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 .
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, 11-14, 22-23 and 25-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita et al. (US Patent Pub. 20200188630 hereinafter “Fujita”) in view of Kerby et al. (US Patent Pub. 20060264904 hereinafter “Kerby”).
Regarding Claim 1, Fujita teaches (Fig 2) a catheter comprising:
a coil body (60; the examiner notes that the wires within braid 60 are considered to be spiraled/coiled in the catheter 100 (see [0088]), therefore 60 is considered a coil body);
a braided body (50) having a tubular shape formed by braiding a plurality of wires (see [0076]), the braided body having an intracoil braided portion (see annotated Fig 2) arranged on an inner peripheral side of the coil body (60) and an extracoil braided portion (see annotated Fig 2) arranged so as to extend beyond the coil body toward a distal end (82) of the catheter (100);
an inner resin layer (32; see [0044] teaching 32 is a part of resin layer 30) that coats an inner peripheral surface of the braided body (50; see [0044] teaching reinforcement layer 40 is incorporated in the resin layer 30; also see [0073] teaching reinforcement layer 40 includes 50 and 60);
and an outer resin layer (33; see [0044] teaching 33 is a part of resin layer 30) that coats an outer peripheral surface of the extracoil braided portion (see annotated Fig 2) of the braided body and the coil body (60).
PNG
media_image1.png
286
792
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig 2 (Fujita)
Fujita does not specify a cushioning material in contact with a part of the extracoil braided portion of the braided body adjacent to the coil body and in contact with a distal end of the coil body, the cushioning material having a rigidity between a rigidity of the braided body and a rigidity of the coil body; wherein:
the cushioning material is arranged between the inner resin layer and the outer resin layer, and
a distal end of the cushioning material is located between the distal end of the coil body and a distal end of the braided body in an axial direction of the catheter.
Kerby teaches (Fig 3) a catheter with an inner layer (34), an outer layer (30) and a cushioning material (32) in contact with a reinforcing layer (31). The cushioning material (32) is arranged between the inner layer (34) and the outer layer (30), and a distal end of the cushioning material is proximal to the distal tip.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the catheter of Fujita such that it includes a cushioning material as taught by Kerby. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that adding layers to a multilayer catheter would allow the user to provide the desired durometer qualities for the catheter (See Kerby [0044]).
Kerby teaches (Fig 3) that the reinforcing material (cushion 32) should extend along the entire catheter up to its distal end (See annotated Fig 2/3). As such, if this reinforcing material/cushion material were to be incorporated into the Fujita catheter, the cushioning material would likewise terminate at a distal section that is proximal to the distal tip (see annotated Fig 2/3 of Fujita and Kerby). Thus, the cushioning material would per se extend between the distal end of the coil and the distal end of the braid (see annotated Fig 2/3 of Fujita and Kerby).
PNG
media_image2.png
372
794
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
275
784
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig 2/3 of Fujita and Kerby (Fujita Fig 2 on top, Kerby Fig 3 on bottom)
The combination of Fujita and Kerby does not specify the cushioning material having a rigidity between a rigidity of the braided body and a rigidity of the coil body. However, Fujita teaches the material of the coil body and the material of the braided body as being tungsten and stainless steel (See Fujita [0151-0152]), similar to the materials of the instant application’s coil body and braided body (See instant specification paragraphs [0049] and [0053] teaching metallic materials including stainless steel, tungsten, superelastic alloys, etc.). Similarly, Kerby teaches the material of the cushion layer (32) is a polyolefin resin (See Kerby [0042] teaching that 32 may be any suitable material disclosed for tubular member 24, and see [0040] disclosing materials for 24) which is the same material disclosed in paragraph [0058] of the instant application (instant specification [0058] “The cushioning material 60 can employ a polyolefin resin”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the braid, coil and the cushioning material of the modified Fujita such that the braid and coil are made of tungsten or stainless steel and the cushioning material is made of polyolefin resin as taught by Fujita and Kerby. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so as these are known selections of materials for the components of a catheter. Furthermore, it has been held that “The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp”.
Based on the disclosure of these known materials for forming the braid, coil and the cushioning material, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to try the claimed configuration (cushion layer’s rigidity between that of the coil and the braid) with a reasonable expectation of success.
The combination does not specify a thickness of a vicinity of the distal end of the cushioning material is thinner than a thickness of a vicinity of a proximal end of the cushioning material.
However, as seen in Kerby [0052], the thickness of the layers (including cushioning layer 32) could be varied in order to vary the stiffness along the length of the catheter. Further, it appears that one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in modifying the thickness cushioning material of the modified Fujita device to have a thickness of a vicinity of the distal end of the cushioning material is thinner than a thickness of a vicinity of a proximal end of the cushioning material, as it involves only adjusting the dimension (thickness) of a component disclosed to require adjustment. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of the modified Fujita by making the thickness of a vicinity of the distal end of the cushioning material thinner than a thickness of a vicinity of a proximal end of the cushioning material as a matter of routine optimization since it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Fujita and Kerby teaches all elements of claim 1 as described above. Fujita further teaches the catheter, wherein the extracoil braided portion of the braided body (50) has a reduced diameter part (22) having an outer diameter reduced toward the distal end of the catheter, and a constant diameter part (21) adjacent to a distal end of the reduced diameter part (22) and having a constant outer diameter throughout an entire length of the constant diameter part (21; see [0116])) in the axial direction of the catheter (See Fujita Fig 2).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Fujita and Kerby teaches all elements of claim 1 as described above. Fujita further teaches the catheter wherein an inner diameter of the inner resin layer in at least a part of the extracoil braided portion is smaller than an inner diameter of the inner resin layer in the intracoil braided portion (See Fujita Fig 2, the diameter of inner layer of section 17, the intracoil braid portion, is larger than the inner diameter of section 21 which is the extracoil braid portion).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Fujita and Kerby teaches all elements of claim 1 as described above. The combination further teaches the catheter wherein a radial length of the catheter at the distal end of the cushioning material is smaller than a radial length of the catheter at a proximal end of the cushioning material (See annotated Fig 2/3 of Fujita and Kerby; with the combination of Fujita and Kerby as described in claim 1, the cushioning material would extend to a distal section of Fujita with a smaller diameter than the proximal end where the cushioning material starts).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Fujita and Kerby teaches all elements of claim 1 as described above. The combination further teaches the catheter wherein the cushioning material has an extended portion extending so as to lie over a plurality of wires composing the coil body (with the modification done in claim 1, the cushioning material is extending over the coil body 60 of Fujita), the plurality of wires being adjacent to each other (See Fujita Fig 2, and [0086] teaching coil body 60 has a plurality of wires adjacent to each other).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Fujita and Kerby teaches all elements of claim 2 as described above. Fujita further teaches the catheter wherein an inner diameter of the inner resin layer in at least a part of the extracoil braided portion is smaller than an inner diameter of the inner resin layer in the intracoil braided portion (See Fujita Fig 2, the diameter of inner layer of section 17, the intracoil braid portion, is larger than the inner diameter of section 21 which is the extracoil braid portion).
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of Fujita and Kerby teaches all elements of claim 2 as described above. The combination further teaches the catheter wherein a radial length of the catheter at the distal end of the cushioning material is smaller than a radial length of the catheter at a proximal end of the cushioning material (See annotated Fig 2/3 of Fujita and Kerby, the radial length at the distal end 23 is smaller than the proximal end).
Regarding Claim 13, the combination of Fujita and Kerby teaches all elements of claim 3 as described above. The combination further teaches the catheter wherein a radial length of the catheter at the distal end of the cushioning material is smaller than a radial length of the catheter at a proximal end of the cushioning material (See annotated Fig 2/3 of Fujita and Kerby, the radial length at the distal end is smaller than the proximal end).
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of Fujita and Kerby teaches all elements of claim 2 as described above. The combination further teaches the catheter wherein the cushioning material has an extended portion extending so as to lie over a plurality of wires composing the coil body (with the modification done in claim 1, the cushioning material is extending over the coil body 60 of Fujita), the plurality of wires being adjacent to each other (See Fujita Fig 2, and [0086] teaching coil body 60 has a plurality of wires adjacent to each other).
Regarding Claim 22, the combination of Fujita and Kerby teaches all elements of claim 1 as described above. The combination further teaches the catheter wherein the cushioning material is formed around an entire circumference of a cross section of the catheter (See Kerby Fig 3, cushioning material 32 is around the circumference – both the top and bottom of the cross sectional view).
Regarding Claim 23, the combination of Fujita and Kerby teaches all elements of claim 1 as described above. The combination further teaches the catheter wherein the intracoil braided portion overlaps the coil body in a radial direction orthogonal to the axial direction of the catheter (See annotated Fig 2 of Fujita), and the extracoil braided portion is distal of the distal end of the coil body along the axial direction and does not overlap the coil body in the radial direction (see annotated Fig 2 of Fujita).
Regarding Claim 25, the combination of Fujita and Kerby teaches all elements of claim 1 as described above. The combination further teaches the catheter wherein: the extracoil braided portion of the braided body has a reduced diameter part (Fujita 22) having an outer diameter reduced toward the distal end of the catheter (Fujita 82), and a constant diameter part (Fujita 21) adjacent to a distal end of the reduced diameter part (Fujita 22) and having a constant outer diameter throughout an entire length of the constant diameter part (See Fujita [0116]) in the axial direction of the catheter; and the distal end of the cushioning material (Fujita 23) is proximal of the distal end of the reduced diameter (Fujita 22) part of the extracoil braided portion along the axial direction of the catheter (See annotated Fig 2 of Fujita and annotated Fig 2/3 of Fujita and Kerby).
Regarding Claim 26, the combination of Fujita and Kerby teaches all elements of claim 1 as described above. The combination further teaches the catheter wherein a proximal end portion of the cushioning material is in contact with an outer peripheral surface of the braided body and is formed over an outer circumference of the coil body (See annotated Fig 2 and annotated Fig 2/3 of Fujita and Kerby, with the modification done in claim 1, the cushioning material is between the coil body and the braided body and Fig 3 of Kerby shows how the cushioning material is in contact with the outer surface of the reinforcing member 31; as such it is interpreted that the arrangement with the modification done in claim 1 would result in “a proximal end portion of the cushioning material is in contact with an outer peripheral surface of the braided body and is formed over an outer circumference of the coil body”).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita and Kerby as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Shimogami et al. (US Patent Pub. 20100094258 hereinafter “Shimogami”).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Fujita and Kerby teaches all elements of claim 1 as described above. The combination does not specify the catheter further comprising a medium resin layer filled in gaps in the braided body and being disposed between the outer resin layer and the inner resin layer.
Shimogami teaches (Fig 3; see [0035--0038]) a catheter with a medium resin layer (34) that fills in gaps in the braided body (30) and is disposed between an outer resin layer (28) and an inner resin layer (26).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the catheter of Fujita such that it comprises a medium resin layer filled in gaps in the braided body and being disposed between the outer resin layer and the inner resin layer as taught by Shimogami. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to embed the braid within the catheter (Shimogami [0038]).
Claim(s) 7-8 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita et al. (US Patent Pub. 20200188630 hereinafter “Fujita”) in view of Shimogami et al. (US Patent Pub. 20100094258 hereinafter “Shimogami”).
Regarding Claim 7, Fujita teaches (Fig 2) a catheter comprising:
a coil body (60; the examiner notes that the wires within braid 60 are considered to be spiraled/coiled in the catheter 100 (see [0088]) , therefore 60 is considered a coil body);
a braided body (50) having a tubular shape formed by braiding a plurality of wires (See [0076]), the braided body having an intracoil braided portion (see annotated Fig 2) arranged on an inner peripheral side of the coil body and an extracoil braided portion (See annotated Fig 2) arranged so as to extend beyond the coil body toward a distal end (82);
an inner resin layer 32; see [0044] teaching 32 is a part of resin layer 30) that coats an inner peripheral surface of the braided body (50; see [0044] teaching reinforcement layer 40 is incorporated in the resin layer 30; also see [0073] teaching reinforcement layer 40 includes 50 and 60); and an outer resin layer (33; see [0044] teaching 33 is a part of resin layer 30) that coats an outer peripheral surface of the extracoil braided portion (see annotated Fig 2) of the braided body (50) and the coil body (60), the outer resin layer being formed as a single piece (See Fig 2; 32, 33 are formed as one layer 30);
wherein: the catheter has a catheter distal end part (80, 21) including the extracoil braided portion (See annotated Fig 2), a catheter proximal end part (17) including the coil body (60) and the intracoil braided portion (See annotated Fig 2), and a catheter connection part (22, 23, 15, 16) connecting the catheter distal end part (80, 21) and the catheter proximal end part (17) in an axial direction of the catheter (See Fig 2), and
the extracoil braided portion of the braided body has a reduced diameter part (extracoil portion in section 22) having an outer diameter reduced toward the distal end (82) of the catheter, and a constant diameter part (extracoil portion within section 21) adjacent to a distal end of the reduced diameter part (22) and having a constant outer diameter throughout an entire length of the constant diameter part in the axial direction of the catheter (See [0116]).
Fujita does not specify the catheter distal end part has a flexural rigidity in range of 0.005 gf-cm2/cm or more to less than 0.05 gf-cm2/cm, the catheter connection part has a flexural rigidity in a range of 0.05 gf-cm2/cm or more to less than 1.4 gf-cm2/cm, the catheter proximal end part has a flexural rigidity in a range of 1.4 gf-cm2/cm or more to less than 3.0 gf-cm2/cm. Fujita does teach in [0107], [0110] and [0113] that the rigidity of the catheter body can be gradually improved towards the proximal side. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify Fujita to include the catheter distal end part has a flexural rigidity in range of 0.005 gf-cm2/cm or more to less than 0.05 gf-cm2/cm, the catheter connection part has a flexural rigidity in a range of 0.05 gf-cm2/cm or more to less than 1.4 gf-cm2/cm, the catheter proximal end part has a flexural rigidity in a range of 1.4 gf-cm2/cm or more to less than 3.0 gf-cm2/cm since applicant has not disclosed that having the catheter distal end part has a flexural rigidity in range of 0.005 gf-cm2/cm or more to less than 0.05 gf-cm2/cm, the catheter connection part has a flexural rigidity in a range of 0.05 gf-cm2/cm or more to less than 1.4 gf-cm2/cm, the catheter proximal end part has a flexural rigidity in a range of 1.4 gf-cm2/cm or more to less than 3.0 gf-cm2/cm solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the device would perform equally well with either design. Furthermore, absent a teaching as to the criticality of the catheter distal end part has a flexural rigidity in range of 0.005 gf-cm2/cm or more to less than 0.05 gf-cm2/cm, the catheter connection part has a flexural rigidity in a range of 0.05 gf-cm2/cm or more to less than 1.4 gf-cm2/cm, the catheter proximal end part has a flexural rigidity in a range of 1.4 gf-cm2/cm or more to less than 3.0 gf-cm2/cm, this particular arrangement is deemed to have been known by those skilled in the art since the instant specification and evidence of record fail to attribute any significance (novel or unexpected results) to a particular arrangement.
Fujita does not specify the braided body is located on an inner resin layer side of a boundary between the inner resin layer and the outer resin layer.
Shimogami teaches (Fig 3, [0034] and [0038]) a catheter with an outer resin layer (28), an inner resin layer (26) and a braid (38,30) that is located on an inner resin layer side (26) of a boundary between the inner resin layer (26) and the outer resin layer (28).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the braided body of Fujita such that the braided body is located on an inner resin layer side of a boundary between the inner resin layer and the outer resin layer as taught by Shimogami. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so as this is an alternative arrangement that would provide a similar result of varying flexibility of the catheter along the length in addition to proving the benefit of reducing the stress concentrated at the boundary between the distal end of the catheter body and the proximal end of the tip (Shimogmai [0016]).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Fujita and Shimogami teaches all elements of claim 7 as described above. Fujita further teaches the catheter wherein a part of the coil body (60) is disposed in the catheter connection part (16; see Fig 2). Fujita does not specify a wire composing a part of the coil body has a diameter becoming thinner toward a distal end of the catheter connection part.
Shimogami teaches [0093] a coil that has a wire thickness that decreases towards the distal section of the coil.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the coil of Fujita such that a wire composing a part of the coil body has a diameter becoming thinner toward a distal end of the catheter connection part as taught by Shimogami. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to decrease the rigidity of the distal section and decrease a stress concentrated towards the tip of the catheter (Shimogami [0093-0094]).
