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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 19, 2025 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 49, 53-54, 56, 59-61, 64-71, and 75-76 are pending. Claims 1-48, 50-52, 55, 57-58, 62-63, 72-74 are canceled. Claims 49, 59 and 69 amended.
Claim 68 is withdrawn as being drawn to a non-elected invention or species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Claims 49, 53-54, 56, 59-61, 64-67, 69-71, and 75-76 are examined on their merits.
Previous Rejections
Rejections and/or objections not reiterated from previous office actions are hereby withdrawn as are those rejections and/or objections expressly stated to be withdrawn. The following rejections and/or objections are either reiterated or newly applied. They constitute the complete set presently being applied to the instant application.
Rejections Withdrawn
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In light of the amendments to the claims the rejection of claims 49, 53-54, 59-61, 64-67, 69-71 and 75-76 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Janssen et al. EP1994923 (11/26/2008) in view of NAYA (Hyaluronic Acid Explained, September 19, 2021 https://web.archive.org/web/20210919224549/https://nayaglow.com/blogs/news/hyaluronic-acid-explained), Morariu US 2006/021625 (9/28/2006) and Watson et al. US 2016/0101031 (4/14/2016) is withdrawn.
Double Patenting
In light of the amendments to the claims the rejection of claims 49, 53-54, 56, 59-61 and 64-71 on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-10 of U.S. Patent No. 11938212 (3/26/2024) in view of Janssen et al. EP1994923 (11/26/2008) and Morariu US 2006/021625 (9/28/2006) and Watson et al. US 2016/0101031 (4/14/2016) is withdrawn.
New Rejections
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 of this title, 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.
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 49, 53-54, 59-61, 64-67, 69-71 and 75-76 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Janssen et al. EP1994923 (11/26/2008) in view of NAYA (Hyaluronic Acid Explained, September 19, 2021 https://web.archive.org/web/20210919224549/https://nayaglow.com/blogs/news/hyaluronic-acid-explained), Morariu US 2006/0216251 (9/28/2006), Watson et al. US 2016/0101031 (4/14/2016) and Brieva et al. US 20150005247 (1/1/2015).
All citations are to the English translations of Janssen.
Janssen et al. (Janssen) teaches the use of a composition comprising a 2-mercapto-Nα, Nα, Nα-trialkyl-L-histidinium-betaine compound and an extract of Laminaria Digitata for regulating or improving the water supply to skin and for stimulating aquaporin synthesis. (See Abstract). Particularly preferred in the composition is 2-mercapto-Nα, Nα, Nα-trimethyl-L-histidinium-betaine, also known as ergothioneine. (See Abstract and [0003]). Janssen teaches that ergothioneine in combination with extracts of Laminaria digitata stimulate aquaporin synthesis and act to improve the water supply to dry skin. (See [0001-0002]).
Ergothioneine is called for in instant claims 49 and 69. Ergothioneine is a thiourea derivative of histidine as called for in instant claim 60.
The composition can comprise other substances that are preferred because they have proven to be particularly effective at soothing and caring for dry skin. These include ascorbyl glucoside which can be present in an amount of from 0.1 -3%. (See [0032]). Ascorbyl glucoside is called for in instant claims 54, 56 and it is a vitamin C as called for in instant claim 53. 0.1-3% overlaps with the from about 0.1 to about 5% called for in instant claims 53, 56 and 69.
Janssen also teaches that compositions which are particularly preferred preferably contain at least one skin cooling agent. (See page 28, lines 51-55). One of these suitable skin-cooling active ingredients is menthyl pyrrolidone carboxylic acid, which is a pyrrolidone carboxylic acid as called for in instant claim 49.
The composition can also comprise hyaluronic acid as called for in instant claims 49. Hyaluronic acid is described as a film-former and as such it is a results-effective variable so it would be no more than routine experimentation to experiment to arrive at the appropriate amount of hyaluronic acid as called for in instant claim 49. (See Film-former section).
The composition can also comprise alpha-tocopherol as called for in instant claims 49 and 69 (See [0032]). Alpha-tocopherol is also a vitamin E as called for instant claims 59 and 60. The alpha-tocopherol can be present in an amount of about 0.05 -1% which overlaps with the from about 0.1 to about 3% called for in instant claim 69. (See [0030] and [0140]). 0.05 -1% also overlaps with the from about 0.2 to about 1% called for in instant claim 49. Janssen teaches that niacinamide is a preferred form of vitamin B3. (See [0140]).
