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 .
This is the first office action on the merits in response to Applicant’s election filed on
02/25/2026.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species II (FIGS. 7A-7C) in the reply filed on February 25, 2026 is acknowledged. Applicant’s election withdraws claims 4 and 14 from further consideration. Claims 1-3, 5-13, and 15-23 are pending and examined.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-3, 9-12, 17, 19-20, and 23 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 6: “at least type of infusion cassette” is believed to be in error for --at least a type of the infusion cassette--
Claim 1, line 8: “the detection system” is believed to be in error for --the infusion cassette detection system-- (see claim 1, line 7)
Claim 1, line 12: “the type of infusion cassette” is believed to be in error for --the type of the infusion cassette--
Claim 2, line 2: “the determined type of infusion cassette” is believed to be in error for --the determined type of the infusion cassette--
Claim 3, lines 1-2: “the type of infusion cassette” is believed to be in error for --the type of the infusion cassette--
Claim 9, line 1: “the detection system” is believed to be in error for --the infusion cassette detection system-- (see claim 1, line 7)
Claim 10, line 2: “the detection system” is believed to be in error for --the infusion cassette detection system-- (see claim 1, line 7)
Claim 10, lines 2-3: “correspond to a hole or marking” is believed to be in error for --correspond to the at least one hole or marking-- (see claim 1, line 5)
Claim 10, lines 4-5: “correspond to an absence of a hole or marking” is believed to be in error for --correspond to an absence of the at least one hole or marking-- (see claim 1, line 5)
Claim 11, line 6: “at least type of infusion cassette” is believed to be in error for --at least a type of the infusion cassette--
Claim 11, lines 10-11: “the type of infusion cassette” is believed to be in error for --the type of the infusion cassette--
Claim 12, line 2: “the determined type of infusion cassette” is believed to be in error for --the determined type of the infusion cassette--
Claim 17, line 2: “notifies” is believed to be in error for --notifying-- (to maintain parallel verb form with “using”)
Claim 19, line 2: “correspond to a hole or marking” is believed to be in error for --correspond to the at least one hole or marking-- (see claim 11, line 5)
Claim 19, line 4: “correspond to an absence of a hole or marking” is believed to be in error for --correspond to an absence of the at least one hole or marking-- (see claim 11, line 5)
Claim 20, line 8: “at least type of infusion cassette” is believed to be in error for --at least a type of the infusion cassette--
Claim 20, lines 12-13: “the type of infusion cassette” is believed to be in error for --the type of the infusion cassette--
Claim 23, line 3: “correspond to a hole or marking” is believed to be in error for --correspond to the at least one hole or marking-- (see claim 20, line 7)
Claim 23, lines 5-6: “correspond to an absence of a hole or marking” is believed to be in error for --correspond to an absence of the at least one hole or marking-- (see claim 20, line 7)
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 10 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.
Regarding claim 10, the phrase "may correspond” in lines 2 and 4 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are in fact performed by the invention, and are part of the invention or if such recitation is just a possible result that may or may not happen. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-3, 5-7, 9-13, 15-16, 18-20, and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hyman (US 5,904,668: IDS reference).
Regarding claim 1, Hyman teaches (Figs. 1, 7, and 8a-8c) an infusion pump (10 – Fig. 1), comprising:
a housing (housing of 10) comprising a pump (10) and a receptacle (Fig. 1: beneath door 30);
an infusion cassette (12 – Fig. 1) that includes tubing (40, 52, and 54 – Fig. 1) for passage of an infusate (col. 3, l. 46), the infusion cassette (12) fitting into the receptacle whereby the tubing (40, 52, and 54) is adjacent the pump (10) when fully inserted, the infusion cassette (12) further comprising at least one hole or marking (notches as described in col. 10, ll. 6-7) on a detection surface thereof that identifies at least type of infusion cassette (col. 10, ll. 6-7: “Each cassette could be uniquely identified by the presence (or absence) of two notches”); and
an infusion cassette detection system (320 – Figs. 7 and 8a-8c) that detects the type of the infusion cassette (12) when the infusion cassette (12) is fully inserted in the receptacle of the housing (10), the detection system (320) comprising at least one emitter/detector pair including an emitter (transmitter) that emits light to the detection surface of the infusion cassette and a corresponding detector (associated receiver) that receives reflected light (col. 10, ll. 4-6: “each light detector having a transmitter which transmits a light beam to an associated receiver”), and a controller (200 – Fig. 7) that determines a presence or absence of the at least one hole or marking on the detection surface from the reflected light and that determines the type of infusion cassette (12) in accordance with the determination of the presence or absence of the at least one hole or marking (via cassette sensor 320 and I/O interface 204 – see col. 7, ll. 24-28).
