DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 26 May 2026 has been entered.
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-7, 11, 13, 14, 16-20, 51, and 53 are pending and subject to this Office Action. Claim 23 has been withdrawn. Claims 1 and 51 have been amended. Claim 53 has been added. Claim 52 has been canceled.
Response of Arguments
Applicant's arguments, pages 7-12, filed 26 May 2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-7, 11, 13, 14, and 17 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claim 1 has been amended to include the limitations of cancelled claim 16.
Claim 51 has been amended to include the limitation: wherein the absorbent material comprises a through-hole for air to pass through
Claim 53 has been added.
Applicant argues, page 8-10, that it would not have been obvious to modify the teachings of Naughton and Fraser such that the absorbent material would be a brush shape.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Fraser teaches the absorbent material can be a flat pad [0052] disk shape [0058] teaches that the absorbent element can contain notches cut into the rim; while shown as square cutouts the notches can be different shapes. [0061] absorbent element positioned inside the atomizer against or near the inner surface of an end wall and held by friction fit[0063] Fraser teaches an absorbent material that has notches in a dish shape but does not explicitly teach why a person having ordinary skill would select this design. Rusico is used to modify this teaching explicitly teaching a brush design, which would be similar to the design disclosed by Fraser, which has the benefit of being able to reach hard to reach locations in the device allowing for better cleaning.
Applicant argues, page 10, that the prior art of Azzopardi and Rogers do not teach the new limitation of a through-hole for air to pass through.
The examiner acknowledges that the amended limitation overcomes the prior art of Azzopardi and Rogers. Azzopardi teaches an aerosol generating device that has a heated cavity that is used for heating an inserted aerosol generating article and a cavity for holding a second material; where the two cavities are separated by end walls that have through holes allowing heated products to pass through. [0045] However, Azzopardi teaches that the material located in the second cavity would be a gel or solid. Rogers is used to modify the teachings of Azzopardi to teach that the material located in the second cavity can be an absorptive material used to hold a vaporizable liquid. [0021]
However, while Rogers discloses that the absorptive material allows for air to flow through the material (Fig 3.) there is no teaching that the absorptive material would have a through-hole.
Fraser teaches the absorbent material may have a central opening, air flow hole, or may have no central opening at all. Fraser teaches the absorbent material may be made with a “sufficiently open structure that air can pass through the absorbent element with little or no impediment to the inhalation air flow rate.” (p5-6 [0059]) A person having ordinary sill would consider the use of a through-hole so that the absorbent element would have a sufficient air flow through the absorbent material.
Applicant argues, page 10-11, that it would not have been obvious to modify the teachings of Naughton and Frasier with the teachings of Schultz. Applicant argues that Schultz is directed to cigarettes and not heat-not-burn devices and that the absorbent material taught by Schultz positioned upstream of the aerosol generating article.
Schultz is not used to teach the location of the plug of absorbent material but the ability of the absorbent material to provide a visual indicator that the material has been used to absorb an unwanted chemical. The teaching of Schultz is used to modify the teaching of Naughton and Fraser to teach a plug of porous absorbent material that contains an indicator additive which changes color in the presence of a significant amount of a selected component of tobacco smoke. (claim 1) Schultz further teaches that the covering for the absorbent material may be clear so that the user can see the plug and color change. This color change allows the user to determine the presence of aldehydes or acids. (cl 1 ln 42-43, 52-54)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-7, 11, 13, 14, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naughton, et al (US20180168224A1) and further in view of Fraser, et al (US20190208821A1, from IDS dated 09/19/2024) and Ruscio, et al (US20210112878A1).
Regarding claim 1, Naughton teaches an aerosol provision device, comprising:
• a housing delimiting a first opening at a first end of the housing, through which to receive aerosol generating material, and delimiting a second opening at a second end of the housing;
• a chamber positioned between the second opening and the first opening, wherein at least part of the chamber is configured to receive the aerosol generating material;
• at least one heater arranged within the housing and configured to heat aerosol generating material received within the chamber thereby to generate an aerosol;
Naughton teaches “The housing has a first opening at a first end through which smokable material can pass so as to be received within and removed from the apparatus in use. The housing has a second opening at a second end opposed from the first end. The housing further has a chamber between the first and second openings. At least one heater is arranged within the housing for heating smokable material removably received within the chamber in use.” (Abstract)
Naughton does not teach an absorbent material for absorbing liquid; and wherein the absorbent material is at least partially arranged within a section of the chamber.
Fraser, directed to the design of aerosol generating devices with an absorbent element, teaches the use of an absorbent material at the upstream end of an aerosol generating device. (Abstract) Frasier teaches that the absorbent element is located in the cartomizer housing where the material to be vaporized is located. ([0052], Fig 4) As such, the absorbent material is considered to be located in the chamber of the device.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Naughton by using the absorbent material as taught by Fraser because both Naughton and Fraser are directed to smoking devices, Fraser teaches “The absorbent element may inhibit said escaped liquid from leaving the component” (p1 [0007]), and this involves combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results
A modified Naughton teaches that in use, the aerosol is drawn along a flow path through the chamber towards the first opening and the absorbent material is at least partially positioned upstream of the at least part of the chamber configured to receive the aerosol generating material.
Naughton teaches that an aerosol generating device is inserted in the heating cavity for heating and consumption. The device is designed so that air flows through the aerosol generating device and chamber and towards the first opening for consumption. Frasier, used to modify Naughton, teaches “the absorbent element located so as to be upstream of the atomizer with respect to an air flow direction along the air flow path when the component is assembled into the electronic vapor provision device.”(p1 [0006]) Thus a modified Naughton would contain the absorbent material at the second end of the cavity in or near the hollow tube and the second opening and upstream of the aerosol generating device and the second opening.
Naughton teaches that the aerosol generating material that is contained in the rod designed to be used with the heat-not-burn device can be in the form of a solid, a liquid, a gel, or a wax. [0024]
PNG
media_image1.png
910
1567
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1.
Fraiser flat pad [0052] disk shape [0058] teaches that the absorbent element can contain notches cut into the rim; while shown as square cutouts the notches can be different shapes. [0061] absorbent element positioned inside the atomizer against or near the inner surface of an end wall and held by friction fit[0063]
Neither Naughton nor Frasier teach a specific shape of a brush for the absorbent element.
Ruscio, directed to the design of electrically heated smoking devices, teaches “It is known to insert a brush into the heating chamber, between uses, to dislodge and remove accumulated residue.” (p1 [0005]) Rusico teaches that the use of a brush can allow the cleaning/absorbent material to reach places that a solid material might miss such as corners or intersections allowing for the removal of unwanted material. [0045]
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Naughton and Fraser by making the absorbent material into a brush as taught by Ruscio because Naughton, Fraser, and Ruscio are directed to smoking devices, Ruscio teaches that a brush can more easily reach difficult to clean areas such as angled intersections. (p5 [0045]) which also would allow the absorbent material to more easily reach and absorb any liquid that gathered in these locations, and this involves the use of known technique to improve similar devices in the same way.
Regarding claim 2, Naughton teaches that the device has a cover movable between a first position in which the second opening is blocked by the cover, and a second position in which the second opening is not blocked by the cover.
Naughton teaches the door of the device has an opening at the distal end that is covered by a door that is “movable between a first position in which the second opening is closed by the door and a second position in which the second opening is open.” (p1 [0006])
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Naughton fails to teach that the cover comprises a recess; and the absorbent material is arranged at least partially in the recess. or that in use, the absorbent material is at least partially positioned between the aerosol generating material and the cover.
Fraser, directed to the design of aerosol generating devices with an absorbent element, teaches that the end cap connector that closes the bottom of the cartomizer where the heater is located. Fraser teaches that the absorbent material is inserted into a recess in the end cap connector before the end cap connector is attached to the cartomizer (p5 [0058]) in order to use the aerosol generating device. As such, the absorbent material would be between the aerosol generating material and the cover when in use.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Naughton by using a recessed portion in the cover as taught by Fraser because both Naughton and Fraser are directed to smoking devices, Fraser teaches the recess is used to “receive and hold the absorbent element” (p6 [0063]), and this involves combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 5, Naughton teaches that the device has a cover on the second opening and that the cover is detachable from the aerosol provision device.
Naughton teaches the cover is a separate piece that is connected to the housing via a hinge to affix the door to the chassis (housing). (p 3 [0032]) Naughton teaches that the door can have various opening mechanisms such as a barrel hinge that uses a pivot pin to attach the door to the chassis. Naughton teaches that the door is a separate part that can be attached to the aerosol generating device.
Regarding claim 6, Fraser teaches that the absorbent material may be made from any absorbent materials including paper, sponge, cellulose acetate filter material, and foamed plastic polymers. (p6 [0067])
Regarding claim 7, Frasier, directed to the design of aerosol generating devices with an absorbent element, teaches that the absorbent material can include “cellulose acetate filter material, cotton wadding, polyester wadding, absorbent materials used in nappies and sanitary towels, rayon, polyurethane, cellulose sponge, and so-called “post office sponge” (a natural, open cell sponge rubber).” (p6 [0067]) While Frasier does not explicitly disclose the absorption capacity of the absorbent material, the Examiner notes that Frasier teaches the same or similar absorbent materials as the Applicant (see specification page 9-10). It follows that the same absorbent material would have similar absorption capacity, absent evidence to the contrary.
Regarding claims 11 and 13, Naughton does not teach wherein at least a portion of the absorbent material is gas permeable nor that the absorbent material comprises a through-hole for air to pass through.
Fraser teaches that the absorbent material may have a central opening, air flow hole, or may have no central opening at all. Fraser teaches the absorbent material may be made with a “sufficiently open structure that air can pass through the absorbent element with little or no impediment to the inhalation air flow rate. (p5-6 [0059])
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Naughton by using an absorbent material with an open structure as taught by Fraser because both Naughton and Fraser are directed to smoking devices, Fraser teaches by using either a hole or an open structure absorbent material the absorbent element does not significantly increase the resistance to draw in the device (p5-6 [0059]), and this involves the use of known technique to improve similar devices in the same way.
Regarding claim 14, Naughton does not teach a device further comprising an absorbent member which comprises the absorbent material supported by a substrate. or that an absorbent material supported by a substrate, wherein the absorbent material is configured to be at least partially received in a chamber or a door of the aerosol provision device adjacent aerosol generating material.
Fraser teaches supports that may be used to hold the absorbent material in a position.(p6 [0063]) The supports used to hold the absorbent material as taught by Fraser are considered to read on the substrate of the instant claim as Frasier teaches the supports are used to provide support and hold the absorbent material in place in the device. As discussed in claims 3 and 4 above, Frasier teaches that the absorbent material can be positioned inside the cartomizer against or near the inner surface of an end wall component.(p6 [0063]) Frasier teaches the location of the absorbent material held in place with a support would either be located inside the cartomizer or the modified door of Naughton.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Naughton by using the supports to hold the absorbent material as taught by Fraser because both Naughton and Fraser are directed to smoking devices, Fraser teaches the supports hold the absorbent element in place so that it does not shift or move in the device (p6 [0063]), and this involves the use of known technique to improve similar devices in the same way
Regarding claim 17, Naughton teaches the chamber of the device comprises a barrier to separate the aerosol generating material from the absorbent material.
Naughton teaches the aerosol generating device contains an area of reduced diameter at the second end of the chamber that provides a stop for the smokable material inserted into the first opening. (p1 [0010]) The use of a tube with a reduced internal diameter to block the smokable material from coming in contact with the cover region of the device is considered to read on the barrier of the instant claim.
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naughton, et al (US20180168224A1), Fraser, et al (US20190208821A1, from IDS dated 09/19/2024) and Ruscio, et al (US20210112878A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bessant, et al (US20180070640A1).
Regarding claims 18 and 19, neither Naughton, Fraser, nor Rusico teach an aerosol device comprising a hydrophobic material arranged within the housing to substantially prevent liquid from leaking out of the aerosol provision device. nor do they teach that at least a portion of the chamber is hydrophobic, or comprises a hydrophobic coating, to encourage the liquid to flow towards the absorbent material.
Naughton teaches the device has a collar around where the smoking article is inserted which would help prevent condensed liquid from escaping through the insertion opening. However, Naughton does not teach the use of a hydrophobic material in the housing to prevent liquid from leaking from the device.
Bessant, directed to the design of aerosol generating devices, teaches that the device comprises a main body which includes “the heating region may comprise a tubular-shaped extractor, wherein an inner surface and an outer surface of the extractor is a hydrophobic or super-hydrophobic surface.” (p4-5 [0075])
Further, the coating of Bessant would encourage any liquid in the heating region to flow to either the insertion hole, where it would be blocked by the collar, or to the distal end where the absorbent material is located. Thus the coating of Bessant is considered to read on the limitations of instant claim 19.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Naughton, Fraser, and Rusico by using the internal hydrophobic coating as taught by Bessant because Naughton, Fraser, Rusico, and Bessant are directed to smoking devices, Bessant teaches that using a hydrophobic coating inside the main body reduces the “formation of residues and condensation on these surfaces” and can reduce the or eliminate the need for cleaning the heating cavity and improve user experience(p2 [0035]; p6 [0094]), and this involves the use of known technique to improve similar devices in the same way.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naughton, et al (US20180168224A1), Fraser, et al (US20190208821A1, from IDS dated 09/19/2024) and Ruscio, et al (US20210112878A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Schultz, et al (US3370592).
Regarding claim 20 Naughton, Fraser, and Rusico are silent with respect to at least a portion of the absorbent material is configured to provide a visual indication to indicate that the absorbent material is ready to be replaced or cleaned.
Schultz, directed to the design of cigarettes, teaches the use of an absorptive material that has an indicator that is added to a filter material that changes color as the material absorbs unwanted components.(cl1 ln33-34) Schultz further teaches that the absorptive medium may be visible through a window or opening. (cl1 ln39)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Naughton, Fraser, and Rusico by using both an indicator in the absorbent material that changes color when the unwanted component (moisture) is absorbed and a window in the cover to be able to observe the color change as taught by Shultz because both Naughton, Fraser, Rusico, and Shultz are directed to smoking products, Shultz teaches the use of a color changing absorbent material and a window to be able to see the material allows the user to see if the material is removing unwanted components (cl1 ln27-29), and this involves the use of known technique to improve similar devices in the same way.
Claim 51 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Azzopardi, et al (WO2019101946A1) and further in view of Rogers, et al (US20190124983A1) and Fraser, et al (US20190208821A1, from IDS dated 09/19/2024).
Regarding claim 51, Azzopardi teaches an aerosol generating apparatus having a housing defining a flow path through the apparatus. (p1 ln 25-26) The apparatus has a first receptacle and a second receptacle that are positioned in the device. The second chamber (receptacle) is designed for the insertion of an aerosol generating article (substrate). (p8 ln 4-5) The second chamber has a second heater, located inside the housing, that is used to heat a second substrate. (p9 ln 9-10) The prior art teaches that the flow path through the device includes both the first and second receptacles; where the heated products of the first substrate pass through the second receptacle/substrate producing an inhalable medium. (p 11 ln 14-19) Azzopardi teaches that the first substrate can be solid or gel substrates. (p 8 ln 4) The prior art further teaches that the solid substrate can be in the form of a flavor pouch comprising a flavor producing material inside a porous material. (p 8 ln 19-20) Azzopardi teaches that the receptacles can be tubes open at both ends allowing the substrate to be inserted and that these tubes can have end walls with through holes that allow the heated products to pass from one receptacle to the other. (p 9 ln 30 – p10 ln 3) The end walls of the tubes separating the first receptacle from the second receptacle. The features noted above are shown in annotated figure 2 below.
PNG
media_image2.png
881
652
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 2.
Azzopardi teaches the first and second chambers (receptacles) can have end walls separating the first receptacle from the second receptacle. are considered to read on the limitation of sealing the aerosol generating material from the absorbent material.
Rogers, directed to the design of vaporizers, teaches a downstream barrier that can be used to inhibit passage of liquid while allowing a desired air flow/ vapor transmissibility through the air flow channel. ([0035], [0044]) A person having ordinary sill would recognize that the barrier taught by Rogers would seal and isolate the absorbent wick structure from the other portions of the vaporizer.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Azzopardi by barrier in the airflow channel as taught by Rogers because both Azzopardi and Rogers are directed to smoking products, Rogers teaches the barrier is used to prevent the vaporizable liquid (or other target liquid) from flowing out through the air inlets or channel when the vaporizer is not in use. [0044], and this involves the use of known technique to improve similar devices in the same way.
Azzopardi or Rodgers are silent with respect to the absorbent material having a central opening.
Fraser, directed to the design of aerosol generating devices with an absorbent element, teaches that the absorbent material located at the end of a atomizer airflow passageway may have a central opening, air flow hole, or may have no central opening at all. Fraser teaches the absorbent material may be made with a “sufficiently open structure that air can pass through the absorbent element with little or no impediment to the inhalation air flow rate. (p5-6 [0059])
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Azzopardi and Rogers by using an absorbent material with an open structure as taught by Fraser because Azzopardi, Rogers, and Fraser are directed to smoking devices, Fraser teaches by using either a hole or an open structure absorbent material the absorbent element does not significantly increase the resistance to draw in the device (p5-6 [0059]), and this involves the use of known technique to improve similar devices in the same way.
Claims 53 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naughton, et al (US20180168224A1) and further in view of Fraser, et al (US20190208821A1, from IDS dated 09/19/2024) and Schultz, et al (US3370592)
Regarding claim 53, Naughton teaches an aerosol provision device, comprising:
• a housing delimiting a first opening at a first end of the housing, through which to receive aerosol generating material, and delimiting a second opening at a second end of the housing;
• a chamber positioned between the second opening and the first opening, wherein at least part of the chamber is configured to receive the aerosol generating material;
• at least one heater arranged within the housing and configured to heat aerosol generating material received within the chamber thereby to generate an aerosol;
Naughton teaches “The housing has a first opening at a first end through which smokable material can pass so as to be received within and removed from the apparatus in use. The housing has a second opening at a second end opposed from the first end. The housing further has a chamber between the first and second openings. At least one heater is arranged within the housing for heating smokable material removably received within the chamber in use.” (Abstract)
Naughton does not teach an absorbent material for absorbing liquid; and wherein the absorbent material is at least partially arranged within a section of the chamber.
Fraser, directed to the design of aerosol generating devices with an absorbent element, teaches the use of an absorbent material at the upstream end of an aerosol generating device. (Abstract) Frasier teaches that the absorbent element is located in the cartomizer housing where the material to be vaporized is located. ([0052], Fig 4) As such, the absorbent material is considered to be located in the chamber of the device.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Naughton by using the absorbent material as taught by Fraser because both Naughton and Fraser are directed to smoking devices, Fraser teaches “The absorbent element may inhibit said escaped liquid from leaving the component” (p1 [0007]), and this involves combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results
A modified Naughton teaches that in use, the aerosol is drawn along a flow path through the chamber towards the first opening and the absorbent material is at least partially positioned upstream of the at least part of the chamber configured to receive the aerosol generating material.
Naughton teaches that an aerosol generating device is inserted in the heating cavity for heating and consumption. The device is designed so that air flows through the aerosol generating device and chamber and towards the first opening for consumption. Frasier, used to modify Naughton, teaches “the absorbent element located so as to be upstream of the atomizer with respect to an air flow direction along the air flow path when the component is assembled into the electronic vapor provision device.”(p1 [0006]) Thus a modified Naughton would contain the absorbent material at the second end of the cavity in or near the hollow tube and the second opening and upstream of the aerosol generating device and the second opening.
Naughton further teaches the aerosol generating material is in the form of a solid.
Naughton teaches that the aerosol generating material that is contained in the rod designed to be used with the heat-not-burn device can be in the form of a solid, a liquid, a gel, or a wax. [0024]
Naughton teaches that the hollow cylindrical tube of the heater forms the chamber to hold the aerosol generating article. Naughton teaches that the heating tube can be formed from various materials including polyimide heater that forms the chamber. [0029] However, Naughton does not explicitly teach that the polyimide heater and chamber would be hydrophobic.
Schultz, directed to the design of cigarettes, teaches the use of an absorptive material that has an indicator that changes color as the material absorbs unwanted components.(cl1 ln33-34) Schultz further teaches that the absorptive medium may be visible through a window or opening. (cl1 ln39)
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Naughton and Fraser by using both an indicator in the absorbent material that changes color when the unwanted component (moisture) is absorbed and a window in the cover to be able to observe the color change as taught by Shultz because both Naughton, Fraser, and Shultz are directed to smoking products, Shultz teaches the use of a color changing absorbent material and a window to be able to see the material allows the user to see if the material is removing unwanted components (cl1 ln27-29), and this involves the use of known technique to improve similar devices in the same way.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VIRGINIA R BIEGER whose telephone number is (703)756-1014. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 7:30-4:30.
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, Phillip Louie can be reached at (571)270-1241. 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.
/V.R.B./ Examiner, Art Unit 1755
/PHILIP Y LOUIE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1755
Prosecution Insights