DETAILED ACTION
In Applicant’s Response filed 4/20/26, Applicant has amended claims 1, 17, 21 and 27; and added new claim 31. Claims 3, 5, 10-16, 22, 25-26 and 28 have been cancelled. Currently, claims 1-2, 4, 6-9, 17-21, 23-24, 27 and 29-31 are pending.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 4/20/26 has been entered.
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(s) 1-2, 4, 6-7, 9 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by SON EITO (JP 2003253223A).
With respect to claim 1, SON EITO discloses an adhesive article (adhesive tape; fig 2; translation pg 1), comprising: an adhesive layer comprising an adhesive (the back surface includes a pressure-sensitive adhesive layer or adhesive layer – translation pg 1); and a substrate layer (a substrate having a high stretchability or elongation rate in one direction is used – translation pg 1) in contact with the adhesive layer (the adhesive is on the back surface of the substrate – translation pg 1), wherein the substrate layer consists of a plurality of cuts (cuts 1 and 2 in figures 1-2) that allows the adhesive article to be pulled along a central axis thereof to transition between an unstressed state and a stressed state (when the adhesive tape is pulled along the “XX” direction/axis in figs 1-2, the tape transitions from an unstressed state where the cuts 1, 2 are closed as shown in fig 1 to a configuration where the cuts 1,2 are opened as shown in fig 2; see translation pg 1); wherein each cut of the plurality of cuts (1,2) extends along a corresponding cut axis that is transverse to the central axis (the cuts 1,2 extend along the non-stretchable/low stretch direction/axis “YY” in figs 1-2), wherein the cut axes are parallel )as shown in figures 1-2), and wherein at least one of the cuts of the plurality of cuts extends to an edge of the substrate layer (as identified in annotated fig 2).
ANNOTATED FIG 2 of SON EITO (JP 2003253223A)
PNG
media_image1.png
388
471
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 2, SON EITO discloses the article as claimed (see rejection of claim 1) and SON EITO also discloses that in the stressed state (shown in fig 2) at least some of the cuts of the plurality of cuts provide apertures configured so one can view through the adhesive article (extension of the tape opens the slits forming a plurality of apertures as shown in fig 2; see also translation pg 1; the tape is applied in this open configuration to a wound site on a knee as described on pgs 1-2 of the translation and shown in fig 3 and thus inherently permits viewing of the wound site through the apertures).
With respect to claim 4, SON EITO discloses the article as claimed (see rejection of claim 1) and SON EITO also discloses that wherein the adhesive comprises a pressure sensitive adhesive (the back surface includes a pressure-sensitive adhesive layer or adhesive layer – translation pg 1).
With respect to claim 6, SON EITO discloses the article as claimed (see rejection of claim 1) and SON EITO also discloses that the stressed state comprises stretching (transition between configuration in fig 1 to configuration in fig 2 upon stretching of the tape along the “XX” direction/axis, see translation pg 1).
With respect to claim 7, SON EITO discloses the article as claimed (see rejection of claim 1) and SON EITO also discloses that when the adhesive article is in the stressed state (shown in fig 2) the adhesive article has optical properties different from optical properties of the adhesive article in the unstressed state (fig 1) (extension of the tape opens the slits forming a plurality of apertures as shown in figs 1-2; the tape is applied in this open configuration to a wound site as shown in fig 3 and thus inherently permits viewing of the wound site through the apertures; in the substantially closed configuration shown in fig 1, it is inherent that substantially no visual inspection of the wound through the tape with the naked eye is permitted - thus, the optical properties in the two states differ because in the stressed state viewing is permitted and in the unstressed state it is not).
With respect to claim 9, SON EITO discloses the article as claimed (see rejection of claim 1) and SON EITO also discloses a device attached to the substate layer (release paper – translation pg 1).
With respect to claim 27, SON EITO discloses the article as claimed (see rejection of claim 1) and SON EITO also discloses that the cut axes are perpendicular to the central axis (as shown in figs 1-2).
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 8, 17-21 and 29-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SON EITO (JP 2003253223A) in view of Greener et al (US 8680360).
With respect to claim 8, SON EITO discloses the article as claimed (see rejection of claim 1) but does not explicitly disclose that the substrate layer has a lower effective modulus of elasticity in at least one axis than an identical substrate layer without the plurality of cuts.
Greener, however, teaches an adhesive article (a lattice that is a wound dressing applied to a wound site using adhesive – col 5 lines 35-36; col 6 line 60- col 7 line 8), comprising: an adhesive layer comprising an adhesive (col 6 line 60 – col 7 line 8); and a substrate layer (lattice material) in contact with the adhesive layer (the adhesive forms a layer on (and thus is in contact with) the wound contacting surface of the open lattice/wound dressing – col 7 lines 5-8), wherein the substrate layer (lattice) includes a plurality of cuts (the lattice includes at least one slit – col 2 lines 11-15; fig 5 illustrates an embodiment which includes a plurality of slits) that allows the adhesive article to be pulled along a central axis thereof to transition between an unstressed state and a stressed state (col 2 lines 15-20), wherein each of the plurality of cuts (i.e. the cuts that are aligned horizontally in fig 5) extends along a corresponding cut axis (interpreted as being an axis that runs in the horizontal direction) that is transverse to the central axis (interpreted as being axis that runs vertically through the center of the article); wherein at least one of the cuts of the plurality of cuts extends to an edge of the substrate layer (as shown in fig 5). Greener further teaches that the substrate layer has a lower effective modulus of elasticity in at least one axis than an identical substrate layer without the plurality of cuts (the cuts in the material render the material more flexible and extensible (as compared to a material with no cuts) – see col 2 lines 49-51; the increased flexibility is interpreted as being due to a lower modulus of elasticity in the material that includes a plurality of cuts). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified the tape of SON EITO so that that the substrate layer has a lower effective modulus of elasticity in at least one axis than an identical substrate layer without the plurality of cuts, as taught by Greener, in order to provide increased flexibility and extensibility for improved user comfort.
With respect to claim 17, SON EITO discloses method comprising: preparing a substrate layer (it is inherent that the substrate is “prepared” in order to be provided as part of the article for use on a patient) that consists of a plurality of cuts (cuts 1 and 2 in figures 1-2) wherein each cut of the plurality of cuts (1,2) extends along a corresponding cut axis that is transverse to the central axis (the cuts 1,2 extend along the non-stretchable/low stretch direction/axis “YY” in figs 1-2), wherein the cut axes are parallel )as shown in figures 1-2), wherein at least one of the cuts of the plurality of cuts extends to an edge of the substrate layer (as identified in annotated fig 2), and wherein the plurality of cuts allows the adhesive article to be pulled along a central axis thereof to transition between an unstressed state and a stressed state (when the adhesive tape is pulled along the “XX” direction/axis in figs 1-2, the tape transitions from an unstressed state where the cuts 1, 2 are closed as shown in fig 1 to a configuration where the cuts 1,2 are opened as shown in fig 2; see translation pg 1); and applying an adhesive to the substrate layer (the back surface includes a pressure-sensitive adhesive layer or adhesive layer – translation pg 1; it is inherent that the adhesive is “applied” to the back of the substrate in order to be provided at that location in the finished article).
SON EITO does not, however, explicitly disclose that in an unstressed state, the length to the width of the cuts of the plurality of cuts is a first ratio, and in a stressed state, the length to the width of the cuts of the plurality of cuts is a second ratio less than the first ratio.
Greener, however, teaches a method (col 7 lines 9-40 describes method of manufacturing a lattice that is a wound dressing applied to a wound site using adhesive – see also col 5 lines 35-36; col 6 line 60- col 7 line 8), comprising: preparing a substrate layer (preparing the lattice material; step “a” in col 7 line 12) that defines a plurality of cuts (the lattice includes at least one slit – col 2 lines 11-15; fig 5 illustrates an embodiment which includes a plurality of slits; i.e. the cuts that are aligned horizontally in fig 5) each cut of the plurality of cuts extending along a corresponding cut axis (interpreted as being an axis that runs horizontally across the article) that is transverse to a central axis of the substrate layer (the cut axis runs horizontally across the article while the central axis runs vertically through the center of the article – thus, the axes are perpendicular or transverse to each other), wherein at least one of the cuts of the plurality of cuts extends to an edge of the substrate layer (as shown in fig 5), and wherein the plurality of cuts allows the substrate layer to be repeatedly pulled (pulling is in steps “b” in col 7; the material can be pulled by hand – see col 5 lines 15-16 and is interpreted as being allowed to be repeatedly pulled due to the elastic behavior of the material – see col 5 line 62- col 6 line 10; the direction of the contractile force is influenced by the geometry of cut in the material to form the lattice, the geometry of extension of the lattice and the geometry of the attachment points between the lattice or wound dressing and the tissue – col 6 lines 55-59) along the central axis thereof (interpreted as being an axis that runs in the vertical direction through the center of the article) to transition back and forth (due to the elastic behavior of the material – see col 5 line 62- col 6 line 10) between the substrate layer from an unstressed state (first conformation where slits are substantially closed), in which the length to the width of the cuts of the plurality of cuts is a first ratio (inherent characteristic of a slit is that it is defined by length and width dimensions and thus a ratio of the length to the width), to a stressed state (second confirmation where the lattice is stretched to expand the slits; shown in fig 5), in which the length to the width of the cuts of the plurality of cuts is a second ratio less than the first ratio (when the lattice is stretched along the central axis, the width dimension of each slit is increased while the length dimension is decreased to form open diamond shapes as shown in fig 5; thus, the length to width ratio in the open/expanded second confirmation inherently is less than the length to width ratio in the unstretched first conformation); and applying an adhesive to the substrate layer (col 6 line 60 – col 7 line 8; the adhesive forms a layer on the wound contacting surface of the open lattice/wound dressing – col 7 lines 5-8). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified the method of SON EITO so that in an unstressed state, the length to the width of the cuts of the plurality of cuts is a first ratio, and in a stressed state, the length to the width of the cuts of the plurality of cuts is a second ratio less than the first ratio, as taught by Greener, in order to maximize the open volume or area of the apertures for improved air circulation and breathability at the skin and wound surfaces (Greener col 3 lines 31-34).
With respect to claim 18, SON EITO in view of Greener discloses the method substantially as claimed (see rejection of claim 17) and Greener also discloses that preparing the substrate layer comprises modifying the substrate layer by cutting the plurality of cuts into the substrate layer with a knife, a blade, a water jet, or a laser beam and that such means are known in the art (col 2 lines 33-34). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified the method of SON EITO in view of Greener so that preparing the substrate layer comprises modifying the substrate layer by cutting the plurality of cuts into the substrate layer with a knife, a blade, a water jet, or a laser beam, as taught by Greener, since Greener teaches that these are cutting means which are known and routinely used in the art.
With respect to claims 19-20, SON EITO in view of Greener discloses the method substantially as claimed (see rejection of claim 17) and Greener also discloses that the adhesive is applied to the substrate layer prior to modifying the substrate layer (example 5 describes the method of manufacturing the article shown in fig 5 and includes discloses that an adhesive material is applied to a foam layer prior to cutting slits therethrough to form the lattice – see col 9 line 60 – col 10 line 23) such that the adhesive includes a plurality of cuts (as described in example 5, the adhesive material is provided on the foam layer prior to cutting slits therethrough – thus, the cuts are provided through both the foam and adhesive – see col 9 line 60 – col 10 line 23). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified the method of SON EITO in view of Greener so that the adhesive is applied to the substrate layer prior to modifying the substrate layer such that the adhesive includes a plurality of cuts, as taught by Greener, in order to ensure that when the slits are formed that they pass through both the substrate and adhesive layers so that both layers are capable of extension and, furthermore, to avoid adhesive entering the slits which could prevent them from opening during extension of the article.
With respect to claim 21, SON EITO discloses an adhesive article (adhesive tape; fig 2; translation pg 1), comprising: a substrate layer (a substrate having a high stretchability or elongation rate in one direction is used – translation pg 1) having a central axis (direction/axis “XX” in figs 1-2) wherein the substrate layer consists of a plurality of cuts (cuts 1 and 2 in figures 1-2) that are all angled relative to the central axis by a non-zero angle (as shown in figs 1-2, the slits 1,2 appear to be perpendicular to the “XX” direction/axis and, thus, are angled about 90 degrees from the “XX” direction/axis) and parallel to one another (as shown in figures 1-2), wherein at least one of the cuts of the plurality of cuts extends to an edge of the substrate layer (as identified in annotated fig 2), and wherein the plurality of cuts allows the adhesive article to be pulled along a central axis thereof to transition the substrate layer from a first state to a second state (when the adhesive tape is pulled along the “XX” direction/axis in figs 1-2, the tape transitions from an unstressed state where the cuts 1, 2 are closed as shown in fig 1 to a configuration where the cuts 1,2 are opened as shown in fig 2; see translation pg 1); and. an adhesive disposed on the substrate layer (the back surface includes a pressure-sensitive adhesive layer or adhesive layer – translation pg 1).
SON EITO does not, however, explicitly disclose that in the first state, the length to the width of the cuts of the plurality of cuts is a first ratio, and in the second state, the length to the width of the cuts of the plurality of cuts is a second ratio less than the first ratio.
Greener, however, teaches a method (col 7 lines 9-40 describes method of manufacturing a lattice that is a wound dressing applied to a wound site using adhesive – see also col 5 lines 35-36; col 6 line 60- col 7 line 8), comprising: preparing a substrate layer (preparing the lattice material; step “a” in col 7 line 12) that defines a plurality of cuts (the lattice includes at least one slit – col 2 lines 11-15; fig 5 illustrates an embodiment which includes a plurality of slits; i.e. the cuts that are aligned horizontally in fig 5) each cut of the plurality of cuts extending along a corresponding cut axis (interpreted as being an axis that runs horizontally across the article) that is transverse to a central axis of the substrate layer (the cut axis runs horizontally across the article while the central axis runs vertically through the center of the article – thus, the axes are perpendicular or transverse to each other), wherein at least one of the cuts of the plurality of cuts extends to an edge of the substrate layer (as shown in fig 5), and wherein the plurality of cuts allows the substrate layer to be repeatedly pulled (pulling is in steps “b” in col 7; the material can be pulled by hand – see col 5 lines 15-16 and is interpreted as being allowed to be repeatedly pulled due to the elastic behavior of the material – see col 5 line 62- col 6 line 10; the direction of the contractile force is influenced by the geometry of cut in the material to form the lattice, the geometry of extension of the lattice and the geometry of the attachment points between the lattice or wound dressing and the tissue – col 6 lines 55-59) along the central axis thereof (interpreted as being an axis that runs in the vertical direction through the center of the article) to transition back and forth (due to the elastic behavior of the material – see col 5 line 62- col 6 line 10) between the substrate layer from a first state (first conformation where slits are substantially closed), in which the length to the width of the cuts of the plurality of cuts is a first ratio (inherent characteristic of a slit is that it is defined by length and width dimensions and thus a ratio of the length to the width), to a second state (second confirmation where the lattice is stretched to expand the slits; shown in fig 5), in which the length to the width of the cuts of the plurality of cuts is a second ratio less than the first ratio (when the lattice is stretched along the central axis, the width dimension of each slit is increased while the length dimension is decreased to form open diamond shapes as shown in fig 5; thus, the length to width ratio in the open/expanded second confirmation inherently is less than the length to width ratio in the unstretched first conformation); and applying an adhesive to the substrate layer (col 6 line 60 – col 7 line 8; the adhesive forms a layer on the wound contacting surface of the open lattice/wound dressing – col 7 lines 5-8). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified the article of SON EITO so that in the first state, the length to the width of the cuts of the plurality of cuts is a first ratio, and in the second state, the length to the width of the cuts of the plurality of cuts is a second ratio less than the first ratio, as taught by Greener, in order to maximize the open volume or area of the apertures for improved air circulation and breathability at the skin and wound surfaces (Greener col 3 lines 31-34).
With respect to claim 29, SON EITO in view of Greener discloses the article substantially as claimed (see rejection of claim 17) and SON EITO also discloses that the cut axes are perpendicular to the central axis (as shown in figs 1-2).
With respect to claim 30, SON EITO in view of Greener discloses the article substantially as claimed (see rejection of claim 21) and SON EITO also disclose that the non-zero angle is about 90 degrees (as shown in figs 1-2, the slits 1,2 appear to be perpendicular to the “XX” direction/axis and, thus, are angled about 90 degrees from the “XX” direction/axis).
With respect to claim 31, SON EITO discloses the article as claimed (see rejection of claim 1) but does not, however, explicitly disclose that in an unstressed state, the length to the width of the cuts of the plurality of cuts is a first ratio, and in a stressed state, the length to the width of the cuts of the plurality of cuts is a second ratio less than the first ratio.
Greener, however, teaches an adhesive article (a lattice that is a wound dressing applied to a wound site using adhesive – col 5 lines 35-36; col 6 line 60- col 7 line 8), comprising: an adhesive layer comprising an adhesive (col 6 line 60 – col 7 line 8); and a substrate layer (lattice material) in contact with the adhesive layer (the adhesive forms a layer on (and thus is in contact with) the wound contacting surface of the open lattice/wound dressing – col 7 lines 5-8), wherein the substrate layer (lattice) includes a plurality of cuts (the lattice includes at least one slit – col 2 lines 11-15; fig 5 illustrates an embodiment which includes a plurality of slits) that allows the adhesive article to be pulled along a central axis thereof to transition between an unstressed state and a stressed state (col 2 lines 15-20), wherein each of the plurality of cuts (i.e. the cuts that are aligned horizontally in fig 5) extends along a corresponding cut axis (interpreted as being an axis that runs in the horizontal direction) that is transverse to the central axis (interpreted as being axis that runs vertically through the center of the article); wherein at least one of the cuts of the plurality of cuts extends to an edge of the substrate layer (as shown in fig 5); wherein the substrate layer transitions from an unstressed state (first conformation where slits are substantially closed), in which the length to the width of the cuts of the plurality of cuts is a first ratio (inherent characteristic of a slit is that it is defined by length and width dimensions and thus a ratio of the length to the width), to a stressed state (second confirmation where the lattice is stretched to expand the slits; shown in fig 5), in which the length to the width of the cuts of the plurality of cuts is a second ratio less than the first ratio (when the lattice is stretched along the central axis, the width dimension of each slit is increased while the length dimension is decreased to form open diamond shapes as shown in fig 5; thus, the length to width ratio in the open/expanded second confirmation inherently is less than the length to width ratio in the unstretched first conformation); and applying an adhesive to the substrate layer (col 6 line 60 – col 7 line 8; the adhesive forms a layer on the wound contacting surface of the open lattice/wound dressing – col 7 lines 5-8). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified the article of SON EITO so that in an unstressed state, the length to the width of the cuts of the plurality of cuts is a first ratio, and in a stressed state, the length to the width of the cuts of the plurality of cuts is a second ratio less than the first ratio, as taught by Greener, in order to maximize the open volume or area of the apertures for improved air circulation and breathability at the skin and wound surfaces (Greener col 3 lines 31-34).
Greener does not, however, explicitly disclose that in the unstressed state, the length to the width of the cuts is a first ratio that is greater than 1000. Greener does, however, teach that the “cuts are not restricted to any particular geometry” (col 2 line 42). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified the geometry of the slits by changing the length and/or width so that in the unstressed state, the length to the width of the cuts is a first ratio that is greater than 1000 since Greener explicitly teaches that changes to the geometry of the slits are customary and routine during manufacturing. Additionally, such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component which is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. Furthermore, modification of the geometry so that the length to width ratio in the unstressed state is, specifically, greater than 1000, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, since discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art.
Claims 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SON EITO (JP 2003253223A) in view of Greener et al (US 8680360) and further in view of Stebbings et al (US 20020193724).
With respect to claim 23, SON EITO in view of Greener discloses the article substantially as claimed (see rejection of claim 21) but does not disclose that the article further comprises a sensor attached to the substrate layer.
Stebbings teaches an adhesive article (adhesive construction 10; fig 1-3) which further comprises a sensor attached to the substrate layer (see Claim 28 and para [0034-0036]; wherein the medical article is in the form of a sensor that is interpreted as being attached to the second major layer of the substrate layer in which the medical article comprises a backing and a stretch removable pressure sensitive adhesive layer disposed thereon). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified the article of SON EITO in view of Greener to further include a sensor attached to the substrate layer, like the article of Stebbings, in order to provide healthcare providers with information related to the condition of a wound for targeted treatment and improved wound monitoring and management.
With respect to claim 24, SON EITO in view of Greener discloses the article substantially as claimed (see rejection of claim 21) but does not disclose that the article further comprises a monitor attached to the substrate layer.
Stebbings teaches an adhesive article (adhesive construction 10; fig 1-3) which further comprises a monitor attached to the substrate layer (para [0034-0036]; wherein the examiner is interpreting the monitor as a device for observing a biological condition or function, wherein the medical article is in the form of a device such as electrodes and sensors used to monitor biological function, that is interpreted as being attached to the second major layer of the substrate layer in which the medical article comprises a backing and a stretch removable pressure sensitive adhesive layer disposed thereon). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified the article of SON EITO in view of Greener to further include a monitor attached to the substrate layer, like the article of Stebbings, in order to provide healthcare providers with information related to the condition of a wound for targeted treatment and improved wound monitoring and management.
Response to Amendments/Arguments
Applicant’s amendments and arguments filed 4/20/26 have been fully considered as follows:
Regarding the claim rejections under 35 USC 103, Applicant’s arguments on pages 6-7 of the Response have been fully considered but are rendered moot in view of the new grounds of rejection presented above which were necessitated by Applicant’s amendments to the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAITLIN CARREIRO whose telephone number is (571)270-7234. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am-4pm.
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, Rachael Bredefeld can be reached at 571-270-5237. 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.
/CAITLIN A CARREIRO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3786
Prosecution Insights