DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-21 are pending.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-21 are pending. Claims 1, 3, 12, and 14-15 have been amended. Claim 21 has been newly added.
Claims 1-21 are under examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed 10/03/2023 and 01/21/2026 fail to comply
with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document;
each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file,
but the information referred to therein has not been considered.
Copies of foreign patent documents WO- 2016/102693-A1 and JP-4649788-B2 were not
included in the application file.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed on 08/12/2026 has been considered by the examiner.
Withdrawn Claim Objections and/or Rejections
The objection of claims 1, 13, and 15 for minor informalities as set forth on p. 2 of the previous office action (mailed on 02/12/2026) has been withdrawn in view of the amendments (filed on 06/09/2026).
Claim Objections-New, Necessitated by Amendments
1. Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 12 is missing a word between “method” and “using” and missing a word between “using” and according” in the preamble. Appropriate correction is required.
2. Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 18 is missing a word before “optoelectronic chip” in the preamble. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112-New, Necessitated by Amendments
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
3. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
MPEP 2163 provides a procedure for evaluating the adequacy of written description to
support the claim elements: a) determining what the claim covers as a whole, b) reviewing the
entire application to understand how applicant provides support for the claimed invention
including each element and/or step, and 3) determining whether there is sufficient written
description to inform a skilled artisan that inventor was in possession of the claimed invention as a whole at the time the application was filed. The proscription against the introduction of new
matter in a patent application serves to prevent an applicant from adding information that goes
beyond the subject matter originally filed. See In re Rasmussen, 650 F.2d 1212, 1214, 211
USPQ 3232, 326 (CCPA 1981).
Instant claim 1 recites “…of temperature-dependent processes in an active area…the thin-film light guide comprising a surface area, and wherein the thin-film heating element covers the surface area of the thin-film guide”.
A search of the originally filed specification shows no teachings of an active area, nor the thin-film heating element covering the surface area of the thin-film guide. Further, the specification makes no mention of an active area nor the thin-film heating element covering the surface area of the thin-film guide. The specification does not provide support for the newly amended claim limitation.
Accordingly, the amendment to claim 1 constitutes new matter. Claims 2-20 are included in the rejection as they depend on claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102- Maintained.
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
4. Claims 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Duer et al., (US20140178861A1) (Notice of references cited filed on 02/12/2026).
Instant claim 1 recites “An optoelectronic chip for receiving a sample in the visualization of temperature-dependent processes in an active area, having a carrier layer, a thin-film lightguide and a thin-film heating element, wherein the thin-film lightguide and the thin- film heating element are arranged either on sides of the carrier layer that are opposite each other or on the same side of the carrier layer, the thin-film light guide comprising a surface area, and wherein the thin-film heating element covers the surface area of the thin-film light guide”.
Duer teaches an optoelectronic chip for receiving a sample in the visualization of temperature-dependent processes in an active area (see [0173] “The light source generates light in one or in several different wavelengths. In some cases, the wavelength of the light emitted by the light source can be tuned by changing its temperature or by placing a filter in front of the light source to pick one wavelength out of the emitted spectrum.”),
having a carrier layer (see [0276] “The substrate of the detection system can made up of
any of a number of well known materials suitable for use in planar light wave circuits. For
example, useful substrate materials include but are not limited to silica (SiO2), glass, epoxy,
lithium niobate and indium phosphide as well as combinations thereof.”),
a thin-film lightguide and a thin- film heating element (see [0235] “In this embodiment, optical sensing site 912 of substrate 904 can include heater 905, for example, a thin-film heater, in the vicinity of each sensing sites 912.”, see [0009] “The first involve slab waveguide fluorescence excitation with light collection from above or below the chip. In this arrangement the bio-analyzed spots are located on the surface of a chip that contains a single slab-waveguide.”, It is known in the art that a slab waveguide is a thin film, page 2 of the instant
application teaches that lightguide and waveguide are the same.),
wherein the thin-film lightguide and the thin-film heating element are arranged either on
sides of the carrier layer that are opposite each other or on the same side of the carrier layer
(see figures 9D and 9H. Figure 9D shows a schematic of the substrate. Figure 9D shows the
collection waveguide (910) and the excitation waveguides (908) on the substrate. Figure 9H
shows a close up of the substrates optical sensing site (912) which includes the heater (905).
Figures 9D and 9H show the location relationship between the thin-film waveguide and the thin-
film heating element being arranged on the same side of the carrier layer), wherein the thin-film heating element covers the surface area of the thin-film light guide (see figure 9I showing the heating element 905 across the surfacer area of the optical sensing site 912. See figure 11D show the makeup of the substrate, where 1108 is the excitation waveguide, which is under the optical sensing site) (instant claim 1).
While the reference does not explicitly disclose the thin-film light guide having a surface area, it is inherent that the thin-film light guide would have a surface area, as all physical objects have a surface area (instant claim 1).
Duer teaches the carrier layer consisting of a transparent material and comprises Si or another SiO2-based glass (see [0362] “In the deposition step a layer of well-defined material having well controlled thickness is deposited across the entire wafer. The most common materials used for waveguide layer deposition are silica (SiO2), also known as glass, and silicon nitride (Si3N4). The optical properties of the silica (mainly its refractive index) is controlled by the amount of doping (Ge, P, and B etc.) introduced during the deposition”) (instant claims 2 and 16). Duer teaches wherein between the carrier layer and the thin-film lightguide there is a further transparent layer that has a lower refractive index than the carrier layer (see [0246] “The bottom layer can have a higher refractive index in order to increase the evanescent field tail presence in the optical sensing sites. An upper layer, about 10 μm thick, can contain the optical sensing site and the light collection structures (funnels and waveguides). The upper layer can have a lower refractive index than the bottom layer in order to minimize light loss when coupling the light out of the substrate to the detector.”, [0278] “It is envisioned that the various layers of the substrate can include different refraction index properties. For example, a waveguide layer (e.g. SiN) has a higher refraction index than a cladding layer of silica deposited thereon.”) (instant claim 3). Duer teaches wherein the further transparent layer comprises of a polymer (see [0276] “The substrate of the detection system can made up of any of a number of well known materials suitable for use in planar lightwave circuits. For example, useful substrate
materials include but are not limited to silica (SiO2), glass, epoxy, lithium niobate and indium
phosphide as well as combinations thereof. The waveguides disclosed herein can be made up
of silicon, silica (SiO2) and derivatives thereof, silicon oxynitride (SiON) and derivatives thereof, silicon nitride (SiN) and derivatives thereof, tantalum oxide (TaOx) and its derivatives thereof,
polymers, lithium niobate and indium phosphide as well as combinations thereof. In one
embodiment, UV light is used to change the refractive index of a waveguide material after deposition.”. Further, is known in the art that silicon is amorphous) (instant claim 4).
Duer teaches wherein the thin-film heating element is equipped with a temperature sensor (see [0093] “FIG. 9H is a schematic of one embodiment of the substrate of the invention illustrating details of an optical sensing site including a heater and a thermistor.”, see figure 9H, see [0235]) (instant claims 5 and 18).
Duer teaches wherein the heating element is optically transparent (see [0235] “FIG. 9H illustrates another embodiment of substrate 904 of the invention wherein optical sensing site 912 includes heater 905 and thermistor 907. In this embodiment, optical sensing site 912 of substrate 904 can include heater 905, for example, a thin-film heater, in the vicinity of each sensing sites 912. Heater 905 can be adapted to enable individual temperature control for each sensing site 912”. It is known in the art that thin-film heaters are optically transparent) (instant claim 6). Duer teaches wherein the thin-film heating element is or comprises a resistance heating element (see [0235] teaching the use of a thermistor, which is a known resistor heating element) (instant claim 7). Duer teaches the sensor which has metal and is at least partially
covers an outer surface of the optoelectronic chip and is further designed to come into thermal
contact with a sample (see [0011] “A third waveguide based bio-sensor utilizes surface plasmon
resonance (SPR). Here, in one example, a thin gold layer is deposited on top of a glass
substrate. The bio-analyzed sample on top of the gold induces changes in the refractive index
above the gold layer, thus changing the resonant angle for generating surface plasmons along
the gold layer…”, see claim 6 of ‘861) (instant claim 8). Duer teaches temperature regulation/control by means of a feedback system between the sensor layer and the heating element (see [0235] “a thin-film heater, in the vicinity of each sensing sites 912. Heater 905 can be adapted to enable individual temperature control for each sensing site 912. In addition to heater 905, thermistor 907 can be located at or near each sensing site 912 thereby providing for measuring the local temperature. In use, this embodiment provides the capability of running the same or any desired different number of cycles and the same or any desired different temperature profiles for each and every sensing site.”) (instant claim 9). Duer teaches wherein an outer surface of the optoelectronic chip, which is designed to come into contact with a sample, at least partially or completely has a surface modification and/or surface functionalization in order to bind molecules contained in a sample (see [0306] “One example of such a ligand includes fluorescein. The additional antibody may be bound to a solid support (e.g., an optical sensing site of the detection system). The additional antibody binds to the ligand coupled with the antibody that binds in turn to the analyte or alternatively to the labeled analyte, forming a mass complex which allows isolation and measurement of the signal generated by the label coupled with the labeled analyte.”) (instant claim 10).
Duer teaches a method of receiving a sample for visualization of temperature-sensitive processes, the method comprising applying an at least partially liquid, solid or gel-like sample to the optoelectronic chip according to claim 1 in such a way that the sample partially or completely surrounds the thin-film lightguide (see [0046] “In general, in yet another aspect, the invention provides a detection method comprising delivering a sample suspected of containing a biologically active analyte molecule to be detected to an optical sensing site on the substrate of a detection system, and spatially translating a scanning light source to a point at which the light source is coupled to and in optical communication with one or more of a plurality of waveguides in optical communication with the optical sensing site, thereby generating a first light wave within said waveguide, wherein the first light wave is transducable by a sensor associated with the optical sensing site to a second light wave. Furthermore, the method comprises detecting a measurable change in the second light wave using a detector in optical communication with the substrate, wherein a measurable change in the second light wave occurs when the sensor interacts with the biologically active analyte molecule.”, see [0238] “Microfluidics can be adapted to drive liquid (in this case the tested sample) using the capillary effect across the substrate. As illustrated in FIG. 9J, this can be achieved by an arrangement of microchannels 909, optionally of varying width, which force the sample from one or more reservoirs 913 to optical sensing sites 912 which can include etched wells to receive the sample. The microchannels can be either etched on the face of the chip itself or can be added as an external structure on a surface of the substrate.”, see [0280] “Where the optical sensing site is a well, it can act as a vessel for a liquid sample”) (instant claim 11). Duer teaches wherein the sample contains at least one or a plurality of particle(s) that is/are capable of and/or designed to interact with a guided mode of the thin-film lightguide (see [0306] The additional antibody binds to the ligand coupled with the antibody that binds in turn to the analyte or alternatively to the labeled analyte, forming a mass complex which allows isolation and measurement of the signal generated by the label coupled with the labeled analyte.”, see claim 6 of Duer) (instant claim 12). Duer teaches an optical system which is designed to be used with an optoelectronic chip according to claim 1, having at least one emitter or scatterer that emits light for optical excitation of the sample parallel to the plane of the thin-film lightguide and having at least one detector that detects light deflected by the sample normal to the plane of the thin- film lightguide (see [0039] “the substrate comprises a plurality of substantially parallel excitation waveguides, and a plurality of substantially parallel collection waveguides, the excitation waveguides and collection waveguides crossing to form a two-dimensional array of intersection regions where an excitation waveguide and a collection waveguide cross and provide optical communication with the intersection region at each crossing; and a plurality of optical sensing sites each in optical communication with an intersection region. The system further comprises a scanning light source that is at some point along its scanning path coupled to and in optical communication with one or more of the excitation waveguides at a first edge of the substrate, and a detector that is coupled to and in optical communication with one or more of the collection waveguides at a second edge of the substrate”) (instant claim 13). Duer teaches the detector being an array detector (see [0044] “In carious embodiments, the detector elements of the detector or of the scanning light source chip may be PIN diodes, avalanche photo-diodes, or a group of pixels which are part of a charge coupled device (CCD) array. In some embodiments, the detector is a silicon photodiode array.") (instant claim 14). Duer teaches the examination of living cells under temperature-controlled conditions (see claims 6 and 8-9 of ‘861) and the cells being biological molecules that contain an enzyme (see [0298]), a protein (see [0196]), DNA (see [0294]- [0295]), or RNA (see [0295]) (instant claims 15 and 20).
Duer teaches wherein the refractive index is between 1.2 and 1.5 (see [0256] “In one embodiment the substrate consists of three waveguide layers having core refractive index of 1.7 and clad reflective index of 1.4. Useful core refractive index values range from about 1.45 to about 2.1, and useful clad refractive index values range from about 1.4 to about 1.5.”) (instant claim 17). Duer teaches comprising a control unit to control and/or regulate the thin-film heating element based on the measurement data acquired by means of the temperature sensor (see [0219] “The working system housing can optionally include temperature control and vibration isolation for the working system (not shown).”, see [0222] “. Electronic boards 807 can further be adapted to drive robotic system 803 and control its motion, to control the motion of the scanning light source chip, and optionally to monitor and control temperature in different areas of the system. Electronic boards can include logic elements and processors (not shown). It is envisioned that electronic boards can further include embedded software both for controlling the working system and for interfacing the outside world, for example by way of interface panel 805 which can include a key-pad or any other input/output port.”, see [0233]) (instant claim 19). Duer teaches the thin-film lightguide is covered by a protective layer (see [0382], see figure 9F showing silica and silicon layers) (instant claim 21).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 06/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The previous 35 USC 102 rejection still applies to instant claim set. The amendments of “the thin-film light guide comprising a surface area, and wherein the thin-film heating element covers the surface area of the thin-film guide” does not overcome the previous rejections.
