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 office action is in response to the application filed on February 7, 2023. The earliest effective filing date of the application is February 7, 2022.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 November 11, 2025 has been entered.
Status of Application
The amendment filed July 30, 2025 with the Applicant Remarks has been entered. The status of the claims upon entry of the present amendment stands as follows:
Pending claims: 1, 3 – 5, 8 – 10, 12, 13, 17, 18, 20 – 24, 26, 27, 30, and 32
Withdrawn claims: 17, 18, 20 – 24, 26, 27, and 30
Amended claims: None
New claims: 32
Previously cancelled claims: 2, 6, 7, 11, 14, 15, 16, 19, 25, 28, 29, and 31
Claims currently under consideration: 1, 3 – 5, 8 – 10, 12, 13, and 32
The status of the objections and rejections regarding the disclosure upon entry of the present amendment stands as follows:
Withdrawn Rejections: The previous rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims 1, 3 – 5, 8 – 10, 12, and 13 over Bindrich have been withdrawn.
35 U.S.C. § 103 Rejections: New rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims 1, 3 – 5, 8 – 10, 12, 13, and 32 over Schjoerring-Thyssen are presented below.
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.
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 1, 3, 13, and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schjoerring-Thyssen et al. (US 20210244666 A1) in view of Rogers Powell (Screen captures from YouTube video clip entitled “DIY Chlorophyll – Easy Natural Green Food Coloring” uploaded on December 10, 2012 by user “Rogers Powell”. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_Vhsj_whiQ) and Partridge et al. (16.4.4 Tunnel Pasteurization. In: Handbook of Brewing (3rd Edition). Taylor & Francis. P. 509. (2018)).
Regarding claim 1, Schjoerring-Thyssen teaches a method for producing a suspension of solid lipid nanoparticles comprising the steps of:
providing a liquid oil phase comprising (a) a lipid having a melting point above 40° C.; and (b) an oil-soluble pigment; and heating said liquid oil phase so as to dissolve the oil-soluble pigment ([0056]; Claim 24);
providing an aqueous phase (i.e., water) comprising a dual surfactant system (c), which comprises (i) a polysorbate, and (ii) a phospholipid, such that the ratio of polysorbate:phospholipid (i:ii) is between 10:1-1:10 ([0057]; Claim 24);
mixing said liquid oil phase from step (a) with said aqueous phase from step (b) in a high shear mixer to create an emulsion (i.e., forming an emulsion including the lipid phase – [0058]; Claim 24);
passing the emulsified mixture from step C through a homogenizer ([0059]; Claim 24); and
cooling the homogenized mixture from step D, thereby providing a suspension of solid lipid nanoparticles (SLNs – [0060]; Claim 24).
Schjoerring-Thyssen teaches the oil-soluble pigment is chlorophyll ([0030]; Claim 6). Schjoerring-Thyssen further teaches dispersing the suspension of solid lipid nanoparticles in a soft drink medium ([0078]; Claim 23).
Schjoerring-Thyssen does not teach the oil-soluble pigment (i.e., chlorophyll) is contained in an aqueous phase from which the chlorophyll is transferred to the lipid in step (a).
Rogers Powell teaches a method of extracting chlorophyll from spinach leaves comprising the steps of:
i. blending spinach leaves with water and straining the blended leaves to produce a green liquid (i.e., an aqueous phase – p. 5 – 9);
ii. boiling (i.e., heating) the green liquid (i.e., aqueous phase) for one minute (i.e., transferring chlorophyll from an aqueous phase – p. 10 – 13);
iii. straining the boiled green liquid to separate chlorophyll pigment from the water (p. 14).
Rogers Powell teaches the heating step (ii) clarifies the chlorophyll from the water, therefore, chlorophyll is transferred from the aqueous phase (p. 12 – 13). Rogers Powell shows the water left behind by the chlorophyll extraction process has lost all color and therefore no longer comprises chlorophyll (p. 15).
