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 .
Claims
Claims 1-10 and 12-23 are pending.
Claims 1, 12, 21, and 22 are amended.
Claim 23 is newly added.
Claim 11 is cancelled.
Examiner advises Applicant to change the status of claims 9-10 in their response to this action as they are no longer withdrawn claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 7 of response filed 07/28/2026, with respect to the 112 rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 112 rejection has been withdrawn per applicant’s amendment to the claims.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-8 and 12-23 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. Furthermore, due to applicant’s amendments a new 112 issue has been invoked.
Applicant's response filed 07/28/2026 provides no arguments regarding the 103 rejection of claims 9-10 specifically and therefore the rejection is maintained. As applicant has provided no arguments, interpretation is made of the lack of disagreement with the rejection.
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 1-8 and 12-23 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.
Regarding claims 1, 12, 21 and 22, the claims have been amended to recite “the diaphragm configured to deform proportional to a change in pressure”, “movement of the diaphragm is proportional to a change in pressure”, “the deformation is proportional to the increase in pressure” and “the diaphragm configured to deform proportional to a change in pressure”. However it is unclear what the term “proportionally” means in regards to the claim language. Applicant’s instant specification (see paragraph 0046) recites “as pressure of the fluid increases, the diaphragm may be configured to extend or move towards the sensor proportionally (linear or non-linearly) with a pressure of the fluid in the receiving portion of the kink detector”. A relationship that is considered “non-linear” is not a proportional one and the paragraph 0046 appears to give the term to recite and cover a relationships that is not “proportional”. The term “proportional” usually requires a constant ratio between two quantities and excludes the non-linear behavior. Applicant’s amendments to the claims appear to give two indistinguishable meanings in scope of what “proportional” actually means and claims. Therefore, the claim has been rendered indefinite. Examiner suggest amending the claims and specification to clarify the meaning and scope of the description and limitation.
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.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Rotstein US9610404
Regarding claim 21, Rotstein discloses a method (infusion pump system-10 implements the method) of detecting a kink within a medication delivery system (See Fig 3,), the method comprising:
passing fluid from a fluid source (fluid cartridge-120) to a pump (pump device-100) through a fluid flow path (fluid channel-260) within the medication delivery system;
passing fluid from the pump to a kink detector (occlusion detection system-250) through the fluid flow path; and
sensing, based on deformation of a diaphragm (flexible membrane-265) coupled to the fluid flow path (Col 12 line 17-Col 13 line 31), an increase in pressure in the fluid or a lack of a flow of fluid when the flow is expected (Col 1 line 48-62, Col 12 line 48-63, Col 15 line 45-55, Col 18 line 59-Col 19 line 27), wherein the deformation is proportional to the increase in pressure in the fluid or a lack of a flow of fluid (Col 12 line 17-Col 13 line 31, Col 15 line 45-55, and Col 18 line 59-Col 19 line 27).
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.
Claims 1-3, 6-7, 12-17, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rotstein US9610404 in view of Olsen US5695473.
Regarding claim 1, Rotstein discloses a disease management device (infusion pump system-10) comprising:
a medical delivery pump (pump device-100) configured to deliver a medication from a medication pouch (fluid cartridge-120) to a patient via a cannula (flexible tube-147 connects to cannula-149) implanted in a patient (See Fig 3, Col 8 line 10-42); and
a kink detection system (occlusion detection system-250) configured to measure an obstruction in the cannula (Col 12 line 17-Col 13 line 31), the kink detection system comprising:
a fluid receiving portion (Cap device-130 includes fluid channel-260) configured to receive fluid from the medical delivery pump (Col 12 line 17-Col 13 line 31);
a diaphragm (flexible membrane-265) coupled to the fluid receiving portion, the diaphragm configured to deform proportional to a change in pressure in the fluid received (Col 12 line 17-Col 13 line 31);
a sensor (sensor circuit-252) configured to measure an extent of deformation of the diaphragm (Col 12 line 17-Col 13 line 31, Col 14 line 4-61 ); and
output an alert to the patient if the change in pressure passes the threshold change (Col 13 line 18-31, Col 17 line 13-54); and a fluid outlet (output port-139 connects to tubing-147) configured to deliver the fluid to the patient (Col 12 line 17-Col 13 line 31).
