DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, claims 1, 2, 4, 6-8, 10-15, 17, 19, and 20 in the reply filed on September 15, 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that
“[C]laim 1 requires, among other things, ‘at least one line for detecting a characteristic of at least a first magnetic sensor of the plurality of magnetic sensors . . . wherein the at least one line includes a first line disposed above a top surface of the first magnetic sensor, and wherein the first binding area is located within a trench in the first line, the trench being above the top surface of the first magnetic sensor.’ Claim 22 requires ‘a plurality of binding areas disposed above the plurality of magnetic sensors, each binding area of the plurality of binding areas for holding fluid, and at least one line for detecting a characteristic of at least a first magnetic sensor of the plurality of magnetic sensors, the at least one line including a first line disposed above a top surface of the first magnetic sensor, a first binding area being located within a trench in the first line, the trench being above the top surface of the first magnetic sensor.’ Immink does not disclose or render obvious any of these features. First, Immink does not disclose ‘at least one line for detecting a characteristic of at least a first magnetic sensor of the plurality of magnetic sensors’ as required by both claim 1 and claim 22. Immink does not disclose any line for detecting any characteristic of any magnetic sensor. The only wires disclosed in Immink are current wires use to generate magnetic fields to manipulate magnetic particles. See, e.g., Immink, ¶ [0092]”, “the current wires 6a and 6b are not ‘at least one line for detecting a characteristic of at least a first magnetic sensor of the plurality of magnetic sensors.’ In the context of FIG. 6, a copy of which is provided below, Immink describes the use of ‘current wires 16a-d’ that ‘are used to magnetize the magnetic particles 4a, 4b for detection.’ Immink, ¶ [0111]”, “the wires 16a-d are used to magnetize particles; like the current wires 6a, 6b, they are not ‘at least one line for detecting a characteristic of at least a first magnetic sensor of the plurality of magnetic sensors, the characteristic indicating presence or absence of one or more magnetic nanoparticles coupled to a first binding area associated with the first magnetic sensor.’ Immink does not describe the read circuitry at all, other than to say, in the context of FIG. 4, copied below, that ‘[t]he small squares 15 at the right hand side of FIG. 4 indicate electrical contacts to connect the sensor substrate 8 to a (portable) reader device.’ Immink, ¶[0102]. These portions of Immink also do not disclose or render obvious ‘at least one line for detecting a characteristic of at least a first magnetic sensor of the plurality of magnetic sensors.’”, and “[F]urthermore, claim 1 requires that ‘the at least one line includes a first line disposed above a top surface of the first magnetic sensor, and wherein the first binding area is located within a trench in the first line, the trench being above the top surface of the first magnetic sensor.’ Claim 22 requires substantially the same elements: ‘the at least one line including a first line disposed above a top surface of the first magnetic sensor, a first binding area being located within a trench in the first line, the trench being above the top surface of the first magnetic sensor.’ Immink does not disclose or render obvious a line, with a trench in it, disposed above a top sensor surface, with a binding area located within the trench. As explained above, Immink’s wires (e.g., 6a-d, 16a-d) are used only to manipulate magnetic particles; they are not structural lines with trenches with binding areas located within those trenches. Immink’s first and second regions (2, 3) are in the walls of the reaction chamber, not in trenches of detection lines situated above the top surfaces of magnetic sensors. See Immink, ¶[0082]. Likewise, the sensor substrate surface 5 of Immink is not within a trench in any line, much less in a line for detecting a characteristic of at least a first magnetic sensor of the plurality of magnetic sensors, the characteristic indicating presence or absence of one or more magnetic nanoparticles coupled to a first binding area associated with the first magnetic sensor. See, e.g., id. at ¶¶ [0080], [0092]-[0099], [0105]. Applicants respectfully submit that the Office’s interpretation of Immink is contrary to the limitations of claims 1 and 22, and to the specification and drawings of Applicants’ application, which claim, describe, and illustrate lines that are distinct elements of the apparatus. Thus, claims 1 and 22 both recite common special technical features. Accordingly, unity of invention is present between Groups I and II, and the restriction requirement should be withdrawn”.
The above arguments have been fully considered and have not been found persuasive toward the withdrawal of the restriction requirement nor persuasive toward the relaxation of same such that Groups I and II will be examined together. Although applicant recited paragraphs [0082], [0092] to [0097], [0102], and [0111] from the prior art of Immink et al., the rejection on claim 1 is not dependent on these paragraphs taught by Immink et al., as argued by applicant. Since Immink et al., teach that “[A]ccording to embodiments of the present invention, however, the sensor cartridge 10 may comprise a same number of regions 2, 3 in the reaction chamber 1 as it comprises GMR elements 8a, 8b . . . . For example, when a first and a second region 2, 3 are provided in the reaction chamber 1 comprising respectively a first and second type of magnetic particles 4a, 4b, according to these embodiments a first and second GMR element 8a and 8b may be provided in the sensor substrate 8 (see FIG. 2). The sensor substrate surface 5 may then comprise a first type of target homologues for specifically binding the first type of target moieties at the location of the first GMR element 8a and may comprise a second type of target homologues for specifically binding the second type of target moieties at the location of the second GMR element 8b”, “the sensor cartridge 10 may comprise any number of sensor elements, e.g. GMR elements 8a, 8b. Preferably, as already discussed, the number of sensor (e.g GMR) elements 8a, 8b may be equal to the number of regions 2, 3 in the reaction chamber 1, and thus to the number of different types of target moieties present in the sample fluid”, “[U]pon actuation of the bottom coil 7a (not shown in this figure, but similar to the embodiments illustrated in FIGS. 1 and 2) the different types of magnetic particles 4a, 4b may be released from their respective regions 2, 3 and may be directed towards the sensor substrate surface 5”, and “[A]sensor cartridge (10) for determining the presence and/or amount of at least two different target moieties present in a sample fluid, the sensor cartridge (10) comprising: a reaction chamber (1) for receiving the sample fluid, at least a first region (2) and a second region (3) located in the reaction chamber (1), the second region (3) being distinct from the first region (2), the first region (2) comprising magnetic or magnetizable objects labelled with a first type of probes for specifically binding a first type of target moieties and the second region (3) comprising magnetic or magnetizable objects labelled with a second type of probes for specifically binding a second type of target moieties, the magnetic or magnetizable objects in the first and second region (2, 3) being directly contactable by the sample fluid, and at least one sensor element (8a) for sensing the presence of magnetic or magnetizable objects (4a, 4b), wherein the sensor cartridge (10) is adapted for distinctively detecting the at least two different target moieties” (see paragraphs [0099], [0102], and [0105] and claim 1), any number of sensor elements such as GMR elements 8a and 8b in Figure 2 are a plurality of magnetic sensors, the respective regions 2 and 3 without different types of magnetic particles 4a and 4b are a plurality of binding areas disposed above the plurality of magnetic sensors, each binding area of the plurality of binding areas for holding fluid, a line in Figure 1 or 2 which has the respective regions 2 and 3 and does not have magnetic particles 4a and 4b is a first line disposed above a top surface of a first magnetic sensor wherein a first binding area is located within a trench in the first line and the trench is above the top surface of the first magnetic sensor (see Figure 1 or 2 taught by Immink et al.,). Therefore, the requirement is still deemed proper and is made FINAL. Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-8, 10-15, 17, 19, and 20 will be examined.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informality: since this case claims a priority for PCT/US21/21274, applicant may consider to add PCT/US21/21274 to the first paragraph of the specification.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informality: “,a change in magnetic field, or a change in resistance” should be “or a change in the magnetic field or a change in the resistance”.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informality: “at least one of silicon dioxide, aluminum oxide, or silicon nitride” should be “at least one of silicon dioxide, aluminum oxide, and silicon nitride”.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informality: “at least one of an oxide or a nitride” should be “at least one of an oxide and a nitride”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Scope of Enablement
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-8, 10-15, 17, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for making an apparatus comprising a plurality of magnetic sensors, a plurality of binding areas disposed above the plurality of magnetic sensors wherein each binding area of the plurality of binding areas is used for holding fluid, and at least one line includes a first line disposed above a top surface of a first magnetic sensor of the plurality of magnetic sensors and a first binding area of the plurality of binding areas is located within a trench in the first line and the trench is above the top surface of the first magnetic sensor, does not reasonably provide enablement for using the apparatus recited in claims 1, 2, 4, 6-8, 10-15, 17, 19, and 20 as an apparatus for nucleic acid sequencing. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to use the invention commensurate in scope with these claims.
Factors to be considered in determining whether a disclosure meets the enablement requirement of 35 USC 112, first paragraph, have been described by the court in In re Wands, 8 USPQ2d 1400 (CA FC 1988). Wands states at page 1404,
“Factors to be considered in determining whether a disclosure would require undue experimentation have been summarized by the board in Ex parte Forman. They include (1) the quantity of experimentation necessary, (2) the amount of direction or guidance presented, (3) the presence or absence of working examples, (4) the nature of the invention, (5) the state of the prior art, (6) the relative skill of those in the art, (7) the predictability or unpredictability of the art, and (8) the breadth of the claims.”
The Nature of The Invention
The claims are drawn to an apparatus for nucleic acid sequencing. The invention is a class of invention which the CAFC has characterized as “the unpredictable arts such as chemistry and biology.” Mycogen Plant Sci., Inc. v. Monsanto Co., 243 F.3d 1316, 1330 (Fed. Cir. 2001).
The Breadth of The Claims
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-8, 10-15, 17, 19, and 20 encompass an apparatus for nucleic acid sequencing, the apparatus comprising: a plurality of magnetic sensors; a plurality of binding areas disposed above the plurality of magnetic sensors, each binding area of the plurality of binding areas for holding fluid; and at least one line for detecting any kind of characteristic of at least a first magnetic sensor of the plurality of magnetic sensors, the characteristic indicating presence or absence of one or more magnetic nanoparticles coupled to a first binding area associated with the first magnetic sensor, wherein the at least one line includes a first line disposed above a top surface of the first magnetic sensor, and wherein the first binding area is located within a trench in the first line, the trench being above the top surface of the first magnetic sensor.
Working Examples
The specification provides no working example for using the apparatus recited in claims 1, 2, 4, 6-8, 10-15, 17, 19, and 20 as an apparatus for nucleic acid sequencing.
The Amount of Direction or Guidance Provided and The State of The Prior Art
The specification provides no working example for using the apparatus recited in claims 1, 2, 4, 6-8, 10-15, 17, 19, and 20 as an apparatus for nucleic acid sequencing. Furthermore, there is no experimental condition and/or experimental data in the specification to support the claimed invention. During the process of the prior art search, the office found a prior art (US 2010/0289483 A1, published on November 18, 2010) which teaches the apparatus recited in claim 1 (see below 102 (a) (1) rejection).
Level of Skill in The Art, The Unpredictability of The Art, and The Quantity of Experimentation Necessary
While the relative skill in the art is very high (the Ph.D. degree with laboratory experience), there is no predictability whether the apparatus recited in claims 1, 2, 4, 6-8, 10-15, 17, 19, and 20 can be used as an apparatus for nucleic acid sequencing.
Since the specification shows that “[A]s shown in FIG. 4A, the apparatus 100 comprises a magnetic sensor array 110 that includes a plurality of magnetic sensors 105, with sixteen magnetic sensors 105 shown in the array 110. To avoid obscuring the drawing, only seven of the magnetic sensors 105 are labeled in FIG. 4A, namely the magnetic sensors 105A, 105B, 105C,
105D, 105E, 105F, and 105G. (For simplicity, this document refers generally to the magnetic sensors by the reference number 105. Individual magnetic sensors are given the reference number 105 followed by a letter.) The apparatus 100 also includes at least one line 120, and, for at least some of the magnetic sensors 105, a binding area 115 for each of those magnetic sensors 105, both discussed in further detail below”, “[T]he magnetic sensors 105 and portions of the lines 120 within the magnetic sensor array 110 are illustrated using dashed lines to indicate that they might not be visible in the top view of the apparatus 100. As explained in further detail below, the magnetic sensors 105 are embedded in the apparatus 100 and are protected from the contents of the binding areas 115 (e.g., by an insulator). Accordingly, it is to be understood that the various illustrated components (e.g., lines 120, magnetic sensors 105, etc.) might not be visible in a physical instantiation of the apparatus 100 (e.g., they may be embedded in or covered by protective material, such as an insulator)”, “[I]n some embodiments, each of the magnetic sensors 105 of the magnetic sensor array 110 is a thin film device that uses the magnetoresistance (MR) effect to detect magnetic labels in an associated binding area 115, described in further detail below. As described in more detail below, each magnetic sensor
105 may operate as a potentiometer with a resistance that varies as the strength and/or direction of the sensed magnetic field changes”, “[I]n some embodiments, nucleic acid is sequenced using immobilized nucleic acid strands (potentially in clonal clusters) that are tethered to the apparatus 100 in the proximity of the magnetic sensors 105 of the magnetic sensor array 110. Four types of reversible terminator bases (RT-bases) may then be added, either together or one at a time, and non-incorporated nucleotides are washed away. Then the magnetic labels, along with the terminal 3’ blocker, may be chemically removed from the nucleic acid strands before the next sequencing cycle begins”, “[T]he nucleic acid strands can be prepared in any suitable manner. For example, the nucleic acid strands can be prepared by random fragmentation of a nucleic acid sample, followed by 5’ and 3’ adapter ligation. These strands of the nucleic acid may then be captured on oligos bound or attached to the surfaces 116 of at least some of the binding areas
115. Linear or exponential amplification including bridge amplification may be used to amplify the strands prior to sequencing”, “[B]ridge amplification and other amplification techniques are well known in the art and can be used with the apparatus 100 in accordance with some embodiments. To begin bridge amplification, the nucleic acid to be sequenced can be attached to a substrate using, for example, adapter strands that are, for example, immobilized in a hydrogel. Then polymerase, primers, and nucleotide precursors may be introduced into the binding area 115 to create double-stranded nucleic acids from the single target strands. Next, the double strands are denatured, which separates the double-sided nucleic acid strands into two single strands that are complements of each other. Bridge formation involves chemistry to cause the single strands to fold over and attach to the complementary adapter strands immobilized on the substrate as shown. Once again, polymerase, primers, and nucleotide precursors are introduced into the binding area 115 to convert individual single strand ‘bridges’ into double-sided strands. Following this step, the double strands are denatured to produce complementary single strands, one being the original ‘forward’ strand and the other a copied ‘reverse’ strand. After repeating these steps many times, clonal clusters are formed with both forward and reverse copies. One of the two clusters (e.g., the reverse strands) can then be cleaved from the binding area 115 before sequencing the remaining cluster (e.g., the forward strands)”, “[T]he use of an amplification procedure in connection with the apparatus 100 for nucleic acid sequencing can improve the SNR of the sequencing process and thereby improve accuracy of the sequencing. The SNR improvement results because the presence of many copies of the same nucleic acid strand to be sequenced within a binding area 115 allows a larger number of magnetically-labeled nucleotide precursors to be incorporated within the binding area 115. The incorporation of a larger number of magnetically-labeled nucleotide precursors, in turn, increases the likelihood that the magnetic sensor 105 associated with that binding area 115 will detect the presence of the magnetic labels within the binding area 115. Thus, having a larger number of copies of the strand to be sequenced reduces the likelihood that the magnetic sensor 105 will miss the incorporation of a magnetically-labeled nucleotide precursor and thereby make a sequencing error”, “[T]o sequence the nucleic acid strands, magnetically-labeled nucleotide precursors may be introduced one at a time or all at once”, and “[I]n some embodiments, the nucleic acid strands are extended one nucleotide at a time, and the magnetic sensor array 110 is used to identify the bound magnetically-labeled nucleotide precursors” (see paragraphs [0063] to [0065], [0097] to [0101], and [0103] and Figure 4A of US 2023/0340589 A1, which is US publication of this instant application), the specification clearly indicates that nucleic acid strands are attached to the surfaces 116 of at least some of the binding areas 115 before sequencing the nucleic acid strands and sequencing the nucleic acid strands within the binding areas 115 allows a larger number of magnetically-labeled nucleotide precursors to be incorporated within the binding area 115, and the magnetic sensor array 110 is used to identify the bound magnetically-labeled nucleotide precursor. Although claim 1 requires an apparatus for nucleic acid sequencing, the apparatus comprising: a plurality of magnetic sensors; a plurality of binding areas disposed above the plurality of magnetic sensors, each binding area of the plurality of binding areas for holding fluid; and at least one line for detecting a characteristic of at least a first magnetic sensor of the plurality of magnetic sensors, the characteristic indicating presence or absence of one or more magnetic nanoparticles coupled to a first binding area associated with the first magnetic sensor, wherein the at least one line includes a first line disposed above a top surface of the first magnetic sensor, and wherein the first binding area is located within a trench in the first line, the trench being above the top surface of the first magnetic sensor, since claim 1 does not require nucleic acid strands are attached to the surfaces of the first binding area of the first line before sequencing the nucleic acid strands, the first magnetic sensor is used to identify labeled nucleotide precursors on one or more magnetic nanoparticle, and the one or more magnetic nanoparticle are contacted with the first magnetic sensor, it is unpredictable how detecting a characteristic of at least the first magnetic sensor of the plurality of magnetic sensors can be indicate presence or absence of one or more magnetic nanoparticles coupled to the first binding area associated with the first magnetic sensor. Furthermore, since claim 1 does not indicate how detecting a characteristic of at least a first magnetic sensor of the plurality of magnetic sensors such as a magnetic field or a resistance or a change in the magnetic field or a change in the resistance in claim 8 or a noise level in claim 11 is correlated to sequencing nucleic acids, it is unpredictable how the apparatus recited in claims 1, 2, 4, 6-8, 10-15, 17, 19, and 20 can be used as an apparatus for nucleic acid sequencing.
Case law has established that “(t)o be enabling, the specification of a patent must teach those skilled in the art how to make and use the full scope of the claimed invention without ‘undue experimentation’.” In re Wright 990 F.2d 1557, 1561. In re Fisher, 427 F.2d 833, 839, 166 USPQ 18, 24 (CCPA 1970) it was determined that “[T]he scope of the claims must bear a reasonable correlation to the scope of enablement provided by the specification to persons of ordinary skill in the art”. The amount of guidance needed to enable the invention is related to the amount of knowledge in the art as well as the predictability in the art. Furthermore, the Court in Genentech Inc. v Novo Nordisk 42 USPQ2d 1001 held that “[I]t is the specification, not the knowledge of one skilled in the art that must supply the novel aspects of the invention in order to constitute adequate enablement”.
In view of above discussions, the skilled artisan will have no way to predict the experimental results. Accordingly, it is concluded that undue experimentation is required to make the invention as it is claimed. These undue experimentation at least includes to test whether the apparatus recited in claims 1, 2, 4, 6-8, 10-15, 17, 19, and 20 can be used as an apparatus for nucleic acid sequencing.
Conclusion
In the instant case, as discussed above, the level of unpredictability in the art is high, the specification provides one with no guidance that leads one to claimed methods. One of skill in the art cannot readily anticipate the effect of a change within the subject matter to which the claimed invention pertains. Thus given the broad claims in an art whose nature is identified as unpredictable, the unpredictability of that art, the large quantity of research required to define these unpredictable variables, the lack of guidance provided in the specification, the absence of any working example related to claimed invention and the no teaching in the prior art balanced only against the high skill level in the art, it is the position of the examiner that it would require undue experimentation for one of skill in the art to perform the method of the claim as broadly written.
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 8 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 8 is rejected as vague and indefinite. Since there are at least two kinds of resistances, electric resistance and magnetoresistance, and the specification teaches that “[F]IGS. 2A and 2B illustrate the resistance of magnetoresistive (MR) sensors in accordance with some embodiments” (see paragraph [0010] of US 2023/0340589 A1, which is US publication of this instant application) and does not teach an electric resistance, does the resistance in the claim mean a magnetoresistance? Please clarify.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Immink et al., (US 2010/0289483 A1, published on November 18, 2010).
Regarding claims 1 and 20, Immink et al., teach an apparatus for nucleic acid sequencing, the apparatus (ie., a sensor cartridge) comprising: a plurality of magnetic sensors (ie., any number of sensor elements such as GMR elements 8a and 8b in Figure 2); a plurality of binding areas (ie., the first region and the second region in Figure 2) disposed above the plurality of magnetic sensors, each binding area of the plurality of binding areas for holding fluid; and at least one line for detecting a characteristic (ie., frequency or pulse) of at least a first magnetic sensor of the plurality of magnetic sensors, the characteristic indicating presence or absence of one or more magnetic nanoparticles coupled to a first binding area associated with the first magnetic sensor, wherein the at least one line includes a first line (ie., a line having the first region and the second region in Figure 2) disposed above a top surface of the first magnetic sensor (ie., GMR elements 8a), and wherein the first binding area is located within a trench in the first line, the trench being above the top surface of the first magnetic sensor as recited in claim 1 wherein the first binding area comprises a structure configured to anchor a nucleic acid (ie., having an ability to anchor a nucleic acid) to the first binding area and the structure comprises a cavity (ie., trench which is a specific kind of cavity with defined dimensions) or a ridge as recited in claim 20 (see paragraphs [0061], [0080], [0092], [0099], [0102], and [0105], Figures 1-3, claims 1-17).
Therefore, Immink et al., teach all limitations recited in claims 1 and 20.
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
Papers related to this application may be submitted to Group 1600 by facsimile transmission. Papers should be faxed to Group 1600 via the PTO Fax Center. The faxing of such papers must conform with the notices published in the Official Gazette, 1096 OG 30 (November 15, 1988), 1156 OG 61 (November 16, 1993), and 1157 OG 94 (December 28, 1993)(See 37 CAR § 1.6(d)). The CM Fax Center number is (571)273-8300.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Frank Lu, Ph.D., whose telephone number is (571)272-0746. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 9 A.M. to 5 P.M.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Dr. Anne Gussow, Ph.D., can be reached on (571)272-6047.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/FRANK W LU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1683 December 12, 2025