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 Amendment
The Amendment filed 03/27/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-20 remain pending are being examined herein.
Status of Objections and Rejections
The rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 35 U.S.C. 103 are being withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendments.
New grounds for rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 35 U.S.C. 103 are necessitated by Applicant’s amendments.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
the limitation in lines 8-13, “a top channel opening…” should be indented for clarity because the limitation is of the pressure equilibration channel.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 7 is 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 7 recites the limitation “… comprising a drain valve communicating with the drain port … “ in lines 1-2. Since the amended claim 1 now recites “a drain port comprising a drain valve” in line 6, it is unclear whether the recited drain valve in this limitation is the same drain valve as the drain valve in the amended claim 1. Clarification is requested. If the Applicant intends the recited drain valves in claims 1 and 7 to be the same drain valve, it is suggested that the limitation to be amended to “… wherein the drain valve is configured for on/off flow control” .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
Claims 1- 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al. (US 6309608 B1) in view of Bailey et al. (US 20120085415 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Zhou teaches a fluid delivery device (Figs. 1, 11, 12), comprising:
a plate (100) comprising a plate opening (the opening of one the reaction vessels 110)(an opening is interpreted as a two-dimension space);
a top wall (200 or 900)(col. 20, lns. 18-23, either 200 or 900 can be used), wherein the top wall and the plate cooperatively enclose a top chamber (col. 17, lns. 39-40, “top compartment” which is the space above the reaction vessels 110 and below 200 or 900);
a bottom wall (wash plate 600)(Figs, 11 and 12, col. 20, lns. 18-37, wash plate 600 can be used instead of plate 300 in Fig. 1), wherein the bottom wall and the plate cooperatively enclose a bottom chamber (col. 18, lns. 2-3, “bottom compartment” space below the reaction vessels and above the bottom of 600);
a drain port (670) comprising a drain valve (col. 24, lns. 59-63) communicating with the bottom chamber (600) (Fig. 11 and col. 23, lns. 1-19); and
a pressure equilibration channel (the reaction vessels 110 at left-most position in the top row, hereinafter “top left-most reaction vessel 110”)(“pressure equilibration” is interpreted as an intended use. The reaction vessels 110 meets the structural limitation of the intended use) comprising:
a top channel opening communicating with the top chamber and a bottom channel opening communicating with the bottom chamber (Fig. 5A), wherein the pressure equilibration channel defines an unobstructed lumen between the top chamber and the bottom chamber (the top left-most reaction vessel 110 is an unobstructed lumen between the top and bottom chamber) configured such that a gas flow path runs between the top chamber and the bottom chamber via the pressure equilibration channel (interpreted as functional limitation. Fig. 5A, reaction vessel 110 is cavity a that is capable of having a gas flow path between the top chamber and bottom chamber through the 110 destinated as the pressure equilibration channel);
a compartment (another one of the reaction vessels 110, which includes the wall provided by plate 100) in the plate opening (the opening of the another one of reaction vessels 110, the opening is a 2 dimensional space, which overlaps with the space of the one of the reaction vessels 110) such that a compartment inlet (the very top portion of the another one of the reaction vessels 110) of the compartment communicates with the top chamber (col. 17, lns. 39-40, “top compartment” which is the space above the reaction vessels 110 and below 200)(col. 15, lns. 56-60 and Fig. 1) and a compartment outlet (the bottom recess 120 of the another one of the reaction vessel 110)(Fig. 5A) of the compartment communicates with the bottom chamber (col. 17, lns. 39-40, “bottom compartment” space below the reaction vessels and above the bottom of 600)(Fig. 5A and col. 10, lns. 10-30, col. 11, lns. 9-24, col. 22, lns. 49-67, col. 23, lns. 1-19) chamber, wherein a liquid flow path runs through the compartment and out from the compartment outlet, through the bottom chamber, and into the drain port (Fig. 5A and col. 10, lns. 10-30, col. 11, lns. 9-24, col. 22, lns. 49-67, col. 23, lns. 1-19);
the liquid flow path from the compartment and the gas flow path from the pressure equilibration channel are in open communication with the bottom chamber simultaneously (Fig. 5A, the slide seal in “vessel open” position), configured such that:
(i) when a pressure differential exists between the top chamber and the bottom chamber and the drain valve is open, liquid flows through the compartment (col. 24, lns. 59-67); and
(ii) upon closure of the drain valve, gas flows through the pressure equilibration channel to equilibrate pressure between the top chamber and the bottom chamber (when the top left-most reaction vessel 110 is without liquid, gas flow through the top left-most reaction vessel 110 resulting equilibrate pressure between the top and bottom chambers).
Zhou teaches the fluid delivery device is a system for performing organic synthesis in a multi-well format. Zhou teaches each well/compartment (reaction vessel 110) contains frit 500 to retain resin as a solid support for organic synthesis to take place (col. 10, lns. 10-30).
Zhou teach the compartment (reaction vessel 110) is integrated to the plate and thus Zhou fail to teach the compartment is removably mounted in the plate opening.
Bailey teaches a multi-well synthesizer (Fig. 2B). Bailey teaches synthesizer comprises of a well plate (202), including a plurality of wells 304 (para. 0043 and Fig. 3B), each is configured to have a vial 104 (removably mounted compartment) inserted within (para. 0044)), wherein vial 104 comprise frits 604, which holds solid support for organic synthesis (paras. 0002, 0005 and 0052).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the integrated reaction vessels 110 taught by Zhou to take the form of insertable vials taught by Bailey (para. 0038) because doing so allow users to have an easier customization flexibility with a reasonable expectation of success (MPEP 2143)(I)(G).
The teachings of Zhou as modified by Bail would yield the compartment (vial taught by Bailey with the shape and dimension of reaction vessel 110 of Zhou, hereinafter “vial”) is removably mounted (Bailey, para. 0013, vials are inserted/mounted into wells. The vial can be removed from the well, for example with appropriate tools, through BRI, anything is removeable) in the plate opening (the corresponding opening of reaction vessel 110).
Regarding claim 2, modified Zhou teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 1. Modified Zhou further teaches wherein the compartment (vial), positioned in the plate opening (Fig. 5A of Zhou).
Regarding claim 3, modified Zhou teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 2. Modified Zhou further teaches wherein the compartment (vial) comprises a solid phase material (resin) positioned between the compartment inlet and the compartment outlet (in modified Zhou, porous frit 500 locates at the bottom of each vial, serve to retain support resin, Zhou, col. 10, lns. 10-30. See also Bailey, para. 0052 and Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 4, modified Zhou teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 3. Modified Zhou further teaches the fluid delivery device of claim 3, wherein the compartment (vial) comprises a frit (Zhou, 500), and the solid phase material is retained on or embedded with the frit (in modified Zhou, porous frit 500 locates at the bottom of each vial, serve to retain support resin, Zhou, col. 10, lns. 10-30. See also Bailey, para. 0052 and Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 5, modified Zhou teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 3. Modified Zhou further teaches wherein the solid phase material is selected from the group consisting of: a plurality of solid phase support elements packed together as a solid phase bed; a porous monolithic support; and a porous material embedded in a frit (in modified Zhou, porous frit 500 locates at the bottom of each vial, serve to retain support resin, Zhou, col. 10, lns. 10-30. See also Bailey, para. 0052 and Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 6, modified Zhou teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 3.
Modified Zhou fails to disclose explicitly the type(s) of resin is being employed as the solid phase material, and thus fails to teach the solid phase material comprises at least one of the following features:
the solid phase material comprises a plurality of solid phase support elements, and the solid phase support elements have a characteristic dimension in a range from 10 mm to 1000 mm;
the solid phase material has a pore size in a range from 10 nm to 500 nm;
the solid phase material is composed of a material selected from the group consisting of: controlled pore glass; porous silica; and polymer resin.
However, Zhou teaches the fluid delivery device is use for semi-automated organic synthesis (Title, Abstract). Zhou further teaches in paragraph 6 in the “Background of the Invention,” that polymeric resins are often used as supports in organic synthesis.
Therefore, It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the resin taught by Zhou in the description of the present invention with polymeric resins because one of the ordinary skill in the art would accordingly have recognize polymeric resins would result in the predictable result of providing a solid phase material for organic synthesis, the intended use of Zhou’s invention (MPEP 2143 (I)(B)).
The teachings of Zhou would yield the solid phase material is composed of polymer resin.
Regarding claim 7, modified Zhou teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 1.
Zhou further teaches the drain port (670) comprising a drain valve (col. 24, ln. 59 – col 25, ln. 5) as discussed in claim 1 above, and the drain valve communicating with the drain port (670) and configured for on/off flow control (interpreted as a functional limitation. Moreover, col. 24, ln. 59 – col 25, ln. 5).
Zhou teaches only 1 drain valve per drain port, and thus fails to teaches the device comprising a drain valve communicating with the drain port and configured for on/off flow control, or configured for both on/off flow control and variable flow rate control.
However, Zhou discloses the claimed invention except for the duplication of a drain valve. Therefore, It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to duplicate the drain valve, since it have been held that a mere duplication of working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. Moreover, "mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced." In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B).
Regarding claim 8, modified Zhou teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 1. Zhou further teaches the fluid delivery device comprising a gas inlet port (gas inlet port)(“gas inlet” is interpreted as an intended use) communicating with the top chamber (col. 20, ln. 6-37, purge gas flows into a gas inlet port located on wash plate 600, through the bottom compartment up through the purge holes, through the top compartment. Col. 20, lns. 38-44 teaches other suitable gas flow arrangement, and gas inlet can be located on cover plate 200, which would give a more direct communication to the top compartment).
Regarding claim 9, modified Zhou teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 8. Zhou further teaches the fluid delivery device of claim 8, comprising a pressure regulating device (mechanical back-pressure regulator or liquid bubbler communicating) with the gas inlet port (col. 20, lns. 38-44 and col., lns. 32-44, a mechanical back-pressure regulator or liquid bubbler and the gas inlet port communicates through the purge gas).
Regarding claim 10, modified Zhou teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 8. Zhou further teaches the fluid delivery device comprising a gas inlet valve (hole 150 on 400 and the portion of 400 that can cover the opening of 142, Figs. 5C and 5F)(interpreted “gas inlet” as an intended use) communicating with the gas inlet port (col. 24-37, gas flows from gas inlet port to hole 150, which when aligns with 142 and 140, allows gas to continue to flow to the top compartment) and configured for on/off flow control (interpreted as a functional limitation. col. 20, lns. 6-37, the alignment between 150 with 140 and 142 controls the purge gas flow).
Regarding claim 11, modified Zhou teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 1. Modified Zhou further teaches wherein the plate opening is one of a plurality of plate openings (the openings of 110 besides the opening at the top left-most position), and the plate is configured to hold a plurality of compartments (vials) in the respective plate openings (interpreted as a functional limitation. Fig. 1, plate 100 is capable of hold a plurality of compartments, vials. Fig. 5A and claim 1), such that respective compartment inlets of the compartments communicate with the top chamber (“top compartment”, space above the reaction vessels 110, or vials in modified Zhou, and below 200)(Figs. 1, 5A, col. 17, lns 39-40) and respective compartment outlets of the compartments communicate with the bottom chamber (“bottom compartment” space below the reaction vessels, or vials in modified Zhou, and above the bottom of 600)(Figs. 5A, col. 10, lns. 10-30, col. 11, lns. 9-24, col. 20, lns. 18-23, col. 23, lns. 1-19).
Regarding claim 12, modified Zhou teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 11. Zhou further teaches wherein the plate openings are sized and positioned such that, when the compartments are positioned in the plate openings, the compartment inlets are spaced from each other at a distance selected from the group consisting of: a distance in a range from 2 mm to 50 mm; a distance of 9.0 mm; a distance of 4.5 mm; and a distance of 2.25 mm (col. 28, ln. 37- col. 29, ln. 3, plate 100 has a row to row spacing of 9 mm, same as a standard 96-well plate, which a column to column spacing of 18 mm, twice of a standard 96-well plate. Spacing is referring to center-to-center spacing.)
Regarding claim 13, modified Zhou teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 11. Modified Zhou further teaches the fluid delivery device of claim 11, comprising the plurality of compartments (vials), positioned in the respective plate openings (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 14, modified Zhou teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 11. Zhou further disclose the fluid delivery device is a synthesizer comprises a multi-well plate (Fig. 1).
Zhou fails to teach wherein: the plurality of plate openings comprises a plurality of plate opening groups, each plate opening group comprising one or more of the plate openings, and the bottom chamber comprises a plurality of sub-chambers, each sub-chamber separately communicating with a respective one of the plate opening groups.
However, Bailey teaches a drain system for multi-well synthesizer (Fig. 2B). Bailey teaches the drain system comprises of a well plate (202), a well adapter plate (204) and a drain plate (206). Bail further teaches that the well adapter plate comprises a plurality of apertures (408) in communication with one or more wells (304), and the drain plate comprises a plurality of channels (506) in communication with one or more of the apertures (Fig. 4A, 4B and 5B, and paras. 0012, 0045). Bailey further teaches the adapter and drain plate setup allows a user to selectively drain the vial within a well found within individual rows of the well plate instead of all the vials at once (para. 0012).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the wash plate of Zhou with the well adapter plate and drain plate taught by Bailey in order to selectively drain individual rows of the well plate with a reasonable expectation of success (Bailey, para. 0012) (MPEP 2143)(I)(G).
The teachings of modified Zhou would yield the plurality of plate openings (opening of 110 in Zhou) comprises a plurality of plate opening groups, each plate opening group comprising one or more of the plate openings, and the bottom chamber comprises a plurality of sub-chambers (channels 506, each channel 506 is in communication with a group apertures 408, and each aperture 408 includes a plurality of wells 304 in Bailey, Figs. 4A, 4B and 5B), each sub-chamber separately communicating with a respective one of the plate opening groups (each plate opening group includes a group of openings of reaction vessels 110 in Zhou that are connected to a group of apertures of Bailey that are in communication with a channel 506 of Bailey, Figs. 4A, 4B and 5B in Bailey).
Regarding claim 15, modified Zhou in view of Bailey teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 14. Modified Zhou teach wherein: the pressure equilibration channel is one of a plurality of pressure equilibration channels comprising respective top channel openings communicating with the top chamber and bottom channel openings; and each bottom channel opening separately communicates with a respective one of the sub- chambers (one of the reaction vessels 110, which is vial in modified Zhou according to claim 1, in each plate opening group is interpreted as a pressure equilibration channel).
Regarding claim 16, Zhou in view of Bailey teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 14. Modified Zhou further teaches the fluid delivery device of claim 14, wherein the drain port is one of a plurality of drain ports (510 in Bailey), each drain port separately communicating with a respective one of the sub-chambers (Bailey, Fig. 5A).
Regarding claim 17, modified Zhou teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 1. Zhou further teach wherein the pressure equilibration channel is one of a plurality of pressure equilibration channels comprising respective top channel openings communicating with the top chamber and bottom channel openings communicating with the bottom chamber (the left-most reaction vessels 110, which is the vial of Bailey in modified Zhou according to claim 1, of each row is interpreted as a pressure equilibration channel).
Regarding claim 18, Zhou in view of Bailey teaches a fluid delivery system, comprising:
the fluid delivery device of claim 1 (see above); and
Zhou further teaches a pressure regulating device (aspirator) communicating with at least one of the top chamber or the bottom chamber, and configured to create a pressure differential between the top chamber (“top compartment”, space above the reaction vessels 110, or vial of Baily in modified Zhou, and below 200) and the bottom chamber (“bottom compartment” space below the reaction vessels, or vials in modified Zhou, and above the bottom of 600)(interpreted a functional limitation, col. 25, lns. 20-34, an aspirator is capable of establishing a pressure different across reaction vessels 110, or vials in modified Zhou, which separates the top and bottom compartments).
Regarding claim 19, Modified Zhou teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 18. Zhou further the fluid delivery system of claim 18, comprising a controller (computer)(col. 26, lns. 37-56, wash solvent being aspirated from reaction vessel can be under computer-control) configured to control
operating the pressure regulating device (aspirator) to create the pressure differential (col. 25, lns. 20-34);
continuing to operate the pressure regulating device for a pulse period effective for flowing a liquid along the liquid flow path such that the liquid wets the solid phase material (col. 25, lns. 20-34, the established pressure difference drives the reactant and wash solutions in the reaction vessels 110, or vials of Bailey in modified Zhou, to flow through the porous frits, which inherently wets the solid phase material that is supported by the frits. the aspirator or vacuum pump is operated for a period of time in order to establish the pressure difference and drain the reaction vessels, or vial in modified Zhou); and
after the pulse period (the time to establish the pressure difference and the reaction vessels are drained, col. 25, lns. 20-34), ceasing to operate the pressure regulating device (it is inherent that operation of the aspirator ceases).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pp. 7-9, filed 03/27/2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are not persuasive.
The Applicant, on p. 7, argues that the reaction vessel 110 of Zhou does not teach “an unobstructed lumen between the top chamber and the bottom chamber” as required by the amended claim 1, because Zhou treats 110 as a reaction vessel instead of a pressure equilibrium channel.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Apparatus claims must distinguish over the prior art in terms of structure rather than function (see MPEP 2114 and 2173.05(g)). Therefore, if the prior art structure is capable of performing the function, then the prior art meets the limitation in the claims. The reaction vessel 110 (at the top-left-most position) of Zhou is a channel of an unobstructed lumen between the top and bottom chambers, and meets the limitations of the pressure equilibration channel as discussed above in the 35 U.S.C. 103 section, and thus can be interpreted as the pressure equilibration channel. Therefore, this argument is unpersuasive.
The Applicant, on pp. 8-9, argues that Zhou in view of Bailey ‘does not supply the claimed “(ii) upon closure of the drain valve, gas flows through the pressure equilibration channel to equilibrate pressure between the top chamber and the bottom chamber" relationship’ based on interpreting purge holes (140/142/150) as the pressure equilibration channel.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. As discussed above, one of the reaction vessels 110 instead of the pressure-equalization path formed purge holes (140/142/150) is interpreted as the pressure equilibrium channel (instead of purge holes 140/142/150). When liquid is absent (liquid is not positively recited), and the drain valve is closed, the reaction vessel 110 does allow gas flow and consequently equilibrate pressure between the top chamber and the bottom chamber. Therefore, this argument is unpersuasive.
The Applicant, on p. 9, argues that a POSITA would not have been motivated to combine Zhou in view of Bailey because substituting Bailey's insertable vials for Zhou's integrated vessels would require changing Zhou's principle of operation which involves “isolating compartments during drainage so that a pressure difference can be established and maintained to promote drainage, and Zhou accomplishes that by moving the sliding seal plate so the pressure-equalization/purge path is closed during drainage.”
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Zhou’s system can still have isolating compartments during drainage with sliding seal plate closing the purge holes whether the vials/vessels are insertable ones or integrated ones, and thus the modification of Zhou’s integrated vessels with Bailey’s insertable ones does not change the principle of operation of Zhou. Therefore, this argument is unpersuasive.
Applicant’s arguments, see p. 10, filed 03/27/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 2-17 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues that claim 2-17 are patentable over Zhou in view of Baily on the basis that claim 1 is patentable. The argument does not provide any specific supposed errors in the examiner's action, and since Zhou in view of Bailey does teach claim 1 as discussed above, this argument is unpersuasive.
Applicant’s arguments, see p. 10, filed 03/27/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 18-19 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues that a POSITA would not combine Zhou's aspirator with the fluid delivery system of amended claim 1, because Zhou’s system “conflicts with eliminating the pressure differential via gas communication while drainage remains available and leaves the conventional persistence challenge rather than the proposed solution of a non-dry equilibration.”
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Zhou teaches amended claim 1 as discussed above, and Zhou further teaches the rest of the limitations in claims 18-19 without any need of additional modifications. Therefore this argument is unpersuasive.
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 MAY CHIU whose telephone number is (571)272-1054. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am - 5 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, Maris Kessel can be reached at 571-270-7698. 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.
/M.L.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1758
/MARIS R KESSEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1758
Prosecution Insights