DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 18, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Amendments to the current set of claims have changed the scope of the claimed invention, but the previous prior art references used read upon the claimed invention.
On page 9 of the Remarks section, as indicated by the page number at the bottom of each page, Applicant discusses the Specification objections and 112 rejections made in the previous Action, and details the amendments made to correct these issues. The Examiner has withdrawn the previous objections and 112 rejections as a result.
On page 10, Applicant argues that the previous 102 prior art rejection using Itou et al., (“Itou”, Machine Translation of JPS5584586”), does not disclose amended independent Claim 31 particularly the limitations, a sensor configured to measure a property indicative of a temperature of the RO-membrane, or to control the cooling arrangement based on the measured property, in order to achieve a desired temperature of the RO-membrane, as presently added to Claim 31 and similar ones to independent Claim 45. Applicant asserts that Itou does not disclose these limitations. However, the Examiner notes that Itou does disclose these limitations, “a sensor configured to measure a property indicative of a temperature of the RO-membrane,” (TIA sensor just upstream of RO 10, See Figure 2, See page 9-11), and “to control the cooling arrangement based on the measured property, in order to achieve a desired temperature of the RO-membrane”, (See page 14). The Examiner finds Applicant’s remarks here unpersuasive for this reason.
On pages 10-12, Applicant argues against the previous 103 prior art rejections, asserting that the various secondary references used do not disclose the above indicated added limitations to independent Claims 31 & 45. Here, the Examiner notes that Itou already discloses these limitations as also discussed above, and so these remarks against the secondary references are considered moot.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 31, 37, 45, 50, and their dependent claims 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 31 recites the limitation “the measured property” on line 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 37 recites the limitation “a heater” on line 5. It is not clear if this “heater” is the same “heater” as already recited on line 4 or not. Examiner interprets to be the same.
Claim 45 recites the limitation “the measured property” on line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 50 recites the limitation “a heater” on line 3. It is not clear if this “heater” is the same “heater” as already recited on line 2 or not. Examiner interprets to be the same.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 31, 33, 34, 38, 45-48 & 51 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Itou et al., JPS5584586A, (“Itou”, “Machine Translation of JPS5584586A”, 30 total pages, published 1980).
Regarding Claims 31, 33, 34 & 38, Itou discloses a water purification apparatus, (See Abstract), comprising: a reverse osmosis ("RO")-device comprising a RO-membrane, (See page 4), wherein the RO- device is configured to receive inlet water to be purified from an inlet path, (Line 2 leading all the way to Line 7 to RO device 10, See Figure 2, See pages 6-7), and produce permeate water into a permeate path, (Line 15, See Figure 2, See page 7), and reject water into a reject path, (Line 11, See Figure 2, See page 7); a recirculation path arranged to recirculate the reject water from the reject path to the inlet water, (Further downstream portion of Line 11 leading to Cooler 12 to Line 8, See Figure 2, See page 7); a cooling arrangement comprising a cooling device, wherein the cooling arrangement is configured to cool recirculating reject water in the recirculation path with the cooling device, (Cooler 12 on Line 11, See Figure 2, See page 7); a sensor configured to measure a property indicative of a temperature of the RO-membrane, (TIA sensor just upstream of RO 10, See Figure 2, See page 9-11; “the temperature indicator/alarm meter TIA” on page 9 and “where the temperature and pressure are measured by the….indicator/alarm meter PIA” on page 10), and a control arrangement configured to control the cooling arrangement to cool the recirculating reject water in the recirculation path in order to cool the RO-membrane, (See pages 18-19, “each operation is automatically controlled”), based on the measured property, in order to achieve a desired temperature of the RO-membrane, (See page 14, “when the temperature or pressure of the water supplied to the reverse osmosis treatment unit reaches the indicated value, the temperature indicator alarm meter TtA…turns on the pressure indicator alarm meter PIA”).
Additional Disclosures Included:
Claim 33: The water purification apparatus according to claim 31, wherein the control arrangement is configured to control the cooling arrangement to reduce the temperature of the RO-membrane with a certain temperature rate, based on the measured property, in order to achieve the desired temperature of the RO-membrane, (See pages 14 & 16-17).