Schjoerring-Thyssen and Rogers Powell are combinable because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely, chlorophyll pigment. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized the method of Rogers Powell to obtain the chlorophyll pigment of step (a), and the water of step (b) of the method of Schjoerring-Thyssen because the teaching of Rogers Powell shows that it was known for such a thing to have been successfully achieved and published at the time of filing, which means it was within the general skill of a worker in the art to obtain chlorophyll pigment from an aqueous phase, with water as a side product. It would be obvious to one of skill in the art to do such a thing on the basis of its suitability for a similar intended use. See MPEP § 2144.07 that discussed that when the prior art recognizes something is suitable for a similar intended use/purpose, such a thing is obvious.
Furthermore, while Schjoerring-Thyssen does not teach the water of the aqueous phase is provided in step (a), MPEP § 2144.04.IV.C states selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results. MPEP § 2144.04.IV.C also states the selection of any order of mixing ingredients is prima facie obvious. Therefore, It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have heated an aqueous phase comprising chlorophyll such as the strained spinach and water produced by step (i) of Rogers Powell with the lipid phase in step (a) of Schjoerring-Thyssen to obtain a lipid phase comprising chlorophyll and an aqueous phase that has had the chlorophyll within it removed. Given that Schjoerring-Thyssen teaches chlorophyll is an oil-soluble pigment that is dissolved within the lipid phase ([0001]; [0030]; Claim 6), and Rogers Powell teaches heating a mixture of chlorophyll and water separates the chlorophyll from the water (p. p. 10 – 14), one of ordinary skill in the art would have has a reasonable expectation of success of combining chlorophyll-containing water with oil and heating to pull the chlorophyll from the water (i.e., aqueous phase) into the oil (i.e., lipid phase).
While the modified method of Schjoerring-Thyssen does not teach transferring at least 50 wt. percent of total chlorophyll within the food product from the aqueous phase to the lipid phase, one of ordinary skill in the art would have adjusted the boiling time in the step (ii) of Rogers Powell to find the degree of chlorophyll transfer from aqueous phase to lipid phase during routine optimization that results in the infused oil with the desired green color. MPEP §2144.05(II) states where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). The claimed transfer of at least 50 wt. percent of total chlorophyll within the food product from the aqueous phase to the lipid phase would thus be obvious.
While Schjoerring-Thyssen does not teach heating the soft drink comprising the solid lipid nanoparticles as a step in the method of making the soft drink, Schjoerring-Thyssen tests the soft drink comprising the solid lipid nanoparticles for heat stability by exposing the soft-drink to 92 °C. for 40 seconds ([0078]). Schjoerring-Thyssen teaches the soft drink comprising the solid lipid nanoparticles passed the heat stability test ([0078]). While Schjoerring-Thyssen does not test a soft drink comprising chlorophyll, one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect a soft drink comprising chlorophyll would also pass the heating test.
Partridge teaches bottle pasteurization achieved via a tunnel pasteurizer is the most reliable way of producing a long shelf life product (p. 509, paragraph 3). Partridge teaches bottle pasteurization is time dependent because the heat needs to gradually penetrate through the container substrate to the core of the container, while avoiding thermal shock to the container (p. 509, paragraph 3). Partridge teaches temperature increases and decreases during bottle pasterurization are progressive so as not to damage the container, and have at least two heating and two cooling zones, which ensures that temperature changes are gradual (p. 510, paragraph 3; Figure 16.4). Partridge teaches the superheat zone is critical as it is here that the final heating to achieve a temperature greater than 60 °C occurs (p. 510, paragraph 3).
Schjoerring-Thyssen and Partridge are combinable because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely, bottled beverages. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have bottle pasteurized the soft drink of Schjoerring-Thyssen via tunnel pasteurizer, as taught by Partridge because bottle pasteurization achieved via a tunnel pasteurizer is the most reliable way of producing a long shelf life product, and the soft drink of Schjoerring-Thyssen is known to be heat-stable.
Regarding claim 3, the polysorbate of step (b) is a stabilizing agent.
Regarding claim 13, the pasteurization method as taught by Partridge is a bottle pasteurization (i.e., the food product is sealed into a container, wherein the sealing the food product into the container is conducted before the operation of the heating).
Regarding claim 32, Schjoerring-Thyssen teaches the solid lipid nanoparticles comprise an oil-soluble pigment (i.e., chlorophyll) and a high-melting lipid ([0001]).
Therefore, because the modified invention of Schjoerring-Thyssen transfers at least 50 wt. percent of total chlorophyll within the food product from the aqueous phase to the lipid phase, the modified invention of Schjoerring-Thyssen inherently retains at least 50 wt. percent of total chlorophyll within the food product in the lipid phase. Furthermore, MPEP § 2112.I states “[T]he discovery of a previously unappreciated property of a prior art composition, or of a scientific explanation for the prior art’s functioning, does not render the old composition patentably new to the discoverer”. In this case, the fact that Schjoerring-Thyssen is silent with respect to the exact fraction of chlorophyll retained in the lipid phase of the emulsion does not render novel the previously unappreciated weight percent of chlorophyll retained in the lipid phase in the solid lipid nanoparticles of Schjoerring-Thyssen.
Claim 4 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schjoerring-Thyssen et al. (US 20210244666 A1) in view of Rogers Powell (Screen captures from YouTube video clip entitled “DIY Chlorophyll – Easy Natural Green Food Coloring” uploaded on December 10, 2012 by user “Rogers Powell”. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_Vhsj_whiQ) and Partridge et al. (16.4.4 Tunnel Pasteurization. In: Handbook of Brewing (3rd Edition). Taylor & Francis. P. 509. (2018)), as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Banerjee et al. (Food Gels: Gelling Process and New Applications. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. Vol 52. Iss 4. Pp. 334 – 346. (2012)).
Schjoerring-Thyssen does not teach the dual surfactant system (i.e., stabilizing agents) comprise a hydrocolloid.
Banerjee teaches common gelling agents are often hydrocolloids (p. 334, paragraph 2). Banerjee teaches these hydrocolloids are derived from natural sources and refers to a range of polysaccharides and proteins that are nowadays widely used in a variety of industrial sectors to perform a number of functions including stabilizing emulsions (p. 334, paragraph 3).
Schjoerring-Thyssen and Banerjee are combinable because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely, stabilizing emulsions. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included a hydrocolloid in the aqueous phase as an additional emulsion stabilizer, as taught by Banerjee, during step (b) in the method of Schjoerring-Thyssen because hydrocolloids are known in the art to be effective emulsion stabilizers.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schjoerring-Thyssen et al. (US 20210244666 A1) in view Rogers Powell (Screen captures from YouTube video clip entitled “DIY Chlorophyll – Easy Natural Green Food Coloring” uploaded on December 10, 2012 by user “Rogers Powell”. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_Vhsj_whiQ) and Partridge et al. (16.4.4 Tunnel Pasteurization. In: Handbook of Brewing (3rd Edition). Taylor & Francis. P. 509. (2018)), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Züge et al. (Use of avocado phospholipids as emulsifier. LWT - Food Science and Technology. Vol 79. Pp. 42 – 51. (2017)).
Schjoerring-Thyssen teaches the phospholipid according to one particular embodiment is selected from sunflower lecithin, soy bean lecithin, cotton seed lecithin, rape seed lecithin or egg yolk lecithin ([0034]).
Schjoerring-Thyssen does not teach the phospholipid of step (b) is an avocado phospholipid.
Züge investigates the viability of avocado phospholipids as a natural surfactant suitable for forming stable emulsions. Züge teaches common sources of phospholipids are egg and soybean, besides milk, sunflower kernels, and rapeseeds (p. 42, Introduction, paragraph 2). Züge teaches phospholipids extracted from avocado oil are capable of forming emulsions and maintaining their stability (p. 50, Conclusion, paragraph 1).
Schjoerring-Thyssen and Züge are combinable because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely, forming emulsions with phospholipids. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected avocado phospholipid as the phospholipid in the method of Schjoerring-Thyssen, as taught by Züge in because avocado phospholipids are known in the art to be suitable phospholipids for use as surfactants in forming emulsions.
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schjoerring-Thyssen et al. (US 20210244666 A1) in view of Rogers Powell (Screen captures from YouTube video clip entitled “DIY Chlorophyll – Easy Natural Green Food Coloring” uploaded on December 10, 2012 by user “Rogers Powell”. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_Vhsj_whiQ) and Partridge et al. (16.4.4 Tunnel Pasteurization. In: Handbook of Brewing (3rd Edition). Taylor & Francis. P. 509. (2018)), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of The Endless Meal (Creamy Avocado Soup. The Endless Meal. (2020, August 9). Retrieved from Wayback Machine Archive - https://web.archive.org/web/20201028083346/https://www.theendlessmeal.com/avocado-soup/ (Year: 2020)).
Regarding claims 8 and 9, claim 8 recites “shelf-stable green salsa product” which is interpreted broadly to include any green sauce, which encompasses green edible liquids. Claim 9 recites the phrase “green soup product” which is interpreted broadly to include green edible liquids. Therefore, a green liquid food product is encompassed by both claims 8 and 9.
Schjoerring-Thyssen teaches a method of coloring a food product comprising adding the solid lipid nanoparticles the food product (Claim 23). Schjoerring-Thyssen teaches the SLNs of this technology are particularly suited to liquid food products ([0053]).
The Endless Meal teaches a no-cook avocado soup comprising 4 cups stock, ¼ cup fresh lime juice, ¼ cup cilantro, 2 ripe avocados, 2 green onions, green part only, 1 garlic clove, 1 teaspoon sea salt, ¼ teaspoon ground cumin, wherein the ingredients are blended together, thereby homogenously mixing them (i.e., forming a liquid food product – p. 9, Ingredients). The Endless Meal teaches the no-cook avocado soup is a pale green color (Images). The Endless Meal teaches the no-cook avocado soup is delicious with fresh flavor and creamy texture (p. 1, paragraph 1).
Schjoerring-Thyssen and The Endless Meal are combinable because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely, green liquid food products. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected the no-cook avocado soup as taught by The Endless Meal as the liquid food product in the method of Schjoerring-Thyssen because the no-cook avocado soup is a pale green color, which would accept additional green coloring, and the no-cook avocado soup is a liquid food product with delicious with fresh flavor and creamy texture.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Schjoerring-Thyssen et al. (US 20210244666 A1) in view of Rogers Powell (Screen captures from YouTube video clip entitled “DIY Chlorophyll – Easy Natural Green Food Coloring” uploaded on December 10, 2012 by user “Rogers Powell”. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_Vhsj_whiQ) and Partridge et al. (16.4.4 Tunnel Pasteurization. In: Handbook of Brewing (3rd Edition). Taylor & Francis. P. 509. (2018)), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Andersen et al. (Thermal Treatment. In: Food Safety Management - A Practical Guide for the Food Industry (1st Edition). Elsevier. (2014)).
The modified method of Schjoerring-Thyssen does not teach the pasteurization (i.e., heating) achieves a 5.0-log reduction of a foodborne microorganism.
Andersen teaches the general objective of pasteurization is to extend product shelf-life by inactivating all non-spore-forming pathogenic bacteria and the majority of vegetative spoilage microorganisms (i.e., foodborne microorganisms), as well as inhibiting or stopping microbial and enzyme activity (p. 435, paragraph 2). Andersen teaches slow pasteurization is a type of pasteurization that uses pasteurization temperatures for several minutes; e.g., typical temperature–time combinations are 63 to 65 °C over 30 min or 75 °C over 8 to 10 min (p. 435, paragraph 3). Andersen teaches since heating applied to destroy microorganisms may also exert adverse effects on the quality of foods, in practice a minimum possible heat treatment is to be used that can guarantee destruction of pathogens and toxins and give the desired storage life, but also retain the characteristic organoleptic properties of food products (p. 437 paragraph 2). By adjusting the time and temperature of pasteurization, the degree of inactivation of heat-resistant pathogens (i.e., the log reduction of a foodborne microorganism) is changed. Therefore, the time and temperature of pasteurization are result effective variables.
Schjoerring-Thyssen and Andersen are combinable because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely, pasteurization. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have adjusted the time and temperature of pasteurization (i.e., heating) to find the reduction in heat-resistant pathogens (i.e., the log reduction of a foodborne microorganism), including a 5-log reduction, as taught by Andersen in the modified method of Schjoerring-Thyssen that results in the desired sterility without reducing the quality of the soft drink by preserving characteristic organoleptic properties, which are damaged by a prolonged thermal treatment.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Schjoerring-Thyssen et al. (US 20210244666 A1) in view of Rogers Powell (Screen captures from YouTube video clip entitled “DIY Chlorophyll – Easy Natural Green Food Coloring” uploaded on December 10, 2012 by user “Rogers Powell”. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_Vhsj_whiQ) and Partridge et al. (16.4.4 Tunnel Pasteurization. In: Handbook of Brewing (3rd Edition). Taylor & Francis. P. 509. (2018)), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Schwartz et al. (Chlorophylls in foods. Food Science and Nutrition. Vol 29. Iss 1. Pp. 1 – 17. (1990)).
The modified method of Schjoerring-Thyssen does not teach less than 30 wt. percent of the chlorophyll converts to pheophytin after 60 days at room temperature.
Schjoerring-Thyssen teaches the solid lipid nanoparticles comprise a dual surfactant system, which comprises (i) a polysorbate, and (ii) a phospholipid ([0057]).
Schwartz teaches the most common alteration that occurs in green vegetables is the conversion of chlorophylls to pheophytins, causing a dramatic color change from bright green to olive-brown (p. 8, col. 2, paragraph 2). Schwartz teaches this conversion is enhanced by extended heat treatment and is dependent upon the amount of acids formed during processing and storage (p. 8, col. 2, paragraph 2). Schwartz teaches the dependence of pheophytin conversion in an acid medium and/or heat has led to many investigations of pH control to preserve the typical green color of chlorophyll or minimize heat exposure by applying high-temperature, short-time processing or combining high-temperature, short-time processing with pH adjustments (p. 9, col. 1, paragraph 1). Schwartz teaches most of these methods proved useful in retaining chlorophyll pigments immediately after processing, but the retained chlorophylls degraded rapidly during storage (p. 9, col. 1, paragraph 1). Schwartz teaches greater stability of chlorophyll color in blanched spinach puree was observed when surfactants were added (p. 9, col. 1, paragraph 1).
Schjoerring-Thyssen and Schwartz are combinable because they are concerned with the same field of endeavor, namely, green food coloring. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have controlled the pasteurization time and/or temperature, as taught by Schwartz, in the method of Schjoerring-Thyssen to arrive at a conversion of less than 30 wt. percent of the chlorophyll to pheophytin after 60 days at room temperature because the conversion of chlorophylls to pheophytins causes a dramatic color change from bright green to olive-brown. Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success because the solid lipid nanoparticles of Schjoerring-Thyssen utilized a dual surfactant system, which Schwartz teaches improves chlorophyll stability.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 12, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues Bindrich teaches away from transferring any of the chlorophyll into the lipid phase from the aqueous phase (p. 6, paragraph 1).
Applicant’s argument with respect to claim 1 has been carefully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argues there is no motivation in Bindrich to increase the amount of chlorophyll in the phase of the emulsion (p. 6, paragraph 2).
Applicant’s argument with respect to claim 1 has been carefully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argues there is no teaching or suggestion in Bindrich that the chlorophyll is transferred from the aqueous phase to the lipid phase (p. 6, paragraph 4).
Applicant’s argument with respect to claim 1 has been carefully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LARK JULIA MORENO whose telephone number is (571)272-2337. The examiner can normally be reached 6:30 - 4:30 M - F.
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, Emily Le can be reached at (571) 272-0903. 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.
/L.J.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1793
/EMILY M LE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1793