However, Rotstein fails to disclose one or more hardware processors configured to: determine a pressure in the fluid based on the extent of deformation; determine if a change in the pressure in the fluid passes a threshold change. Olsen discloses one or more hardware processors (processor module-50) configured to:
determine a pressure in the fluid based on the extent of deformation (Sensors-42 and 44 are used as diaphragm gauges, Col 5 line 48-Col 6 line 6);
determine if a change in the pressure in the fluid passes a threshold change (Fig 8A-B, Col 10 line 9-Col 13 line 2 discloses determining if a pressure change in the fluid exceeds a predetermined range and alerting a user).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Olsen into Rotstein for the purpose increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for shutting down or adjusting the device if undesired pressure is detected which protects the device from potential damage.
Regarding claim 2, Rotstein discloses the device according to claim 1.
However, Rotstein fails to disclose the sensor comprises a capacitive sensor. Olsen discloses the sensor comprises a capacitive sensor (Sensors-42 and 44 can be capacitive sensors, Col 5 line 48-64).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Olsen into Rotstein for the purpose increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for using a sensor type with a higher detection sensitivity which would increase measurement accuracy.
Regarding claim 3, Rotstein discloses the device according to claim 1.
However, Rotstein fails to disclose the sensor comprises a conductive sensor. Olsen discloses. the sensor comprises a conductive sensor (Sensors-42 and 44 can be conductive sensors such as force sensing resistors (FSR) and foil type strain gauges, Col 5 line 48-64).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Olsen into Rotstein for the purpose increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for converting physical stretching, bending or pressure into direct electrical resistance or impedance changes which improves the detection range.
Regarding claim 6, Rotstein discloses the device according to claim 3.
However, Rotstein fails to disclose the conductive sensor is located within a conductive sensing circuit, the conductive sensing circuit comprising: a bias resistor; a conductive strip; and a controller. Olsen discloses the conductive sensor (Sensors-42 and 44 can be conductive sensors such as force sensing resistors (FSR) and foil type strain gauges, Col 5 line 48-64).is located within a conductive sensing circuit (pump mechanism-32 includes it’s own respective conductive circuit), the conductive sensing circuit comprising: a bias resistor (included in conductive circuits); a conductive strip (foil strips is a conductive strip); and a controller (control module, Col 10 line 30-42). (See claim 4, Col 5 line 39-64.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Olsen into Rotstein for the purpose increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for converting physical stretching, bending or pressure into direct electrical resistance or impedance changes which improves the detection range.
Regarding claim 7, Rotstein discloses the device according to claim 6.
However, Rotstein fails to disclose the conductive strip is configured to stretch as the pressure in the fluid is increased. Olsen discloses the conductive strip (foil strips is a conductive strip) is configured to stretch as the pressure in the fluid is increased. (Col 5 line 39-64.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Olsen into Rotstein for the purpose increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for converting physical stretching, bending or pressure into direct electrical resistance or impedance changes which improves the detection range.
Regarding claim 12, Rotstein discloses a method (infusion pump system-10 implements the method) of detecting a kink (occlusion detection system-250) within a disease management device, the method comprising:
passing fluid from a fluid source (fluid cartridge-120) to a pump (pump device-100) through a fluid flow path within the disease management device (cap device-130 includes fluid channel-260);
passing fluid from the pump to a kink detector through the fluid flow path (Col 12 line 17-Col 13 line 31); sensing movement of a diaphragm (flexible membrane-265) connected to the kink detector in response to the fluid passing (Col 12 line17-Col 13 line 31);
measuring the movement of the diaphragm (Col 12 line 17-Col 13 line 31, Col 14 line 4-61), wherein movement of the diaphragm is proportional to a change in pressure of the fluid (Col 12 line 17-Col 13 line 31), and passing fluid from the kink detector to a cannula (output port-139 connects to tubing -147 connected to cannula-149) located at an implantation site of a patient (See fig 3).
However, Rotstein fails to disclose measuring pressure of the fluid based on movement of the diaphragm. Olsen discloses measuring pressure of the fluid based on movement of the diaphragm (Sensors-42 and 44 are used as diaphragm gauges, Col 5 line 48-Col 6 line 6), (Fig 8A-B, Col 10 line 9-Col 13 line 2 discloses determining if a pressure change in the fluid exceeds a predetermined range and alerting a user).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Olsen into Rotstein for the purpose increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for shutting down or adjusting the device if undesired pressure is detected which protects the device from potential damage.
Regarding claim 13, Rotstein in view of Olsen disclose the method according to claim 12.
Furthermore, Rotstein discloses alerting a patient of the kink based on a determination of a kink presence. (Col 13 line 18-31, Col 17 line 13-54)
Regarding claim 14, Rotstein discloses the method according to claim 12.
However, Rotstein fails to disclose a capacitive sensor senses movement of the diaphragm. Olsen discloses a capacitive sensor senses movement of the diaphragm. (Sensors-42 and 44 can be capacitive sensors, Col 5 line 48-64).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Olsen into Rotstein for the purpose increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for using a sensor type with a higher detection sensitivity which would increase measurement accuracy.
Regarding claim 15, Rotstein discloses the method according to claim 12.
However, Rotstein fails to disclose a conductive sensor senses movement of the diaphragm. Olsen discloses a conductive sensor senses movement of the diaphragm. (Sensors-42 and 44 can be conductive sensors such as force sensing resistors (FSR) and foil type strain gauges, Col 5 line 48-64).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Olsen into Rotstein for the purpose increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for converting physical stretching, bending or pressure into direct electrical resistance or impedance changes which improves the detection range.
Regarding claim 16, Rotstein discloses the method according to claim 15.
However, Rotstein fails to disclose the conductive sensor is located within a conductive sensing circuit comprising: a conductive strip configured to measure a force of the diaphragm; a bias resistor; and a controller. Olsen discloses the conductive sensor (Sensors-42 and 44 can be conductive sensors such as force sensing resistors (FSR) and foil type strain gauges, Col 5 line 48-64) is located within a conductive sensing circuit (pump mechanism-32 includes it’s own respective conductive circuit), comprising: a conductive strip (foil strips is a conductive strip) configured to measure a force of the diaphragm; a bias resistor (included in conductive circuits); and a controller (control module, Col 10 line 30-42). (See claim 4, Col 5 line 39-64.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Olsen into Rotstein for the purpose increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for converting physical stretching, bending or pressure into direct electrical resistance or impedance changes which improves the detection range.
Regarding claim 17, Rotstein discloses the method according to claim 16.
However, Rotstein fails to disclose the conductive strip is configured to stretch as the pressure in the fluid is increased. Olsen discloses the conductive strip (foil strips is a conductive strip) is configured to stretch as the pressure in the fluid is increased. (Col 5 line 39-64.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Olsen into Rotstein for the purpose increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for converting physical stretching, bending or pressure into direct electrical resistance or impedance changes which improves the detection range.
Regarding claim 22, Rotstein discloses a disease management device (infusion pump system-10) comprising:
a medical delivery pump (pump device-100) configured to deliver a flow of medication (fluid cartridge-120) to a patient (See Fig 3, Col 8 line 10-42); and
a kink detection system (occlusion detection system-250) the kink detection system configured to indicate an increase in pressure in the flow or a lack of the flow when the flow is expected (Col 1 line 48-62, Col 12 line 48-63, Col 15 line 45-55, Col 18 line 59-Col 19 line 27), the kink detection system further comprising:
a fluid receiving portion (cap device-130 includes fluid channel-260) configured to receive fluid from the medical delivery pump (Col 12 line 17-Col 13 line 31);
a diaphragm (flexible membrane-265) coupled to the fluid receiving portion, the diaphragm configured to deform proportional to a change in pressure in the fluid received (Col 12 line 17-Col 13 line 31);
a sensor (sensor circuit-252) configured to measure an extent of deformation of the diaphragm (Col 12 line 17-Col 13 line 31, Col 14 line 4-61 ); and output an alert to the patient if the change in pressure passes the threshold change (Col 13 line 18-31, Col 17 line 13-54); and
a fluid outlet (output port-139 connects to tubing-147) configured to deliver the fluid to the patient (Col 12 line 17-Col 13 line 31).
However, Rotstein fails to disclose one or more hardware processors configured to: determine a pressure in the fluid based on the extent of deformation; determine if a change in the pressure in the fluid passes a threshold change. Olsen discloses one or more hardware processors (processor module-50) configured to:
determine a pressure in the fluid based on the extent of deformation (Sensors-42 and 44 are used as diaphragm gauges, Col 5 line 48-Col 6 line 6);
determine if a change in the pressure in the fluid passes a threshold change (Fig 8A-B, Col 10 line 9-Col 13 line 2 discloses determining if a pressure change in the fluid exceeds a predetermined range and alerting a user).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Olsen into Rotstein for the purpose increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for shutting down or adjusting the device if undesired pressure is detected which protects the device from potential damage.
Claims 4-5, 18-20 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rotstein US9610404 in view of Olsen US5695473 in further view of Haase US6700392.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Rotstein and Olsen disclose the device according to claim 2.
However, the combination fails to disclose the capacitive sensor is located within a capacitive sensing circuit, the capacitive sensing circuit comprising: a bias resistor; a touchpad; a capacitor; and a controller. Haase discloses the capacitive sensor (sensing capacitor-310) is located within a capacitive sensing circuit (circuit-100), the capacitive sensing circuit comprising: a bias resistor (resistor-312); a touchpad (capacitor-310); a capacitor (Schmitt trigger-110, 309); and a controller (counter/timer module, Col 9 line 27-37). (See figs 1 and 3)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Haase into Rotstein for the purpose increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for using sensors with a higher detection sensitivity which would increase measurement accuracy.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Rotstein and Olsen disclose the device according to claim 4.
However, the combination fails to an electrical capacitance of the touchpad is configured to correspond to movement of the diaphragm. Haase discloses an electrical capacitance of the touchpad (capacitor-310) is configured to correspond to movement of the diaphragm (Col 6 line 5- Col 7 line 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Haase into Rotstein for the purpose increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for using sensors with a higher detection sensitivity which would increase measurement accuracy.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Rotstein and Olsen disclose the method according to claim 14.
However, the combination fails to disclose the capacitive sensor is located within a capacitive sensing circuit comprising: a bias resistor; a touchpad; a capacitor; and a controller. Haase discloses the capacitive sensor (sensing capacitor-310) is located within a capacitive sensing circuit (circuit-100), comprising: a bias resistor (resistor-312); a touchpad (capacitor-310); a capacitor (Schmitt trigger-110, 309); and a controller (counter/timer module, Col 9 line 27-37). (See figs 1 and 3)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Haase into Rotstein for the purpose increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for using sensors with a higher detection sensitivity which would increase measurement accuracy.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Rotstein and Olsen disclose the method according to claim 18.
However, the combination fails to disclose the capacitor measures an electrical capacitance of the touchpad. Haase discloses the capacitor (Schmitt trigger-110, 309) measures an electrical capacitance of the touchpad (capacitor-310).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Haase into Rotstein for the purpose increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for using sensors with a higher detection sensitivity which would increase measurement accuracy.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Rotstein and Olsen disclose the method according to claim 19.
However, the combination fails to disclose the electrical capacitance is configured to correspond to the movement of the diaphragm. Haase discloses the electrical capacitance is configured to correspond to the movement of the diaphragm. (Col 6 line 5- Col 7 line 10)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Haase into Rotstein for the purpose increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for using sensors with a higher detection sensitivity which would increase measurement accuracy.
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Rotstein and Olsen disclose the method according to claim 19.
However, the combination fails to disclose a capacitance of the touchpad changes in proportion to the extent of deformation of the diaphragm. Haase discloses a capacitance of the touchpad (capacitor-310) changes in proportion to the extent of deformation of the diaphragm. (Col 6 line 63-Col 7 line 20)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Haase into Rotstein for the purpose increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for using sensors with a higher detection sensitivity which would increase measurement accuracy.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rotstein US9610404 in view of Olsen US5695473 in further view of Kruse et al US10736037 (hereinafter “Kruse”).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Rotstein and Olsen disclose the device according to claim 1.
However, the combination fails the one or more hardware processors are further configured to communicate with peripheral devices via bluetooth. Kruse discloses the one or more hardware processors are further configured to communicate with peripheral devices via bluetooth. (See Figs 2 and 5-6B, Col 5 line 43- Col 6 line 22, Col 6 line 58-Col 9 line 14)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the design of Kruse into Rotstein for the purpose of increasing life of the device. The modification would allow for using low-power components that allow for remote dosing adjustments, real-time compliance tracking and automation scheduling using external devices.
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flaherty US7887505 in view of Olsen US5935106 (hereinafter “Olsen 106’”)
Regarding claim 9, Flaherty discloses a detection system (fluid delivery device-10 connected to device-100) configured to detect an obstruction within a fluid flow path (flow path-210 connected to exit port-70), the detection system comprising:
a fluid receiving portion configured to receive fluid from a delivery pump (dispensers-40 can be a pump device, Col 8 line 4-27), (Col 8 lines 28-Col 9 line 32 and Figs 3-4 which shows the detector positioned on the flow path-210);
a diaphragm (diaphragm-220) coupled to the fluid receiving portion, the diaphragm configured to deform in correspondence with a change in pressure in the fluid received (Col 8 line 28-Col 9 line 32);
a sensor (sensor-230) configured to measure an extent of deformation of the diaphragm (Col 8 line 44-Col 9 line 16); and
one or more hardware processors (processors-50) configured to output an alert to a user if the change in pressure passes the predetermined threshold (Col 9 line 23-32 and Col 9 line 63-Col 10 line 19).
However, Flaherty fails to disclose determine a pressure in the fluid based on the extent of deformation; determine if a change in the pressure in the fluid passes a predetermined pressure threshold. Olsen 106’ discloses determine a pressure in the fluid based on the extent of deformation (Col 5 line 51-Col 6 line 9); determine if a change in the pressure in the fluid passes a predetermined pressure threshold (Col 7 line 43-Col 8 line 31). (Col 8 line 13-16, Col 10 line 33-Col 12 line 63 discloses outputting an alert based on a pressure passing a threshold).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include Olsen 106’ into Flaherty for the purpose of increasing the life of the device. The modification would allow for shutting down or adjusting the device if undesired pressure is detected which protects the device from potential repair or replacement.
Regarding claim 10, Flaherty discloses the detection system according to claim 9.
However, Flaherty fails to disclose the sensor comprises a capacitive sensor. Olsen 106’ discloses the sensor comprises a capacitive sensor. (Col 5 line 51-Col 6 line 9)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include Olsen 106’ into Flaherty for the purpose of increasing detection accuracy. The modification would allow for using sensors with a higher detection sensitivity which would increase measurement accuracy.
Conclusion
The prior art as cited on the PTO-892 is made of record and not relied upon but considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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 NIGEL H PLUMB whose telephone number is (571)272-8886. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-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, John Breene can be reached at 571-272-4107. 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 (USA or CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NIGEL H PLUMB/ Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/Eric S. McCall/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights