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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 07/23/2026 has been entered. Claim 1 has been amended. Claims 2-5, 9-10, 12-22, and 24 are in the original/previously presented form. Claims 6-8, 11, and 23 are cancelled. Claim 25 is newly presented. Thus, claims 1-5, 9-10, 12-22, and 24-25 remain pending in the application.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/19/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the figures do not clearly depict the limitations listed in claim 9. On page 8 of Applicant’s Remarks, filed 07/23/2026, the applicant argues “the Examiner may have inadvertently overlooked the later drawings…The Examiner’s attention is directed to the embodiment illustrated in Figures 45-55, in which the second opening (indicated as 2400 in Fig. 54) is larger than the first opening (indicated as 2400 in Fig. 46). This is also indicated by the dome-shaped nature of chamber 2450, as shown in Fig. 53, where the bottom of the dome is considerably larger than the top of the dome.” Firstly, according to the specification, the reference number 2400 is associated with “through-hole”, and the first opening is indicated as 2112, the proximal surface is indicated as 2110, the second opening is indicated as 2122, and the distal surface is indicated as 2120. Secondly, when looking at Figures 45-55, it still remains unclear to the examiner how the first opening in the proximal surface is smaller than the second opening in the distal surface. Specifically looking at Figure 50 and understanding where the first and second openings have been labeled on the other figures, the first opening appears to span all of the second opening and more. The examiner agrees with the applicant’s point regarding Figure 53 and the bottom of the dome being considerably larger than the top of the dome. But to the examiner’s point, the top of the dome exists closer to the distal surface 2120 and thus the second opening, making the bottom of the done closer to the larger opening in the proximal surface. The examiner suggests reviewing how the figures have been labeled in light of the limitations of claim 9.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “2120” has been used twice in FIGURE 52.
The drawings are objected to because many of the figures are presented with a single indication arrow directing the location of two or more reference numbers separated by forward slashes. The examiner finds this confusing as it is unclear to what part of the figure the attention of the arrow is being drawn to. The examiner suggests only providing one reference number per indicator arrow in order to clearly communicate what is being identified within each figure.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the retainer" in the second and third lines of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the retainer" in the first line of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3, 15, 17-18, 22, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khalaj (United States Patent No. US 10,195,399 B2), and further in view of LeLievre et al. (United States Patent No. US 10,773,057 B1; herein, LeLievre), Helm (United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2020/0330732 A1), and Khalaj (United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2015/0088075 A1; herein, Khalaj 2).
Regarding claim 1, Khalaj discloses a fixation device (catheter securement device 10) to secure a catheter tube in a bent configuration relative to a surface of a patient's skin (FIG. 5), wherein the fixation device comprises:
a body (base 12) comprising:
a proximal surface (bottom surface 17) which, in use, faces towards the surface of the patient's skin (FIG. 6);
a distal surface (top surface 30) which, in use, faces away from the surface of the patient's skin (FIG. 5);
a first opening in the proximal surface (FIG. 2, opening 14 from the bottom surface 17 side);
a second opening in the distal surface (FIG. 2, opening 14 from the top surface 30 side);
a sidewall that connects the first opening and the second opening to form a through-hole (FIG. 2, opening 14 crafted through base 12), wherein the sidewall substantially surrounds the through-hole (FIG. 2); and
a channel formed in the distal surface (FIG. 5, slot 24) which, in use, receives a first portion of the catheter tube (FIG. 5, catheter 32 in slot 24),
wherein the body is configured such that the catheter tube extends in use from the channel through the through-hole to an exit point at which a second portion of the catheter tube exits the patient's skin (FIG. 6), wherein the orientation of the first portion of the catheter tube is substantially different to an orientation of the second portion of the catheter tube (FIG. 6, catheter 32 perpendicular to skin exiting body and parallel to skin after).
Khalaj does not disclose wherein the fixation device further comprises an adhesive configured to retain the first portion of the catheter tube in the channel, wherein the body is configured such that the sidewall is in use spaced from the exit point to create a window to a region of the patient's skin that substantially surrounds the exit point, wherein the window permits visual inspection of the exit point in use, and wherein the sidewall is configured to form an overhang, wherein an end of the channel is provided in the overhang and wherein, when in use, the overhang spaces the second portion of the catheter tube from a proximal region of the sidewall.
However, LeLievre teaches the fixation device further comprises an adhesive configured to retain the first portion of the catheter tube in the channel (FIG. 2(d)-2(f), col. 5 line 66 - col. 6 line 31, Retaining tabs 31,32 comprise a patch of VELCRO® loop fasteners that mates with a patch of VELCRO® hook fasteners on the top face of patches 14-1,14-2 in order to secure the medical device within blocks 41 and 43. The examiner interprets a hook-and-loop fastener system as analogous to an adhesive because it accomplishes the same function of adhering two parts together, as well as securing a medical device within a channel.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fixation device disclosed by Khalaj to include an adhesive for retaining a first portion of the catheter tube in a channel as taught by LeLievre in order to attain a highly desirable degree of securement between the fixation device and catheter tube.
Khalaj in view of LeLievre still does not disclose wherein the body is configured such that the sidewall is in use spaced from the exit point to create a window to a region of the patient's skin that substantially surrounds the exit point, wherein the window permits visual inspection of the exit point in use, and wherein the sidewall is configured to form an overhang, wherein an end of the channel is provided in the overhang and wherein, when in use, the overhang spaces the second portion of the catheter tube from a proximal region of the sidewall.
However, Helm teaches the body is configured such that the sidewall is in use spaced from the exit point to create a window to a region of the patient's skin that substantially surrounds the exit point (FIG. 1A and FIG. 2A-2B, transparent viewing window 118), wherein the window permits visual inspection of the exit point in use ([0040], “An optional transparent viewing window 118 may be disposed adjacent the distal portion 112 such that a catheter 101 and a catheter insertion site 108 may be viewed by a clinician.”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fixation device disclosed by Khalaj to include a window for visual inspection of the exit point as taught by Helm in order that the exit point and patient’s skin near the exit point remain viewable by a clinician ([0040]).
Khalaj in view of LeLievre and Helm still does not disclose wherein the sidewall is configured to form an overhang, wherein an end of the channel is provided in the overhang and wherein, when in use, the overhang spaces the second portion of the catheter tube from a proximal region of the sidewall.
However, Khalaj 2 teaches the sidewall is configured to form an overhang (FIG. 11B, transition 102 into catheter opening 26), wherein an end of the channel is provided in the overhang ([0039], catheter channel 28 transitions into catheter opening 26) and wherein, when in use, the overhang spaces the second portion of the catheter tube from a proximal region of the sidewall (FIG. 11B-11C, catheter 104 is spaces from the wall at catheter opening 26). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fixation device disclosed by Khalaj to include an overhand at the end of a channel which spaces the catheter tube from a sidewall as taught by Khalaj 2 in order to ease threading of the catheter tube into the overhang ([0040]). It would also be understood by someone in the art that an overhang design would reduce kinking or pinching of the catheter during entry or exit from the exit point.
Regarding claim 2, in the modified device of Khalaj, Khalaj discloses a channel wall forming the channel (FIG. 1, slot 24 has been cut through housing 18 to create channel) therein and wherein the channel wall is configured to act as the retainer (col. 6 lines 11-13 and col. 6 lines 26-30 catheter 32 in slot 24 described as both “secured” and “snug fit”).
Regarding claim 3, in the modified device of Khalaj, Khalaj discloses a distal region of the channel forms a slit (slot 24) which extends from the distal surface to a proximal region of the channel, wherein the slit has a width that is smaller than a width of the first portion of the catheter tube configured to be received in the channel (FIG. 5, col. 6 lines 26-30).
Regarding claim 10, in the modified device of Khalaj, Khalaj does not disclose the sidewall is shaped to form a chamber around the exit point in use.
However, Helm teaches the sidewall is shaped to form a chamber around the exit point in use (FIG. 1A and FIG. 2A-2B, [0046], chamber 120 which may be at least partially defined by the body 111, the displaceable member 115, the base plate 140, and the circumferential seal member 130). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fixation device disclosed by modified Khalaj to form the sidewall into a chamber as taught by Helm in order to provide a substantially sterile environment around the catheter and exit point ([0046]).
Regarding claim 15, in the modified device of Khalaj, Khalaj discloses the body further comprises one or more protrusions configured to grip a dressing positioned on or proximate the exit point (FIG. 2, lip 15).
Regarding claim 17, in the modified device of Khalaj, Khalaj discloses the body is configured such that, when the first portion of the catheter tube is received in the channel in use, the catheter tube exits and extends away from the body in a substantially parallel direction to the patient's skin (FIG. 6, catheter 32 perpendicular to skin exiting body and parallel to skin after).
Regarding claim 18, in the modified device of Khalaj, Khalaj discloses the channel is a first channel which may, in use, receive a first portion of the catheter tube (FIG. 5, catheter 32 in slot 24), and the body further comprises a second channel formed in the distal surface (FIG. 5, alternative channels that are not depicted to have tubing through them) which, in use, may receive the first portion of the catheter tube (col. 6 lines 22-25) as an alternative to the first portion of the catheter tube being received in the first channel, wherein the first channel is configured such that the catheter tube extends away from the body in a first direction (FIG. 5, catheter 32 in slot 24) when the first portion of the catheter tube is positioned in the first channel, and the second channel is configured such that the catheter tube extends away from the body in a second direction (col. 6 lines 22-25, catheter positioned in slot dependent on desired direction) when the first portion of the catheter tube is positioned in the second channel, wherein the first direction is substantially different from the second direction (Fig. 5, col. 6 lines 22-25).
Regarding claim 22, in the modified device of Khalaj, Khalaj discloses a movable cover configured to cover at least a section of the window (FIG. 1, cover member 16 movable by hinge line 22).
Regarding claim 24, in the modified device of Khalaj, Khalaj discloses a catheter system (FIG. 5, securement device assembly 50) for medical applications, wherein the catheter system comprises:
a catheter tube configured to be inserted into an exit point in a patient's skin (catheter 32); and
a fixation device (catheter securement device 10) according to claim 1.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khalaj in view of LeLievre, Helm, and Khalaj 2 as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Hartman (United States Patent No. US 3,110,304 A).
Regarding claim 4, in the modified device of Khalaj, Khalaj does not disclose does not disclose the body is configured to form a lead-in to the slit to facilitate insertion of the catheter tube into the channel in use.
However, Hartman teaches the body is configured to form a lead-in to the slit to facilitate insertion of the catheter tube into the channel in use (FIG. 1, the shape of speculum 10 is the same as the claimed lead-in). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the slit disclosed by modified Khalaj with the funnel-like shape of the speculum taught by Hartman, which is commonly understood to allow for guided entry and exit. Albeit a wider representation of the curved edge into a channel, the speculum functions in the same funneling manner as the intended lead-in.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khalaj in view of LeLievre, Helm, and Khalaj 2 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Panotopoulos (United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2014/0316366 A1).
Regarding claim 5, in the modified device of Khalaj, Khalaj does not disclose the retainer comprises a clip.
However, Panotopoulos teaches the retainer comprises a clip (clasping means 51). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the slit disclosed by modified Khalaj to include a clip as taught by Panotopoulos in order to grasp and secure the catheter ([0029]).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khalaj in view of LeLievre, Helm, and Khalaj 2 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ekfeldt et al. (United States Patent Application No. US 2018/0325718 A1; herein, Ekfeldt).
Regarding claim 9, in the modified device of Khalaj, Khalaj does not disclose the first opening in the proximal surface is smaller than the second opening in the distal surface.
However, Ekfeldt teaches the first opening in the proximal surface is smaller than the second opening in the distal surface (Fig. 9, The proximal annular ring 202 has a proximal through-going hole 205 that is smaller in diameter than the distal annular ring 203 having a distal through-going hole 206). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first and second openings disclosed by modified Khalaj with the structure of the Ekfeldt device, specifically the proximal surface opening being smaller than the distal surface opening, in order to allow for easy access to the first opening through the second opening ([0121]-[0122]).
Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khalaj in view of LeLievre, Helm, and Khalaj 2 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hanson et al. (United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2016/0193452 A1; herein, Hanson).
Regarding claim 12, in the modified device of Khalaj, Khalaj does not disclose the body is configured to form a gap such that the second portion of the catheter tube can pass through the gap and into the through-hole when attaching the fixation device to the catheter tube in situ, wherein the gap extends from an end of the body to the side wall.
However, Hanson teaches the body is configured to form a gap such that the second portion of the catheter tube can pass through the gap and into the through-hole (Fig. 2 and Fig. 5, recess (or slit or notch) 156) when attaching the fixation device to the catheter tube in situ, wherein the gap extends from an end of the body to the side wall (Fig. 2, recess 156 to central portion 154). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fixation device disclosed by modified Khalaj to include a gap stretching from an end to the sidewall with access to the through-hole as taught by Hanson in order to allow a portion catheter tube to pass from one surface of the fixation device to another ([0054]).
Regarding claim 13, in the modified device of Khalaj, Khalaj does not disclose the width of the gap is substantially equal to or less than the diameter of the catheter tube.
However, Hanson teaches the width of the gap is substantially equal to or less than the diameter of the catheter tube (Fig. 1 and Fig. 2, [0054] the recess 156 is configured to allow a portion of a catheter to pass through). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fixation device disclosed by modified Khalaj to include a gap stretching from an end to the sidewall to be equal or less than the diameter of the catheter tube as taught by Hanson in order to allow a portion catheter tube to pass from one surface of the fixation device to another ([0054]).
Regarding claim 14, in the modified device of Khalaj, Khalaj does not disclose the body is configured to be able to deform to an extent sufficient for a user to manually open the gap to pass the second portion of the catheter tube through the gap.
However, Hanson teaches the body is configured to be able to deform to an extent sufficient for a user to manually open the gap to pass the second portion of the catheter tube through the gap ([0054], The recess 156 allows a portion of the catheter to pass through, but it also allows the dressing body 102 as a whole to conform around bulky parts of medical articles. Therefore, by broadest reasonable interpretation, there would need to be some ability of the device to deform to fit around or with various medical articles.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fixation device disclosed by modified Khalaj to include a deformable gap stretching from an end to the sidewall as taught by Hanson in order to allow a portion catheter tube to pass from one surface of the fixation device to another ([0054]).
Claims 16, 20-21, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khalaj in view of LeLievre, Helm, and Khalaj 2 as applied to claims 1 and 18 above, and further in view of Her (United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2018/0236206 A1).
Regarding claim 16, in the modified device of Khalaj, Khalaj does not disclose the body is configured such that, when viewed from a side in a direction substantially parallel to the proximal surface, the distal surface has a substantially convex-shaped envelope.
However, Her teaches the body is configured such that, when viewed from a side in a direction substantially parallel to the proximal surface, the distal surface has a substantially convex-shaped envelope (FIG. 3, FIG. 5, FIG. 7, The fixture body 20 has a guide fence 25 which gives the body a convex shape). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fixation device disclosed by modified Khalaj to make the distal surface a convex-shaped envelope as taught by Her in order to support the catheter tube as it extends through the fixture device ([0038]).
Regarding claim 20, in the modified device of Khalaj, Khalaj does not disclose the body is configured such that, when viewed in cross-section from a side in a direction substantially perpendicular to the proximal surface, the second channel comprises one or more curved regions which bend a third portion of the catheter tube.
However, Her teaches the body is configured such that, when viewed in cross-section from a side in a direction substantially perpendicular to the proximal surface, the second channel comprises one or more curved regions which bend a third portion of the catheter tube (FIG. 6a, FIG. 7, second guide hole GH2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the second channel disclosed by modified Khalaj to incorporate a curved portion as taught by Her in order that backflow through the catheter tube can be more stably prevented ([0042]).
Regarding claim 21, in the modified device of Khalaj, Khalaj does not disclose the body is configured such that, when viewed in cross-section from a side in a direction substantially parallel to the proximal surface, the channel comprises one or more curved regions which bend the first portion of the catheter.
However, Her teaches the body is configured such that, when viewed in cross-section from a side in a direction substantially parallel to the proximal surface, the channel comprises one or more curved regions which bend the first portion of the catheter (FIG. 6a and FIG. 8, second guide hole GH2 holds all portions of the catheter at some point). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the second channel disclosed by modified Khalaj to incorporate a curved portion as taught by Her in order that backflow through the catheter tube can be more stably prevented ([0042]).
Regarding claim 25, in the modified device of Khalaj, Khalaj does not disclose at least a portion of the body forming the channel is resiliently deformable.
However, Her teaches at least a portion of the body forming the channel is resiliently deformable ([0052], cover 30 is deformable). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the fixation device disclosed by modified Khalaj to have at least a portion of the body forming the channel be deformable as taught by Her in order that the catheter tube can be easily inserted into the channel ([0052]).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khalaj in view of LeLievre, Helm, and Khalaj 2 as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Bierman (United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2002/0133121 A1).
Regarding claim 19, in the modified device of Khalaj, Khalaj does not disclose the body comprises a channel portion which is common to the first channel and to the second channel.
However, Bierman teaches the body comprises a channel portion which is common to the first channel and to the second channel (Fig. 9 and Fig. 10, S-clip 124 allows for catheter portions to exist in multiple channels at once). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify fixation device disclosed by modified Khalaj to include a common channel portion as taught by Bierman in order to secure the catheter tube in a plurality of channels ([0019]). The device disclosed by Khalaj already allows for the catheter to exit from multiple slot options, but only one at a time. The modification would give the option for the catheter to sit in more than one slot at a given moment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, pages 11-12 of Applicant’s Remarks filed 07/23/2026, with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Mogg (United States Patent No. US 7,749,199 B2) is considered relevant prior art with regards to a catheter clamp having a channel that guides the catheter tube into an insertion point.
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 Evelyn A Thoman whose telephone number is (571)272-8496. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 a.m-4:30 p.m..
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, Michael Tsai can be reached at 571-270-5246. 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.
/EVELYN A THOMAN/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3783
/THEODORE J STIGELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights