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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on 03/12/2026. These drawings are acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-7 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1-7 and 12 are not clear with respect to what applicant is claiming. The claims do not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired.
Claim 1 is unclear reciting “a microchip” because a microchip is generally understood as an integrated circuit (IC) or computer chip, which typically contains a set of electronic circuits (i.e., transistors and resistors), which work together to process and store information in electronic devices. Therefore, it is unclear whether the applicant is trying to claim a microchip or a microfluidic chip. For the purpose of this Office action, the limitation will be interpreted as a microfluidic chip.
Claims 1-3 and 4 are unclear reciting “central processing unit (CPU) configured to” because the claims do not specify how the CPU is configured to achieve the claimed function. It is further unclear how a CPU itself is structurally configured for performing the claimed function, since the device do not positively recite additional elements, such as a non-transitory computer readable memory programmed with instructions to perform the claimed function. Claim 1 is further unclear reciting “the vibration element is configured to apply, based on a displacement waveform of the vibration element, vibration to the sheath liquid, [...]” because it is unclear what structural configuration is being claimed. Claims 5-7 are similarly unclear.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the fluid" in L15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim limitation ‘central processing unit (CPU) configured to’/‘the CPU is further configured to’ has been evaluated under the three-prong test set forth in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, but the result is inconclusive. Thus, it is unclear whether this limitation should be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the term “means” or generic placeholder is modified by a word, which is ambiguous regarding whether it conveys structure or function; and/or the claim limitation uses the word “means” or a generic placeholder coupled with functional language, but it is modified by some structure or material that is ambiguous regarding whether that structure or material is sufficient for performing the claimed function. The boundaries of this claim limitation are ambiguous; therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
In response to this rejection, applicant must clarify whether this limitation should be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Mere assertion regarding applicant’s intent to invoke or not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph is insufficient. Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim to clearly invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, by reciting “means” or a generic placeholder for means, or by reciting “step.” The “means,” generic placeholder, or “step” must be modified by functional language, and must not be modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function;
(b) Present a sufficient showing that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, should apply because the claim limitation recites a function to be performed and does not recite sufficient structure, material, or acts to perform that function;
(c) Amend the claim to clearly avoid invoking 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, by deleting the function or by reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to perform the recited function; or
(d) Present a sufficient showing that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, does not apply because the limitation does not recite a function or does recite a function along with sufficient structure, material or acts to perform that function.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1/a2 as being anticipated by Kanda (US 2011/0259749 A1; incorporated U.S. Patent Publication No. 2009-0122311 to Kanda, and U.S. Pat. No. 7,443,491 to Kanda).
Regarding claim 1, Kanda teaches:
1. A microparticle sorting device, comprising:
a microchip (e.g., flow-defining block 10) including:
a main flow path (e.g., sample conduit 13, flow chamber 14, flow channel 15);
a sheath liquid flow path (i.e., flow path for the sheath liquid from the sheath inlet 12 ¶ 0033+) that communicates with the main flow path (see Fig. 1 for example), wherein the sheath liquid flow path supplies sheath liquid (see i.e., a flow supplying mechanism including a sample-liquid supplying system and a sheath-liquid supplying system ¶ 0032+);
a sample liquid flow path (e.g., 11) that communicates with the main flow path (see Fig. 1 for example), wherein
the sample liquid flow path supplies sample liquid (see i.e., a flow supplying mechanism including a sample-liquid supplying system and a sheath-liquid supplying system ¶ 0032+), and
the sample liquid includes a microparticle (e.g., cell particles ¶ 0011+; cell particles P ¶ 0032-0033+);
a sheath liquid introduction unit (e.g., 12) configured to introduce the sheath liquid (¶ 0032-0033+);
a sample liquid introduction unit (e.g., 11) configured to introduce the sample liquid (¶ 0032-0033+); and
an orifice (e.g., nozzle 24) at an end of the main flow path (see Fig. 5A for example), wherein
the orifice discharges a stream of fluid (see ¶ 0034 & Fig. 5A for example), and
the fluid includes the sample liquid and the sheath liquid (see ¶ 0034 for example);
a connection member (see i.e., recesses in the body of the flow-defining block 10; flexible sample tube 17; see also lock screws ¶ 0044; block holder 28 ¶ 0059; screw mechanisms and/or alignment pins ¶ 0064) attached to the microchip (see Fig. 1 & ¶ 0044, 0059 for example), wherein the connection member includes:
a sample introduction coupling part (see i.e., the sample liquid is supplied from the sample liquid supplying system through the flexible sample tube 17 that is hermetically inserted within the sample conduit 13 as shown in FIGS. 3A ¶ 0040; see also recesses in the body of the flow-defining block 10; and lock screws ¶ 0044) coupled to the sample liquid introduction unit (see i.e., a sample conduit 13 [...] hermetically sealed and inserted within the sample inlet 11 ¶ 0033, 0040; Figs. 1, 3A & ¶ 0044 for example); and
a sheath liquid introduction coupling part (see i.e., recesses in the body of the flow-defining block 10; see also lock screws ¶ 0044) coupled to the sheath liquid introduction unit (see Fig. 1 & ¶ 0044 for example);
a vibration element (e.g., oscillator 16) attached to the connection member (see Fig. 1 & ¶ 0044 for example), wherein
the vibration element is capable of applying, based on a displacement waveform of the vibration element, vibration to the sheath liquid (see i.e., an oscillator 16 having a piezo-actuator (PZT) oscillating at a given frequency (e.g., f=60 kHz). The oscillator 16 is designed to apply oscillation to the flow-defining block 10 together with a jet flow JF ejected through a nozzle 24 of a nozzle plate 22 (as described later), thereby splitting the jet flow to a plurality of droplets D at the break-off point. Thus, the frequency of the oscillator 16 is selected such that each of the droplets D contains a single cell particle P dyed with a fluorescent labeling reagent. ¶ 0034), and
the fluid is converted into a plurality of droplets by the application of the vibration (see ¶ 0034 for example);
a camera (e.g., imaging device 21 such as a CCD camera ¶ 0046) configured to capture an image at a position where the fluid is converted into the plurality of droplets (¶ 0046), wherein the image includes image data that represents the fluid and a droplet of the plurality of droplets (see ¶ 0046 for example);
a central processing unit (CPU) configured to determine, based on a break-off point in the image and states of a satellite droplet of the plurality of droplets (e.g., controller ¶ 0046; see also ¶ 0032 incorporated reference U.S. Patent Publication No. 2009-0122311 to Kanda, e.g., computer ¶ 0077-0078, 0037), at least one of: a harmonic superposition amplitude ratio associated with the displacement waveform, a harmonic phase difference associated with the displacement waveform, or a superimposed wave voltage associated with the displacement waveform (see ¶ 0046; and the incorporated reference ‘311 Abstract, Claim 1+); and
a vibration application control unit (see i.e., an oscillator 16 having a piezo-actuator (PZT) oscillating at a given frequency (e.g., f=60 kHz). The oscillator 16 is designed to apply oscillation to the flow-defining block 10 together with a jet flow JF ejected through a nozzle 24 of a nozzle plate 22 (as described later), thereby splitting the jet flow to a plurality of droplets D at the break-off point. Thus, the frequency of the oscillator 16 is selected such that each of the droplets D contains a single cell particle P dyed with a fluorescent labeling reagent. ¶ 0034; the frequency of the oscillator 16 is adjusted ¶ 0049; ¶ 0046; see also ¶ 0032 incorporated references U.S. Patent Publication No. 2009-0122311 to Kanda, see e.g., oscillator such as a piezoelectric element ¶ 0043, computer ¶ 0077-0078, 0037; and U.S. Pat. No. 7,443,491 to Kanda, see e.g., oscillating device/apparatus 90 throughout the reference; The host computer 109 uses the signal to determine the biological features of the particles. Also, the sorting controller 110 uses the signal for controlling the power supply circuitry of the sorting apparatus. C11/L23-26).
With regard to limitations in claims 1-7 (e.g., wherein the sheath liquid flow path supplies sheath liquid; [...] supplies [...], to introduce [...]; [...] discharges [...]; to capture an image [...]; [...] to determine, based on a break-off point in the image and states of a satellite droplet of the plurality of droplets, at least one of: a harmonic superposition amplitude ratio associated with the displacement waveform, a harmonic phase difference associated with the displacement waveform, or a superimposed wave voltage associated with the displacement waveform; and [...] to control the displacement waveform of the vibration element based on the at least one of the harmonic superposition amplitude ratio, the harmonic phase difference, or the superimposed wave voltage, etc.), these claim limitations are considered process or intended use limitations, which do not further delineate the structure of the claimed apparatus from that of the prior art. The cited prior art teaches all of the positively recited structure of the claimed apparatus. The Courts have held that a statement of intended use in an apparatus claim fails to distinguish over a prior art apparatus. See In re Sinex, 309 F.2d 488, 492, 135 USPQ 302, 305 (CCPA 1962). The Courts have held that the manner of operating an apparatus does not differentiate an apparatus claim from the prior art, if the prior art apparatus teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim. See Ex Parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (BPAI 1987). The Courts have held that apparatus claims must be structurally distinguishable from the prior art in terms of structure, not function. See In re Danley, 120 USPQ 528, 531 (CCPA 1959); and Hewlett-Packard Co. V. Bausch and Lomb, Inc., 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (see MPEP §§ 2114 and 2173.05(g)). "Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim." Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666,667 (Bd. App. 1969). Furthermore, "[i]nclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims." See In re Young, 75 F.2d *>996, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963)) (see MPEP § 2115).
Regarding claim 12, Kanda teaches: 12. The microparticle measuring device according to claim 1, wherein the sheath liquid introduction coupling part has a sheath liquid converging part (see i.e., The flow-defining block 10 is designed to guide the sample liquid through the sample conduit 13 and the sheath liquid through the sheath inlet 12 into a flow chamber 14. ¶ 0033), and the sheath liquid converging part has a width that gradually or partially narrows from a side of the vibration element toward a side of the sheath liquid introduction unit (see i.e., narrowing shape of the flow chamber 14 in Fig. 1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otsuka et al. (US 2018/0045638 A1) in view of Kanda (US 2011/0259749 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Otsuka et al. teach:
1. A microparticle sorting device (e.g., 1, 11, 31) comprising:
a microchip (e.g., Microchip 2 ¶ 0055-0058) including:
a main flow path (i.e., a flow path of a sample flow channel, a flow path upstream of the orifice 21);
a sheath liquid flow path (i.e., flow path downstream of the sheathe inlet 23) that communicates with the main flow path (see Fig. 11 & ¶ 0055 for example), wherein the sheath liquid flow path supplies sheath liquid (see ¶ 0055 for example);
a sample liquid flow path (i.e., flow path downstream of the sample inlet 22) that communicates with the main flow path (see Fig. 11 & ¶ 0055-0056 for example), wherein
the sample liquid flow path supplies sample liquid (see ¶ 0055 for example), and
the sample liquid includes a microparticle (see i.e., In the microchip 2, a sample inlet 22 into which a liquid (sample liquid) including sorting object particles is introduced ¶ 0055);
a sheath liquid introduction unit (e.g., sheath inlet 23) configured to introduce the sheath liquid (see ¶ 0055 for example);
a sample liquid introduction unit (e.g., sample inlet 22) configured to introduce the sample liquid (see ¶ 0055 for example); and
an orifice (e.g., 21) at an end of the main flow path (see Fig. 11 for example), wherein
the orifice discharges a stream of fluid (see ¶ 0059 for example), and
the fluid includes the sample liquid and the sheath liquid (see i.e., In the microchip 2, the sample liquid is introduced into the sample inlet 22, joins with the sheath liquid introduced into the sheath inlet 23, is sent to a sample flow channel, and is ejected from an orifice 21 provided in a termination of the sample flow channel. ¶ 0055);
a connection member attached to the microchip (e.g., piping; and i.e., The vibration element 3 may be provided at a position where vibration can be applied to the liquid flowing through the flow channel, may be arranged in the microchip 2, may be arranged to contact the microchip 2, and may be attached to piping such as sheath piping to introduce a liquid into the flow channel. ¶ 0059), wherein the connection member includes:
a sheath liquid introduction coupling part (e.g., sheath piping) coupled to the sheath liquid introduction unit (see ¶ 0059 for example);
a vibration element (e.g., Vibration Element 3) attached to the connection member (see i.e., The vibration element 3 may be provided at a position where vibration can be applied to the liquid flowing through the flow channel, may be arranged in the microchip 2, may be arranged to contact the microchip 2, and may be attached to piping such as sheath piping to introduce a liquid into the flow channel. ¶ 0059), wherein
the vibration element is configured to apply, based on a displacement waveform of the vibration element, vibration to the sheath liquid (see ¶ 0023, 0059 for example), and
the fluid is converted into a plurality of droplets by the application of the vibration (see ¶ 0059 for example);
a camera (e.g., Imaging Element (Camera) 12 ¶ 0100-0101; Light Detection Unit; the light detecting unit configured by a laser light source, a radiation system including a condensing lens, a dichroic mirror, and a band pass filter condensing/radiating laser light for the particles, and a detection system detecting the measurement object light generated from the particles by radiating the laser light. The detection system configured by a photo multiplier tube (PMT) and an area imaging element such as a CCD or a CMOS element ¶ 0069-0070+) configured to capture an image at a position where the fluid is converted into the plurality of droplets, wherein the image includes image data that represents the fluid and a droplet of the plurality of droplets (see i.e., The imaging element (camera) 12 images the fluid before becoming the liquid droplet and the liquid droplet, at a position (break-off point BP) where a laminar flow of a sample liquid and a sheath liquid discharged from an orifice 21 becomes the liquid droplet. The fluid and the liquid droplet can be imaged using various imaging elements such as a photoelectric converting element, in addition to an imaging device such as a CCD or a CMOS camera. In addition, a position adjusting mechanism 15 to change the position of the camera 12 is preferably provided in the camera 12. Thereby, the position of the camera 12 can be easily controlled according to an instruction from the excitation control unit 14 to be described below. In addition, in the particle sorting apparatus 11 according to this embodiment, a light source (not illustrated in the drawings) to illuminate an imaging region may be provided in addition to the camera 12. ¶ 0100-0101);
a central processing unit (CPU) (information processing device ¶ 0104; processor, computer Claim 8) configured to determine, based on a break-off point in the image and states of a satellite droplet of the plurality of droplets, at least one of: a harmonic superposition amplitude ratio associated with the displacement waveform, a harmonic phase difference associated with the displacement waveform, or a superimposed wave voltage associated with the displacement waveform (see Figs. 2-10 and i.e., A voltage supplying unit 13 supplies a driving voltage to a vibration element 3. The driving voltage of the vibration element 3 is supplied according to a sine wave to form a stabilized liquid droplet and is controlled by two elements of a frequency (a clock value) and amplitude (a drive value). ¶ 0102; see also An excitation control unit 14 controls driving power of the vibration element 3, on the basis of an image imaged by the camera 12, and controls a position of the camera 12 according to necessity. Specifically, the excitation control unit 14 controls the voltage supplying unit 13 or the position adjusting mechanism 15, on the basis of a state of a fluid before forming a liquid droplet in an image or a state of a satellite liquid droplet existing between a break-off point and a liquid droplet closest to the break-off point or both the state of the fluid and the state of the satellite liquid droplet. ¶ 0103; The excitation control unit 14 can be configured by an information processing device including a general-purpose processor, a main storage device, and an auxiliary storage device. In this case, the voltage supplying unit 13 or the position adjusting mechanism 15 can be automatically controlled by inputting image data imaged by an imaging element such as the camera 12 to the excitation control unit 14 and executing a programmed control algorithm. Such a computer program may be stored in a recording medium such as a magnetic disk, an optical disk, a magneto-optical disk, and a flash memory or may be distributed through a network. ¶ 0104); and
a vibration application control unit (e.g., Charging Unit 4 ¶ 0060+, Charging Control Unit 7 ¶ 0067+) configured to control the displacement waveform of the vibration element based on the at least one of the harmonic superposition amplitude ratio, the harmonic phase difference, or the superimposed wave voltage (see ¶ 0062, 0067-0068, 0076-0077, 102-104 for example).
Regarding claim 1, Otsuka et al. teach: In the microchip 2, a sample inlet 22 into which a liquid (sample liquid) including sorting object particles is introduced (¶ 0055), and the sample liquid being introduced appears to teach a coupling means. However, Otsuka et al. do not explicitly teach: a sample introduction coupling part coupled to the sample liquid introduction unit.
See Kanda above.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the device of Otsuka et al. with a sample introduction coupling part, as taught by Kanda, for the purpose of the sample liquid introduction unit hermetically coupled to the microchip. The Court in KSR, “[w]hen a work is available in one field of endeavor, design incentives and other market forces can prompt variations of it, either in the same field or a different one”, 550 U.S. at ___, 82 USPQ2d at 1396 (emphasis added), or solves a problem which is different from that which the applicant was trying to solve, may also be considered for the purposes of 35 U.S.C. 103. See MPEP 2141.
With regard to limitations in claims 1-7 (e.g., wherein the sheath liquid flow path supplies sheath liquid; [...] supplies [...], to introduce [...]; [...] discharges [...]; to capture an image [...]; [...] to determine, based on a break-off point in the image and states of a satellite droplet of the plurality of droplets, at least one of: a harmonic superposition amplitude ratio associated with the displacement waveform, a harmonic phase difference associated with the displacement waveform, or a superimposed wave voltage associated with the displacement waveform; and [...] to control the displacement waveform of the vibration element based on the at least one of the harmonic superposition amplitude ratio, the harmonic phase difference, or the superimposed wave voltage, etc.), these claim limitations are considered process or intended use limitations, which do not further delineate the structure of the claimed apparatus from that of the prior art. The cited prior art teaches all of the positively recited structure of the claimed apparatus. The Courts have held that a statement of intended use in an apparatus claim fails to distinguish over a prior art apparatus. See In re Sinex, 309 F.2d 488, 492, 135 USPQ 302, 305 (CCPA 1962). The Courts have held that the manner of operating an apparatus does not differentiate an apparatus claim from the prior art, if the prior art apparatus teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim. See Ex Parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (BPAI 1987). The Courts have held that apparatus claims must be structurally distinguishable from the prior art in terms of structure, not function. See In re Danley, 120 USPQ 528, 531 (CCPA 1959); and Hewlett-Packard Co. V. Bausch and Lomb, Inc., 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (see MPEP §§ 2114 and 2173.05(g)). "Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim." Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666,667 (Bd. App. 1969). Furthermore, "[i]nclusion of material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims." See In re Young, 75 F.2d *>996, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) (as restated in In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963)) (see MPEP § 2115).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Otsuka et al. (US 2018/0045638 A1) in view of Kanda (US 2011/0259749 A1) or Ito (US 2014/0048458 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Otsuka et al. do not explicitly teach: 12. The microparticle measuring device according to claim 1, wherein the sheath liquid introduction coupling part has a sheath liquid converging part, and the sheath liquid converging part has a width that gradually or partially narrows from a side of the vibration element toward a side of the sheath liquid introduction unit.
See Kanda above.
Ito teaches: a microparticle measuring device (Abstract+), wherein a sheath liquid introduction coupling part (i.e., coupling part of a sheath fluid channel 14 to a main channel 15) has a sheath liquid converging part (i.e., converging part from 14 to 16 including a communication opening 156), and the sheath liquid converging part has a width that gradually or partially narrows from a side of a vibration element (i.e., downstream side of sorting channel 16, and an actuator 31) toward a side of a sheath liquid introduction unit (i.e., upstream side of a sheath fluid inlet 13; see Figs. 2-3, 5 for example).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the device of Otsuka et al. with a sheath liquid converging part having a width that gradually or partially narrows from a side of the vibration element toward a side of the sheath liquid introduction unit, as taught by Kanda to guide the sample liquid through the sample conduit 13 and the sheath liquid through the sheath inlet 12 into a flow chamber 14. (Kanda ¶ 0033, Fig. 1); or as taught by Ito (¶ 0008-0013, Figs. 2-3, 5), to increase microparticle sorting efficiency (Ito ¶ 0006-0007, 0016). The Court stated that if a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond his or her skill. Id. at ___, 82 USPQ2d at 1396. The Court in KSR, “[w]hen a work is available in one field of endeavor, design incentives and other market forces can prompt variations of it, either in the same field or a different one”, 550 U.S. at ___, 82 USPQ2d at 1396 (emphasis added), or solves a problem which is different from that which the applicant was trying to solve, may also be considered for the purposes of 35 U.S.C. 103. See MPEP 2141.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Applicant is thanked for their thoughtful amendments to the claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEAN KWAK whose telephone number is (571)270-7072. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH, 4:30 am - 2:30 pm EST.
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, CHARLES CAPOZZI can be reached at (571)270-3638. 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.
/DEAN KWAK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1798
DEAN KWAK
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1798
Prosecution Insights