally wedge shaped extension or boss 17”.) the bolster segments (at least Figs. 3-4 elements 21).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the therapeutic pillow taught by Rosenberg with the less wide wedge shaped neck gradient ramp taught by Keilhauer with a reasonable expectation of success and predictable results to arrive at a therapeutic pillow with neck gradient ramp less wide than the distance between the two side bolster segments. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it “extends substantially beyond a line drawn between the from corners of the pillow to provide support not only to the neck but the upper back of the user” (Keilhauer [Col 5 lines 46-55]).
The combination of Rosenberg and Keilhauer does not explicitly teach:
the outer faces are substantially parallel.
However, Hsin teaches:
the outer faces are substantially parallel (at least Figs. 3-5 the outer faces of element 20).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the therapeutic pillow taught by the combination of Rosenberg and Keilhauer with the outer face shape being substantially parallel taught by Hsin with a reasonable expectation of success and predictable results to arrive at a therapeutic pillow substantially parallel outer faces. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “the distance between the outer hind skull surface to the outer surface of the normal arched cervical vertebra when people lies on one's back while the central length B approximately equals the distance between the outer side surface of two ears of human head with slight clearance for tolerance” (Hsin [0029]), which fits the dimensions of the user’s head.
Re Claim 2, the combination of Rosenberg, Keilhauer, and Hsin teaches:
The therapeutic pillow of Claim 1 (detailed with respect to claim 1).
Rosenberg further teaches:
wherein the neck gradient comprises a convex upper surface (at least Figs. 1-4).
Re Claim 3, the combination of Rosenberg, Keilhauer, and Hsin teaches:
The therapeutic pillow of Claim 1 (detailed with respect to claim 1).
Rosenberg further teaches:
wherein the central section and the buttress are both fabricated of molded foam material (at least [0018] “supine head pillow 10 will be partially or wholly composed of one or more pieces of molded memory foam”.), the molded foam material of the buttress being stiffer than the molded foam material of the central section (at least [0020] “second piece 52 is composed a material having a greater firmness, a greater density, and/or a decreased flexibility relative to the material from which head support piece 50 is produced. Second piece 52 thus serves to reinforce laterally-opposed side rails 36, as well as to enhance the physical support offered by neck pad 42”.).
Re Claim 4, the combination of Rosenberg, Keilhauer, and Hsin teaches:
The therapeutic pillow of Claim 3 (detailed with respect to claim 3).
Keilhauer further teaches:
wherein the foam material comprises polyurethane foam (at least [Col. 6 lines 23-26] “therapeutic pillow 1 and 15 may be made from high resilience polyurethane foam”.).
Re Claim 5, the combination of Rosenberg, Keilhauer, and Hsin teaches:
The therapeutic pillow of Claim 3 (detailed with respect to claim 3).
Rosenberg further teaches:
wherein the central section is fabricated (at least [0018] “supine head pillow 10 will be partially or wholly composed of one or more pieces of molded memory foam”.).
Keilhauer further teaches:
of viscoelastic polyurethane foam (at least [Col. 4 lines 6-10] “polyurethane foam is the preferred material for the pillow of the present invention, any resilient form retaining material providing suitable comfort to the user may be used”. It is noted that “resilient form retaining material is a characteristic of viscoelastic polyurethane foam, and it is noted that a person of ordinary skill in the art understands that polyurethane foam is viscoelastic (https://mattressstoreslosangeles.com/blogs/mattress-buying-guide/what-is-visco-elastic-foam?srsltid=AfmBOooXQ0CkDHatukIM_siLlnRRDJ3hBWaAdC4m3NPPfA5MDklDtUZ5).).
Re Claim 7, the combination of Rosenberg, Keilhauer, and Hsin teaches:
The therapeutic pillow of Claim 1 (detailed with respect to claim 1).
Rosenberg further teaches:
wherein the neck gradient ramp is configured as a forward extension of the central section overlying a forward extension of the buttress (at least Figs. 1-6 element 42 and [0017] “Neck pad 42 further extends laterally between the inner edges of laterally-opposed side rails 36 and may have a width substantially equivalent to that of head support surface 30”.).
Re Claim 9, the combination of Rosenberg, Keilhauer, and Hsin teaches:
The therapeutic pillow of Claim 1 (detailed with respect to claim 1).
Rosenberg further teaches:
wherein the neck gradient ramp extends forwardly of the front edge approximately 20% of the distance between the front and rear edges (at least Figs. 1-6 element 42 and [0017] “Neck pad 42 further extends laterally between the inner edges of laterally-opposed side rails 36 and may have a width substantially equivalent to that of head support surface 30”.).
Claim(s) 6, 8, 11-12, 14, 16, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosenberg in view of Keilhauer and Hsin and further in view of US 8161588 B1 to Anson.
Re Claim 6, the combination of Rosenberg, Keilhauer, and Hsin teaches:
The therapeutic pillow of Claim 1 (detailed with respect to claim 1).
The combination of Rosenberg, Keilhauer, and Hsin does not explicitly teach:
wherein the buttress comprises a spherical cap depression, a portion of the central section being positioned within the spherical cap depression.
However, Anson teaches:
wherein the buttress comprises a spherical cap depression, a portion of the central section being positioned within the spherical cap depression (at least Figs. 1-2 element 34 and [Col. 6 lines 47-67] “semi-spherical cephalic indentation 34 sized and configured for comfortably accepting and providing support to a rear area 36 of a head 38 of the user”.).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the foam pillow taught by the combination of Rosenberg, Keilhauer, and Hsin with the spherical depression taught by Anson with a reasonable expectation of success and predictable results to arrive at a pillow with spherical depression. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it is “configured for comfortably accepting and providing support to a rear area 36 of a head 38 of the user” (Anson [Col. 6 lines 47-67]).
Re Claim 8, the combination of Rosenberg, Keilhauer, Hsin, and Anson teaches:
The therapeutic of Claim 6 (detailed with respect to claim 6).
Anson further teaches:
wherein a thickness of the buttress is reduced at the spherical cap depression (at least Fig. 2).
Re Claim 11, Rosenberg teaches:
A therapeutic pillow for promoting sleep of a user in a supine position (at least [Abstract] “orthopedic pillow are provided for supporting the head of a sleeper in a supine position”), the therapeutic pillow comprising
a generally rectangular foot print, the pillow comprising parallel front (at least Fig. 2 element 22 and [0012] “proximal edge 22”.) and rear edges (at least Fig. 2 element 20 and [0012] “distal edge 20”.), and parallel right and left lateral edges (at least Fig. 2 elements 36),
a central section comprising a surface for accommodating a back of the user’s head (at least Figs. 1-6 element 30 and [0014] “head support surface 30, which serves as the primary source of support for the back of the sleeper's head when using supine head pillow 10”.), a pair of laterally spaced bolster segments projecting upwardly each comprising an outer face, the bolster segments extending between the front and rear edges (at least Figs. 1-6 element 36 and [0015] “Laterally-opposed side rails 36 can assume the form of any upwardly-extending projections or features suitable for helping to maintain a sleeper's head in a neutral position when the backside of the sleeper's head rests upon head support surface 30”.),
a buttress underlying the central section (at least Fig. 4 element 12 and [0012] “base 12”.), the buttress comprising a pair of laterally spaced bolster stiffeners (at least Figs. 1-3 element 40 and [0020] “second piece 52 extends and wraps around relatively soft center piece 50 to form or define a lower, base portion of neck pad 42 and outer portions 40 of laterally-opposed side rails 36 not typically contacted by a sleeper's head during usage of pillow 10. As also described below, second piece 52 is composed a material having a greater firmness, a greater density, and/or a decreased flexibility relative to the material from which head support piece 50 is produced. Second piece 52 thus serves to reinforce laterally-opposed side rails 36, as well as to enhance the physical support offered by neck pad 42”.),
the central section and the buttress both having a generally "U" shaped transverse cross section (at least Fig. 3), the central section and the buttress being fabricated of molded foam (at least [0018] “supine head pillow 10 will be partially or wholly composed of one or more pieces of molded memory foam”.), the molded foam of the buttress being stiffer than the molded foam of the central section (at least [0020] “second piece 52 is composed a material having a greater firmness, a greater density, and/or a decreased flexibility relative to the material from which head support piece 50 is produced. Second piece 52 thus serves to reinforce laterally-opposed side rails 36, as well as to enhance the physical support offered by neck pad 42”.), the central section being nested within the buttress with the bolster stiffeners abutting the outer faces of the bolster segments (at least Figs. 1-4),
and a neck gradient ramp positioned between the bolster segments and projecting forwardly of the front edge (at least Figs. 1-6 element 42 and [0017] “Neck pad 42 further extends laterally between the inner edges of laterally-opposed side rails 36 and may have a width substantially equivalent to that of head support surface 30”.).
Rosenberg does not explicitly teach:
the outer faces are substantially parallel,
the buttress further comprising a spherical cap depression, a portion of the central section being positioned within the spherical cap depression,
wherein a width of the neck gradient ramp is less than a distance between the bolster segments.
However, Keilhauer teaches:
wherein a width of the neck gradient ramp is less than a distance between (at least Figs. 3-5 element 17 and [Col 5 lines 46-55] “a generally rectangular shaped section 16 which is integrally moulded with a generally wedge shaped extension or boss 17”.) the bolster segments (at least Figs. 3-4 elements 21).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the therapeutic pillow taught by Rosenberg with the less wide wedge shaped neck gradient ramp taught by Keilhauer with a reasonable expectation of success and predictable results to arrive at a therapeutic pillow with neck gradient ramp less wide than the distance between the two side bolster segments. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it “extends substantially beyond a line drawn between the from corners of the pillow to provide support not only to the neck but the upper back of the user” (Keilhauer [Col 5 lines 46-55]).
The combination of Rosenberg and Keilhauer does not explicitly teach:
the outer faces are substantially parallel.
However, Hsin teaches:
the outer faces are substantially parallel (at least Figs. 3-5 the outer faces of element 20).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the therapeutic pillow taught by the combination of Rosenberg and Keilhauer with the outer face shape being substantially parallel taught by Hsin with a reasonable expectation of success and predictable results to arrive at a therapeutic pillow substantially parallel outer faces. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “the distance between the outer hind skull surface to the outer surface of the normal arched cervical vertebra when people lies on one's back while the central length B approximately equals the distance between the outer side surface of two ears of human head with slight clearance for tolerance” (Hsin [0029]), which fits the dimensions of the user’s head.
The combination of Rosenberg, Keilhauer, and Hsin does not explicitly teach:
the buttress further comprising a spherical cap depression, a portion of the central section being positioned within the spherical cap depression.
However, Anson teaches:
the buttress further comprising a spherical cap depression, a portion of the central section being positioned within the spherical cap depression (at least Figs. 1-2 element 34 and [Col. 6 lines 47-67] “semi-spherical cephalic indentation 34 sized and configured for comfortably accepting and providing support to a rear area 36 of a head 38 of the user”.).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the foam pillow taught by combination of Rosenberg, Keilhauer, and Hsin with the spherical depression taught by Anson with a reasonable expectation of success and predictable results to arrive at a pillow with spherical depression. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it is “configured for comfortably accepting and providing support to a rear area 36 of a head 38 of the user” (Anson [Col. 6 lines 47-67]).
Re Claim 12, the combination of Rosenberg, Keilhauer, Hsin, and Anson teaches:
The therapeutic pillow of Claim 11 (detailed with respect to claim 11).
Keilhauer further teaches:
wherein the molded foam comprises polyurethane foam (at least [Col. 6 lines 23-26] “therapeutic pillow 1 and 15 may be made from high resilience polyurethane foam”.).
Re Claim 14, the combination of Rosenberg, Keilhauer, Hsin, and Anson teaches:
The therapeutic pillow of Claim 11 (detailed with respect to claim 11).
Rosenberg further teaches:
wherein the neck gradient ramp extends forwardly of the front edge approximately 20% of the distance between the front and rear edges (at least Figs. 1-6 element 42 and [0017] “Neck pad 42 further extends laterally between the inner edges of laterally-opposed side rails 36 and may have a width substantially equivalent to that of head support surface 30”.).
Re Claim 16, Rosenberg teaches:
A therapeutic pillow for maintaining a supine position of a user and precluding facial contact of the user with sleeping surfaces thereby reducing the likelihood of development of facial wrinkles (at least [Abstract] “orthopedic pillow are provided for supporting the head of a sleeper in a supine position”), the therapeutic pillow comprising:
a front edge (at least Fig. 2 element 22 and [0012] “proximal edge 22”.),
a central section formed of a first molded foam material and configured to accommodate a back of the user’s head (at least Figs. 1-6 element 30 and [0014] “head support surface 30, which serves as the primary source of support for the back of the sleeper's head when using supine head pillow 10”.), the central section comprising a head support surface and a pair of upwardly projecting laterally spaced bolster segments each comprising an outer face (at least Figs. 1-6 element 36 and [0015] “Laterally-opposed side rails 36 can assume the form of any upwardly-extending projections or features suitable for helping to maintain a sleeper's head in a neutral position when the backside of the sleeper's head rests upon head support surface 30”.),
a buttress formed of a second molded foam material (at least [0018] “supine head pillow 10 will be partially or wholly composed of one or more pieces of molded memory foam”.), the buttress underlying the central section (at least Fig. 4 element 12 and [0012] “base 12”.), the buttress having a pair of laterally spaced bolster stiffeners (at least Figs. 1-3 element 40 and [0020] “second piece 52 extends and wraps around relatively soft center piece 50 to form or define a lower, base portion of neck pad 42 and outer portions 40 of laterally-opposed side rails 36 not typically contacted by a sleeper's head during usage of pillow 10. As also described below, second piece 52 is composed a material having a greater firmness, a greater density, and/or a decreased flexibility relative to the material from which head support piece 50 is produced. Second piece 52 thus serves to reinforce laterally-opposed side rails 36, as well as to enhance the physical support offered by neck pad 42”.),
the first molded foam material being softer and less dense than the second molded foam material (at least [0020] “second piece 52 is composed a material having a greater firmness, a greater density, and/or a decreased flexibility relative to the material from which head support piece 50 is produced. Second piece 52 thus serves to reinforce laterally-opposed side rails 36, as well as to enhance the physical support offered by neck pad 42”.), the central section being nested within the buttress with the bolster stiffeners abutting the outer faces of the bolster segments (at least Figs. 1-4), and
a neck gradient ramp positioned between the bolster segments and projecting forwardly of the front edge (at least Figs. 1-6 element 42 and [0017] “Neck pad 42 further extends laterally between the inner edges of laterally-opposed side rails 36 and may have a width substantially equivalent to that of head support surface 30”.).
Rosenberg does not explicitly teach:
the outer faces are substantially parallel,
the buttress comprising a spherical cap depression wherein the thickness of the second molded foam material is reduced, a portion of the first molded foam material being positioned within the spherical cap depression, the spherical cap depression being configured to accommodate an occipital protuberance at the back of the user’s head,
wherein a width of the neck gradient ramp is less than a distance between the bolster segments.
However, Keilhauer teaches:
wherein a width of the neck gradient ramp is less than a distance between (at least Figs. 3-5 element 17 and [Col 5 lines 46-55] “a generally rectangular shaped section 16 which is integrally moulded with a generally wedge shaped extension or boss 17”.) the bolster segments (at least Figs. 3-4 elements 21).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the therapeutic pillow taught by Rosenberg with the less wide wedge shaped neck gradient ramp taught by Keilhauer with a reasonable expectation of success and predictable results to arrive at a therapeutic pillow with neck gradient ramp less wide than the distance between the two side bolster segments. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it “extends substantially beyond a line drawn between the from corners of the pillow to provide support not only to the neck but the upper back of the user” (Keilhauer [Col 5 lines 46-55]).
The combination of Rosenberg and Keilhauer does not explicitly teach:
the outer faces are substantially parallel.
However, Hsin teaches:
the outer faces are substantially parallel (at least Figs. 3-5 the outer faces of element 20).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the therapeutic pillow taught by the combination of Rosenberg and Keilhauer with the outer face shape being substantially parallel taught by Hsin with a reasonable expectation of success and predictable results to arrive at a therapeutic pillow substantially parallel outer faces. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because “the distance between the outer hind skull surface to the outer surface of the normal arched cervical vertebra when people lies on one's back while the central length B approximately equals the distance between the outer side surface of two ears of human head with slight clearance for tolerance” (Hsin [0029]), which fits the dimensions of the user’s head.
The combination of Rosenberg, Keilhauer, and Hsin does not explicitly teach:
the buttress comprising a spherical cap depression wherein the thickness of the second molded foam material is reduced, a portion of the first molded foam material being positioned within the spherical cap depression, the spherical cap depression being configured to accommodate an occipital protuberance at the back of the user’s head.
However, Anson teaches:
the buttress comprising a spherical cap depression wherein the thickness of the second molded foam material is reduced, a portion of the first molded foam material being positioned within the spherical cap depression, the spherical cap depression being configured to accommodate an occipital protuberance at the back of the user’s head (at least Figs. 1-2 element 34 and [Col. 6 lines 47-67] “semi-spherical cephalic indentation 34 sized and configured for comfortably accepting and providing support to a rear area 36 of a head 38 of the user”.).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the foam pillow taught by the combination of Rosenberg, Keilhauer, and Hsin with the spherical depression taught by Anson with a reasonable expectation of success and predictable results to arrive at a pillow with spherical depression. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it is “configured for comfortably accepting and providing support to a rear area 36 of a head 38 of the user” (Anson [Col. 6 lines 47-67]).
Re Claim 19, the combination of Rosenberg, Keilhauer, Hsin, and Anson teaches:
The therapeutic pillow of Claim 16 (detailed with respect to claim 16).
Keilhauer further teaches:
wherein the first molded foam material comprises polyurethane foam and the second molded foam material comprises polyurethane foam (at least [Col. 6 lines 23-26] “therapeutic pillow 1 and 15 may be made from high resilience polyurethane foam”.).
Re Claim 20, the combination of Rosenberg, Keilhauer, Hsin, and Anson teaches:
The therapeutic pillow of Claim 16 (detailed with respect to claim 16).
Keilhauer further teaches:
the first molded foam material comprises viscoelastic polyurethane foam (at least [Col. 4 lines 6-10] “polyurethane foam is the preferred material for the pillow of the present invention, any resilient form retaining material providing suitable comfort to the user may be used”. It is noted that “resilient form retaining material is a characteristic of viscoelastic polyurethane foam, and it is noted that a person of ordinary skill in the art understands that polyurethane foam is viscoelastic (https://mattressstoreslosangeles.com/blogs/mattress-buying-guide/what-is-visco-elastic-foam?srsltid=AfmBOooXQ0CkDHatukIM_siLlnRRDJ3hBWaAdC4m3NPPfA5MDklDtUZ5).).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEORGE SUN whose telephone number is (571)270-7221. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00am-4:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Justin Mikowski can be reached at (571) 272-8525. 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.
/GEORGE SUN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3673