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 .
Formal Matters
Applicant’s response filed 7 October 2025 is acknowledged. No Claims are amended. Claims 1-23 are pending and under examination.
Objections/Rejections Withdrawn
The rejection of claim 9 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or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention, is withdrawn in light of Applicant’s Remarks.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that the device of Ricci et al., US 20170156847 (8 June 2017) is structurally different from the claimed device. Applicant argues that the device of the present application comprises two plates that are interlockable through a plurality of connecting elements extending from one plate to the other and are designed to lock the two plates together (Remarks, numbered page 4). Applicant argues that in Ricci’s device the tines only partially pierce the tissue and are distinct from the connecting elements in both shape and function because the claimed connecting elements “go all the way through” (Remarks, numbered page 5). Applicant argues that Ricci uses a spacer plus cables to provide necessary support and that without this Ricci’s device would fail (Remarks, numbered page 5). Applicant argues that in claim 1, no auxiliary fixation or tensioning cables are included (Remarks, numbered page 6). Applicant argues that independent claim 11 recites the same claim elements as claim 1 and that Ricci is likewise not applicable to independent claim 11 (Remarks, numbered page 6). Applicant argues that references Kubiak and Farah in combination with Ricci do not cure the defects of Ricci in failing to provide connecting elements and the need for cables to provide stability and load distribution (Remarks, numbered page 6).
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive.
As stated of record and below, Ricci teaches two biocompatible and bioresorbable plates, 120 and 140. The two plates of Ricci are expressly configured to be lockable (¶47). Ricci expressly teaches that the distance between the two plates may be allowed to fluctuate within a range in order to facilitate adequate blood flow through the fixation device (¶47). FIGs 2A and 3A of Ricci teach 120 and 140. FIG 2A shows the spacing elements 150A-B. FIG 3A show engagement features 155A and 155B (engagement features that spacing elements 150A-B fit onto in order to lock the two plates together (¶¶46, 47). The manner in which the parts of connecting elements of the device structurally lock together is expressly taught at ¶¶46, 47. Ricci teaches that the respective clamping surfaces of the first (120) and second plate (140) are configured to face each other and the tines (118/119/130) are configured to extend through the soft-tissue segment (FIG 1A, ¶6). Similarly, spacing members 150A-B are also taught as alternatively being configured to intersect and extend through the soft tissue segment (¶48). Ricci textually teaches more than what is shown in the figures. That is why the citations are directed to both textual paragraphs and the figures.
Applicant’s claims are drawn to a device and an assembly. The presence of additional components in the prior art does not otherwise detract from what is taught in the prior art. The rejections are maintained the reasons above, below, and of record. The rejections are also clarified to remove redundancies and to better focus the analysis based on Applicant’s reply.
Rejections Maintained
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.
Claims 1-9, 11-20, and 23 remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ricci et al., US 20170156847 (8 June 2017), for the reasons of record and the reasons set forth herein.
Regarding claim 1, Ricci teaches a bio-compatible and bio-resorbable (¶34) implantable device for repairing a soft tissue (FIG 1A, ¶34, soft tissue fixation device 100), comprising: at least two bio-compatible and bio-resorbable (¶34) plates comprising a first plate (120) and a second plate (140) made as separate and interlockable pieces (FIGs 1A-B, 2A, 3A; ¶43); and
a plurality (130; ¶45) of bio-compatible and bio-resorbable (¶34) connecting elements (spacing members 150A-B, ¶45) suitable for connecting said first plate (120) and said second plate (140);
wherein: said first plate (120) comprises a first surface (FIG 2A) suitable for being laid onto a first side of the soft tissue (¶33); said second plate (140) comprises a second surface (FIG 3A) suitable for being laid onto a second side of the soft tissue (¶33);
each connecting element of said plurality of bio-compatible and bio-resorbable (¶34) connecting elements (spacing members 150A-B, ¶45) comprises a first portion integral with the first plate (FIGs 1A, 2A; ¶32) and a second portion integral with the second plate (FIGs 1A, 3A; ¶45); and
said plurality (130; ¶45) of bio-compatible and bio-resorbable (¶34) connecting elements (spacing members 150A-B) extend from at least one of said first surface of the first plate (120) and said second surface of the second plate (140) for reaching the other one of said first surface of the first plate (¶44) and said second surface of the second plate (FIGs 1A, 1B; ¶45), for locking (¶47) in a definable respective position said first plate and said second plate (¶47), thereby acting as positioning elements of the first and second plates in respect to the soft tissue (FIGs 1A, 2A, 3A; ¶¶33, 48).
Regarding claim 2, Ricci teaches the bio-compatible and bio-resorbable implantable device of claim 1, as set forth above, wherein said plurality of bio-compatible and bio-resorbable (¶34) connecting elements have same shape and size (spacing members 150A-B, ¶46).
Regarding claim 3, Ricci teaches the bio-compatible and bio-resorbable implantable device of claim 1, as set forth above, wherein said plurality (130; ¶45) of bio-compatible and bio-resorbable (¶34) connecting elements extend from said first surface (122) of the first plate (120) to said second surface (142) of the second plate (140) in a straight line (FIGs 1A, 2A, 3A; ¶¶48, 49).
Regarding claim 4, Ricci teaches the bio-compatible and bio-resorbable implantable device of claim 1, as set forth above, wherein said first portion (FIGs 1A, 2A; ¶32) and said second portion (FIGs 1A, 3A; ¶45) of said plurality (130; ¶45) of bio-compatible and bio-resorbable (¶34) connecting elements are interlockable (¶¶46, 47) according to any of the following modes: undercut coupling, latching, snap-fitting, force fitting, hook-loop coupling, and any combination thereof (¶¶46, 47).
Regarding claim 5, Ricci teaches the bio-compatible and bio-resorbable implantable device of claim 1, as set forth above, wherein one of said first portion (FIGs 1A, 2A; ¶32) and second portion (FIGs 1A, 3A; ¶45) of each connecting element comprises a hole (gap, 153A-B; hole 156A-B; ¶46), either blind or passing through (FIG 3A), and the other one of said first portion (FIGs 1A, 2A; ¶32) and second portion (FIGs 1A, 3A; ¶45) of each connecting element comprises a protrusion (FIGs 1A-1B, 2A, 3A; 150A-B).
Regarding claim 6, Ricci teaches the bio-compatible and bio-resorbable implantable device of claim 1, as set forth above, wherein at least one of said first portion (FIGs 1A, 2A; ¶32) and said second portion (FIGs 1A, 3A; ¶45) of each connecting element comprises a protrusion (FIGs 1A, 152A-B) comprising a head with a convex tip (FIG 2A; ¶46 tips 151A-B).
Regarding claim 7, Ricci teaches the bio-compatible and bio-resorbable implantable device of claim 1, as set forth above, wherein at least one of said first portion (FIGs 1A, 2A; ¶32) and said second portion (FIGs 1A, 3A; ¶45) of each connecting element comprises a protrusion (spacing members 150A-B, ¶46) comprising a convex base, and a lateral surface devoid of sharp edges, for example cylindrical or frusto-conical (FIGs 1A-B, 2A, 3A-B).
Regarding claim 8, Ricci teaches the bio-compatible and bio-resorbable implantable device of claim 1, as set forth above, wherein said plurality of bio-compatible and bio-resorbable (¶34) connecting elements are arranged in arrays (¶48), wherein the connecting elements of a first array are offset with respect to the connecting elements of a second array adjacent to said first array (FIGs 1A-B, 2A, 3A; ¶48).
Regarding claim 9, Ricci teaches the bio-compatible and bio-resorbable implantable device of claim 1, as set forth above, wherein both said first plate (120) and said second plate (140) delimit at least partially one or more windows suitable for exposing a portion of the soft tissue to surrounding environment (FIGs 1A; ¶¶8, 47, 49).
Element 17 is recited in the instant specification as a “window” and “[p]referably, said one or more windows 17 are delimited by both plate edges” (Specification p. 14, ¶111). In Figure 4, element 17 points to empty space that is not a part of the implantable device. The plain meaning of the word “delimited” means having fixed boundaries or limits. In order to promote compact prosecution, the examiner is broadly interpreting the “delimit at least partially one or more windows” as the boundaries of the device exposing a portion of the soft tissue to the surrounding environment.
PNG
media_image1.png
347
467
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding independent claim 11, Ricci teaches an assembly for repairing a soft tissue (FIG 1A, ¶34, soft tissue fixation device 100), comprising: at least one bio-compatible and bio-resorbable (¶34) implantable device for repairing a soft tissue, comprising: at least two bio-compatible and bio-resorbable (¶34) plates comprising a first plate (120) and a second plate (140) made as separate and interlockable pieces (FIGs 1A-B, 2A, 3A; ¶43); and a plurality (130; ¶45) of bio-compatible and bio-resorbable (¶34) connecting elements (spacing members 150A-B, ¶45) suitable for connecting said first plate (120) and said second plate (140);
wherein: said first plate (120) comprises a first surface (FIG 2A) suitable for being laid onto a first side of the soft tissue (¶33); said second plate (140) comprises a second surface (FIG 3A) suitable for being laid onto a second side of the soft tissue (¶33);
each connecting element of said plurality of bio-compatible and bio-resorbable (¶34) connecting elements (spacing members 150A-B) comprises a first portion integral with the first plate (FIGs 1A, 2A; ¶46) and a second portion integral with the second plate (FIGs 1A, 3A; ¶47); and
said plurality (130; ¶45) of bio-compatible and bio-resorbable (¶34) connecting elements (spacing members 150A-B) extend from at least one of said first surface of the first plate (120) and said second surface of the second plate (140) for reaching the other one of said first surface of the first plate (¶44) and said second surface of the second plate (FIGs 1A, 1B; ¶45), for locking (¶47) in a definable respective position said first plate and said second plate (¶47), thereby acting as positioning elements of the first and second plates in respect to the soft tissue (FIGs 1A, 2A, 3A; ¶¶33, 48); and
a non-implantable perforating device made in separate piece with respect to said bio-compatible and bio-resorbable implantable device (¶39, object 135).
wherein said non-implantable perforating device (135) comprises a plurality of perforating elements (100) suitable for making perforations in said soft tissue for making positioning paths for said plurality of bio-compatible and bio-resorbable (¶34) connecting elements (¶39).
The term “non-implantable perforating device” is interpreted under the broadest reasonable interpretation standard. The Specification teaches a “non-implantable perforating device” is made in the form of a third perforating plate 31 (¶114). Element 31 is contrasted with implantable device 10 at ¶126. See FIGs 9A-D.
Regarding claim 12, Ricci teaches the assembly of claim 11, as set forth above, wherein each of said plurality of perforating elements (tines 118/119/130) delimits a longitudinal through channel (annotated FIG 1A) to allow insertion of said plurality of bio-compatible and bio-resorbable (¶34) connecting elements (spacing members 150A-B), whereby the perforating elements (tines 118/119/130) are fit (¶48) onto the first portion (122) or onto the second portion (142) of the connecting elements (spacing members 150A-B) during implantation of said first plate (120) or said second plate (140), respectively (¶48).
The word “delimits” is broadly interpreted in its plain meaning of having boundaries or limits.
Regarding claim 13, Ricci teaches the assembly of claim 11, as set forth above, wherein said non-implantable perforating device (135) comprises a support (100) from which said perforating elements extend (FIG 2B).
Regarding claim 14, Ricci teaches the assembly of claim 13, as set forth above, wherein said perforating elements (tines 118/119/130) are made as separate pieces with respect to said support and fastened thereto by threaded fastening means, whereby the perforating elements are screwed to the support (¶35).
Regarding claim 15, Ricci teaches the assembly of claim 13, as set forth above, wherein said support (100) comprises a thrust surface (121/141) configured to abut against a back plate (122/142) of at least one of said first plate (120) and said second (140) plate during implantation of the bio-compatible and bio-resorbable implantable device (100), for pushing the connecting elements (spacing members 150A-B) within the perforations made by the perforating elements within the soft tissue (FIGs 1A, 2A, 3A).
Regarding claim 16, Ricci teaches the bio-compatible and bio-resorbable implantable device of claim 1, as set forth above, wherein said soft tissue is a tendon (¶¶2, 31, 35).
Regarding claim 17, Ricci teaches the bio-compatible and bio-resorbable implantable device of claim 1, as set forth above, wherein said plurality of bio-compatible and bio-resorbable (¶34) connecting elements (spacing members 150A-B) have a same material composition (¶34).
Regarding claim 18, Ricci teaches the bio-compatible and bio-resorbable implantable device of claim 3, as set forth above, wherein said plurality of bio-compatible and bio-resorbable (¶34) connecting elements (spacing members 150A-B) extending from the first surface (122) of the first plate (120) to the second surface (142) of the second plate (140) are all parallel (¶6 ¶¶12, 32).
Regarding claim 19, Ricci teaches the bio-compatible and bio-resorbable implantable device of claim 4, as set forth above, wherein interlocking of the first (FIGs 1A, 2A; ¶32) and second portions (FIGs 1A, 3A; ¶45) is made by undercut coupling (¶¶46, 47), and wherein the first portion (FIGs 1A, 2A; ¶32) comprises a first abutment (122) surface facing the first surface of the first plate (120), so as to couple against a second abutment surface (142) of the second plate (140), which is opposite or contraposed with respect to the second surface of the second plate (FIGs 1A, 2A, 3A; ¶43).
Regarding claim 20, Ricci teaches the bio-compatible and bio-resorbable implantable device of claim 1, as set forth above, wherein the first portion of each connecting element (spacing members 150A-B) comprises a first protrusion extending from said first plate (120) and the second portion of each connecting element (spacing members 150A-B) comprises a second protrusion extending from said second plate (FIGs 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 3A, 4; ¶44, two spacing members 150A, 150B).
Regarding claim 23, Ricci teaches the assembly of claim 11, as set forth above, wherein the connecting elements (spacing members 150A-B) each delimit a longitudinal through channel (annotated FIG 1A) for insertion of said plurality of perforating elements (tines 118/119/130) of the perforating device (100), so that the connecting elements (spacing members 150A-B) are fit (¶48) onto the perforating elements (tines 118/119/130) during implantation of at least one of said first plate (120) and second plate (140) (¶44).
The word “delimits” is broadly interpreted in its plain meaning of having boundaries or limits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 10, 21, and 22 remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ricci et al., US 20170156847 (8 June 2017) in view of Kubiak et al., US 20180078253 (22 March 2018), further in view of Farah et al., “Physical and Mechanical Properties of PLA, and their Functions in Widespread Applications – A Comprehensive Review.” Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, vol. 107, Dec. 2016, pp. 367-92, for the reasons of record and the reasons set forth herein.
Regarding claim 10, Ricci teaches the bio-compatible and bio-resorbable (¶34) implantable device (100) of claim 1, as set forth above. Ricci teaches wherein the connecting elements are made of a bio-compatible and bio-resorbable material as polymers and composites (¶34).
Ricci does not teach that specific bio-resorbable material having elastic modulus comprised between 0.2 gigapascals and 4 gigapascals.
Kubiak teaches devices and systems for repairing soft tissue (Abstract). Kubiak teaches old and well-known bio-compatible and bio-resorbable materials such as polylactic acid (PLA) and polycaprolactone (PCL) are suitable bio-resorbable material for soft tissue repair (¶128).
Farah teaches that semi-crystalline polylactic acid (PLA) has an approximate tensile modulus of 0.35-3.5GPA (p. 6, Table 2; see also Section 2.2. Mechanical Properties). Farah also teaches that the elastic modulus will vary depending on the physical properties of the PLA as well as whether it is oriented or unoriented (p. 6, Tables 3 and 4). PCL is taught as being in the range of 0.21-0.44 GPa (p. 6, Table 2).
Ricci teaches bio-compatible and bio-resorbable materials as polymers, but does not teach the innate physical properties of the bio-resorbable material. Kubiak teaches in the same field of endeavor as Ricci, devices and systems for repairing soft tissue. Kubiak teaches old and well-known bio-compatible and bio-resorbable materials such as polylactic acid (PLA) and polycaprolactone (PCL) as suitable bio-resorbable material for soft tissue repair (¶128).
Neither Ricci nor Kubiak teach the physical properties of PLA and PCL.The physical properties the most commonly used bio-resorbable materials, polylactic acid (PLA) and polycaprolactone (PCL) are taught by Farah et al., in the Review Article.
One of ordinary skill in the art, looking to suitable bio-compatible and bio-resorbable materials for use in soft-tissue repair devices, such as the ones taught by Ricci and Kubiak, would be well-aware of the innate physical properties of various bio-compatible and bio-resorbable materials. One of ordinary skill in the art would be aware of the physical and mechanical properties of PLA and its functions in widespread applications, as taught by Farah. Table 2 of Farah provides a detailed list of old and well-known biopolymers and their physical properties, including their tensile modulus measured in gigapascals. One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been able to determine the most suitable polymers for the intended soft tissue repair application, as generally taught by Ricci, and as more specifically taught by Kubiak. The physical properties of the bio-compatible and bio-resorbable compositions best suited for the applications of Kubiak, as expressly taught by Kubiak, are set forth in the Review article by Farah. One of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success using the general polymers of Ricci, with the specific PLA and PCL of Kubiak, given their known physical properties as reviewed by Farah.
One of ordinary skill in the art would also readily recognize that a product and its physical properties are inseparable. Moreover, products of identical chemical composition cannot have mutually exclusive properties.” A chemical composition and its properties are inseparable. Therefore, if the prior art teaches the identical chemical structure, the properties applicant discloses and/or claims are necessarily present. In re Spada, 911 F.2d 705, 709, 15 USPQ2d 1655, 1658 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding claim 21, Ricci modified by Kubiak and Farah teaches the bio-compatible and bio-resorbable implantable device of claim 10, as set forth above.
Ricci teaches comprising a biocompatible and bio-resorbable material (¶34), wherein said bio-compatible and bio-resorbable material is a blend of two or more biopolymers (¶34, as generic polymers and composites).
In this regard, Ricci teaches polymers and composites generally. Farah teaches PLA at p. 6, Section 2.2 and a summary of PLA copolymers for various applications p. 16, col 2, 5.1.
Kubiak teaches devices and systems for repairing soft tissue (Abstract). Kubiak teaches old and well-known bio-compatible and bio-resorbable materials such as polylactic acid (PLA) and polycaprolactone (PCL) are suitable bio-resorbable material for soft tissue repair (¶128).
Ricci, Kubiak and Farah teach in the same field of endeavor, devices and systems for repairing tissue. One of ordinary skill in the art, looking to suitable bio-compatible and bio-resorbable materials for use in soft-tissue repair devices, such as the ones taught by Ricci and Kubiak, would be well-aware of the innate physical properties of various bio-compatible and bio-resorbable materials, including those taught by Farah. One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would be able to determine the most suitable polymers for the intended soft tissue repair application, as generally taught by Ricci, and as more specifically taught by Kubiak, based on physical properties taught by Farah. One of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success using the general polymers of Ricci, with the specific PLA and PCL of Kubiak and the discussion of Farah, given their known use in specific applications, including soft-tissue repair. A selection of the most appropriate combinations would be finite and predictable, especially in light of the teachings of Kubiak.
Regarding claim 22, Ricci modified by Kubiak and Farah teaches the bio-compatible and bio-resorbable implantable device of claim 21, as set forth above. Ricci teaches polymers and composites (¶34).
Ricci does not teach wherein said blend is a blend of polylactic acid and polycaprolactone.
Although Ricci teaches polymers and composites generally, Farah teaches a summary of PLA copolymers throughout the reference for various applications (p. 16, col 2, 5.1).
Kubiak teaches devices and systems for repairing soft tissue (Abstract). Kubiak teaches old and well-known bio-compatible and bio-resorbable materials such as polylactic acid (PLA) and polycaprolactone (PCL) are suitable bio-resorbable material for soft tissue repair (¶128).
Ricci, Kubiak and Farah teach in the same field of endeavor, devices and systems for repairing tissue. One of ordinary skill in the art, looking to suitable bio-compatible and bio-resorbable materials for use in soft-tissue repair devices, such as the ones taught by Ricci and Kubiak, would be well-aware of the innate physical properties of various bio-compatible and bio-resorbable materials, including those taught by Farah. One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would be able to determine the most suitable polymers for the intended soft tissue repair application, as generally taught by Ricci, and as more specifically taught by Kubiak, based on physical properties taught by Farah. One of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success using the general polymers of Ricci, with the specific PLA and PCL of Kubiak and the discussion of Farah, given their known use in specific applications, including soft-tissue repair. A selection of the most appropriate combinations would be finite and predictable, especially in light of the teachings of Kubiak.
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CHERIE M POLAND whose telephone number is (703)756-1341. The examiner can normally be reached M-W (9am-9pm CST) and R-F (9am-3pm CST).
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, Jackie Ho can be reached at 571-272-4696. 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.
/CHERIE M POLAND/Examiner, Art Unit 3771
/SHAUN L DAVID/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771