Regarding claim 2, Hyman teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Hyman further teaches (Fig. 7) the controller (200) controls operation of the pump (10 – Fig. 1) in accordance with the determined type of infusion cassette (col. 8, ll. 57-60: “The infusion pump 10 has the capability to alter its operation based upon the type of cassette 12 which is inserted into the pump 10, as determined by the cassette sensor 320”).
Regarding claim 3, Hyman teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Hyman further teaches (Fig. 7) the controller (200) determines the type of infusion cassette (12 – Fig. 1) by determining a code represented by a presence or absence of the at least one hole or marking on the detection surface of the infusion cassette (col. 10, ll. 6-7: “Each cassette could be uniquely identified by the presence (or absence) of two notches”. In this case, the “code” would be the presence or absence of the two notches) and uses the code as a search criterion into at least one of a drug library database or a library of available infusion cassettes (col. 10, ll. 13-16: “Thus, the use of two light detectors and two associated notch locations would allow detection of four different types of cassettes, thus allowing four pre-programmed modes of pump operation”).
Regarding claim 5, Hyman teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 3, and Hyman further teaches (Fig. 1) the code represents at least one pumping parameter of the pump (10) – (col. 10, ll. 13-16: “Thus, the use of two light detectors and two associated notch locations would allow detection of four different types of cassettes, thus allowing four pre-programmed modes of pump operation”).
Regarding claim 6, Hyman teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 5, and Hyman further teaches (Fig. 7) the controller (200) controls operation of the pump (10 – Fig. 1) in accordance with the at least one pumping parameter (col. 7, ll. 43-45: “The operation of the infusion pump 10 is controlled by a computer program stored in the EPROM 204 and executed by the controller 200”).
Regarding claim 7, Hyman teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Hyman further teaches (Fig. 7) the controller (200) uses the code to limit programming choices for the pump (10 – Fig. 1) – (col. 9, ll. 31-36: “When the patient subsequently turned on the pump to perform the infusion (after a cassette 12 is primed with the liquid to be infused and inserted into the pump), the program would proceed from step 412 directly to the ready-to-run step 410, which would prevent the patient from altering the infusion parameters”).
Regarding claim 9, Hyman teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Hyman further teaches (Fig. 8a-8c) the detection system (320) further comprises at least one mechanical, electrical, or electro-mechanical sensor (as shown in Figs. 8a-8c, cassette sensor 320 is an electrical sensor that comprises an electrical circuit) adapted to detect at least one of a shape of the infusion cassette, an indentation in the infusion cassette, a textured surface of the infusion cassette, a presence or absence of at least one notch in the infusion cassette (in this case, sensor 320 is adapted to detect the presence or absence of notches as described in col. 10, ll. 6-7), or a presence or absence of at least one of a quick response (QR) code, a radiofrequency identification (RFID) tag, or a product name.
Regarding claim 10, Hyman teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 1, and Hyman further teaches (Fig. 7) two sensors (col. 10, ll. 3-4: “two light detectors could be disposed side by side in the top portion of the pump”) that are adapted to calibrate the detection system (320), wherein a measurement by a first sensor may correspond to a hole or marking in the detection surface of the infusion cassette (12 – Fig. 1) when the infusion cassette (12) is fully inserted into the receptacle and a measurement by a second sensor may correspond to an absence of a hole or marking in the detection surface of the infusion cassette (12) when the infusion cassette (12) is fully inserted (col. 10, ll. 8-13: “Each light detector would detect the presence of a notch because the light beam would be uninterrupted when the cassette was inserted into the pump, whereas the absence of a notch would cause the light beam to be interrupted upon insertion of the cassette”).
