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. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement filed May 14, 2024 (3 pages), fails 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: No copy of PCT/IB2023/056285 (WO 2023/042825) has been provided No copy of TW 112122837 has been provided Specification The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because : In line 1, “thereof comprising:” should be changed to “thereof, the methods comprising:” In line 4, “a cell’s sensitivity” should be changed to “a sensitivity of a cell” In line 5, “fields comprising:” should be changed to “fields, the methods comprising:” In line 5, “alternating electric fields” should be changed to “the alternating electric fields” In line 6, “a cell” should be changed to “the cell” In line 7, “the cell’s sensitivity” should be changed to “the sensitivity of the cell” In line 8, “a cell comprising:” should be changed to “a cell, the methods comprising:” In line 9, “a cell” should be changed to “the cell” In line 10, “cytotoxicity” should be changed to “the cytotoxicity” In line 11, “alternating electrical fields” should be changed to “alternating electric fields” In lines 11-12, “a cell comprising:” should be changed to “a cell, the methods comprising:” In line 12, “alternating electric fields” should be changed to “the alternating electric fields” In line 12, “a cell” should be changed to “the cell” In line 14, “sensitivity” should be changed to “the sensitivity” In line 14, “the alternating electrical fields” should be changed to “the alternating electric fields” In line 15, “maintaining” should be changed to “the maintaining” In line 15, “enhancing” should be changed to “the enhancing” In line 15, “sensitivity” should be changed to “the sensitivity” In line 1 5 , “a cell” should be changed to “the cell” In line 15, “alternating electrical fields” should be changed to “the alternating electric fields” In line 16, “alternating electrical fields” should be changed to “the alternating electric fields” A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). Claim Objections Claim s 1, 4-7, 10-11, 13-14, and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities: In regards to claim 1, line 1, “thereof comprising:” should be changed to “thereof, the method comprising:”. In regards to claim 4, line 2, “administering” should be changed to “the administering”. In regards to claim 4, line 2, “FGF” should be changed to “FGF inhibitors”. In regards to claim 5, line 1, “FGF” should be changed to “FGF inhibitors”. In regards to claim 6, line 1, “a cell’s sensitivity” should be changed to “a sensitivity of a cell”. In regards to claim 6, line 1, “fields comprising:” should be changed to “fields, the method comprising:”. In regards to claim 6, line 2, “alternating electric fields” should be changed to “the alternating electric fields”. In regards to claim 6, line 2, “a cell” should be changed to “the cell”. In regards to claim 6, lines 4-5, “a fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors” should be changed to “fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors”. In regards to claim 6, line 6, “the cell’s sensitivity” should be changed to “the sensitivity of the cell”. In regards to claim 7, line 1, “a cell comprising:” should be changed to “a cell, the method comprising:”. In regards to claim 7, line 2, “a cell” should be changed to “the cell”. In regards to claim 7, lines 4-5, “a fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors” should be changed to “fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors”. In regards to claim 7, line 6, “cytotoxicity” should be changed to “the cytotoxicity”. In regards to claim 10, line 2, “alternating electric fields” should be changed to “the alternating electric fields”. In regards to claim 11, line 2, “FGF receptors (FGFR)” should be changed to “FGF receptors (FGFRs)”. In regards to claim 13, lines 1-2, “FGF receptors (FGFR)” should be changed to “FGF receptors (FGFRs)”. In regards to claim 14, line 1, “FGF-7, FGF-basic” should be changed to “FGF-7, or FGF-basic”. In regards to claim 17, line 1, “an ovarian cancer” should be changed to “an ovarian cancer cell”. In regards to claim 17, lines 1-2, “lung cancer cell” should be changed to “a lung cancer cell”. Appropriate correction is required. 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claim s 9-19 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. In regards to claim 9, line 1 recites “the FGF inhibitor”. First , t here is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Second, claim 9 depends upon claim 1. Claim 1, line 4 recites “one or more fibroblast growth factor (FGF) inhibitors”. It is unclear whether the two terms are the same component or different components. In regards to claim 10, line 1 recites “the FGF inhibitor”. First, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Second, claim 10 depends upon claim 1. Claim 1, line 4 recites “one or more fibroblast growth factor (FGF) inhibitors”. It is unclear whether the two terms are the same component or different components. In regards to claim 11, line 1 recites “the FGF inhibitor”. First, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Second, claim 11 depends upon claim 1. Claim 1, line 4 recites “one or more fibroblast growth factor (FGF) inhibitors”. It is unclear whether the two terms are the same component or different components. In regards to claim 12, line 1 recites “the FGFR inhibitor”. First, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Second, claim 12 depends upon claim 1. Claim 1, lines 4-5 recite “fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors”. It is unclear whether the two terms are the same component or different components. In regards to claim 13, line 1 recites “the FGFR inhibitor”. First, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Second, claim 13 depends upon claim 1. Claim 1, lines 4-5 recite “fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors”. It is unclear whether the two terms are the same component or different components. In regards to claim 14, line 1 recites “the FGF”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In regards to claim 15, line 1 recites “the FGFR”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In regards to claim 16, line 1 recites “the FGFR inhibitor”. First, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Second, claim 16 depends upon claim 1. Claim 1, lines 4-5 recite “fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors”. It is unclear whether the two terms are the same component or different components. In regards to claim 16, line 1 recites “the inhibitors of Table 1”. First, t here is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Second, MPP 2173.05(s) recites: Where possible, claims are to be complete in themselves. Incorporation by reference to a specific figure or table "is permitted only in exceptional circumstances where there is no practical way to define the invention in words and where it is more concise to incorporate by reference than duplicating a drawing or table into the claim. Incorporation by reference is a necessity doctrine, not for applicant’s convenience." Ex parte Fressola , 27 USPQ2d 1608, 1609 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1993) (citations omitted). Examiner is of the opinion that the Compounds of Table 1 (Specification, paragraph [0046]) could be listed as words in the claim, thus allowing the claim to be complete in itself and not requiring reference to Table 1. In regards to claim 17, line 1 recites “the cancer cell”. First, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Second, claim 17 depends upon claim 6. Claim 6, line 1 recites “a cell’s” and line 2 recites “a cell”. It is unclear whether the two terms are the same component or different components. In regards to claim 18, line 1 recites “the alternating electric field”. First, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Second, claim 18 depends upon claim 1. Claim 1, line 2 recites “alternating electric fields”. It is unclear whether the two terms are the same component or different components. In regards to claim 19, line 1 recites “the alternating electric field”. First, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Second, claim 19 depends upon claim 1. Claim 1, line 2 recites “alternating electric fields”. It is unclear whether the two terms are the same component or different components. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claims 1-5, 7, 9, 11, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Ivkov et al (US 2005/0090732) . In regards to claim 1, Ivkov et al teaches a method of treating a subject in need thereof (claim 19: A t herapeutic method for treating the body, body part, tissue, cell, or body fluid of a subjec t) comprising: applying alternating electric fields, at a frequency for a period of time, to a target site of the subject in need thereof (claim 19: administering targeted thermotherapy to a target by supplying a bioprobe to the target and exposing the bioprobe to an alternating magnetic field (AMF ))( paragraph [0052]: an alternating magnetic field is accompanied by an alternating electric field ) administering one or more fibroblast growth factor (FGF) inhibitors or fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors to the subject in need thereof ( claim 19: administering at least one other therapy to the target )( claim 40: w herein the at least one other therapy comprises administering … Interferon -α)(Table III: Interferon -α… Inhibits FGF production ) In regards to claim 2, Ivkov et al teaches wherein the subject has mesothelioma, ovarian cancer or lung cancer (Table I: Lung cancer… Mesotheliomas … Ovarian cancer) . In regards to claim 3, Ivkov et al teaches wherein the target site comprises one or more cancer cells (paragraph [0047]: cancer cells) . In regards to claim 4, Ivkov et al teaches wherein the alternating electric fields are applied before, after, or simultaneously with administering the one or more FGF or FGFR inhibitors (claim 19: administering targeted thermotherapy to a target by supplying a bioprobe to the target and exposing the bioprobe to an alternating magnetic field (AMF), and b. administering at least one other therapy to the target, wherein the at least one other therapy is administered prior to, during, after the targeted thermotherapy administration, or a combination thereo f)(paragraph [0052]: an alternating magnetic field is accompanied by an alternating electric field )(claim 40: w herein the at least one other therapy comprises administering … Interferon -α)(Table III: Interferon -α… Inhibits FGF production ). In regards to claim 5, Ivkov et al teaches wherein the one or more FGF or FGFR inhibitors are administered intratumorally, intracranially, intraventricularly, intrathecally, epidurally, intradurally , intravascularly, intravenously (targeted or non-targeted), intraarterially, intramuscularly, subcutaneously, intraperitoneally, orally, intranasally, via intratumor injection (e.g. computed tomography-guided, during surgery or biopsy) or via inhalation (paragraph [0160] : Pharmaceuticals involving antiangiogenesis , that are currently under development, are listed in Table III. In one embodiment of the invention, the targeted therapy system is used in combination with at least one of these pharmaceuticals )( Table III: Interferon -α… Inhibits FGF production )(claim 19: administering targeted thermotherapy to a target by supplying a bioprobe to the target )(paragraph [0097] : A method of administering bioprobes 590 to the desired area for treatment and the dosage may depend upon, but is not limited to, the type and location of the diseased material … Other methods of administration include intravascular injection, intravenous injection, intraperitoneal injection, subcutaneous injection, and intramuscular injection. Bioprobes 590 may be formulated in an injectable format (suspension, emulsion) in a medium such as, for example, water, saline, Ringer's solution, dextrose, albumin solution, or oils. Bioprobes 590 may also be administered to the patient through topical application via a salve or lotion, transdermally through a patch, orally ingested as a pill or capsule or suspended in a liquid, or rectally inserted in suppository form. Bioprobes 590 may also be suspended in an aerosol or pre-aerosol formulation suitable for inhalation via the mouth or nose ). In regards to claim 7, Ivkov et al teaches a method (claim 19: A t herapeutic method ) of increasing cytotoxicity in a cell (paragraph [0008] : Immunotherapeutics fall into at least three classes: (1) deployment of antibodies that, themselves, target growth receptors, disrupt cytokine pathways, or induce complement or antibody-dependent cytotoxicity ) comprising: applying alternating electric fields, at a frequency for a period of time, to a cell (claim 19: administering targeted thermotherapy to a target by supplying a bioprobe to the target and exposing the bioprobe to an alternating magnetic field (AMF ))( paragraph [0052]: an alternating magnetic field is accompanied by an alternating electric field )(paragraph [0047]: cells are exemplary targets ) contacting one or more fibroblast growth factor (FGF) inhibitors or a fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors to the cell (claim 19: administering at least one other therapy to the target )(claim 40: w herein the at least one other therapy comprises administering … Interferon -α)(Table III: Interferon -α… Inhibits FGF production )(paragraph [0047]: cells are exemplary targets ) , thereby increasing cytotoxicity in the cell (paragraph [0008] : Immunotherapeutics fall into at least three classes: (1) deployment of antibodies that, themselves, target growth receptors, disrupt cytokine pathways, or induce complement or antibody-dependent cytotoxicity ) In regards to claim 9, Ivkov et al teaches wherein the FGF inhibitor inhibits or decreases FGF expression (Table III: Inhibits FGF production ) . In regards to claim 11, Ivkov et al teaches wherein the FGF inhibitor prevents FGF from interacting or binding to one or more FGF receptors (FGFR) (Table III states “ Inhibits FGF production ” from which it is understood that FGF will not be produced and thus will not interact or bind to FGF receptors ). In regards to claim 20, Ivkov et al teaches administering a cancer therapeutic (paragraph [0162]: chemo-… therapy) . 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, 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. Claims 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ivkov et al, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ji et al (US 2020/0281907) . In regards to claim 12, Ivkov et al does not teach wherein the FGFR inhibitor prevents FGFR from interacting or binding with one or more FGFs. Ji et al teaches a method of treating a subject in need thereof, wherein the FGFR inhibitor prevents FGFR from interacting or binding with one or more FGFs (paragraph [0006] : Inhibitors of FGFR are currently being developed for the treatment of cancer. For example, pemigatinib )( paragraph [0157] : Pemigatinib can be used in combination with one or more other kinase inhibitors for the treatment of diseases, such as cancer, that are impacted by multiple signaling pathways. For example, a combination can include one or more inhibitors of the following kinases for the treatment of cancer: … FGFR1, FGFR2, FGFR3, FGFR4 ) (paragraph [0002]: four FGFR proteins (FGFR1-4) that are capable of binding ligands )(paragraph [0003]: FGF ligands ). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method, of Ivkov et al, with wherein the FGFR inhibitor prevents FGFR from interacting or binding with one or more FGFs , as taught by Ji et al, as such will allow for treating cancer in a patient in need thereof (Abstract) as overexpression of FGF can lead to tumor development, progression, and resistance to conventional cancer therapies (paragraph [0003]). In regards to claim 13, Ivkov et al does not teach wherein the FGFR inhibitor blocks one or more FGF receptors (FGFR). Ji et al teaches a method of treating a subject in need thereof, wherein the FGFR inhibitor blocks one or more FGF receptors (FGFR) (paragraph [0006] : Inhibitors of FGFR are currently being developed for the treatment of cancer. For example, pemigatinib )( paragraph [0157] : Pemigatinib can be used in combination with one or more other kinase inhibitors for the treatment of diseases, such as cancer, that are impacted by multiple signaling pathways. For example, a combination can include one or more inhibitors of the following kinases for the treatment of cancer: … FGFR1, FGFR2, FGFR3, FGFR4 ). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method, of Ivkov et al, with wherein the FGFR inhibitor blocks one or more FGF receptors (FGFR) , as taught by Ji et al, as such will allow for treating cancer in a patient in need thereof (Abstract) as overexpression of FGF can lead to tumor development, progression, and resistance to conventional cancer therapies (paragraph [0003]). In regards to claim 14, Ivkov et al is silent about wherein the FGF is FGF-21, FGF-19, FGF-7, FGF-basic. Ji et al teaches a method of treating a subject in need thereof, wherein the FGF is FGF-19 (paragraph [0 005]: FGF19). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method, of Ivkov et al, with wherein the FGF is FGF-19 , as taught by Ji et al, as e ctopic expression of FGF - 19 in transgenic mice was shown to lead to tumor formation in the liver and a neutralizing antibody to FGF - 19 was found to inhibit tumor growth in mice (paragraph [0 005]) . In regards to claim 15, Ivkov et al is silent about wherein the FGFR is FGFR1, FGFR2, FGFR3, or FGFR4. Ji et al teaches a method of treating a subject in need thereof, wherein the FGFR is FGFR1, FGFR2, FGFR3, or FGFR4 (paragraph [0157] : FGFR1, FGFR2, FGFR3, FGFR4 ). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method, of Ivkov et al, with wherein the FGFR is FGFR1, FGFR2, FGFR3, or FGFR4 , as taught by Ji et al, as inhibition of these kinases will allow for the treatment of cancer (paragraph [0157] ). In regards to claim 16, Ivkov et al is silent about wherein the FGFR inhibitor can be one or more of the inhibitors of Table 1. Ji et al teaches a method of treating a subject in need thereof, wherein the FGFR inhibitor can be one or more of the inhibitors of Table 1 (paragraph [0006] : Inhibitors of FGFR are currently being developed for the treatment of cancer. For example, pemigatinib ) . It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method, of Ivkov et al, with wherein the FGFR inhibitor can be one or more of the inhibitors of Table 1 , as taught by Ji et al, as such will allow for treating cancer in a patient in need thereof (Abstract) as overexpression of FGF can lead to tumor development, progression, and resistance to conventional cancer therapies (paragraph [0003]). Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ivkov et al, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Palti (US 7,565,205) . In regards to claim 18, Ivkov et al is silent about wherein the frequency of the alternating electric field is between 50 kHz and 1 MHz. Palti teaches a method of treating a subject in need thereof, wherein the frequency of the alternating electric field is between 50 kHz and 1 MHz (column 11, lines 40-43: the electric fields that are used are alternating fields having frequencies that are in the range … from about 100 KHz to about 300 KHz ). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method, of Ivkov et al, with wherein the frequency of the alternating electric field is from about 100 KHz to about 300 KHz , as taught by Palti , which is in the claimed range of between 50 kHz and 1 MHz , as t hese type of electric fields are also referred to below as "TC fields", which is an abbreviation of "Tumor Curing electric fields", since these electric fields fall into an intermediate category (between high and low frequency ranges) that have bio-effective field properties while having no meaningful stimulatory and thermal effects , and t hese frequencies are sufficiently low so that the system behavior is determined by the system's Ohmic (conductive) properties but sufficiently high enough not to have any stimulation effect on excitable tissues (column 11, lines 43-52) . In regards to claim 19, Ivkov et al is silent about wherein the alternating electric field has a field strength of between 0.5 and 4 V/cm RMS. Palti teaches a method of treating a subject in need thereof, wherein the alternating electric field has a field strength of between 0.5 and 4 V/cm RMS (column 15, lines 51-53: The desired field strength in the tissue being treated is … between about 2 V/cm and 3 V/cm ). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method, of Ivkov et al, with wherein the alternating electric field has a field strength of between about 2 V/cm and 3 V/cm , as taught by Palti , which is in the claimed range of between 0.5 and 4 V/cm RMS , as such will cause the electric field to selectively damage cells that are undergoing cell division and l eave cells that are not undergoing cell division substantially unharmed (column 32, lines 39-44). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6, 8, and 17 are allowed over the prior art of record . Note: claim 17 is rejected under 35 USC 112(b). In regards to independent claim 6, the prior art of record does not disclose or render obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the combination of a method of increasing a cell’s sensitivity to alternating electric fields , as claimed, specifically including contacting one or more fibroblast growth factor (FGF) inhibitors or a fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors to the cell, thereby increasing the cell’s sensitivity to the alternating electric fields. Ivkov et al teaches a method (claim 19: A t herapeutic method ) comprising: applying alternating electric fields, at a frequency for a period of time, to a cell (claim 19: administering targeted thermotherapy to a target by supplying a bioprobe to the target and exposing the bioprobe to an alternating magnetic field (AMF ))( paragraph [0052]: an alternating magnetic field is accompanied by an alternating electric field )(paragraph [0047]: cells are exemplary targets ) contacting one or more fibroblast growth factor (FGF) inhibitors or a fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors to the cell (claim 19: administering at least one other therapy to the target )( claim 40: w herein the at least one other therapy comprises administering … Interferon -α)(Table III: Interferon -α… Inhibits FGF production )(paragraph [0047]: cells are exemplary targets ) However, Ivkov et al is silent about whether the method is specifically “a method of increasing a cell’s sensitivity to alternating electric fields ” and whether contacting one or more fibroblast growth factor (FGF) inhibitors or a fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors to the cell specifically results in “ thereby increasing the cell’s sensitivity to the alternating electric fields ”. Thus, independent claim 6 is allowed over the prior art of record . Dependent claims 8 and 17 are allowed over the prior art of record by virtue of being dependent upon independent claim 6. Note: claim 17 is rejected under 35 USC 112(b). Claim 10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. In regards to claim 10, the prior art of record does not disclose or render obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the combination of a method of treating a subject in need thereof, as claimed, specifically including wherein the FGF inhibitor blocks upregulation of FGF expression in response to alternating electric fields. Ivkov et al teaches wherein the FGF inhibitor blocks upregulation of FGF expression (Table III: Inhibits FGF production ) . However, Ivkov et al is silent about whether the FGF inhibitor blocks upregulation of FGF expression is specifically “ in response to alternating electric fields ”. Thus, claim 10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim 1. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT SHEFALI D PATEL whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-3645 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday-Friday 8:30am-4:30pm 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Kevin C Sirmons can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 272-4965 . 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. /SHEFALI D PATEL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783