Claim 34: The water purification apparatus according to claim 31, wherein the cooling arrangement comprises a cooling path configured to direct water to the cooling device to be used as a cooling liquid by the cooling device, (Water in Line 11 directed to Cooler 12 and cooled down to cool the tank 6, See Figure 2, See page 3).
Claim 38: The water purification apparatus according to claim 31, wherein the control arrangement is configured to, during the cooling of the RO-membrane: prevent fresh inlet water to reach the RO-device using an inlet valve; prevent the permeate water from being passed from the apparatus using a permeate valve; and prevent the reject water from being passed to drain, using a drain valve, (V7 is closed, permeate directed to Tank 6, Reject is directed to Tank 6, inlet water from Tank 1 to Tank 6 is stopped, cooler 12 is still used, See Figure 2, See pages 13-14, Itou).
Regarding Claims 45-48 & 51, Itou discloses a method for cooling a reverse osmosis ("RO")-membrane in a water purification apparatus comprising a RO-device comprising the RO-membrane, See Abstract and See page 4), the method comprising: receiving inlet water to be purified at the RO-device from an inlet path, (Line 2 leading all the way to Line 7 to RO device 10, See Figure 2, See pages 6-7); producing permeate water into a permeate path, (Line 15, See Figure 2, See page 7), and reject water into a reject path, (Line 11, See Figure 2, See page 7); recirculating the reject water from the reject path to the inlet water via a recirculation path, (Further downstream portion of Line 11 leading to Cooler 12 to Line 8, See Figure 2, See page 7); measuring a property indicative of a temperature of the RO-membrane, (TIA sensor just upstream of RO 10, See Figure 2, See page 9-11; “the temperature indicator/alarm meter TIA” on page 9 and “where the temperature and pressure are measured by the….indicator/alarm meter PIA” on page 10), and controlling a cooling arrangement comprising a cooling device to cool the reject water in the recirculation path with the cooling device, in order to cool the RO-membrane (Cooler 12 on Line 11, See Figure 2, See page 7; and See pages 18-19, “each operation is automatically controlled”), based on the measured property in order to achieve a desired temperature of the RO-membrane, (See page 14, “when the temperature or pressure of the water supplied to the reverse osmosis treatment unit reaches the indicated value, the temperature indicator alarm meter TtA…turns on the pressure indicator alarm meter PIA”).
Additional Disclosures Included:
Claim 46: The method according to claim 45, comprising measuring a property indicative of a temperature of the RO-membrane, (TIA sensor just upstream of RO 10, See Figure 2, See page 10-11), and wherein the controlling comprises controlling cooling of the RO-membrane with the cooling arrangement based on the property, (See page 14).
Claim 47: The method according to claim 46, wherein the controlling comprises controlling the cooling arrangement to reduce the temperature of the RO-membrane by a certain temperature change rate, based on the measured property, in order to achieve a desired temperature of the RO-membrane, (See pages 14 & 16-17).
Claim 48: The method according to claim 45, wherein the controlling comprises directing water to the cooling device via a cooling path, the water used as a cooling liquid by the cooling device, (Water in Line 11 directed to Cooler 12 and cooled down to cool the tank 6, See Figure 2, See page 3).
Claim 51: The method according to claim 45, wherein the controlling comprises, during the cooling of the RO-membrane: preventing fresh inlet water to reach the RO-device using an inlet valve; preventing the permeate water from being passed from the apparatus using a permeate valve; and preventing the reject water from being passed to drain using a drain valve, (V7 is closed, permeate directed to Tank 6, Reject is directed to Tank 6, Valve V6 closed, and inlet water from Tank 1 to Tank 6 is stopped, cooler 12 is still used, See Figure 2, See pages 13-14, Itou).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 35, 36 & 49 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itou et al., JPS5584586A, (“Itou”, “Machine Translation of JPS5584586A”, published 1980), in view of Henson et al., (“Henson”, US 2013/0126174).
Regarding Claim 35 & 36, Itou discloses the water purification apparatus according to claim 34, but does not disclose wherein the cooling path is configured to direct the inlet water from the inlet path to the cooling device to be used as a cooling liquid by the cooling device, wherein the cooling path is further configured to direct the inlet water used as the cooling liquid by the cooling device, and outputted from the cooling device, to a drain.
Henson discloses a water purification apparatus, (See Abstract, Henson), wherein the cooling path is configured to direct the inlet water from the inlet path to the cooling device to be used as a cooling liquid by the cooling device, (Fluid from Line 378 to RO tank 380 which is directed towards RO Membrane 400 which is considered inlet is also redirected to Cooling System via Line 379, See Figure 2B, represented by Cool 320 in Figure 2A or Figure 4, See paragraph [0046] & [0049] for line 378; See paragraphs [0044] & [0048] for cooling system), wherein the cooling path is further configured to direct the inlet water used as the cooling liquid by the cooling device, and outputted from the cooling device, to a drain, (Redirected inlet water from Line 379 is recirculated to Line 324 “FROM COOL” in Figure 2B and can be directed to drain at either Line 336 or 386, See Figure 2B, See paragraphs [0045], [0046], Henson).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the apparatus of Itou by incorporating wherein the cooling path is configured to direct the inlet water from the inlet path to the cooling device to be used as a cooling liquid by the cooling device, wherein the cooling path is further configured to direct the inlet water used as the cooling liquid by the cooling device, and outputted from the cooling device, to a drain as in Henson so it “resupplies water lost in” the cooling system, (See paragraph [0048], Henson), in “proportion to the amount of cooling that is provided”, (See paragraph [0058], Henson).
Additional Disclosures Included:
Claim 36: The water purification apparatus according to claim 35, comprising a waste path configured to pass the reject water from the reject path to the drain, (Valve V5 and Line 13 directs Retentate 11 away, See Figure 2, Itou; or Line 407 in Figure 2B, See paragraph [0046], Henson), and wherein the cooling path comprises a bypass path configured to bypass the cooling device and direct the inlet water into the waste path or the cooling path downstream of the cooling device in order to cool the reject water being passed to the drain, (Line 378 continues to RO Tank 382 without exclusively passing through Line 379, hence bypasses cooling system, See Figure 2B, See paragraph [0046], Henson).
Regarding Claim 49, Itou discloses the method according to claim 48, but does not disclose wherein the directing comprises directing the inlet water from the inlet path to the cooling device via the cooling path, the water to be used as a cooling liquid by the cooling device; and directing the inlet water used as the cooling liquid by the cooling device and outputted from the cooling device to a drain.
Henson discloses a water purification method, (See Abstract, Henson), wherein the directing comprises directing the inlet water from the inlet path to the cooling device via the cooling path, the water to be used as a cooling liquid by the cooling device, (Fluid from Line 378 to RO tank 380 which is directed towards RO Membrane 400 which is considered inlet is also redirected to Cooling System via Line 379, See Figure 2B, represented by Cool 320 in Figure 2A or Figure 4, See paragraph [0046] & [0049] for line 378; See paragraphs [0044] & [0048] for cooling system), and directing the inlet water used as the cooling liquid by the cooling device and outputted from the cooling device to a drain, (Redirected inlet water from Line 379 is recirculated to Line 324 “FROM COOL” in Figure 2B and can be directed to drain at either Line 336 or 386, See Figure 2B, See paragraphs [0045], [0046], Henson).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the method of Itou by incorporating wherein the directing comprises directing the inlet water from the inlet path to the cooling device via the cooling path, the water to be used as a cooling liquid by the cooling device; and directing the inlet water used as the cooling liquid by the cooling device and outputted from the cooling device to a drain as in Henson so it “resupplies water lost in” the cooling system, (See paragraph [0048], Henson), in “proportion to the amount of cooling that is provided”, (See paragraph [0058], Henson).
Claims 37 & 50 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itou et al., JPS5584586A, (“Itou”, “Machine Translation of JPS5584586A”, 30 total pages, published 1980), in view of Fabig, (US 2009/0134080).
Regarding Claim 37, Itou discloses the water purification apparatus according to claim 34, but does not disclose wherein the control arrangement is configured to control the water purification apparatus to perform heat disinfection of the RO-membrane by means of water heated by a heater, wherein the heat disinfection includes passing the water heated by a heater through the RO-membrane; and control the cooling arrangement to cool the reject water in the recirculation path (24) in order to cool the RO-membrane (2a) after the heat disinfection of the RO-membrane (2a) is completed.
Fabig discloses a water purification apparatus, (See Abstract, Henson), , wherein the control arrangement is configured to control the apparatus to perform heat disinfection of the RO-membrane by means of water heated by a heater, wherein the heat disinfection includes passing the water heated by a heater through the RO-membrane, (Heating Device 56 for disinfection upstream of RO Membrane 66, See Figure 4 or 5, See paragraph [0070], Fabig); and control the cooling arrangement to cool the reject water in the recirculation path (24) in order to cool the RO-membrane (2a) after the heat disinfection of the RO-membrane (2a) is completed, (Control Valve 76 is opened, water can be run through the system with cool water including Line 70, See Figure 5, See paragraph [0070], Fabig).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the apparatus of Itou by incorporating wherein the control arrangement is configured to control the apparatus to perform heat disinfection of the RO-membrane by means of water heated by a heater, wherein the heat disinfection includes passing the water heated by a heater through the RO-membrane; and control the cooling arrangement to cool the reject water in the recirculation path (24) in order to cool the RO-membrane (2a) after the heat disinfection of the RO-membrane (2a) is completed as in Fabig in order to use “a combination of water recirculation and re-purification…and periodic full system heat disinfection to maintain the microbiological cleanliness of the system”, (See paragraph [0041], Fabig).
Regarding Claim 50, Itou discloses the method according to claim 45 but does not disclose comprising: performing heat disinfection of the RO-membrane by means of water heated by a heater, wherein the heat disinfection includes passing the water heated by a heater through the RO-membrane; and controlling the cooling arrangement to cool the reject water in the recirculation path in order to cool the RO-membrane after the heat disinfection of the RO-membrane is completed.
Fabig discloses a method, (See Abstract, Henson), comprising: performing heat disinfection of the RO-membrane by means of water heated by a heater, wherein the heat disinfection includes passing the heated water through the RO-membrane, (Heating Device 56 for disinfection upstream of RO Membrane 66, See Figure 4 or 5, See paragraph [0070], Fabig); and controlling the cooling arrangement to cool the recirculated reject water in the recirculation path in order to cool the RO-membrane after the heat disinfection of the RO-membrane is completed, (Control Valve 76 is opened, water can be run through the system with cool water including Line 70, See Figure 5, See paragraph [0070], Fabig).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the apparatus of Itou by incorporating comprising: performing heat disinfection of the RO-membrane by means of water heated by a heater, wherein the heat disinfection includes passing the water heated by a heater through the RO-membrane; and controlling the cooling arrangement to cool the reject water in the recirculation path in order to cool the RO-membrane after the heat disinfection of the RO-membrane is completed as in Fabig in order to use “a combination of water recirculation and re-purification…and periodic full system heat disinfection to maintain the microbiological cleanliness of the system”, (See paragraph [0041], Fabig).
Claim(s) 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itou et al., JPS5584586A, (“Itou”, “Machine Translation of JPS5584586A”, 30 total pages, published 1980), in view of Max, (US 2003/0150483).
Regarding Claim 40, Itou discloses the water purification apparatus according to claim 31, but does not disclose wherein the cooling device comprises a thermoelectric cooler.
Max discloses wherein the cooling device comprises a thermoelectric cooler, (See paragraph [0024]-[0026], Max).
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the apparatus of Itou by incorporating wherein the cooling device comprises a thermoelectric cooler as in Max because “thermoelectric elements are completely solid state and contain no mechanical parts or fluids or gases” such that “precision temperature control is possible”, (See paragraph [0026], Max).
Claim(s) 41 & 42 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itou et al., JPS5584586A, (“Itou”, “Machine Translation of JPS5584586A”, 30 total pages, published 1980), in view of Max, (US 2003/0150483), in further view of Hoshina, JP2007125493A, (“Hoshina”, “Machine Translation of JP2007125493A”, 48, pages, published 2007).
Regarding Claims 41 & 42, Modified Itou discloses the water purification apparatus according to claim 40, but does not disclose wherein the thermoelectric cooler is configured to transfer heat from the reject water in the recirculation path to the permeate water in the permeate path.
Hoshina discloses wherein the thermoelectric cooler is configured to transfer heat from the reject water in the recirculation path to permeate water in the the permeate path, (Both permeate and retentate directed into Buffer Tank with cooler, See Figure 2, See paragraph [0041], Hoshina).
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the apparatus of Itou by incorporating wherein the thermoelectric cooler is configured to transfer heat from the reject water in the recirculation path to the permeate water in the permeate path as in Hoshina so that “the permeate and concentrate water are constantly recirculated…when there is no customer demand and the equipment is in standby mode” that “also takes economic efficiency into consideration”, (See paragraph [0041] & [0042], Hoshina).
Additional Disclosures Included:
Claim 42: The water purification apparatus according to claim 41, wherein the water purification apparatus is configured to measure a property indicative of a temperature of the permeate water downstream a point of heat transfer to the permeate water, (Temperature measured in buffer tank when permeate is recirculated and joined, See Figure 2, See paragraph [0031] & [0032], Hoshina), wherein the control arrangement is configured to control the cooling arrangement based on the property, in order to achieve a predetermined temperature of the permeate water, (See pages 14 & 16-17, Itou).
Claim(s) 43 & 44 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itou et al., JPS5584586A, (“Itou”, “Machine Translation of JPS5584586A”, 30 total pages, published 1980), in view of Max, (US 2003/0150483), in further view of Omura et al., (“Omura”, “Machine Translation of JPH0550053A”, 12 total pages, published 1993).
Regarding Claims 43 & 44, modified Itou discloses the water purification apparatus according to claim 40, but does not disclose wherein the thermoelectric cooler is configured to transfer heat from the recirculating reject water in the recirculation path to reject water being passed to drain.
Omura discloses wherein the thermoelectric cooler is configured to transfer heat from the recirculating reject water in the recirculation path to reject water being passed to drain, (Heat Exchanger 3 accepts recirculated concentrate that is passed to drain afterwards, See Figure 1, See paragraphs [0009] & [0010], Omura).
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the apparatus of modified Itou by incorporating wherein the thermoelectric cooler is configured to transfer heat from the recirculating reject water in the recirculation path to reject water being passed to drain as in Omura so that ‘by pre-cooling the raw water using the permeate and/or concentrate that has passed through the reverse osmosis device, cooling energy can be saved”, (See paragraph [0014], Omura).
Additional Disclosures Included:
Claim 44: The water purification apparatus according to claim 43, comprising a concentration sensor configured to measure a concentration of the permeate water, (CIA-2 (conductive dust indicator), See Figure 2, See pages 8-9 & 10, Itou), and a temperature sensor configured to measure a property indicative of the temperature of the reject water being passed to a drain downstream the thermoelectric cooler, (TIA and V6 and V5, downstream of reject stream being cooled with raw water, See Figure 1, See page 10, Itou), wherein the control arrangement is configured to control cooling of the recirculating reject water in the recirculation path based on the concentration of the permeate water and the property of the reject water being passed to the drain, (See pages 10-11, Itou).
Claim(s) 52 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Itou et al., JPS5584586A, (“Itou”, “Machine Translation of JPS5584586A”, published 1980), in view of Sendelius et al., (“Sendelius”, US 2020/0129927).
Regarding Claim 52, Itou discloses the method according to claim 45, but does not disclose wherein the water purification apparatus includes a computer program comprising instructions configured to perform the method.
Sendelius discloses wherein the water purification apparatus includes a computer program comprising instructions configured to perform the method, (See paragraphs [0001], [0063], [0118], Sendelius).
It would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the apparatus of modified Itou by incorporating wherein the water purification apparatus includes a computer program comprising instructions configured to perform the method as in Sendelius because “it is of great importance that the microbial status of RO module…is excellent” so “in order to achieve this, the water purification apparatus…runs cleaning programs on a timely basis”, (See paragraph [0118], Sendelius).
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 JONATHAN M PEO whose telephone number is (571)272-9891. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9AM-5PM.
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, Bobby Ramdhanie can be reached at 571-270-3240. 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.
/JONATHAN M PEO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1779