DETAILED ACTION
Applicant' s arguments, filed 06/10/2026, have been fully considered. The following rejections and/or objections are either reiterated or newly applied. They constitute the complete set presently being applied to the instant application.
Applicants have amended their claims, filed 01/09/2026, and therefore rejections newly made in the instant office action have been necessitated by amendment.
Claims 1, 7-13, 17-18, and 21-22 are the current claims hereby under examination.
All below references to Applicant’s specification are made using the paragraph numbers assigned in the US publication of the present application US 20220354429 A1.
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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Claim 13: a magnetic field generator configured to generate a magnetic field. This limitation is interpreted as referring to a power source and coil of conductive wire as described in paragraphs 0042-0044 and Fig. 1 of Applicant’s specification and its equivalents.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
It is noted that the limitation “sensor” is being interpreted as referring to both a sensing element and the associated circuitry supporting its function in all claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 13, 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 13 recites “a sensor electrically coupled to the first wire … magnetic field passing through the first wire” but the limitation “the first wire” lacks sufficient antecedent basis. For the purposes of this examination, the limitation is interpreted as the sensor electrically connected to at least one of the plurality of coiled wires
Claims 17-18 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 13.
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.
Claims 1, 7-9, 12-13, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi US Patent Application Publication Number US 20190183665 A1 hereinafter Choi in view of Keilman US Patent Application Publication Number US 2009/0005859 A1 hereinafter Keilman
Regarding claim 1, Choi discloses a stent (Abstract), comprising:
an expandable tubular scaffold having a proximal end and a distal end (Paragraphs 0003-0004, 0006, and 0033: the stent, the conventional function of a stent is to expand once inserted; Fig. 2A the stent has proximal and distal ends);
a plurality of coiled wires coupled to the tubular scaffold (Paragraph 0053: the plurality of induction coils coupled to the stent body; Fig. 2B references 200, 230, and 250);
wherein the plurality of coiled wires are electrically coupled to one another (Paragraph 0053: the plurality if induction coils are connected in parallel); and
a sensor electrically coupled to an outer surface of one of the plurality of coiled wires, wherein the sensor is configured to monitor a physiological parameter within the vessel (Paragraphs 0043 and 0053: the sensor receives power from the plurality of coils and is thus considered “electrically coupled to an outer surface” of one of the coils since it would seem that the sensor is electrically coupled to the entire coil including its outer surface since power is transferred from the coil to the sensor);
wherein the sensor is inductively powered by a magnetic field passing through the first wire (Paragraphs 0016, 0051 and 0053: the coils are powered through induction, or a magnetic field passing through the coils).
Choi fails to further disclose the stent comprising: wherein the tubular scaffold includes a plurality of braided filaments extending from the proximal end to the distal end.
Keilman teaches an apparatus includes an endoluminal implant, a RF coupling coil coupled to the endoluminal implant and a therapeutic transducer electrically coupled to the RF coupling coil and physically coupled to the endoluminal implant. The RF coupling coil supplies electrical power to the therapeutic transducer. The therapeutic transducer has a capability for delivering therapeutic energy to a lumen disposed within the endoluminal implant in response to signals coupled via the RF coupling coil (Abstract). Thus Keilman falls within the same field of endeavor as Applicant’s invention.
Keilman teaches that a tubular scaffold may include a plurality of braided filaments extending from the proximal end to the distal end (Paragraphs 0094: the stent may be formed of a woven mesh of fine helical wires)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to configure the stent of Choi to be a braided stent as taught by Keilman because such a change is a simple substitution of one known element (the stent type of Choi) for another known element (the stent type of Keilman) with no surprising technical effect.
Regarding claim 7, Choi in view of Keilman teaches the stent of claim 1. Modified Choi further discloses the stent wherein the sensor is electrically coupled to a battery configured to store energy for powering the sensor (Paragraphs 0042 and 0045-0046; Fig. 1 references 240 and 260: the power storage portion is in communication with the sensor)
Regarding claim 8, Choi in view of Keilman teaches the stent of claim 1. Modified Choi further discloses the stent further comprising wireless communication circuitry configured to generate wireless signals responsive to output from the sensor, wherein the wireless signals responsive to output from the sensor are configured to be received by an external receiver located in a remote location from the sensor (Paragraphs 0043-0044: the second communication circuitry may transmit sensor data to the external device).
Regarding claim 9, Choi in view of Keilman teaches the stent of claim 1. Modified Choi further discloses the stent wherein the sensor is selected from a group consisting of a temperature sensor, a pH sensor, a flow sensor, a pressure sensor, an oxygen sensor, and a heart rate sensor (Paragraph 0043: the sensor may be temperature, flow, or pressure sensor.
Regarding claim 12, Choi in view of Keilman teaches the stent of claim 1. Modified Choi further discloses the stent wherein at least one of the plurality of coiled wires includes an insulated covering (Paragraph 0053: a silicone layer may surround the circuit portion. The circuit portion includes the coils; Figs. 1 and 3-4: references 200, 230, and 280).
Regarding claim 13, Choi discloses a medical device system (Abstract), comprising:
an external power transmission portion (Paragraphs 0016, 0041, and 0051)
a stent (Paragraph 0033: the stent), comprising:
an expandable tubular scaffold having a proximal end and a distal end, and a lumen extending therethrough (Paragraphs 0003-0004, 0006, and 0033: the stent, the conventional function of a stent is to expand once inserted; Fig. 2A the stent has proximal and distal ends);
a plurality of coiled wires attached to the tubular scaffold, wherein the plurality of coiled wires are electrically coupled to one another (Paragraph 0053: the plurality of induction coils connected in parallel coupled to the stent body; Fig. 2B references 200, 230, and 250);
a sensor electrically coupled to the first wire wherein the sensor is configured to monitor a physiological parameter within the vessel (Paragraphs 0043 and 0053: the sensor receives power from the plurality of coils and is thus considered “electrically coupled to an outer surface” of one of the coils since it would seem that the sensor is electrically coupled to the entire coil including its outer surface since power is transferred from the coil to the sensor), the sensor being inductively powered by the magnetic field passing through the first wire (Paragraphs 0016, 0051 and 0053: the coils are powered through induction, or a magnetic field passing through the coils);
wireless communication circuitry configured to generate wireless signals responsive to output from the sensor (Paragraphs 0043-0044: the second communication circuitry may transmit sensor data to the external device); and
an external receiver configured to receive the wireless signals responsive to output from the sensor (Paragraphs 0043-0044: the second communication circuitry may transmit sensor data to the external device, or external receiver).
Choi fails to further disclose the system comprising: a magnetic field generator configured to generate a magnetic field; and wherein the tubular scaffold includes a plurality of braided filaments extending from the proximal end to the distal end.
Keilman teaches a magnetic field generator configured to generate a magnetic field (Paragraphs 0080-0082 and 0087-0091: the external coil to provide signals to and receive data from the transducers; Fig. 7: the external receiver 90 and magnetic flux lines 112); and wherein the tubular scaffold includes a plurality of braided filaments extending from the proximal end to the distal end (Paragraphs 0094: the stent may be formed of a woven mesh of fine helical wires)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to configure the system of Choi to include a magnetic field generator as the external communication unit and to use a braided stent as taught by Keilman because such a change is a simple substitution of one known element (the external power transmission/communication method and stent type of Choi) for another known element (the external power transmission/communication method and stent type of Keilman) with no surprising technical effect.
Regarding claim 17, Choi in view of Keilman teaches the system of claim 13. Modified Choi fails to further disclose the system wherein the magnetic field generator includes the receiver.
Keilman teaches a system wherein the magnetic field generator includes the receiver (Paragraphs 0080-0082 and 0087-0091: the external coil to provide signals to and receive data from the transducers; Fig. 7: the external receiver 90 and the magnetic flux lines 112; The external coil is the magnetic field generator and the receiver).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to configure the system of modified Choi to use the magnetic field generator as the receiver as taught by Keilman because such a modification is s simple substitution of one known element (the wireless communication method of Choi) for another known element (the wireless communication method of Keilman) with no surprising technical effect.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi US Patent Application Publication Number US 20190183665 A1 hereinafter Choi in view of Keilman US Patent Application Publication Number US 2009/0005859 A1 hereinafter Keilman as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Poon US Patent Application Publication Number US 20150335285 A1 hereinafter Poon
Regarding claim 10, Choi in view of Keilman teaches the stent of claim 1. Modified Choi fails to further disclose the stent wherein the sensor is only coupled to the outer surface of the one of the plurality of coiled wires
Poon teaches an implantable device is provided that can include any number of features. In some embodiments, the device induces a coil antenna configured to receive wireless power from a power source external to the patient (Abstract). Thus, Poon is reasonably pertinent to the problem at hand.
Poon teaches that a sensor may be connected directly to a coil for receiving wireless power (Paragraphs 0042, 0047, and 0052; Fig. 1c and 3a-c). The sensor with attached coil can be disposed on stents (Paragraph 0066).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to configure the system of modified Choi to have the sensor attached directly and only to one of the coils as taught by Poon because such a configuration may reduce the complexity of the device by removing intervening components between the power receiving coil and sensor of modified Choi. Additionally, choi teaches that the sensor is exposed to the outside environment (Paragraph 0055) and thus configuring the sensor to be attached directly to the coil as taught by Poon is considered to teach attaching the sensor to only one of the coiled wires since the sensor is not further attached to any circuitry components or the stent body.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi US Patent Application Publication Number US 20190183665 A1 hereinafter Choi in view of Keilman US Patent Application Publication Number US 2009/0005859 A1 hereinafter Keilman as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Tassel US Patent Application Publication Number US 2005/0149170 A1 hereinafter Tassel.
Regarding claim 11, Choi in view of Keilman teaches the stent of claim 1. Modified Choi fails to further disclose the stent wherein the sensor is attached to a portion of the tubular scaffold, and wherein the tubular scaffold is configured to transfer power from the plurality of coiled wires to the sensor.
Tassel teaches an implantable stent having surface features adapted to promote an organized growth pattern of infiltrating cells when implanted in a tubular organ. The surface features comprise depressions, pores, projections, pleats, channels or grooves in the stent body and are designed to increase turbulence or stagnation in the flow of a liquid, such as blood through the stent, and/or to promote the growth of infiltrating cells in an organized pattern. Alternatively, the stent can be populated with living cells prior to implant and can be heatable from an external source of energy, thereby inducing production of therapeutic bioactive agents from ingrowing cells. The invention also provides an implantable heatable stent for transcutaneously monitoring the flow of fluid through a lumen into which the stent is implanted by measuring the rate at which the heated stent cools in response to blood flow when the source of heat is removed (Abstract). Thus, tassel falls within the same field of endeavor as Applicant’s invention.
Tassel teaches that a stent body may be used to transfer energy to a sensor in order to activate the sensor (Paragraph 0067).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to implement the conductive stent structure and teachings of Tassel into the stent of modified Choi such that the power generated by the coils Choi would be connected to the stent which in turn would be connected to the sensing circuitry because such a configuration may allow the implanted circuitry to be placed in a more desirable location for a particular use case. Additionally, the particular method of transferring power from the receiving coils to the sensor of Choi is considered a matter of routine optimization and experimentation as transferring the power directly from the coil to the sensors, from the coil into the stent then to the sensors, or from the coil and through some other intermediate structure or wire then to the sensors produces the same effect of supplying power to the sensors. Thus the particular method of transferring power from the excitation coil to the sensor is considered a matter of routine optimization and experimentation to configure the system to a desired use case or particular stent structure but does not produce a surprising technical effect.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi US Patent Application Publication Number US 20190183665 A1 hereinafter Choi in view of Keilman US Patent Application Publication Number US 2009/0005859 A1 hereinafter Keilman as applied to claim 17 above and further in view of Spillman US Patent Number US 6206835 B1 hereinafter Spillman.
Regarding claim 18, Choi in view of Keilman teaches the system of claim 17. Modified Choi fails to further disclose the system, wherein the magnetic field generator includes a handheld device.
Spillman teaches an implant device which is responsive to an external interrogation circuit. The implant device includes a structure implantable within a living animal and operatively configured to carry out or assist in carrying out a function within the living animal. The device further includes an electrically passive sensing circuit integral with the structure for sensing a parameter associated with the function. In particular, the sensing circuit includes an inductive element wherein the sensing circuit has a frequency dependent variable impedance loading effect on the interrogation circuit in response to an interrogation signal provided by the exciter/interrogator element, the impedance loading effect varying in relation to the sensed parameter (Abstract). Thus, Spillman falls within the same field of endeavor as Applicant’s invention.
Spillman teaches an exciter or interrogator unit which is a handheld sized device which communicates with an implanted device utilizing magnetic and/or electromagnetic coupling (Fig. 3 references 38 and 52; Col 4 lines 28-40).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to configure the external device for providing power and receiving signals from the stent of Choi to be a handheld unit as taught by Spillman because configuring the external device to be a handheld unit may improve the usability of the system and communication quality since a handheld interrogator unit can typically be brought into closer proximity to the implanted device than a stationary communication unit and may allow for a greater degree of positional adjustment to best align the external coil with the coil of the implanted stent.
Claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi US Patent Application Publication Number US 20190183665 A1 hereinafter Choi in view of Keilman US Patent Application Publication Number US 2009/0005859 A1 hereinafter Keilman as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Kveen US Patent Application Publication Number US 20070150009 A1 hereinafter Kveen.
Regarding claim 21, Choi in view of Keilman teaches the stent of claim 1. Modified Choi fails to further disclose the stent wherein each of the plurality of coiled wires extends along a majority of a length of the tubular scaffold at circumferentially spaced apart locations.
Kveen teaches a pacing apparatus having a stent electrode through which pulses of electrical current can be delivered. Stent electrodes receive energy for generating the electrical current from a variety of sources. Sources include from one or more induction coils that can form at least a portion of the stent. Sources can also include an implantable pulse generator coupled to a lead through which pulses of the electrical current are supplied to the stent electrodes (Abstract). Thus, Kveen falls within the same field of endeavor as Applicant’s invention.
Kveen teaches that induction coils may extend circumferentially along a longitudinal axis of a stent and may form at least a portion of the structural members of the stent, or may lie on and be attached to a stent having structural members separate from the induction coils (Paragraph 0027-0028). Kveen further teaches that control circuitry may be located in a variety of locations including between members of the induction coil, suspended within the lumen of the stent, within the material structure of the stent, or away from the stent (Paragraph 0031). Additionally, Kveen teaches that a stent may have a plurality of induction coils arranged in a variety of different manners and electrically isolated from each other or connected in series or in parallel depending on the requirements of the device. The coils may be positioned along the longitudinal axis of the stent (Paragraphs 0078-0083; Figs. 7a-c and 8a-c). Thus, Kveen teaches that the number, positioning, and connectivity of coils used in a stent is not particularly limited and may be adapted to the required use case.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to configure modified Choi such that the plurality of coiled wires extend along a majority of a length of the tubular scaffold at circumferentially spaced apart locations in light of the teachings of Kveen because Kveen teaches that the number, position, connectivity, and other factors of coil construction and/or integration into a stent are matters of routine optimization and experimentation to adapt the power receiving structure to the required use case of the instrumented stent. In particular, the configuration of the coils, their length, number of turns, orientation, size, connectivity, and where they are attached to the stent are all considered matter of routine optimization and experimentation as one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that each of these coil variables are readily adapted to obtain the required power input for the instruments of the sensor based on factors such as the type and number of sensors being utilized, where the stent is being implanted, the orientation of the stent after implantation, dimensionality requirements of the stent, and other factors that affect power consumption and transmission as well as in-vivo requirements for the overall structure. Thus the claimed configuration of coils is considered to be obvious in light of the teachings of Choi in view of Keilman as applied to claim 1 and further in light of the teachings of Kveen in regards to coil construction. The claimed configuration of coils is not considered to produce a surprising technical effect as the coils are still used for their conventional purpose of receiving signals/power and transmitting signals.
Regarding claim 22, Choi in view of Keilman further in view of Kveen teaches the stent of claim 21. Modified Choi fails to further disclose the stent wherein the plurality of filaments comprise braided wires extending from the proximal end to the distal end.
Keilman teaches the stent wherein the plurality of filaments comprise braided wires extending from the proximal end to the distal end (Paragraphs 0094: the stent may be formed of a woven mesh of fine helical wires; Fig. 9)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to configure the system of modified Choi to use a braided stent as taught by Keilman because such a change is a simple substitution of one known element (the stent type of Choi) for another known element (the stent type of Keilman) with no surprising technical effect.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US Patent Number US 6280385 B1 hereinafter Melzer teaches a stent with a passive magnetic resonance circuit (Abstract). Melzer teaches an inductor coil in a stent wherein the inductor is not formed of the skeleton of the stent itself but rather an additional wire woven into the stent skeleton (Col 10 lines 38-44; Fig. 2 reference 2’).
US Patent Application Publication Number US 2006/0178576 A1 hereinafter Weber teaches a resonator device for medical devices with a helical structure which may be used in conjunction with a stent (Abstract). Weber teaches a resonator coil may be woven at least partially through the openings of a stent structure (Paragraphs 0061 and 0076; Fig. 8)
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 MATTHEW ERIC OGLES whose telephone number is (571)272-7313. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00AM - 5:30PM.
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, Jason Sims can be reached on Monday-Friday from 9:00AM – 4:00PM at (571) 272 – 7540. 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.
/MATTHEW ERIC OGLES/Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/RENE T TOWA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights