DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 03/16/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-7, 9-44 have been amended. Claim 8 is cancelled. Claims 1-7, 9-44 remain pending in this application. Claims 6-7, 9-13, 15, 17-18, 21-22 are withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
The amendments to the claims overcome objections and 112(b) rejections and the objections and 112(b) rejections are therefore withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections 35 USC §103 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the same combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. A new grounds of rejection is made over Glithero in view of De Weert.
Applicant argues that Glithero and Keleny, alone or in combination, does not disclose a filtering device coupled to the degassing leg, wherein the filtering device is configured to odorlessly remove malodorous gases from the stool in the collection bag. Keleny is no longer relied upon. De Weert is cited to teach a filtering device configured to remove malodorous gases form the stool in the collection bag. Further, as discussed below, Glithero discloses a filtering device coupled to the degassing leg. Glithero further discloses that the filtering device can be used with other types of drainage systems and is not limited to urine. With respect to the claim limitations reciting “stool”, the claim recites “an apparatus” and such limitations relating to “stool” relate to the intended use of the system.
Accordingly, claim 1 is rejected under Glithero in view of De Weert.
Claim Objections
Claims 30 and 35 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 30, ln. 2 should read ---absorbs the aromatic substance and releases the aromatic---
Claim 35, ln. 2 should read ---a hose that extend[[ing]]s from the outflow port---
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Section 33(a) of the America Invents Act reads as follows:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no patent may issue on a claim directed to or encompassing a human organism.
Claim 37 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 and section 33(a) of the America Invents Act as being directed to or encompassing a human organism. See also Animals - Patentability, 1077 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 24 (April 21, 1987) (indicating that human organisms are excluded from the scope of patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101). Claim 37 recites “a head unit that is anchored in a rectum of the patient via a balloon element that is placed in the rectum”. Such language positively claims the human organism, namely, the rectum. Applicant is recommended to use inferential language (e.g. adapted to, for, configured to, or whereby clause) to avoid positively claiming the human body.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 23 recites “wherein the granulate is a snail-shaped granulate, a spiral-shaped granulate or a helical structure that guides the malodourous gas to be cleaned through the filtering device.” Such granulate is not described in the specification. The specification discloses activated carbon as being the exemplary granulate. For the purposes of compact prosecution and in light of the specification, activated carbon will be considered as a granulate that “is a snail-shaped granulate, a spiral-shaped granulate or a helical structure that guides the malodourous gas to be cleaned through the filtering device”.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 14, 16, 19-20, 23, 25-26, 28, 34, 37-41 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glithero et al. (Pub. No.: US 2018/0303655 A1) in view of De Weert (Pub. No.: US 2016/0278969 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Glithero discloses (fig. 1-2B) an apparatus (urinary drainage bag system 100) comprising:
A collection bag (drainage bag 104);
A tubular structure (vent adapter assembly 102/202) comprising:
An inflow port (proximal portion 224);
An outflow port (distal portion 226); and
A drainage line (intermediate portion 240) having a first end coupled to the inflow port and a second end coupled to the outflow port (fig. 2A-2B), wherein the drainage line is configured to:
Receive waste from a patient via the inflow port (¶ 0027, fig. 1); and
Guide the waste downstream through the tubular structure to the collection bag via the outflow port (¶ 0027, fig. 1); and
A degassing leg (vent wall 242) extending, at an inclined angle towards the inflow port, from a wall opening in the tubular structure, wherein the wall opening is between the inflow port and output port (fig. 2, ¶ 0040); and
A filtering device (vent 210, ¶ 0044) coupled to the degassing leg (fig. 2, ¶ 0040).
Glithero fails to disclose that the drainage line is configured to receive stool from a patient via the inflow port; and guide the stool downstream through the tubular structure to the collection bag via the outflow port. However, such limitation relates to the intended use of the system, which, in this case, imparts no further limitations on the structure of the device. The apparatus of Glithero is capable of being used for stool since Glithero discloses that tubular structure can be used in other types of drainage systems (¶ 0025) and using the device for this purpose requires only routine skill in the art (See § MPEP 2114 II).