The composition can also comprise monomers of amino acids, including glycine, arginine and taurine as called for in instant claims 64 and 71. (See [0130]). The ratios of taurine, glycine and arginine are 1:1:1 and is considered to be close enough to the claimed range of claims 65 and 66 to render it obvious, given that there is no reason to expect a substantially different result when a 1:1:1 ratio compared to using a 1.5:0.5:0.5 ratio. See MPEP 2144.05 I. Also, Applicant is reminded that generally, differences in concentration or temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such concentration or temperature is critical. See MPEP 2144.05 II.
Particularly preferred compositions according to the invention are in the form of oil-in-water emulsions, with particularly preferred emulsions according to the invention having lamellar structures. i.e., containing vesicles. (See [0193]). The vesicles can contain some of the components of the composition, which reads on claims 60 and 75. The composition can be in the form of a cream as called for in instant claim 67. (See [0196]). Janssen teaches caprylic/capric acid triglyceride as called for in instant claims 61 and 76. (See 6th examples series: Day creams with a lasting moisturizing effect).
It would be prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the earliest effective filing date invention making the Janssen composition to combine ergothioneine with 0.1-3% ascorbyl glucoside in order to have a preferred form of vitamin C, menthyl pyrrolidone carboxylic acid in order to have a particularly preferred skin cooling active ingredient, 0.05-1% alpha-tocopherol in order to have a preferred form of vitamin E and 1% niacinamide in order to have a preferred form of vitamin B3 in an oil-in-water lamellar composition with vesicles in order to have a preferred form of a composition that can regulate and treat dry skin as taught by Janssen.
Janssen teaches hyaluronic acid but does not teach the molecular weight of the hyaluronic acid. Janssen teaches ergothioneine but does not teach amounts as low as 0.001%. Janssen teaches niacinamide but does not expressly teach 3% niacinamide. Janssen does not teach sodium pyrrolidone carboxylic acid. These deficiencies are made up for with the teachings of NAYA, Morariu, Watson et al. and Brieva et al.
NAYA teaches using hyaluronic acid of the molecular weight range of less than 100 kDA (Table). Less than 100 kDa overlaps with the 10 kDa to 75 kDa called for in claim 49. NAYA is in the same field of endeavor of hyaluronic acid for skin care compositions. NAYA teaches the regenerative properties of hyaluronic acid and its ability to work at deeper levels of the skin to have a longer lasting effect of making the skin form and visibly reducing wrinkles. (See Table and Section Low Molecular Weight).
Morairu teaches using a topical composition comprising a carnitine and a carnosine which can be used to treat skin to improve the appearance of aged skin characterized by wrinkles and loss of elasticity. (See Abstract). The composition can comprise nicotinamide and preferred antioxidants including alpha-tocopherol. The composition also can include an anti-glycation agent such as ergothioneine. (See [0065, [0072-73]). Ergothioneine is an AGE inhibitor and can inhibit the formation of advanced glycation end products (AGEs). (See [0072]). Anti-glycation agents slow the glycation of proteins and aids in the long-term elasticity of skin. (See [0075]). Morairu teaches that the components of its formulation exhibit synergy in acting on the mitochondria (the decline of which is involved in the skin aging process). (See [0039]).
Ergothioneine can be present in an amount of from 0.001% to 30%. (See [0073]). 0.001% to 30% overlaps with the 0.001% to 0.01% called for in instant claims 49 and 59.
With respect to the weight ratio of alpha-tocopherol to ergothioneine, if 1 wt% alpha tocopherol were selected, as taught in Janssen and 0.005 wt% ergothioneine is selected as taught in Morairu, then an about 200:1 alpha-tocopherol to ergothioneine weight ratio is achieved, as called for in instant claims 49, 59 and 69.
Watson et al. (Watson) teaches a cosmetic composition for the regulating skin health and appearance. (See Abstract). Watson teaches that the cosmetic composition for the regulating skin health and appearance has 0.1 to about 10 wt% niacinamide as being a safe and effective amount of niacinamide for the regulation of skin health and appearance. (See [0067]). Watson teaches that cells were treated with 3% niacinamide and that treatment with niacinamide provided a protective effect to cells. (See [0097] and claim 4). Therefore, there is a powerful protective effect that 3% niacinamide specifically has on individual cells that is expressly taught in Watson. 3% niacinamide is called for in instant claims 49, 59 and 69. Watson teaches that a combination of a flavonoid compound, a vitamin B3 compound and a hydrolyzed silk compound can synergistically protect against cellular damage. (See [0106]).
Brieva et al. teaches a composition for treating skin aging with at least two phenolic compounds (one flavonoid and one non-flavonoid), at least one hydrotrope, at least one emulsifier, water and a lipid-soluble antioxidant. (See Abstract). The hydrotrope can be sodium pyrrolidone carboxylic acid and the lipid -soluble antioxidant is vitamin E. (See Abstract and [0018]). Brieva teaches that its composition has increased water solubility and provides high protection against oxidative stress to the skin and maintains the integrity of cell membranes. (See [0006]). Sodium pyrrolidone carboxylic acid is called for in instant claim 49, 59 and 69.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date making the Janssen composition of ergothioneine, 0.1-3% ascorbyl glucoside, 0.05-1% alpha-tocopherol and 1% niacinamide in an oil-in-water lamellar composition with vesicles to
have the hyaluronic acid have a molecular weight of less than 100 kDa in composition to be applied to the skin as taught by NAYA in order to take advantage of the regenerative properties of hyaluronic acid and its ability to work at deeper levels of the skin to have a longer lasting effect of making the skin firm and visibly reducing wrinkles as taught by NAYA.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date making the Janssen composition of ergothioneine, 0.1-3% ascorbyl glucoside, 0.05-1% alpha-tocopherol and 1% niacinamide in an oil-in-water lamellar composition with vesicles to have the amount of ergothioneine be from 0.001 to 30%, in light of Morairu’s teaching that ergothioneine in these amounts is an anti-glycation agents that slow the glycation of proteins and aids in the long-term elasticity of skin.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date making the Janssen composition of ergothioneine, 0.1-3% ascorbyl glucoside, 0.05-1% alpha-tocopherol and 1% niacinamide in an oil-in-water lamellar composition with vesicles to increase the amount of niacinamide to 3% as taught by Watson in light of Watsons teaching that 3% niacinamide provided a protective effect to cells. Therefore, there is a powerful protective effect that 3% niacinamide specifically has on individual cells that is expressly taught in Watson.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date making the Janssen composition of ergothioneine, 0.1-3% ascorbyl glucoside, 0.05-1% alpha-tocopherol and 1% niacinamide in an oil-in-water lamellar composition with vesicles to add sodium pyrrolidone carboxylic acid as taught by Brieva in order to have a hydrotrope that can increase the water solubility of alpha-tocopherol (vitamin E) as taught by Brieva.
If 0.1% is chosen for alpha-tocopherol and 1% is chosen for niacinamide, the weight ratio of alpha-tocopherol to niacinamide (0.1% to 1%) is about 1:10 which falls within the range of from about 1:5 to about 1:11 as called for in instant claims 49, 59 and 69.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 49, 53-54, 56, 59-61 and 64-71 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-10 of U.S. Patent No. 11938212 (3/26/2024) in view of Janssen et al. EP1994923 (11/26/2008) and Morariu US 2006/021625 (9/28/2006), Watson et al. US 2016/0101031 (4/14/2016) and Brieva et al. US 20150005274 (1/1/2015).
Although the claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claims are directed to a skin care composition comprising from about 0.1 to about 3 wt% of vitamin E comprising alpha-tocopherol, ergothionine, and sodium pyrrolidone carboxylic acid and from about 1 to about 10 wt% of vitamin B comprising niacinamide with from about 0.1 to 5 wt% of ascorbyl glucoside in the form of an emulsion containing vesicles.
Claims 1-10 of U.S. Patent 11938212 are directed to a skin care composition comprising from about 0.1 to about 3 wt% of vitamin E comprising alpha-tocopherol, about 0.1 to about 7 wt% of ergothionine or pyrrolidone carboxylic acid and from about 0.7 to about 5 wt% of vitamin B comprising niacinamide with from about 0.5 to 5 wt% of ascorbyl glucoside.
The composition claimed in U.S. Patent No. 11938212 differs from the composition of the instant claims in that it does not require that the composition be in the form of vesicles, it does not teach amounts of ergothioneine that are less than 0.1%, it does not teach sodium pyrrolidone carboxylic acid and does not teach 3% niacinamide. These deficiencies are made up for with the teachings of Janssen, Morairu, Watson and Brieve.
The teachings of Janssen are described supra. It would be prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art making the composition of U.S. Patent No. 11938212 to have the composition have vesicles in order to have a composition form that is preferred for the delivery of ergothioneine to the skin as taught by Janssen.
The teachings of Morairu are described supra. It would be prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art making the composition of U.S. Patent No. 11938212 to have the amount of ergothioneine be from 0.001 to 30%, in light of Morairu’s teaching that ergothioneine in these amounts is an anti-glycation agents that slow the glycation of proteins and aids in the long-term elasticity of skin.
The teachings of Watson are described supra. It would be prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art making the composition of U.S. Patent No. 11938212 to have the composition have 3% niacinamide as taught by Watson in light of Watsons teaching that this is a safe and effective amount of niacinamide for the regulation of skin health and appearance in a cosmetic composition and Watsons teaching that 3% niacinamide provided a protective effect to cells.
The teachings of Brieva are described supra. It would be prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art making the composition of U.S. Patent No. 11938212 to use sodium pyrrolidone carboxylic acid in order to have a hydrotrope that increases the water solubility of alpha-tocopherol (vitamin E) as taught by Brieva.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments of October 20, 2025 have been fully considered and are found to be mostly unpersuasive.
Applicants note the amendments to the claims and where they find support.
Applicants assert that the combination of the prior art fails to suggest the claimed invention and the rejection is based on impermissible hindsight. Applicants assert that while Janssen describes optional ingredients that could be included in its formulations but does not provide any guidance or motivation to select and combine alpha-tocopherol, ergothioneine, niacinamide, hyaluronic acid and PCA. Janssen also does not provide any teaching of the synergistic antioxidant effect that results from this particular combination, Janssen’s focus is on hydration, not enhanced antioxidant activity. Applicants assert that the synergistic and unexpectedly enhanced antioxidant effect of the combination of ingredients is not taught by the prior art.
The Office’s reliance on Naya, Morariu and Watson to supply the missing elements constitutes an impermissible hindsight because these references are general in nature and fail to supply the necessary motivation.
Applicants assert that the amendments to the claims further distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art in that there is no teaching in the prior art of the narrower range of alpha-tocopherol and the prior art does not teach the claimed alpha-tocopherol to ergothioneine ratio of about 200:1.
Applicants further argue that even if the claimed composition was made obvious by the prior art, Applicants improved results are sufficient to rebut the same. Specifically, the experimental results demonstrate that a combination of alpha-tocopherol, ergothioneine and sodium pca exhibit a significant decrease in ROS (reactive oxygen species) production in human derived keratinocyte cell culture. This combination shows an unexpected impact in decreasing ROS production in keratinocytes relative to each treatment alone.
Applicants assert that these arguments also apply to the obviousness-type double patenting rejection and request its withdrawal.
Applicant’s arguments have been carefully considered and are found to be mostly unpersuasive. However, in light of the amendments to the claims, the rejections have been withdrawn above.
Applicants’ assertion that a person of ordinary skill in the art would not be motivated from Janssen, Morariu and Watson to combine either tocopherol or niacinamide with ergothioneine is not found to be persuasive because there is motivation to combine these ingredients.
Specifically, as described in the rejection above, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date making the Janssen composition of ergothioneine, 0.1-3% ascorbyl glucoside, menthyl pyrrolidone carboxylic acid, 0.05-1% alpha-tocopherol and 1% niacinamide in an oil-in-water lamellar composition with vesicles to have the hyaluronic acid have a molecular weight of less than 100 kDa in composition to be applied to the skin as taught by NAYA in order to take advantage of the regenerative properties of hyaluronic acid and its ability to work at deeper levels of the skin to have a longer lasting effect of making the skin firm and visibly reducing wrinkles as taught by NAYA.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date making the Janssen composition of ergothioneine, 0.1-3% ascorbyl glucoside, menthyl pyrrolidone carboxylic acid, 0.05-1% alpha-tocopherol and 1% niacinamide in an oil-in-water lamellar composition with vesicles to have the amount of ergothioneine be from 0.001 to 30%, in light of Morairu’s teaching that ergothioneine in these amounts is an anti-glycation agents that slow the glycation of proteins and aids in the long-term elasticity of skin. An amount of ergothioneine of from 0.001 to 30 wt% allows for an about 200:1 alpha-tocopherol to ergothioneine weight ratio to be achieved if 1 wt% alpha tocopherol were selected, as taught in Janssen and 0.005 wt% ergothioneine is selected as taught in Morairu. Therefore, Applicants’ argument that the prior art fails to teach the claimed alpha-tocopherol to ergothioneine ratio of about 200:1 is not found to be persuasive.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date making the Janssen composition of ergothioneine, 0.1-3% ascorbyl glucoside, menthyl pyrrolidone carboxylic acid, 0.05-1% alpha-tocopherol and 1% niacinamide in an oil-in-water lamellar composition with vesicles to increase the amount of niacinamide to 3% as taught by Watson in light of Watsons teaching that 3% niacinamide provided a protective effect to cells. Therefore, there is a powerful protective effect that 3% niacinamide specifically has on individual cells that is expressly taught in Watson.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date making the Janssen composition of ergothioneine, 0.1-3% ascorbyl glucoside, 0.05-1% alpha-tocopherol and 1% niacinamide in an oil-in-water lamellar composition with vesicles to add sodium pyrrolidone carboxylic acid as taught by Brieva in order to have a hydrotrope that can increase the water solubility of alpha-tocopherol (vitamin E) as taught by Brieva.
Respectfully, Applicants’ assertion that hindsight has been employed in making the obviousness rejections is incorrect and unpersuasive. Hindsight has not been used in making any obviousness rejections; this is evident in that all of the claimed elements are taught or suggested in the prior art references themselves and so is the motivation to combine them. Since both the teaching of the components and the motivation to use it is found in the prior art references themselves, the rejection relies on only knowledge from the prior art references themselves.
The rejections are specific and supported by the teachings of the references themselves. There references are far more than general in nature, as asserted by Applicants, and the motivations to combine the teachings of the references are quite powerful and relevant.
Applicants argument that Janssen, Morariu and Watson are silent regarding any increased effect that might arise from combining either tocopherol or niacinamide with ergothioneine is not found to be persuasive because it is not necessary that the prior art suggest an increased effect. The reason or motivation to modify the reference may often suggest what the inventor has done, but for a different purpose or to solve a different problem. It is not necessary that the prior art suggest the combination to achieve the same advantage or result is covered by applicant. See, e.g., In re Kahn, 441 F.3d 977, 987, 78 USPQ2d 1329, 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (motivation question arises in the context of the general problem confronting the inventor rather than the specific problem solved by the invention); Cross Med. Prods., Inc. v. Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc., 424 F.3d 1293, 1323, 76 USPQ2d 1662, 1685 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (“One of ordinary skill in the art need not see the identical problem addressed in a prior art reference to be motivated to apply its teachings.”); In re Linter, 458 F.2d 1013, 173 USPQ 560 (CCPA 1972) (discussed below); In re Dillon, 919 F.2d 688, 16 USPQ2d 1897 (Fed. Cir. 1990), cert. denied, 500 U.S. 904 (1991).
Applicants’ assertion of unexpected results is not found to be persuasive because the antioxidant effects of the claimed components are taught by most cited references. Since the references teach the claimed result, it is more of an expected effect rather than an unexpected effect. Janssen teaches ergothioneine’s antioxidant effect, Morairu teaches the antioxidant effects of nicotinamide and alpha-tocopherol. (See Morairu [0065, [0072-73]). Watson teaches that cells were treated with 3% niacinamide and that treatment with niacinamide provided a protective effect to cells. (See [0097] and claim 4).
The response to Applicants’ arguments also applies to the obviousness-type double patenting rejection.
Conclusion
No claims are allowed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARAH CHICKOS whose telephone number is (571)270-3884. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-6.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, David Blanchard can be reached on 571-272-0827. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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.
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.
/SARAH CHICKOS/
Examiner, Art Unit 1619
/DAVID J BLANCHARD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1619
Prosecution Insights