DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/5/2026 has been entered.
Acknowledgment
Claim 1 amended and filed on 2/5/2026
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 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); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-18 of U.S. Patent No. 11,690,958B2 in view of Shkarlet et al. (US. 20070186681A1) (“Shkarlet”).
Claim 1 of the current application discloses a system comprising (Patent, claim 1, Col. 40, lines 24-46), a housing (Patent, claim 1, Col. 40, lines 24-25), a fluid flow sensor (Patent, claim 1, Col. 40, lines 42-44) and a port Patent, (claim 1, Col. 40, lines 40-44), a transmitter (the transmitter can be a part of second sensor as the second sensor can be RFID, NFC or proximity sensor see claims 2-5), and it is but it fails to disclose that the fluid flow sensor include an ultrasonic sensor
However, in the medical filed, it is important to keep the medical device in sterile cover/cap for prevention contamination. Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the device of claim 1 of the patent so that it include a sterile cap before usage to eliminate the contamination.
However, Shkarlet discloses a flow sensor include an ultrasonic sensor (Figs. 7-9, ¶0030-¶0031).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the device of claim 1 of the patent so that the fluid flow sensor include an ultrasonic sensor as taught by Shkarlet for the purpose of enhancing the accuracy of flow measurements and particularly when the operating conditions (Shkarlet, ¶0042).
The claim of the patent is broader as it does not specify that the fluid flow sensor is in connection with port.
Also, claims 2-20 of the current application can be found in claim 1-18 of the patent such as claim 2 ( patent, claim 1,Col. 40, line 42-44), claim 3 (claim 1,Col. 40, line 42-44), claim 4 (claim 1,Col. 40, line 42-44), claim 5 (claim 1,Col. 40, line 42-44), claim 6 (claim 1,Col. 40, line 42-44), claim 7 (claim 1,Col. 40, line 42-44), claim 9 (claim 1,Col. 40, line 28-30), claim 10 (claim 1,Col. 40, line 28-30), claim 11 (claim 1,Col. 40, line 28-30), claim 12 (claim 2, Col. 40, line 45-50), claim 13 (claim 4 ,Col. 40, line 54-59), claim 14 (claim 5, Col. 40, line 60-67), claim 15 (claim 6, Col. 40, line 1-2), claim 16 (claim 7 ,Col. 41, line 3-5), claim 17 (claim 8 ,Col. 41, line 5-10), claim 18 (claim 11 ,Col. 41, line 18-30), claim 19 (claim 15 ,Col. 42, line 3-8), claim 20 (claim 1,Col. 40, line 42-46).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 6-8 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Khair et al. (US. 20100280486A1) (“Khair”) in view of Shkarlet et al. (US. 20070186681A1) (“Shkarlet”) and further in view of Spark et al. (US. 20040171983A1) (“Spark”) and further more in view of Flaherty et al. (US, 20020040208A1) (“Flaherty”).
Re Claim 1, Khair discloses a system ( Fig. 1-6) comprising: a housing ( housing of 12, 20, 100) having a medication port ( port of 20 for the syringe, Fig. 6) configured to be fluidically coupled to a fluid outlet of a manually administrable medication container (outlet of syringe 24, ¶0023 or outlet of 18 ) comprising medication for administration to a patient (Fig. 1, ¶0023); and a fluid flow sensor (110, 116, ¶0026 ¶0028) capable to generate fluid flow information indicative of at least one of a fluid flow, a volume characteristic, or any combination thereof of a fluid in a fluid channel fluidically coupled to the medication port (End A to End B which flow from syringe to 22, Fig. 4, Fig. 6, ¶0024 Annotated Fig. 6 of Khair); and a transmitter (126) disposed within the housing (Fig. 4) and in communication with and/or coupled to the fluid flow sensor (Fig. 4, ¶0028); wherein the housing is separated into a reusable sub-housing (104, Fig. 4, ¶0024) and a disposable sub- housing (102, Fig. 4 includes the connection tube 22 and the connection between 100 and 20 Fig. 1, ¶0024), wherein the reusable sub-housing includes the transmitter (104 includes 126, Fig. 4), and wherein the disposable sub-housing includes the fluid flow sensor (110, 116, ¶0026), the fluid channel, and the medication port (Fig. 4 and Fig. 1), but it fails to disclose that the fluid flow sensor including an ultrasonic sensor and the disposable sub-housing includes fluid flow sensor that including the ultrasonic senor and wherein the re-usable sub-housing is operatively coupled to the disposable sub- housing by a connection interface including at least one electrical contact, and a removable sterility cap removably affixed to the medication port’ and wherein removal of the removable sterility cap initiate communications, via the transmitter, between the transmitter and a remote data collection system.
PNG
media_image1.png
740
628
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 6 of Khair
However, Shkarlet discloses a flow sensor (Fig. 1-10) and a housing (20) and a conduit (60 channel around the conduit 70, ¶0045, Fig. 4) and wherein the flow sensor include an ultrasonic sensor (Figs. 1-10, ¶0030-¶0031).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the device of Khair so that the fluid flow sensor including an ultrasonic sensor and the disposable sub-housing includes fluid flow sensor that including the ultrasonic senor as taught by Shkarlet for the purpose of enhancing the accuracy of flow measurements and particularly when the operating conditions (Shkarlet, ¶0042).
The modified Khair in view of Shkarlet fails to disclose wherein the re-usable sub-housing is operatively coupled to the disposable sub- housing by a connection interface including at least one electrical contact, and a removable sterility cap removably affixed to the medication port’ and wherein removal of the removable sterility cap initiate communications, via the transmitter, between the transmitter and a remote data collection system.
However, Spark discloses a flow sensor device (Fig. 1-4, ¶0024) comprises: a housing (118) has a re-usable sub-housing (118b, ¶0027) that contains an electric circuit (122) and a battery (142) and a disposable sub-housing (118a, ¶0027) that contains a sensor (120) and wherein re-usable sub-housing is operatively coupled to the disposable sub- housing by a connection interface including at least one electrical contact (electrical interconnection, ¶0024).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the device of Khair so that the re-usable sub-housing is operatively coupled to the disposable sub- housing by a connection interface including at least one electrical contact as taught by Spark for the purpose of connecting the sensor with the power source and processor as it is needed to process the sensor data (Spark, ¶0024).
However, Flaherty discloses a flow device (Fig. 13-14, ¶0123) comprises: a housing (10) has transmitter (microprocessor with a transmitter (50, ¶0053) and a removable sterility cap (352) removably affixed to the medication port ( 72) and wherein removal of the removable sterility cap initiate communications, via the transmitter, between the transmitter and a remote data collection system (¶0123, removal of the 352 will activate the power and the transmitter).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the device of Khair so that to include a removable sterility cap removably affixed to the medication port’ and wherein removal of the removable sterility cap initiate communications, via the transmitter, between the transmitter and a remote data collection system.as taught by Flaherty for the purpose of keeping the device sterilized and at first usage the power is activated (Flaherty, ¶0123-¶0124).
Re Claim 6, Khair discloses a further fluid channel fluidically coupled between the first fluid channel and the medication port (side port of 20 which attached to 18 and it is between the syringe port and channel between 20 and 22, Fig. 6) .
Re Claim 7, Khair discloses wherein the further fluid channel (side channel From End C to intersection between the three lumens of y-connector 22 in annotated Fig. 6 of Khair) extends from an opening of the medication port at a distal end and terminates at the fluid channel at an intersection intermediate a first end and a second end of the fluid channel (channel from End A to End B).
Re Claim 8, Khair discloses wherein the fluid channel (side channel from End C to End A ) extends from an opening of the medication port at a distal end and terminates at the further fluid channel at an intersection intermediate a first end and a second end of the further fluid channel (channel from End B to intersection of the three lumens of y-connector 22).
Claims 9-20 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Khair in view of Shkarlet , Spark and Flaherty and further in view of De La Huerga et al. (US. 20020038392A1) (“De La Huerga”).
Re Claim 9, Khair in view of Shkarlet and Spark fails to discloses a first identification sensor disposed within the housing to generate identification information indicative of contents of the medication container when the fluid outlet of the medication container is fluidically coupled or is being fluidically coupled to the medication port.
However, De La Huerga discloses a system (Figs. 16, Fig. 26, abstract) comprising: a housing (housing includes 100, 150a/150b and 162a) having a medication port (port of 150) configured to be fluidically coupled to a fluid outlet of a manually administrable medication container (146 bag with outlet 143, 145, ¶0144) comprising medication for administration to a patient ( abstract, ¶0004); a first identification sensor (reader 122a , ¶0246) disposed within the housing to generate identification information indicative of contents of the medication container when the fluid outlet of the medication container is fluidically coupled or is being fluidically coupled to the medication port (¶0220, Fig. 16).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modify the housing of Khair to include a first identification sensor so that the system comprising a first identification sensor disposed within the housing to generate identification information indicative of contents of the medication container when the fluid outlet of the medication container is fluidically coupled or is being fluidically coupled to the medication port as taught by De La Huerga for the purpose of ensuring of using the correct medication and sending a warning message in case of error (De La Huerga, abstract, ¶0219-¶0220).
Re Claim 10, Khair in view of Shkarlet and Spark fails to disclose a second sensor disposed within the housing to detect administration information from a source other than the medication container that is associated with the administration of the contents of the medication container.
However, De La Huerga discloses a system (Figs. 16, Fig. 26, abstract) and a second sensor (122b, if the medical is intended to the patient ¶0214) disposed within the housing (100a, 100b Fig. 26) to detect information from a source other than the medication container that is associated with the administration of the contents of the medication container (¶0214).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modify the housing of Khair to include a second sensor so that the system comprising a second sensor disposed within the housing to detect administration information from a source other than the medication container that is associated with the administration of the contents of the medication container as taught by De La Huerga for the purpose of validating the medication source and delivery line with the correct patient (De La Huerga, abstract, ¶0168, ¶0214).
Re Claim 11, Khair in view of Shkarlet and Spark fails to disclose wherein the second sensor further detects information on the medication container that is associated with the administration of the contents of the medication container.
However, De La Huerga discloses a system (Figs. 16, Fig. 26, abstract) and a second sensor (122b, if the medical is intended to the patient ¶0214) and the second sensor further detects information on the medication container that is associated with the administration of the contents of the medication container (¶0214).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modify the housing of Khair to include a second sensor so that the second sensor further detects information on the medication container that is associated with the administration of the contents of the medication container as taught by De La Huerga for the purpose of validating the medication source and delivery line with the correct patient (De La Huerga, abstract, ¶0168, ¶0214).
Re Claim 12, Khair discloses wherein the transmitter (¶0028, 126, Fig. 4) is further in communication with and/or coupled to the fluid flow sensor (¶0028), and the administration information respectively generated by the fluid flow sensor to a remote data collection system (¶0028), but it fails to disclose that transmitter is in communication with and/or coupled the first identification sensor, and wherein the transmitter is configured to transmit the identification information and the administration information to a remote data collection system.
However, De La Huerga discloses a system (Figs. 16, abstract) and a first identification sensor (122a), a second sensor (122b) and a transmitter (255a, 255b, ¶0149) is in communication with and/or coupled the first identification sensor, and the identification information, the administration information respectively generated by the first identification sensor, and the identification information to a remote data collection system (¶0195 transmit information to the remote devices, ¶0160).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modify the transmitter of Khair so that transmitter is in communication with and/or coupled the first identification sensor, and wherein the transmitter is configured to transmit the identification information and the administration information to a remote data collection system as taught by De La Huerga for the purpose of validating the medication source and delivery line with the correct patient (De La Huerga, abstract, ¶0159-160).
Re Claim 13, Khair fails to disclose wherein the identification information and/or the administration information detected by the first identification sensor and/or the second sensor comprises one or more of: a one dimensional barcode, a two dimensional barcode, symbolic information, an image, magnetic media, a near field communication (NFC) tag, biometric data, RFID encoded information.
However, De La Huerga discloses a system (Figs. 16, abstract) and wherein the identification information and/or the administration information detected by the first identification sensor and/or the second sensor comprises one or more of: a one dimensional barcode (¶0030 bar code or RFID), a two dimensional barcode, symbolic information, an image, magnetic media, a near field communication (NFC) tag, biometric data, RFID encoded information (¶0246, bar code or RFID).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modify the system of Khair so that the identification information and/or the administration information detected by the first identification sensor and/or the second sensor comprises one or more of: a one dimensional barcode, a two dimensional barcode, symbolic information, an image, magnetic media, a near field communication (NFC) tag, biometric data, RFID encoded information as taught by De La Huerga for the purpose of validating the medication source and delivery line with the correct patient using an art recognized mean of validating (De La Huerga, abstract, ¶0135).
Re Claim 14, Khair fails to disclose wherein the identification information and/or the administration information detected by the first identification sensor and/or the second sensor characterizes one or more of the patient, demographics associated with the patient, a medical record for the patient, a picture of the patient, a video associated with the patient, a biometric patient identifier (ID), a medical record number, physical characteristics of the patient, allergies of the patient, contraindications, and BROSELOW color.
However, De La Huerga discloses a system (Figs. 16, abstract) and the identification information and/or the administration information detected by the first identification sensor and/or the second sensor characterizes one or more of the patient, demographics associated with the patient, a medical record for the patient, a picture of the patient, a video associated with the patient, a biometric patient identifier (ID), a medical record number, physical characteristics of the patient, allergies of the patient, contraindications, and BROSELOW color (¶0153, ID RFID, ¶0154, a biometric patient identifier (ID)).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modify the system of Khair so that the identification information and/or the administration information detected by the first identification sensor and/or the second sensor characterizes one or more of the patient, demographics associated with the patient, a medical record for the patient, a picture of the patient, a video associated with the patient, a biometric patient identifier (ID), a medical record number, physical characteristics of the patient, allergies of the patient, contraindications, and BROSELOW color as taught by De La Huerga for the purpose of validating the medication source and delivery line with the correct patient using an art recognized mean of validating (De La Huerga, abstract, ¶0153-¶153).
Re Claim 15, Khair fails to disclose wherein the administration information detected by the second sensor characterizes a patient sample.
However, De La Huerga discloses a system (Figs. 16, Fig. 26, abstract) and a second sensor (122b, if the medical is intended to the patient ¶0214) and the administration information detected by the second sensor characterizes a patient sample (¶0214, patient 12).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modify the system of Khair so that the administration information detected by the second sensor characterizes a patient sample as taught by De La Huerga for the purpose of validating the medication source and delivery line with the correct patient using an art recognized mean of validating (De La Huerga, abstract, ¶0214).
Re Claim 16, Khair fails to disclose wherein the administration information detected by the second sensor characterizes a medical device.
However, De La Huerga discloses a system (Figs. 16, Fig. 26, abstract) and a second sensor (122b, ¶0214) and the administration information detected by the second sensor characterizes a medical device (¶0214, pump 100b).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modify the system of Khair so that the administration information detected by the second sensor characterizes a medical device as taught by De La Huerga for the purpose of checking the right medication for the medical device (De La Huerga, abstract, ¶0214).
Re Claim 17, Khair fails to disclose wherein the medical device is selected from a group consisting of: an intravenous (IV) pump, an EKG monitor, a defibrillator, a pulse oximeter, and a blood pressure monitor.
However, De La Huerga discloses a system (Figs. 16, Fig. 26, abstract) and a second sensor (122b, if the medical is intended to the patient ¶0214) and the medical device is selected from a group consisting of: an intravenous (IV) pump, an EKG monitor, a defibrillator, a pulse oximeter, and a blood pressure monitor (¶0214, pump 100b).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modify the system of Khair so that the medical device is selected from a group consisting of: an intravenous (IV) pump, an EKG monitor, a defibrillator, a pulse oximeter, and a blood pressure monitor as taught by De La Huerga for the purpose of validating the medication source and delivery line with the correct patient using an art recognized mean of validating (De La Huerga, abstract, ¶0214).
Re Claim 18, Khair fails to disclose wherein the administration information detected by the second sensor is selected from the group consisting of a picture of a caregiver associated with the patient a video of a caregiver associated with the patient, an identification code associated with a caregiver associated with the patient, a password associated with a caregiver associated with the patient, an identification of a caregiver associated with the patient, a name of a caregiver associated with the patient, an affiliation of a caregiver associated with the patient, a responsible clinician associated with a caregiver associated with the patient, and a decision-making authority associated with a caregiver associated with the patient.
However, De La Huerga discloses the administration information detected by the second sensor is selected from the group consisting of a picture of a caregiver associated with the patient a video of a caregiver associated with the patient, an identification code associated with a caregiver associated with the patient, a password associated with a caregiver associated with the patient, an identification of a caregiver associated with the patient, a name of a caregiver associated with the patient, an affiliation of a caregiver associated with the patient, a responsible clinician associated with a caregiver associated with the patient, and a decision-making authority associated with a caregiver associated with the patient (¶0110 information related to the prescribing physician which is the caregiver associated with the patient and/or an affiliation of a caregiver associated with the patient).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modify the system of Khair so that the administration information detected by the second sensor is selected from the group consisting of a picture of a caregiver associated with the patient a video of a caregiver associated with the patient, an identification code associated with a caregiver associated with the patient, a password associated with a caregiver associated with the patient, an identification of a caregiver associated with the patient, a name of a caregiver associated with the patient, an affiliation of a caregiver associated with the patient, a responsible clinician associated with a caregiver associated with the patient, and a decision-making authority associated with a caregiver associated with the patient as taught by De La Huerga for the purpose of checking the prescribing physician or qualifications regarding physicians that may administer the medicant (De La Huerga, abstract, ¶0110).
Re Claim 19, Khair fails to disclose wherein the administration information detected by the second sensor characterizes one or more of: medication type, medication concentration, medication expiration date, medication NDC, and RxNorm code.
However, De La Huerga discloses a system (Figs. 16, Fig. 26, abstract) and a second sensor (122b, if the medical is intended to the patient ¶0214) and the administration information detected by the second sensor characterizes one or more of: medication type, medication concentration, medication expiration date, medication NDC, and RxNorm code (¶0214, right medication is mean type of medication).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modify the system of Khair so that the administration information detected by the second sensor characterizes one or more of: medication type, medication concentration, medication expiration date, medication NDC, and RxNorm code as taught by De La Huerga for the purpose of validating the medication source and delivery line with the correct patient using an art recognized mean of validating (De La Huerga, abstract, ¶0214).
Re Claim 20, Khair fails to disclose wherein the first sensor generates the data when the fluid outlet of the medication container is fluidically coupled or is being fluidically coupled to the medication port.
However, De La Huerga discloses a system (Figs. 16, Fig. 17, abstract) comprising: the first sensor (128, 125) generates the data when the fluid outlet of the medication container (146) is fluidically coupled or is being fluidically coupled to the medication port ( port of 108, ¶0147, Fig. 17).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modify the housing of Khair so that the first sensor generates the data when the fluid outlet of the medication container is fluidically coupled or is being fluidically coupled to the medication port as taught by De La Huerga for the purpose of ensuring whether the container is connected with the housing (De La Huerga, abstract, ¶0147).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remark, filed 2/5/2026, with respect to newly added limitation and the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 103 rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made over Khair in view of Shkarlet, Spark and Flaherty.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAMZA A. DARB whose telephone number is (571)270-1202. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00 M-F (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, Chelsea Stinson can be reached at (571) 270-1744. 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.
/HAMZA A DARB/Examiner, Art Unit 3783 /CHELSEA E STINSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3783