Glithero fails to disclose wherein the filtering device is configured to odorlessly remove malodourous gases from the stool in the collection bag.
De Weert teaches (fig. 1, 6) an apparatus (ostomy bag assembly, abstract) and thus in the same field of endeavor, comprising: a collection bag (outer bag 2); and a filtering device (8), wherein the filtering device is configured to odorlessly remove malodourous gases from stool in the collection bag (¶ 0007) in order to allow the user to vent the collection bag to exhaust gas to prevent over inflation of the collection bag (¶ 0007) and treat the gas prior to exiting (¶ 0029).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the filtering device of Glithero such that it is configured to odorlessly remove malodourous gases from the stool in the collection bag, as taught by De Weert, in order to allow the user to vent the collection bag to exhaust gas to prevent over inflation of the collection bag (De Weert ¶ 0007) and treat the gas prior to exiting (De Weert ¶ 0029).
Regarding claim 4, Glithero discloses wherein the filtering device is physically separated from the drainage line (fig. 2A-2B).
Glithero fails to disclose that the filtering device is physically separated form the drainage line to prevent contact with the stool flowing through the drainage line. However, such limitation relates to the intended use of the system, which, in this case, imparts no further limitations on the structure of the device. The filtering device of Glithero is physically separated from the drainage line (fig. 2A-2B) and using the device for this purpose requires only routine skill in the art (See § MPEP 2114 II).
Regarding claim 14, Glithero discloses wherein an inlet opening of the filtering device is covered by a gas-permeable layer (retention member 230, fig. 2A-2B, ¶ 0048).
Regarding claim 16¸ Glithero discloses wherein the gas-permeable layer is a microporous membrane (fig. 2A-2B, ¶ 0048).
Regarding claim 19¸ Glithero in view of De Weert fail to disclose wherein the filtering device includes a granulate.
De Weert teaches wherein the filtering device includes a granulate (i.e., activated carbon, ¶ 0008), as such granulate is an active gas filtering ingredient (¶ 0008).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the filtering device of Glithero in view of De Weert such that it includes a granulate, as taught by De Weert, as such granulate is an active gas filtering ingredient (De Weert ¶ 0008).
Regarding claim 20, Glithero in view of De Weert disclose wherein the granulate comprises an adsorbing granulate, an absorbing granulate, or a filtering granulate (De Weert ¶ 0008).
Regarding claim 23, Glithero in view of De Weert disclose wherein the granulate is a snail-shaped granulate, a spiral-shaped granulate or a helical structure that guides the malodourous gas to be cleaned through the filtering device (i.e., activated carbon, De Weert ¶ 0008).
Regarding claim 25, Glithero in view of De Weert fail to disclose wherein the filtering device is detachable from the degassing leg.
De Weert teaches wherein the filtering device is detachable (¶ 0051) in order to allow the user or patient to maintain optimum capacity of the filter device and easily dispose a saturated or expired filter device (¶ 0051).
It would have been obvious to modify the degassing leg of Glithero in view of De Weert such that the filtering device is detachable therefrom, as taught by De Weert, in order to allow the user or patient to maintain optimum capacity of the filter device and easily dispose a saturated or expired filter device (De Weert ¶ 0051).
Regarding claim 26, Glithero in view of De Weert fail to disclose wherein the filtering device is connected to the degassing leg via a screw closure.
However, Glithero discloses that the filtering device is connected to the degassing leg using a suitable technique (¶ 0046) and discloses a screw closure as being a suitable attachment method for attaching elements of the apparatus (¶ 0049).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the filtering device of Glithero in view of De Weert such that the filtering device is connected to the degassing leg via a screw closure, as a screw closure is a suitable attachment method (Glithero ¶ 0049).
Regarding claim 28, Glithero in view of De Weert fail to disclose an accessory dispenser unit configured to continuously release odor-neutralizing aromatic substances in an outlet region of the tubular structure via an integrated releasing function.
De Weert further teaches an accessory dispenser unit (cartridge 21) configured to continuously release odor-neutralizing aromatic substances (¶ 0053) in an outlet region of a tubular structure (filter exhaust opening 30) via an integrated release function (¶ 0069) in order to enhance comfort of use of the apparatus (¶ 0008).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Glithero in view of De Weert such that it comprises an accessory dispenser unit configured to continuously release odor-neutralizing aromatic substances in an outlet region of the tubular structure via an integrated releasing function, as taught by De Weert, in order to enhance comfort of use of the apparatus (De Weert ¶ 0008).
Regarding claim 34, Glithero in view of De Weert fail to disclose wherein the collection bag is connected to the tubular structure via a screw closure.
However, Glithero discloses that a screw closure is suitable for connecting elements of the apparatus (¶ 0041).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the collection bag of Glithero in view of De Weert such that it is connected to the tubular structure via a screw closure as a screw closure is suitable for connecting elements of the apparatus (Glithero ¶ 0041).
Regarding claim 37, Glithero discloses wherein the tubular structure is connected to a head unit (catheter 106).
Regarding the limitation of the head unit being “anchored in a rectum of the patient via a balloon element that is placed in the rectum”, such limitation relates to the intended use of the system, which, in this case, imparts no further limitations on the structure of the device. The head unit of Glithero comprises a balloon (i.e., a foley catheter, ¶ 0029) and is capable of being anchored in a rectum of the patient via a balloon element that is placed in the rectum and using the device for this purpose requires only routine skill in the art (See § MPEP 2114 II).
Regarding claim 38, Glithero discloses wherein the tubular structure is comprised of a PVC-based material (¶ 0043).
Regarding claim 39, Glithero discloses wherein the tubular structure comprises a T-shaped form (fig. 2A-2B).
Regarding claim 40, Glithero in view of De Weert fail to disclose wherein the filtering device is filled with activated carbon.
De Weert teaches wherein the filtering device is filled with activated carbon (¶ 0008) as activated carbon is an active gas filtering ingredient (¶ 0008).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the filtering device of Glithero in view of De Weert such that it is filled with activated carbon, as taught by De Weert, as activated carbon is an active gas filtering ingredient (De Weert ¶ 0008).
Regarding claim 41, the limitation “wherein the stool is conducted through the tubular structure to prevent contamination of gas-discharging components” such limitation relates to the intended use of the system, which, in this case, imparts no further limitations on the structure of the device. The gas-discharging components of Glithero are separated from the pathway of the tubular structure (fig. 2A-2B) and is capable of performing the above function and using the device for this purpose requires only routine skill in the art (See § MPEP 2114 II).
Claim(s) 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glithero in view of De Weert, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tanghoej (Pub. No.: US 2012/0116335 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Glithero in view of De Weert fail to disclose wherein the degassing leg is upstream of a return-inhibiting element at an inlet of the collection bag.
Tanghoej teaches (fig. 1-3) an apparatus (abstract) and thus in the same field of endeavor, comprising a return-inhibiting element (anti-reflux valve 7) at an inlet of a collection bag (urine collection bag 1) (¶ 0047) in order to prevent back-flow (¶ 0025).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Glithero in view of De Weert such that it includes a return-inhibiting element at an inlet of the collection bag, as taught by Tanghoej, in order to prevent back-flow (Tanghoej, ¶ 0025).
Further, regarding the limitation of the degassing leg being is upstream of a return-inhibiting element, such limitation is taught by Glithero in view of De Weert and further in view of Tanghoej since the return-inhibiting element is disposed at the inlet of the collection bag.
Regarding claim 3, Glithero in view of De Weert and further in view of Tanghoej disclose wherein the return-inhibiting element comprises one or more foil layers (Tanghoej foil layers 8a, 8b, ¶ 0047).
Claim(s) 5, 24, and 31-32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glithero in view of De Weert, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Timms (Pub. No.: US 2019/0365560 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Glithero discloses wherein the filtering device comprises a compartment (fig. 2A-2B). Glithero in view of De Weert fail to disclose wherein the filtering device is configured to release an aromatic substance, and wherein the filtering device comprises an absorbent storage component that is inserted into the compartment, wherein the absorbent component absorbs the aromatic substance; and a peel-off foil that seals the compartment.
De Weert further teaches wherein the filtering device is configured to release an aromatic substance (¶ 0053), and wherein the filtering device comprises: a compartment (fig. 6); an absorbent storage component (filter 22) that is inserted into the compartment (fig. 6), wherein the absorbent component absorbs the aromatic substance (¶ 0053) in order to enhance comfort of use of the apparatus (¶ 0008).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the filtering device of Glithero in view of De Weert such that it is configured to release an aromatic substance, and wherein the filtering device comprises an absorbent storage component that is inserted into the compartment, wherein the absorbent component absorbs the aromatic substance, in order to enhance comfort of use of the apparatus (De Weert ¶ 0008).
Glithero in view of De Weert fail to disclose a peel-off foil that seals the compartment.
Timms teaches (fig 1-2) an apparatus (¶ 0044) and thus in the same field of endeavor, comprising a filtering device (deodorizing device 30, ¶ 0044), and a peel-off foil (protective layer 28) that seals a compartment (¶ 0057) in order to project the filtering device (¶ 0057).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Glithero in view of De Weert such that it comprises a peel-off foil that seals the compartment, as taught by Timms, in order to project the filtering device (Timms ¶ 0057).
Regarding claim 24, Glithero in view of De Weert fail to disclose wherein the filtering device comprises a material that filters infectious pathogens.
Timms teaches (fig. 1-2) an apparatus (¶ 0044) and thus in the same field of endeavor, comprising a filtering device (deodorizing device 30, ¶ 0044), wherein the filtering device comprising a material that filters infectious pathogens (¶ 0045) in order to inhibit or reduce bacterial growth, thereby reducing the odorous gases generated by bacteria in the effluent (¶ 0045).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the filtering device of Glithero in view of De Weert such that it comprises a material that filters infectious pathogens, as taught by Timms, in order to inhibit or reduce bacterial growth, thereby reducing the odorous gases generated by the bacteria in the effluent (Timms ¶ 0045).
Regarding claim 31, Glithero in view of De Weert and further in view of Timms disclose wherein the absorbent storage component is annular (De Weert fig. 7A).
Regarding claim 32, Glithero in view of De Weert and further in view of Timms disclose a central opening (22a) of the absorbent storage component (De Weert, ¶ 0059, fig. 7a). Glithero in view of De Weert and further in view of Timms fail to disclose wherein a wick extends inside the central opening of the absorbent storage component.
Timms teaches (fig 1-2) the filtering device (deodorizing device 30, ¶ 0044) comprising a wick (layer 17, ¶ 0047) in order to provide surface wicking (¶ 0047).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the central opening of the absorbent storage component of Glithero in view of De Weert and further in view of Timms such that it includes the wick of Timms, in order to provide surface wicking (Timms ¶ 0047).
Claim(s) 27, 33, and 42-44 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glithero in view of De Weert, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Roszkowiak et al. (Pub. No.: US 2020/0138618 A1).
Regarding claim 27, Glithero in view of De Weert fail to disclose wherein the filtering device is connected to the degassing leg via a bayonet closure.
Roszkowiak teaches (fig. 1) an apparatus (fecal management device 101) and thus in the same field of endeavor, comprising a bayonet closure for connecting a hose (sheath 103) to a collection bag (115) (¶ 0034) as such connection is a suitable connection mechanism (¶ 0034).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify filtering device of Glithero in view of Keleny such that it comprise a bayonet closure, as taught by Roszkowiak, connecting the filtering device to the degassing leg, as such connection is a suitable connection mechanism (Roszkowiak, ¶ 0034).
Regarding claim 33, Glithero in view of De Weert fail to disclose wherein the collection bag is connected to the tubular structure via a bayonet closure.
Roszkowiak teaches (fig. 1) an apparatus (fecal management device 101) and thus in the same field of endeavor, comprising a collection bag (115) and a tubular structure (sheath 103), wherein the collection bag is connected to the tubular structure via a bayonet closure (¶ 0034) as such connection is a suitable connection mechanism (¶ 0034).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to collection bag of Glithero in view of Keleny such that it is connected to the tubular structure via a bayonet closure, as taught by Roszkowiak, connecting the filtering device to the degassing leg, as such connection is a suitable connection mechanism (Roszkowiak, ¶ 0034).
Regarding claim 42, Glithero in view of De Weert fail to disclose a hook configured to vertically suspend the collection bag.
Roszkowiak teaches (fig. 1, 10) a system (fecal management device 101) (abstract) and thus in the same field of endeavor, wherein a hook (dual hanger 127) configured to vertically suspend the collection bag (¶ 0022) in order to allow for the collection container to be supported (¶ 0042).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the hose-like or tube-like or T-shaped structure of Glithero in view of De Weert such that it includes a hook configured to vertically suspend the collection bag, as taught by Roszkowiak, in order to allow for the collection container to be supported (Roszkowiak ¶ 0042).
Regarding claim 43, the limitation “wherein the hook enables upward inclination of the tubular structure when the collection bag is flat” relates to the intended use of the system, which, in this case, imparts no further limitations on the structure of the device. The apparatus of Glithero in view of De Weert and further in view of Roszkowiak comprises a hook and such hook is capable of enabling upward inclination of the tubular structure when the collection bag is flat and using the device for this purpose requires only routine skill in the art (See § MPEP 2114 II).
Regarding claim 44, Glithero in view of De Weert and further in view of Roszkowiak disclose wherein the hook is a double-sided hook (Roszkowiak ¶ 0042, fig. 10).
Claim(s) 29-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glithero in view of De Weert and further in view of Timms as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Ehspamer et al. (Pub. No.: US 2004/0116882 A1).
Regarding claim 29, Glithero in view of De Weert and further in view of Timms fail to disclose wherein the absorbent storage component is a multi-layered pressed cellulose.
Erspamer teaches (fig. 2A) an apparatus (sanitary napkin 10) and thus in the same field of endeavor, comprising an absorbent storage component (16) that is a multi-layered pressed cellulose (¶ 0052) as such materials are suitable for holding perfumes (¶ 0052).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the absorbent storage component of Glithero in view of De Weert and further in view of Timms such that it is a multi-layered pressed cellulose as such materials are suitable for holding perfumes (Erspamer ¶ 0052).
Regarding claim 30, the limitation “wherein the multi-layered pressed cellulose absorbs the aromatic substance and releases the aromatic substance to an environment” relates to the intended use of the system, which, in this case, imparts no further limitations on the structure of the device. The apparatus of Glithero in view of De Weert and further in view of Timms and further in view of Erspamer includes the cellulose that includes perfume and is capable of absorbing the aromatic substance and releasing the aromatic substance to an environment and using the device for this purpose requires only routine skill in the art (See § MPEP 2114 II).
Claim(s) 35-36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glithero in view of De Weert, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Martell (US Pat. No.: 6,007,525).
Regarding claim 35, Glithero in view of De Weert fail to disclose wherein the tubular structure comprises a hose extending from the outflow port to the filtering device via the degassing leg.
Martell teaches (fig. 2-3) an apparatus (abstract) and thus in the same field of endeavor, comprising: a tubular structure (filtering and deodorizing device 10), wherein the tubular structure comprises a hose (tubular gas inlet member 72, conduit 14, and conduit 90) extending from an outflow port (lower end wall 70) to the filtering device (filter cartridge 64) (fig. 2-3) in order to provide gas flow communication between the filtering device and the outflow port (col. 3, ln. 28-37).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the tubular structure of Glithero in view of De Weert such that it comprises a hose extending from the outflow port to the filtering device via the degassing leg, as taught by Martell, in order to provide gas flow communication between the filtering device and the outflow port (Martell col. 3, ln. 28-37).
Regarding claim 36, Glithero in view of De Weert and further in view of Martell disclose wherein the hose extends into the collection bag (pouch 12) (Martel col. 3, ln. 28-37).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Longstaff (Pub. No.: US 2008/0228155 A1) discloses an apparatus comprising a filtering device. Blanton (US Pat. No.: 6,165,159) discloses an apparatus comprising a filtering device.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEAGAN NGO whose telephone number is (571)270-1586. The examiner can normally be reached M - TH 8:00 - 4:00 PT.
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, Sarah Al-Hashimi can be reached at (571) 272-7159. 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.
/MEAGAN NGO/Examiner, Art Unit 3781
/PHILIP R WIEST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781
Prosecution Insights