While the reference does not explicitly disclose the thin-film light guide having a surface area, it is inherent that the thin-film light guide would have a surface area, as all physical objects have a surface area.
On p. 6 applicant argues that Duer does not teach the heater covering the surface area of the sensing site.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e.,the heater covering the surface area of the sensing site) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Instant claim 1 recites the thin-film heating element covering the surface area of the thin-film light guide.
For the purpose of compact prosecution, examiner will address the limitations that are not recited in the instant claims.
In figure 9I of Duer, the optical sensing site is 912, and the heater is 905. Figure 9I shows that the heater and optical sensing site are not adjacent to each other. Figure 9I shows that the surface area of the optical sensing site is covered by the heater. See image 9I attached below:
PNG
media_image1.png
579
841
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Double Patenting- Maintained.
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.
5. Claims 1-2, 11-14, and 20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory
double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4, 8-13, and 15 of copending Application
No. 18270163 (reference application) (Notice of references cited filed on 02/12/2026). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are not patentably distinct from each other for the reasons set forth below.
Regarding instant claim 1, ‘163 teaches an optoelectronic chip for receiving a sample
in the visualization of temperature-dependent processes in an active area, having a carrier layer, a thin-film lightguide and a thin- film heating element, wherein the thin-film lightguide and the thin-film heating element are arranged either on sides of the carrier layer that are opposite each other or on the same side of the carrier layer, the thin-film later guide comprising a surface area, and wherein the thin-film heating element covers the surface area of the thin-film light guide (see claims 1 and 8 of ‘163).
Regarding instant claim 2, ‘168 teaches wherein the carrier layer consists completely
or at least partially of an opaque or transparent material (see claim 8 of ‘163).
Regarding instant claim 11, ‘168 teaches applying an at least partially liquid, solid or
gel-like sample to the optoelectronic chip according to claim 1 in such a way that the sample
partially or completely surrounds the thin-film lightguide (see claim 9 of ‘163).
Regarding instant claim 12, ‘168 teaches wherein the sample contains at least one or
a plurality of particle(s) that is/are capable of and/or designed to interact with a guided mode of
the thin-film lightguide (see claims 4 and 10 of ‘163).
Regarding instant claim 13, ‘168 teaches having at least one emitter or scatterer that
emits light for optical excitation of the sample parallel to the plane of the thin-film lightguide and
having at least one detector that detects light deflected by the sample normal to the plane of the thin-film lightguide (see claims 1 and 11-12 of ‘163).
Regarding instant claim 14, ‘168 teaches wherein the detector is an array detector
and/or the optical system is a microscope (see claim 13 of ‘163).
Regarding instant claim 20, ‘168 teaches wherein the biological molecule comprises
an enzyme, a protein or a deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid (RNA) (see claim 15
of ‘163).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably
indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On p. 6 applicant requests the rejection be held in abeyance until there is allowable subject matter in the application. This has been fully considered but is not found to be persuasive.
Applicant’s attention is respectfully directed to M.P.E.P. § 804(I)(B)(1), which states:
“A complete response to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection is either a
reply by applicant showing that the claims subject to the rejection are patentably distinct from
the reference claims or the filing of a terminal disclaimer in accordance with 37 CFR 1.321 in the
pending application(s) with a reply to the Office action (see MPEP § 1490 for a discussion of
terminal disclaimers). Such a response is required even when the nonstatutory double patenting
rejection is provisional.”
“As filing a terminal disclaimer, or filing a showing that the claims subject to the
rejection are patentably distinct from the reference application’s claims, is necessary for further consideration of the rejection of the claims, such a filing should not be held in abeyance. Only objections or requirements as to form not necessary for further consideration of the claims may be held in abeyance until allowable subject matter is indicated. Replies with an omission should be treated as provided in MPEP § 714.03. Therefore, an application must not be allowed unless the required compliant terminal disclaimer(s) is/are filed and/or the withdrawal of the nonstatutory double patenting rejection(s) is made of record by the examiner. See MPEP § 804.02, subsection VI, for filing terminal disclaimers required to overcome nonstatutory double patenting rejections in applications filed on or after June 8, 1995. (emphasis added)”.
Accordingly, the rejection is maintained and is expressly not held in abeyance.
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
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 MCKENZIE A DUNN whose telephone number is (571)270-0490. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Tuesday 730 am -530pm, Wednesday-Friday 730 am-430 pm.
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, Gregory Emch can be reached at (571)272-8149. 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.
/MCKENZIE A DUNN/ Examiner, Art Unit 1678
/GREGORY S EMCH/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1678
Prosecution Insights