Regarding claim 11, Hyman teaches (Figs. 1, 7, and 8a-8c) a method of operating an infusion pump (10 – Fig. 1), comprising:
inserting an infusion cassette (12 – Fig. 1) into a receptacle (Fig. 1: beneath door 30) of a housing (housing of 10) of the infusion pump (10) whereby tubing (40, 52, and 54 – Fig. 1) of the infusion pump (10) adapted for passage of an infusate (col. 3, l. 46) is adjacent a pump (10) of the housing when fully inserted in the receptacle (col. 3, ll. 32-33: “When the cassette 12…is inserted into the pump 10”);
detecting (using cassette sensor 320) at least one hole or marking (notches as described in col. 10, ll. 6-7) on a detection surface of the infusion cassette (12) that identifies at least type of infusion cassette (12) by using at least one emitter/detector pair (transmitter/receiver) to emit light to the detection surface of the infusion cassette (12) and to receive reflected light indicative of a presence or absence of the at least one hole or marking on the detection surface (col. 10, ll. 4-6: “each light detector having a transmitter which transmits a light beam to an associated receiver”); and
determining a code represented by a presence or absence of the at least one hole or marking on the detection surface from the reflected light, the code representing the type of infusion cassette (col. 10, ll. 6-7: “Each cassette could be uniquely identified by the presence (or absence) of two notches”. In this case, the “code” would be the presence or absence of the two notches).
Regarding claim 12, Hyman teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 11, and Hyman further teaches (Fig. 7) controlling (using controller 200) operation of the pump (10 – Fig. 1) in accordance with the determined type of infusion cassette (col. 8, ll. 57-60: “The infusion pump 10 has the capability to alter its operation based upon the type of cassette 12 which is inserted into the pump 10, as determined by the cassette sensor 320”).
Regarding claim 13, Hyman teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 11, and Hyman further teaches (Fig. 7) using the code as a search criterion into at least one of a drug library database or a library of available infusion cassettes (col. 10, ll. 13-16: “Thus, the use of two light detectors and two associated notch locations would allow detection of four different types of cassettes, thus allowing four pre-programmed modes of pump operation”).
Regarding claim 15, Hyman teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 11, and Hyman further teaches (Figs. 1 and 7) the code represents at least one pumping parameter of the pump (10 – Fig. 1) – (col. 10, ll. 13-16: “Thus, the use of two light detectors and two associated notch locations would allow detection of four different types of cassettes, thus allowing four pre-programmed modes of pump operation”), further comprising controlling (using controller 200 – Fig. 7) operation of the pump (10) in accordance with the at least one pumping parameter (col. 7, ll. 43-45: “The operation of the infusion pump 10 is controlled by a computer program stored in the EPROM 204 and executed by the controller 200”).
Regarding claim 16, Hyman teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 11, and Hyman further teaches (Fig. 1) using the code to limit programming choices for the pump (10) – (col. 9, ll. 31-36: “When the patient subsequently turned on the pump to perform the infusion (after a cassette 12 is primed with the liquid to be infused and inserted into the pump), the program would proceed from step 412 directly to the ready-to-run step 410, which would prevent the patient from altering the infusion parameters”).
Regarding claim 18, Hyman teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 11, and Hyman further teaches (Fig. 7 and 8a-8c) detecting (using cassette sensor 320) at least one of a shape of the infusion cassette, an indentation in the infusion cassette, a textured surface of the infusion cassette, a presence or absence of at least one notch in the infusion cassette (in this case, sensor 320 is adapted to detect the presence or absence of notches as described in col. 10, ll. 6-7), or a presence or absence of at least one of a quick response (QR) code, a radiofrequency identification (RFID) tag, or a product name.
Regarding claim 19, Hyman teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 11, and Hyman further teaches (Fig. 7) calibrating a detection system (320, see also col. 10, ll. 3-4: “two light detectors could be disposed side by side in the top portion of the pump”) using a measurement by a first sensor to correspond to a hole or marking in the detection surface of the infusion cassette (12 – Fig. 1) when the infusion cassette (12) is fully inserted into the receptacle and a measurement by a second sensor to correspond to an absence of a hole or marking in the detection surface of the infusion cassette (12) when the infusion cassette (12) is fully inserted (col. 10, ll. 8-13: “Each light detector would detect the presence of a notch because the light beam would be uninterrupted when the cassette was inserted into the pump, whereas the absence of a notch would cause the light beam to be interrupted upon insertion of the cassette”).
Regarding claim 20, Hyman teaches (Figs. 1, 7, and 8a-8c) a non-transitory controller-readable storage medium (EPROM 204 – Fig. 7) storing controller-executable instructions that, when executed by a controller (200 – Fig. 7) of an infusion pump (10 – Fig. 1), cause the infusion pump (10) to perform operations comprising (col. 7, ll. 43-45: “The operation of the infusion pump 10 is controlled by a computer program stored in the EPROM 204 and executed by the controller 200”):
detecting insertion of an infusion cassette (12 – Fig. 1) into a receptacle (Fig. 1: beneath door 30) of a housing (housing of 10) of the infusion pump (10) whereby tubing (40, 52, and 54 – Fig. 1) of the infusion pump (10) adapted for passage of an infusate (col. 3, l. 46) is adjacent a pump (10) of the housing when fully inserted in the receptacle (col. 3, ll. 32-33: “When the cassette 12…is inserted into the pump 10”);
detecting (using cassette sensor 320) at least one hole or marking (notches as described in col. 10, ll. 6-7) on a detection surface of the infusion cassette (12) that identifies at least type of infusion cassette (12) by using at least one emitter/detector pair (transmitter/receiver) to emit light to the detection surface of the infusion cassette (12) and to receive reflected light indicative of a presence or absence of the at least one hole or marking on the detection surface (col. 10, ll. 4-6: “each light detector having a transmitter which transmits a light beam to an associated receiver”); and
determining a code represented by a presence or absence of the at least one hole or marking on the detection surface from the reflected light, the code representing the type of infusion cassette (col. 10, ll. 6-7: “Each cassette could be uniquely identified by the presence (or absence) of two notches”. In this case, the “code” would be the presence or absence of the two notches).
Regarding claim 22, Hyman teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 20, and Hyman further teaches (Figs. 1, 7, and 8a-8c) instructions that when executed by the controller (200 – Fig. 7) of the infusion pump (10 – Fig. 1) cause the infusion pump (10) to detect (using cassette sensor 320) at least one of a shape of the infusion cassette, an indentation in the infusion cassette, a textured surface of the infusion cassette, a presence or absence of at least one notch in the infusion cassette (in this case, sensor 320 is adapted to detect the presence or absence of notches as described in col. 10, ll. 6-7), or a presence or absence of at least one of a quick response (QR) code, a radiofrequency identification (RFID) tag, or a product name.
Regarding claim 23, Hyman teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 11, and Hyman further teaches (Figs. 1 and 7) instructions that when executed by the controller (200 – Fig. 7) of the infusion pump (10 – Fig. 1) cause the infusion pump (10) to calibrate a detection system (320, see also col. 10, ll. 3-4: “two light detectors could be disposed side by side in the top portion of the pump”) using a measurement by a first sensor to correspond to a hole or marking in the detection surface of the infusion cassette (12 – Fig. 1) when the infusion cassette (12) is fully inserted into the receptacle and a measurement by a second sensor to correspond to an absence of a hole or marking in the detection surface of the infusion cassette (12) when the infusion cassette (12) is fully inserted (col. 10, ll. 8-13: “Each light detector would detect the presence of a notch because the light beam would be uninterrupted when the cassette was inserted into the pump, whereas the absence of a notch would cause the light beam to be interrupted upon insertion of the cassette”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 8, 17, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hyman (US 5,904,668: IDS reference), in view of Olsen (US 6,123,686: IDS reference).
Regarding claim 8, Hyman teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 3, and Hyman further teaches (Fig. 1) a user interface (keypad 14 and display 16).
However, Hyman does not teach the controller uses the code to identify a mismatch between a selected drug and an installed infusion cassette and notifies a user via the user interface.
Olsen teaches (Fig. 1) a similar infusion pump (20) comprising an infusion cassette detection system (42) that identifies cassettes (26) based on a code (40) printed on the cassette (26), and additionally comprises a controller (24) and a user interface (keypad 36 and display 38); and further teaches:
the controller (24) uses the code (40) to identify a mismatch between a selected drug and an installed infusion cassette (26) and notifies a user via the user interface (col. 3, ll. 1-6: “The pump apparatus may include an audible signal device for generating an appropriate audible signal when the control module has identified either a correct cassette or an incorrect cassette. Visual signals, such as a green and/or red LED, may be provided with the pump to indicate the appropriateness of the cassette sensed”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hyman such that the controller uses the code to identify a mismatch between a selected drug and an installed infusion cassette and notifies a user via the user interface, in order to decrease the chance for human error and to provide a safer and more effective system, as taught by Olsen (col. 4, ll. 7-10).
Regarding claim 17, Hyman teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 11, and Hyman further teaches (Fig. 1) a user interface (keypad 14 and display 16).
However, Hyman does not teach using the code to identify a mismatch between a selected drug and an installed infusion cassette and notifies a user via the user interface.
Olsen teaches (Fig. 1) a similar infusion pump (20) comprising an infusion cassette detection system (42) that identifies cassettes (26) based on a code (40) printed on the cassette (26), and additionally comprises a controller (24) and a user interface (keypad 36 and display 38); and further teaches:
using the code (40) to identify a mismatch between a selected drug and an installed infusion cassette (26) and notifies a user via the user interface (col. 3, ll. 1-6: “The pump apparatus may include an audible signal device for generating an appropriate audible signal when the control module has identified either a correct cassette or an incorrect cassette. Visual signals, such as a green and/or red LED, may be provided with the pump to indicate the appropriateness of the cassette sensed”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hyman by including the step of using the code to identify a mismatch between a selected drug and an installed infusion cassette and notifies a user via the user interface, in order to decrease the chance for human error and to provide a safer and more effective system, as taught by Olsen (col. 4, ll. 7-10).
Regarding claim 21, Hyman teaches the invention as claimed and as discussed above for claim 20, and Hyman further teaches (Fig. 1) a user interface (keypad 14 and display 16).
However, Hyman does not teach instructions that when executed by the controller of the infusion pump cause the infusion pump to use the code to identify a mismatch between a selected drug and an installed infusion cassette and notifies a user via the user interface.
Olsen teaches (Fig. 1) a similar infusion pump (20) comprising an infusion cassette detection system (42) that identifies cassettes (26) based on a code (40) printed on the cassette (26), and additionally comprises a controller (24) and a user interface (keypad 36 and display 38); and further teaches:
the infusion pump uses the code (40) to identify a mismatch between a selected drug and an installed infusion cassette (26) and notifies a user via the user interface (col. 3, ll. 1-6: “The pump apparatus may include an audible signal device for generating an appropriate audible signal when the control module has identified either a correct cassette or an incorrect cassette. Visual signals, such as a green and/or red LED, may be provided with the pump to indicate the appropriateness of the cassette sensed”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hyman by including instructions that when executed by the controller of the infusion pump cause the infusion pump to use the code to identify a mismatch between a selected drug and an installed infusion cassette and to notify a user via the user interface, in order to decrease the chance for human error and to provide a safer and more effective system, as taught by Olsen (col. 4, ll. 7-10).
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure: see also attached form PTO-892 “Notice of References Cited”.
Jung (US 5,899,674): Figs. 13-14 teaches an infusion pump (surgical instrument 11) comprising: a housing comprising a pump (11 contains a peristaltic pump roller head – see col. 4, ll. 6-7) and a receptacle (48); an infusion cassette (10) that includes tubing (Fig. 1: 16 and 18) and further comprising at least one hole or marking on a detection surface (Fig. 1 shows a cassette identification system 34 consisting of tabs 36, which have holes); an infusion cassette detection system comprising at least one emitter/detector pair (38,40) including an emitter (Fig 11: LEDs 38) and a corresponding detector (Fig. 11: phototransistor 40), and a controller that determines the presence or absence of the at least one hole or marking (claim 1: “the computer being capable of identifying patterns of input signals from the phototransistor array”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENRY NG whose telephone number is (571)272-2318. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 AM - 6:30 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Devon Kramer can be reached at 571-272-7118. 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.
/HENRY NG/Examiner, Art Unit 3741 /DEVON C KRAMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights