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 .
Detailed Action
This Office Action responds to the application filed on 08/14/2025.
Claims 1-17 are pending. Claims 18-20 remain withdrawn.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I (Claims 1-17) in the reply filed on 8/14/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that it should be no undue burden on the Examiner to consider all claims in the single application. This is not found persuasive because restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all these inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and examination burden if restriction were not required because the inventions require a different field of search (for example, searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search queries). Specifically, searching microrobot structures with basic PDMS compositions would require different CPC classifications than searching complex multi-block magnetic microrobot architectures with specific weight ratios and geometric configurations, therefore would result in undue burden on the Examiner.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 18, 19, and 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made with traverse in the reply filed on 8/14/2025.
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 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.
Claims 1 – 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20140225694A1 (Sitti) in view of US20210059779A1 (Zhao) and further in view of US20150243404A1 (Wong).
In regards to claim 1 (Sitti) shows a microrobot, comprising:
a first cuboid block comprising polydimethylsiloxane; Sitti [0095] acknowledges polydimethylsiloxane as the usual material for microrobot structural elements and channel components, establishing PDMS as the conventional matrix for such microrobot block structures.
wherein the first cuboid block has a first outer side face and a second outer side face, and the first outer side face is opposite to the second outer side face; Sitti [0093] teaches an 800×800×75 µm cuboid micro-pump block having rectangular planar faces, wherein opposing faces of the cuboid are by geometry directly opposite one another.
a second cuboid block having an outer side face attached over an entirety of the first outer side face of the first cuboid block; Sitti [0114] teaches fabricating multi-piece micro-gripper structures where separate molded magnetic composite blocks are joined together along their full contact faces using epoxy, resulting in full-face attachment between adjacent cuboid elements.
a third cuboid block having an outer side face attached over an entirety of the second outer side face of the first cuboid block; Sitti [0114] teaches joining separate molded magnetic composite blocks along their full contact faces, and Sitti [0093] teaches the resulting structure as a cuboid element with planar faces available for full-face attachment on opposing sides.
wherein the third cuboid block and the second cuboid block are disposed oppositely, and the third cuboid block comprises the mixture; Sitti [0110] teaches a micro-gripper structure wherein two magnetic composite elements are disposed on opposing sides of a central connecting member, and each element comprises the same NdFeB-containing magnetic composite mixture.
wherein the first outer side face of the first cuboid block, the second outer side face of the first cuboid block, the outer side face of the second cuboid block. and the outer side face of the third cuboid block are planar faces; Sitti [0093] teaches an 800×800×75 µm cuboid block structure, wherein all outer surfaces of a molded rectangular cuboid are inherently planar faces.
Sitti differs from the claimed invention in that it does not explicitly disclose wherein the second cuboid block comprises a mixture, the mixture comprises polydimethylsiloxane and neodymium magnet particles; wherein a weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the second cuboid block is from 1: 1 to 1: 10 based on a total weight of the mixture of the second cuboid block; wherein a weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the third cuboid block is from 1: 1 to 1: 10 based on a total weight of the mixture of the third cuboid block;
Zhao teaches wherein the second cuboid block comprises a mixture, the mixture comprises polydimethylsiloxane and neodymium magnet particles; Zhao [0049] teaches a ferromagnetic composite comprising polydimethylsiloxane mixed with NdFeB hard-magnetic microparticles uniformly dispersed throughout the elastomer matrix.
Zhao differs from the claimed invention in that it does not explicitly disclose wherein a weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the second cuboid block is from 1: 1 to 1: 10 based on a total weight of the mixture of the second cuboid block; wherein a weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the third cuboid block is from 1: 1 to 1: 10 based on a total weight of the mixture of the third cuboid block;
Wong teaches wherein a weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the second cuboid block is from 1: 1 to 1: 10 based on a total weight of the mixture of the second cuboid block; Wong [0042] teaches a PDMS-based composite wherein conducting particles constitute 86% to 91% by weight of the total composite. Wong [0024] further teaches mixing 17.6 g of particles with 2.4 g of PDMS, yielding a particle-to-PDMS ratio of approximately 7:1, which falls within the claimed 1:1 to 1:10 range. It would have been obvious to apply these weight ratio teachings to NdFeB particles for optimized magnetic responsiveness.
Wong teaches wherein a weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the third cuboid block is from 1: 1 to 1: 10 based on a total weight of the mixture of the third cuboid block; Wong [0042] teaches the same weight ratio range as applied to limitation v above. It would have been obvious to apply these ratios consistently to the third block for uniform magnetic response.
The motivation to combine Sitti and Zhao at the effective filing date of the invention is to produce a magnetically actuatable multi-block microrobot with well-defined cuboid block geometry and full-face block interfaces by applying Zhao's NdFeB hard-magnetic microparticle composite technology to Sitti's established cuboid block microrobot architecture for precise remote magnetic control in biomedical applications.
The motivation to combine Sitti, Zhao, Wong at the effective filing date of the invention is to optimize particle loading within the NdFeB-PDMS composite blocks by applying Wong's specific PDMS-to-particle weight ratio teachings to the combined Sitti-Zhao microrobot structure for enhanced and predictable magnetic responsiveness across all magnetic blocks.
In regards to claim 2 (Sitti) shows the microrobot according to claim 1:
wherein the second cuboid block and the third cuboid block have the same magnetization direction; Sitti [0110] teaches that when two magnetic composite elements are magnetized in parallel, their magnetization directions are oriented in the same direction, resulting in a magnetically attractive state used for coordinated actuation across multiple blocks.
In regards to claim 3 (Sitti) shows the microrobot according to claim 1:
wherein the second cuboid block and the third cuboid block have different magnetization directions; Sitti [0109] teaches a torque-based micro-gripper wherein the two magnetic composite arm elements are magnetized in outwardly opposing directions, and Sitti [0114] teaches that each gripper tip is explicitly magnetized in an opposite direction to the other, establishing different magnetization directions across two opposing magnetic blocks.
In regards to claim 4 (Sitti) does not show, wherein the weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the second cuboid block is 1:4:
Wong teaches wherein the weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the second cuboid block is 1:4; Wong [0042] teaches the weight percentage of the conducting particles in the PDMS-based composite is in the range of 86% to 91%. It would be obvious to apply these same weight ratios to neodymium particles for optimized magnetic responsiveness.
The motivation to combine Sitti and Zhao at the effective filing date of the invention is to produce a magnetically actuatable multi-block microrobot with well-defined cuboid block geometry and full-face block interfaces by applying Zhao's NdFeB hard-magnetic microparticle composite technology to Sitti's established cuboid block microrobot architecture for precise remote magnetic control in biomedical applications.
The motivation to combine Sitti, Zhao, Wong at the effective filing date of the invention is to select a specific 1:4 PDMS-to-NdFeB weight ratio from within Wong's taught range and apply it to Zhao's NdFeB-PDMS composite blocks in Sitti's microrobot structure for precisely optimized magnetic particle loading and uniform repeatable magnetic actuation performance.
In regards to claim 5 (Sitti) does not show, wherein the weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the third cuboid block is 1:4:
Wong teaches wherein the weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the third cuboid block is 1:4; Wong [0042] teaches the weight percentage of the conducting particles in the PDMS-based composite is in the range of 86% to 91%. It would be obvious to apply these same weight ratios to neodymium particles for optimized magnetic responsiveness.
The motivation to combine Sitti and Zhao at the effective filing date of the invention is to produce a magnetically actuatable multi-block microrobot with well-defined cuboid block geometry and full-face block interfaces by applying Zhao's NdFeB hard-magnetic microparticle composite technology to Sitti's established cuboid block microrobot architecture for precise remote magnetic control in biomedical applications.
The motivation to combine Sitti, Zhao, Wong at the effective filing date of the invention is to select a specific 1:4 PDMS-to-NdFeB weight ratio from within Wong's taught range and apply it to Zhao's NdFeB-PDMS composite blocks in Sitti's microrobot structure for precisely optimized magnetic particle loading and uniform repeatable magnetic actuation performance.
In regards to claim 6 (Sitti) does not show: wherein the microrobot has a length between 30 μm and 3000 μm, a width between 10 μm and 999 μm, and a height between 10 μm and 999 μm;
Zhao teaches wherein the microrobot has a length between 30 μm and 3000 μm, a width between 10 μm and 999 μm, and a height between 10 μm and 999 μm; Zhao [0040] teaches the elongate body 2 has an overall diameter no greater than about 2500 μm and the overall diameter of the elongate body 2 ranges from about 250-1000 μm providing dimensions within all claimed ranges.
The motivation to combine Sitti and Zhao at the effective filing date of the invention is to produce a magnetically controllable microrobot having component block dimensions within the micro-scale range established by both references by combining Sitti's cuboid block microrobot structure with Zhao's NdFeB-PDMS composite for biomedical navigation in viscous environments.
In regards to claim 7 (Sitti) shows the microrobot according to claim 1:
wherein the first cuboid block of the microrobot has a length between 10 μm and 999 μm, a width between 10 μm and 999 μm, and a height between 10 μm and 999 μm; Sitti [0093] teaches an 800×800×75 µm cuboid block, and Sitti [0105] further teaches microrobots around 300 to 800 µm in size, providing component block dimensions within all claimed ranges.
In regards to claim 8 (Sitti) shows the microrobot according to claim 1:
wherein the second cuboid block of the microrobot has a length between 10 μm and 999 μm, a width between 10 μm and 999 μm, and a height between 10 μm and 999 μm; Sitti [0093] teaches an 800×800×75 µm cuboid block with Sitti [0105] teaching microrobots in the 300 to 800 µm size range, providing component block dimensions within all claimed ranges.
In regards to claim 9 (Sitti) shows the microrobot according to claim 1:
wherein the third cuboid block of the microrobot has a length between 10 μm and 999 μm, a width between 10 μm and 999 μm, and a height between 10 μm and 999 μm; Sitti [0093] teaches an 800×800×75 µm cuboid block, and Sitti [0105] further teaches microrobots around 300 to 800 µm in size, providing component block dimensions within all claimed ranges.
In regards to claim 10 (Sitti) shows the microrobot according to claim 1:
wherein the microrobot further comprises a fourth cuboid block having one side connected to the first cuboid block, and the fourth cuboid block comprises the polydimethylsiloxane, and the microrobot has a T-shaped structure; Sitti [0119] explicitly teaches a T-shaped magnetic micro-part that is assembled, magnetized, and actuated by remote magnetic fields, directly disclosing a T-shaped microrobot structure. Sitti [0095] acknowledges polydimethylsiloxane as the conventional structural material for such microrobot elements.
In regards to claim 11 (Sitti) shows the microrobot according to claim 10:
a fifth block connected to the second cuboid block and the fourth cuboid block; Sitti [0113] teaches a micro-gripper frame structure comprising two arm members connected to a cross member, wherein each arm member connects two distinct structural elements, establishing the principle of a block connected to both a lateral magnetic element and a central connecting block.
a sixth block connected with the third cuboid block and the fourth cuboid block, and wherein the fourth cuboid block is disposed between the fifth block and the sixth block; Sitti [0113] teaches the cross member disposed between two arm elements, with each arm connected symmetrically on opposing sides of the central member, directly teaching the fourth block disposed between symmetrically connected fifth and sixth blocks.
Sitti differs from the claimed invention in that it does not explicitly disclose wherein the fifth block comprises the mixture, and wherein a weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the fifth block is from 1:1 to 1: 10 based on a total weight of the mixture of the fifth block; the sixth block comprises the mixture, and a weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the sixth block is from 1:1 to 1:10 based on a total weight of the mixture of the sixth block;
Wong teaches wherein the fifth block comprises the mixture, and wherein a weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the fifth block is from 1:1 to 1: 10 based on a total weight of the mixture of the fifth block; Wong [0042] teaches the weight percentage of the conducting particles in the PDMS-based composite is in the range of 86% to 91%. It would be obvious to apply these same weight ratios to neodymium particles for optimized magnetic responsiveness.
Wong teaches the sixth block comprises the mixture, and a weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the sixth block is from 1:1 to 1:10 based on a total weight of the mixture of the sixth block; Wong [0042] teaches the weight percentage of the conducting particles in the PDMS-based composite is in the range of 86% to 91%. It would be obvious to apply these same weight ratios to neodymium particles for optimized magnetic responsiveness.
The motivation to combine Sitti, Zhao, Wong at the effective filing date of the invention is to achieve optimized and uniform magnetic responsiveness across all magnetic blocks by extending Sitti's established multi-arm connected microrobot framework with Zhao's NdFeB-PDMS ferromagnetic composite and Wong's precise PDMS-to-particle weight ratio control across the fifth and sixth blocks.
In regards to claim 12 (Sitti) shows the microrobot according to claim 11:
wherein the second cuboid block, the third cuboid block, the fifth block, and the sixth block have the same magnetization direction with each other; Sitti [0110] teaches that multiple magnetic composite elements can be magnetized in parallel, producing the same magnetization direction across all magnetic blocks for coordinated actuation. Sitti [0052] further teaches placing the entire mold in a strong uniform magnetic field to simultaneously magnetize all magnetic elements in the same direction.
In regards to claim 13 (Sitti) shows the microrobot according to claim 11:
wherein the second cuboid block, the third cuboid block, the fifth block, and the sixth block have different magnetization directions with each other; Sitti [0038] teaches independently controlling the magnetization direction of each magnetic element by applying field pulses of different strengths, and Sitti [0109] teaches magnetization directions oriented in outwardly opposing directions across multiple discrete magnetic blocks, producing different magnetization directions across the structure.
In regards to claim 14 (Sitti) does not show wherein the weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the fifth block is 1:4:
Wong teaches wherein the weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the fifth block is 1:4; Wong [0042] teaches the weight percentage of the conducting particles in the PDMS-based composite is in the range of 86% to 91%. It would be obvious to apply these same weight ratios to neodymium particles for optimized magnetic responsiveness.
The motivation to combine Sitti, Zhao, Wong at the effective filing date of the invention is to achieve consistent and uniform magnetic performance across all magnetic blocks for coordinated multi-axis actuation by applying Wong's specific 1:4 PDMS-to-NdFeB weight ratio to the fifth and sixth blocks of Sitti's multi-arm microrobot structure incorporating Zhao's NdFeB-PDMS composite.
In regards to claim 15 (Sitti) does not show wherein the weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the sixth block is 1:4:
Wong teaches wherein the weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the sixth block is 1:4; Wong [0042] teaches the weight percentage of the conducting particles in the PDMS-based composite is in the range of 86% to 91%. It would be obvious to apply these same weight ratios to neodymium particles for optimized magnetic responsiveness.
The motivation to combine Sitti, Zhao, Wong at the effective filing date of the invention is to achieve consistent and uniform magnetic performance across all magnetic blocks for coordinated multi-axis actuation by applying Wong's specific 1:4 PDMS-to-NdFeB weight ratio to the fifth and sixth blocks of Sitti's multi-arm microrobot structure incorporating Zhao's NdFeB-PDMS composite.
In regards to claim 17 (Sitti) does not show the microrobot according to claim 10:
Zhao teaches wherein a diameter of each of the neodymium magnet particles is between 0.5 μm and 50 μm; Zhao [0049] teaches ferromagnetic particles 6 (preferably microparticles) and it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to optimize the particle diameter within the range of 0.5-50 μm to achieve proper magnetic responsiveness while maintaining uniform distribution within the PDMS matrix.
The motivation to combine Sitti and Zhao at the effective filing date of the invention is to achieve uniform particle distribution within the PDMS matrix while maintaining adequate magnetic responsiveness by applying Sitti's teaching of NdFeB particles refined to under 10 µm to Zhao's NdFeB-PDMS microrobot composite across all magnetic blocks of the microrobot structure.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20140225694A1 (Sitti) in view of US20210059779A1 (Zhao) and further in view of US20150243404A1 (Wong) as applied in claim 10 above, and further in view of US20200305796A1 (Duplat).
In regards to claim 16 (Sitti) does not show the microrobot according to claim 10 wherein the microrobot further comprises, a seventh block connected to another side of the fourth block, wherein the seventh block and the first block are disposed oppositely, and the seventh block comprises the polydimethylsiloxane; an eighth block connected to one side of the seventh block, wherein the eighth block comprises the mixture, and wherein a weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the eighth block is from 1: 1 to 1: 10 based on a total weight of the mixture of the eighth block; a ninth block connected to another side of the seventh block, wherein the seventh block is disposed between the eighth block and the ninth block, wherein the ninth block comprises the mixture; a weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the ninth block is from 1: 1 to 1: 10 based on a total weight of the mixture of the ninth block; and wherein the microrobot has an H shaped structure:
Wong teaches wherein the eighth block comprises the mixture, and wherein a weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the eighth block is from 1: 1 to 1: 10 based on a total weight of the mixture of the eighth block; Wong [0042] teaches the weight percentage of the conducting particles in the PDMS-based composite is in the range of 86% to 91%. It would be obvious to apply these same weight ratios to neodymium particles for optimized magnetic responsiveness.
Wong teaches wherein the seventh block is disposed between the eighth block and the ninth block, wherein the ninth block comprises the mixture; a weight ratio of the polydimethylsiloxane to the neodymium magnet particles of the ninth block is from 1: 1 to 1: 10 based on a total weight of the mixture of the ninth block; Wong [0042] teaches the weight percentage of the conducting particles in the PDMS-based composite is in the range of 86% to 91%. It would be obvious to apply these same weight ratios to neodymium particles for optimized magnetic responsiveness.
Wong differs from the claimed invention in that it does not explicitly disclose a seventh block connected to another side of the fourth block, wherein the seventh block and the first block are disposed oppositely, and the seventh block comprises the polydimethylsiloxane; an eighth block connected to one side of the seventh block; a ninth block connected to another side of the seventh block; wherein the microrobot has an H- shaped structure;
Duplat teaches a seventh block connected to another side of the fourth cuboid block, wherein the seventh block and the first cuboid block are disposed oppositely, and the seventh block comprises the polydimethylsiloxane; Duplat [0039] teaches a microrobot body with a head portion and a rear portion connected by a central deformable PDMS portion, wherein structural PDMS blocks are disposed on opposing sides of a central connecting element.
Duplat teaches an eighth block connected to one side of the seventh block; Duplat [0039] teaches basic multi-component microrobot structure where additional block connections would be obvious structural variations for enhanced magnetic control.
Duplat teaches a ninth block connected to another side of the seventh block; Duplat [0039] teaches basic multi-component microrobot structure where additional block connections would be obvious structural variations for enhanced magnetic control.
Duplat teaches wherein the microrobot has an H- shaped structure; Duplat [0039] teaches microrobot with multiple connected structural components where H-shaped structure would be obvious geometric variation of multi-component microrobot design.
The motivation to combine Sitti, Zhao, and Wong at the effective filing date of the invention is to provide a structurally symmetric expanded microrobot with precise magnetic particle loading across the eighth and ninth blocks by combining Sitti's multi-block connected microrobot architecture with Zhao's NdFeB-PDMS composite technology and Wong's optimized weight ratios for enhanced magnetic control.
The motivation to combine Sitti, Zhao, Wong, and Duplat at the effective filing date of the invention is to extend the T-shaped structure of claim 10 into a symmetric H-shaped geometry by incorporating Duplat's opposing-element multi-component microrobot structural framework into the combined Sitti-Zhao-Wong microrobot for independent magnetic actuation about a central axis and advanced directional control in biomedical navigation.
Response to Argument
Applicant's arguments filed on February 2, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues with respect to claim 1 that Zhao fails to disclose cuboid blocks having planar outer side faces, that Zhao's outer shell 4 and inner core 3 are arranged in a coaxial inner-outer tubular configuration with curved surfaces rather than planar faces, and that Zhao fails to disclose an outer side face of a second cuboid block attached over an entirety of an outer side face of a first cuboid block. Applicant further argues that the planar-faced block structure of the claimed invention enables modular heterogeneous material integration that is structurally incompatible with Zhao's tubular configuration, and that claims 2 through 17 are allowable by virtue of their dependency from claim 1.
However, the examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner notes that the present office action has been revised to rely on US20140225694A1 (Sitti) as the primary reference in place of Zhao. Accordingly, applicant's arguments directed specifically to the structural limitations of Zhao are moot with respect to the current rejection.
Sitti directly and explicitly discloses the limitations applicant argues are absent from the prior art. Sitti [0093] teaches an 800×800×75 µm cuboid micro-pump block with rectangular planar outer surfaces, directly disclosing the cuboid block geometry and planar face requirements of claim 1. Sitti [0114] teaches joining separate molded magnetic composite cuboid blocks along their full contact faces using epoxy, directly disclosing full-face outer side face attachment between adjacent blocks. Sitti [0110] teaches two magnetic composite blocks disposed on opposing sides of a central connecting member, establishing the oppositely disposed block arrangement recited in claim 1. Furthermore, applicant's argument that the claimed planar block architecture enables modular material integration that is incompatible with tubular structures does not distinguish over Sitti, which employs the same planar-faced modular block architecture to achieve complex multi-block configurations including T-shaped structures as taught in Sitti [0119].
Regarding claims 2 through 17, applicant has provided no substantive response to the specific limitations of the dependent claims beyond asserting allowability by dependency. As the rejection of independent claim 1 is maintained for the reasons set forth above, and as each dependent claim limitation is separately supported by the cited references as detailed in the rejection, claims 2 through 17 remain rejected. Therefore, all rejections are maintained.
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 ANWER AHMED ALAWDI whose telephone number is (703)756-1018. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:30 pm.
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, Jack Chiang can be reached on (571)-272-7483. 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.
/ANWER AHMED ALAWDI/Examiner, Art Unit 2851
/JACK CHIANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2851