Regarding Claim 24, the combination of Fujita and Shimogami teaches all elements of claim 7 as described above. Fujita further teaches the catheter wherein the intracoil braided portion (annotated Fig 2) overlaps the coil body (60) in a radial direction orthogonal to the axial direction (See Fig 2), and the extracoil braided portion (Annotated Fig 2) is distal of a distal end of the coil body (60) along the axial direction and does not overlap the coil body in the radial direction (see Fig 2).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita and Shimogami as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Zhou (US Patent Pub. 20050043713).
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Fujita and Shimogami teaches all elements of claim 7 as described above. Fujita further teaches the catheter wherein a part of the extracoil braided portion (Annotated Fig 2) is disposed in the catheter connection part (16, 15, 23, 22). Fujita does not specify a wire composing a part of the extracoil braided portion has a diameter becoming thicker toward a distal end of the coil body.
Zhou teaches (Fig 5) an extracoil braid (52) with a wire (58 or 60) having a proximal diameter (D1) and a distal diameter (D2). The distal diameter (D2) is less than the proximal diameter (See [0038]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the extracoil braid of Fujita such that a wire composing a part of the extracoil braided portion has a diameter becoming thicker toward a distal end of the coil body as taught by Zhou. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to provide suitable kink resistance in a proximal section as well as sufficient flexibility in a distal section (See Zhou [0002]).
The examiner takes the position that the wire diameter of the extracoil braided portion is thicker towards a distal end of the coil body because the distal end of the coil body is more proximal than the distal end of the extracoil braided portion. As such, the distal most portion of the extracoil braided portion has a reduced diameter compared to the section of the extracoil braided portion that is located at the distal end of the coil body.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita and Shimogami as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Ishikawa (US Patent Pub. 20150335857 hereafter “Ishikawa”).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Fujita and Shimogami teaches all elements of claim 7 as described above. Fujita does not teach the catheter wherein an outer diameter of the catheter is constant throughout an entire length.
Ishikawa teaches [0029] a catheter (1) with a constant outer diameter and inner diameter (See Fig 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the outer diameter of Fujita such that it is constant throughout an entire length as taught by Ishikawa. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to prevent and reduce the increase of sliding resistance between the outer peripheral surface of the catheter and an inner wall (Ishikawa [0029]).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita and Shimogami as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Zhou (US Patent Pub. 20050043713).
Regarding Claim 19, the combination of Fujita and Shimogami teaches all elements of claim 8 as described above. The combination further teaches the catheter wherein a part of the extracoil braided portion (see Annotated Fig 2) is disposed in the catheter connection part (16, 15, 23, 22). The combination does not specify a wire composing a part of the extracoil braided portion has a diameter becoming thicker toward a distal end of the coil body.
Zhou teaches (Fig 5) an extracoil braid (52) with a wire (58 or 60) having a proximal diameter (D1) and a distal diameter (D2). The distal diameter (D2) is less than the proximal diameter (See [0038]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the extracoil braid of Fujita such that a wire composing a part of the extracoil braided portion has a diameter becoming thicker toward a distal end of the coil body as taught by Zhou. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to provide suitable kink resistance in a proximal section as well as sufficient flexibility in a distal section (See Zhou [0002]).
The examiner takes the position that the wire diameter of the extracoil braided portion is thicker towards a distal end of the coil body because the distal end of the coil body is more proximal than the distal end of the extracoil braided portion. As such, the distal most portion of the extracoil braided portion has a reduced diameter compared to the section of the extracoil braided portion that is located at the distal end of the coil body.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita and Shimogami as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Ishikawa (US Patent Pub. 20150335857 hereafter “Ishikawa”).
Regarding Claim 20, the combination of Fujita and Shimogami teaches all elements of claim 8 as described above. The combination does not specify the catheter wherein an outer diameter of the catheter is constant throughout an entire length.
Ishikawa teaches [0029] a catheter (1) with a constant outer diameter and inner diameter (See Fig 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the outer diameter of Fujita such that it is constant throughout an entire length as taught by Ishikawa. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to prevent and reduce the increase of sliding resistance between the outer peripheral surface of the catheter and an inner wall (Ishikawa [0029]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 7 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection takes into consideration the amendments filed 4/3/2026.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NEERAJA GOLLAMUDI whose telephone number is (571)272-6449. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5.
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, Michael Tsai can be reached at (571) 270-5246. 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.
/NEERAJA GOLLAMUDI/Examiner, Art Unit 3783
/WESLEY G HARRIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights