DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the amendment filed 4/1/2026. As directed by the amendment, claims 1-3 and 5-19 have been amended, claims 4 and 20-38 have been cancelled, and no claims have been newly added. Thus, claims 1-3 and 5-19 are presenting pending in this application.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a sealing member depending from the mask body and configured to engage with the user’s face” in claims 1, 9, and 18; and “at least one reinforcement formation” in claim 15.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objections
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 19, line 2 recites, “wherein distance between a first side”; it is suggested to amend the claim to recite --wherein a distance-- so that the claim is grammatically correct. Line 3 recites “the surface of the mask body”, line 4 recites “the distance between the top edge of the mask body”; line 4 recites “the top edge”, and lines 4-5 recite “the bottom edge”; it is suggested to amend the claim to recite --a surface--, --a distance--, --a top edge--, and --a bottom edge--, respectively, as it is the first time the limitations are recited.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Section 33(a) of the America Invents Act reads as follows:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no patent may issue on a claim directed to or encompassing a human organism.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 and section 33(a) of the America Invents Act as being directed to or encompassing a human organism. See also Animals - Patentability, 1077 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 24 (April 21, 1987) (indicating that human organisms are excluded from the scope of patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101).
The following claim(s) appear to positively recite part of the human body in combination with the structure of the claimed invention:
Claim 17, lines 1-2, "the cheek portions of the sealing member and the face mask extending laterally across the wearer's cheeks."
Applicant needs to clearly state using inferential language (e.g. configured to, adapted to, etc.) so that the human anatomy is not claimed.
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.
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 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-7, 9-10, 12, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsao (2022/0118293) in view of Whitby et al (2022/0233893).
Regarding claim 1, Tsao discloses a face mask, the face mask comprising a mask body (1) that defines a cavity configured to accommodate the nose and mouth of a wearer (used to cover the nose and mouth of the user) (para [0034]) and a sealing member (15) (annular ring) depending from the mask body (1) configured to engage with the wearer's face (for better air tightness between the bask body (1) and the face of the user) (para [0035]), the mask body comprising: a pair of second airflow members (3) including a filter (37) (para [0038]), the filter (37) being located in a first region of the mask body (1) (filter (37) is disposed in second airflow members (37) (para [0038]) and as shown in fig 2, a first filter (37) in a right second airflow member (37) would be disposed on a right side of the mask body (1) and a second filter (37) in a left second airflow member (37) would be disposed on a left side of the mask body (10); and a nasal portion configured to accommodate the nose of the wearer (upper portion of mask body accommodates a nose of a wearer), a mouth portion configured to accommodate the mouth of the wearer (bottom portion of mask body accommodates a mouth of a wearer), and cheek portions configured to extend laterally across the wearer's cheeks (lateral arcuate extensions cover the cheeks of the wearer) (fig 2, para [0034]).
Tsao does not disclose that the face mask is an oxygen delivery mask, wherein the mask body includes a gas inlet, wherein the gas inlet is located on a second side of the mask body.
However, Whitby in fig 2 teaches a face mask including a mask body including a filter mask substructure (400), and a gas inlet (300) (hose connector member), wherein the gas inlet (300) is on a left side of the mask body (para [0064]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Tsao by providing a gas inlet located on a left side of the mask body as taught by Whitby in order to allow the filter mask to connect to an air hose to connect to an auxiliary supply of oxygen when ambient air is contaminated and deficient in desired constituents (Whitby, para [0004]). The now-modified Tsao’s device is considered that the face mask is an oxygen delivery mask, as Whitby discloses that face mask may be adapted to connect to an oxygen supply via the connector apparatus (100 of Whitby) containing gas inlet (300 of Whitby), and therefore the modified Tsao’s face mask is configured to delivery oxygen to a user. The modified Tsao’s device is considered that the filter is located in a first region of the mask body and the gas inlet is located at a second region of the mask body, as Tsao discloses that a first filter (37) in a right second airflow member (3) would be disposed on a first (right) region of the mask body (1), and Whitby discloses that a gas inlet (300) is disposed in a second (left) region of the mask body.
Regarding claim 2, the modified Tsao’s references discloses the first (right) and second (left) regions are located on different sides of the wearer's mouth and/or nose, in use (a first filter (37 of Tsao) is disposed in a right second airflow member (37 of Tsai) on a first (right) region of the mask body (1 of Tsao), and that a gas inlet (300 of Whitby) is disposed in a second (left) region of the mask body).
Regarding claim 3, the modified Tsao’s references disclose the first and second regions are located on different sides of a midline, the midline extending from a central point of the nasal region to a central point of the chin region, such that oxygen flows from the gas inlet to the filter, passing over the wearer's nose and/or mouth (as shown in fig 1 of Tsao and fig 2 of Whitby, right airflow member (3 of Tsao) containing filter (37 of Tsao) is disposed at a right side of the mask body, and gas inlet (300 of Whitby) is disposed in a left side of the mask body, and therefore oxygen filling the mask body would flow from left to right and pass over the wearer's nose and/or mouth).
Regarding claim 5, Tsao discloses the mask body is transparent (para [0034]).
Regarding claim 6, the modified Tsao’s reference discloses the gas inlet (300 of Whitby) is a spigot (330 of Whitby) (hose connector member (300) includes a connection elbow (330) shown in figs 2-3 to be in the form of a spigot) (Whitby, para [0067]).
Regarding claim 7, the modified Tsao’s reference discloses the spigot (300 of Whitby) is releasably attached to an aperture (200 of Whitby) (mask connector apparatus) in the face mask (Whitby, para [0068]).
Regarding claim 9, Tsao discloses the mask body comprises a support frame (1) (body) (para [0034]), a filter (37) disposed in second airflow member (3) (para [0038]) and a sealing member (15), wherein the sealing member (15) is fixed to the support frame (1) and the filter (37) (sealing member (15) is disposed along the outer periphery of the support frame (1)) (para [0039]).
Regarding claim 10, Tsao in fig 6 discloses an external face of the support frame (1) comprises a shield (30) (lid of second airflow member (3), which extends over at least part of a surface of the filter (37) (lid forms chamber (S) (para [0037]), and as shown in fig 6, filter (37) is disposed in chamber (S) (para [00378]) so that the lid (30) extends over at least part of a surface of the filter (37)) (see fig 6).
Regarding claim 12, Tsao discloses in fig 6 the shield (30) is separated from the filter (37), and being configured such that air flows between the shield (30) and the filter (37) before the air is drawn through the filter by the wearer during inhalation (as shown in fig 6, portion of chamber (S) is between the shield (30) and filter (37) to allow air to flow between the shield (30) and the filter (37)).
Regarding claim 17, Tsao discloses the sealing member (15) comprises cheek portions, the cheek portions of the sealing member and the face mask, extend laterally across the wearer's cheeks (mask body (1) includes two lateral arcuate extensions for covering the mouth and the cheeks of the user, and sealing member (15) extends along the periphery of mask body (1) (para [0039]), and as shown in fig 3, the cheek portions of the sealing member and the face mask are shown to extend laterally across the wearer's cheeks).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsao and Whitby et al as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Bowsher (2015/0250970).
Regarding claim 8, modified Tsao discloses a spigot.
Modified Tsao does not disclose the spigot is integrally formed with the face mask.
However, Bowsher teaches a respiratory mask including a mask body (12) (para [0029]) and an inlet port (26) including a spigot (30) (connector) (para [0036]), and as shown in figs 1-2, the spigot (30) is shown to be integrally formed with the mask body (12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of modified Tsao so that the spigot is integrally formed with the face mask, as the feature of making a spigot for receiving oxygen integral with a face mask is known in the art, and it appears that the device of modified Tsao would perform equally well to deliver oxygen to the mask if the spigot was integrally formed with the face mask. See MPEP 2144.04(V)(B).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsao and Whitby et al as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Spear (2015/0108682).
Regarding claim 11, modified Tsao discloses a shield.
Modified Tsao does not disclose the shield is formed of a plastics material.
However, Spear teaches a filter for a respiratory device, wherein the filter (29) in enclosed in a filter component cartridge (10) including a shield (30) (para [0019]), wherein the cartridge (10) and shield (30) a harder plastic (para [0013]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device is made of modified Tsao so that the shield is made from a hard plastic, as the use of a harder plastic to form a shield for a filter cartridge is known in the art, and it appears that the device of modified Tsao would perform equally well to support the filter if the shield were made of a hard plastics material. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Claim(s) 13-14 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsao and Whitby et al as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Melidis et al (2015/0090266).
Regarding claim 13, modified Tsao discloses the sealing member (15 of Tsao) depends from at least a portion of a peripheral edge of the mask body (1 of Tsao) (Tsao, para [0039]).
Modified Tsao does not disclose the sealing member comprising both an inwardly and outwardly depending lip portion relative to the peripheral edge of the mask body.
However, Melidis teaches a breathing mask including a sealing member (1) (mask cushion), wherein the mask cushion includes a lip portion (3) (sealing lip), and as shown in fig 5a, the lip includes at least one inwardly depending portion (78) (indentation portion) (para [0102]) and at least one outwardly depending portion (79) (vertex) (para [0103]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of modified Tsao so that the sealing member includes both an inwardly and outwardly depending lip portion relative to the peripheral edge of the mask body as taught by Melidis in order to configure the sealing section to have a high level of sealing action, with a high degree of wearing comfort (Melidis, para [0006]).
Regarding claim 14, the modified Tsao’s references discloses the portion of the peripheral edge of the support frame about which the inwardly and outwardly depending lip portions extend may comprise a chin portion (as shown in figs 3 and 7 of Tsao, lower peripheral edge of the support frame (1) extends at a chin portion, and as shown in fig 6 of Melidis cross section 6g discloses the lower portion corresponding to a chin portion includes inwardly and outwardly depending lip portions (Melidis, para [0116], fig 6).
Regarding claim 18, modified Tsao discloses the sealing member (15 of Tsao) depends from at least a portion of a peripheral edge of the mask body (1 of Tsao) (Tsao, para [0039]), the sealing member (15 of Tsao) comprising a chin region, a nasal region, and cheek regions intermediate the chin and nasal regions (as shown in figs 3 and 7 of Tsao, lower portion of sealing member corresponds to a chin region, upper portion of sealing member corresponds to a nasal regions, and intermediate portions of the seal between the chin and nasal region corresponds to a chin region.
Tsao does not disclose the sealing member further comprising both an inwardly and outwardly depending lip portion relative to the peripheral edge of the mask body, wherein the inwardly depending lip portion extends about the chin and nasal regions of the sealing member, and the outwardly depending lip portion extends about the chin and cheek regions of the sealing member.
However, Melidis teaches a breathing mask including a sealing member (1) (mask cushion), wherein the mask cushion includes a lip portion (3) (sealing lip), and as shown in fig 5a, the lip includes at least one inwardly depending portion (78) (indentation portion) (para [0102]) and at least one outwardly depending portion (79) (vertex) (para [0103]), and as shown in fig 6, the inwardly depending lip portion extends about the chin and nasal regions of the sealing member (inwardly depending lip portion is shown in cross section of nasal region in fig 6a and chin region in fig 6g) and the outwardly depending lip portion extends about the chin and cheek regions of the sealing member (outward depending lip portion is shown in cross section of chin region in fig 6g and cheek region in fig 6c-d).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of modified Tsao so that the sealing member includes both an inwardly and outwardly depending lip portion relative to the peripheral edge of the mask body, wherein the inwardly depending lip portion extends about the chin and nasal regions of the sealing member, and the outwardly depending lip portion extends about the chin and cheek regions of the sealing member as taught by Melidis in order to configure the sealing section to have a high level of sealing action, with a high degree of wearing comfort (Melidis, para [0006]).
Claim(s) 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsao and Whitby et al as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Olsen et al (10,828,443).
Regarding claim 15, modified Tsao discloses a sealing member (15) including a nasal portion.
Modified Tsao des not disclose the nasal portion of the sealing member includes at least one reinforcement formation.
However, Olsen in figs 1-12 teaches a respiratory interface including a face mask including a sealing member (110) (mask seal), wherein the sealing member (110) includes a reinforcement formation (174) (band) at a nasal portion of sealing member (col 10, ln 34-44) to support a rolling hinge including bend (152) and a region of reduced thickness (172) to allow an upper portion (154) of the sealing member (11) to be displaced about hinge axis H (col 11, ln 9-32).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of modified Tsao by configuring the nasal portion of the sealing member to include at least one reinforcement formation comprising a band, a bend, and a region of reduced thickness to allow an upper portion of the sealing member to be displaced about a hinge axis as taught by Olsen in order to the nasal region of the sealing member to be movable relative to an oral region such that forces exerted by the nasal region in multiple positions remain substantially constant while forces exerted by the oral region increase (Olsen, col 3, ln 21-26) to prevent excessive forces on a nasal bridge of a user leading to discomfort (Olsen, col 1, ln 37-46).
Regarding claim 16, the modified Tsao’s reference discloses the at least one reinforcing member comprises one or more ribs (174 of Olsen) (band) positioned on each side of a nasal region of the sealing member (110 of Olsen) (as shown in fig 3, band (174) extends to each side of a nasal region of the sealing member (110)) (Olsen, fig 3, col 10, ln 19-32).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsao and Whitby, or in the alternative, rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsao and Whitby et al as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Key et al (2020/0155877).
Regarding claim 19, modified Tsao in fig 1 of Tsao show that the mask body has an aspect ratio such that a distance between a first side edge of the mask body and an opposing side edge of the mask body, measured along the surface of the mask body, is larger than the distance between the top edge of the mask body in the nasal region and the bottom edge of the mask body in the chin region, measured along the surface of the mask body.
Modified Tsao does not disclose a distance between a first side edge of the mask body and an opposing side edge of the mask body, measured along the surface of the mask body, is between 1.2 and 2 times larger than the distance between the top edge of the mask body in the nasal region and the bottom edge of the mask body in the chin region, measured along the surface of the mask body.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of modified Tsao so that a distance between a first side edge of the mask body and an opposing side edge of the mask body, measured along the surface of the mask body, is between 1.2 and 2 times larger than the distance between the top edge of the mask body in the nasal region and the bottom edge of the mask body in the chin region, measured along the surface of the mask body, as the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device. See MPEP2144.04IV)(A).
In the alternative, although modified Tsao does not explicitly disclose that a distance between a first side edge of the mask body and an opposing side edge of the mask body, measured along the surface of the mask body, is between 1.2 and 2 times larger than the distance between the top edge of the mask body in the nasal region and the bottom edge of the mask body in the chin region, Key teaches a filtration mask, wherein the mask has a height of 3 inches to about 5.5 inches and a width from about 4.5 inches to 6.5 inches, and therefore a distance between a first side edge of the mask body and an opposing side edge of the mask body is about 0.818 (4.5 inches/5.5 inches) and 2.17 (6.5 inches/3 inches) times larger than the distance between the top edge of the mask body and a bottom edge of the mask body (para [0026]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of modified Tsao so that a distance between a first side edge of the mask body and an opposing side edge of the mask body, measured along the surface of the mask body, is between 1.2 and 2 times larger than the distance between the top edge of the mask body in the nasal region and the bottom edge of the mask body in the chin region as taught by Key, as a filtration mask having a height of 3 inches to about 5.5 inches and a width from about 4.5 inches to 6.5 inches is known in the art, and it appears that the device of modified Tsao would perform equally well to cover a user’s face with the disclosed dimensions.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-8, filed 4/1/2026, with respect to the objection to the drawings on page 7, third paragraph, the objection to the claims on page 7, fifth full paragraph-page 8, first paragraph, the rejection under 35 USC § 112(b) on page 8, first full paragraph, and the rejection under 35 USC § 101 on page 8, second full paragraph have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection to the drawings and claims 1-3 and 5-19 and the rejection of claims 1-19 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 4/1/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on page 8, third full paragraph-page 9, first paragraph of applicant’s remarks, that Tsao does not disclose a filter located in a first region of a mask body and gas inlet located in a second region of the mask body, and because Tsao is a PPE mask, it would not have been obvious to modify Tsao to be an oxygen delivery mask. However, Whitby discloses that it may be desirable to use a face mask with an auxiliary oxygen supply (para [0004]), and Whitby’s face mask is considered to be a PPE mask because Whitby discloses that the respiratory mask is used a wide variety of applications to protect a respiratory system from particles suspended in the air or from unpleasant or noxious gases (para [0002]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan, upon seeing Whitby’s disclosure to modify a mask like that of Tsao, which is used to protect a respiratory system from particles suspended in the air or from unpleasant or noxious gases, by providing a gas inlet located on a left side of the mask body as taught by Whitby in order to allow the filter mask to connect to an air hose to connect to an auxiliary supply of oxygen when ambient air is contaminated and deficient in desired constituents (Whitby, para [0004]). The now-modified Tsao’s mask is considered to read on the broadest reasonable interpretation of “an oxygen delivery mask” because modified Tsao is a respiratory mask, and as modified by Whitby, includes an inlet by which oxygen is delivered to the respiratory mask. Therefore, the rejection is maintained.
Applicant argues on page 9, first full paragraph-fourth full paragraph of applicant’s remarks, that while Whitby shows an opening on the left-hand side of the mask, no reason is given for the positioning, nor are any advantages associated with it suggested. However, patents are relevant as prior art for all that they contain, and the use of patents as references is not limited to what the patentees describe as their own inventions or to the problems with which they are concerned. See MPEP 2123(I). In this case, Whitby in fig 2 shows that the gas inlet is disposed in a lower left corner of the mask body, and even though no reason is given for the positioning, the configuration shown in fig 2 can be relied on to teach that a gas inlet can be disposed in a lower left corner of the mask body. Therefore, the rejection is maintained.
Applicant argues on page 9, fifth full paragraph-page 10, second full paragraph of applicant’s remarks, that Whitby requires that the gas inlet be inserted in a hole in a filter, and would require that two filters be removed from Tsao in order to provide a connection for a gas inlet. However, as shown in fig 5a-b, Whitby discloses that the opening (200) (corresponding to mask connector member) is mounted on a filter mask substructure (400), and the filter mask substructure (400) is used to support a filter (para [0071]). The filter mask substructure (400) of Whitby is considered to be analogous to Tsao’s mask body (1) as Tsao’s mask body (1) is used to support the filters, and providing an opening in the mask body (1) to provide a gas inlet would not require that two filters be removed as argued by applicant, as the gas inlet can be provided on a portion of the mask where a filter is not present. Therefore, the rejection is maintained.
Applicant argues on page 10, fourth full paragraph-page 11, second full paragraph of applicant’s remarks, that the Bowsher, Melidis, and Olsen do not overcome the deficiencies of the combination of Tsao and Whitby. However, as discussed above, because the modified Tsao’s device teaches all the limitations of claim 1, the rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS Y SUL whose telephone number is (571)270-5260. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 am-5:30 pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, TIMOTHY STANIS can be reached at 571-272-5139. 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.
/DOUGLAS Y SUL/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights