DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the amendment filed 4/7/2026. As directed by the amendment, claims 1-13 have been amended and no claims have been cancelled or newly added. Thus, claims 1-13 are presenting pending in this application.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claims 1-3, 8, and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 7 recites, “an optical module provided on one side of the slide part to irradiate light onto a user’s body”; it is suggested to amend the claim to recite --configured to-- to make clear that the human body is not being claimed.
Claim 2, lines 6 recites, “the other side penetrating the lower slide housing”; it is suggested to amend the claim to recite --the other side of the roller assembly-- so that it is clear what element “the other side” refers to.
Claim 3, line 4 recites, “the other side”; it is suggested to amend the claim to recite --the other side of the lower slide housing-- so that it is clear what element “the other side” refers to.
Claim 8, line 3 recites, “the lower surface”; it is suggested to recite --a lower surface-- as it is the first time the limitation is being recited.
Claim 10, lines 2-4 recites, “the bottom surface”, “the edge”, “the center”, and “the inner side” of the diffusion plate; it is suggested to recite --a bottom surface--, --an edge--, --a center--, and --an inner side--, respectively, as it is the first time the limitations are being recited.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a body massage unit which massages at least a portion of a user’s body” in claim 1.
“an optical module . . . to irradiate light onto a user’s body” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim 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.
Claim(s) 8-11 is/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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 8, line 4 recites, “is exposed outside”; it is unclear what the limitation “outside” in reference to (e.g. what is the lower surface outside of?).
Claims 9-11 are rejected for being either directly or indirectly depending from a rejected claim base.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Section 33(a) of the America Invents Act reads as follows:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no patent may issue on a claim directed to or encompassing a human organism.
Claims 1-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 and section 33(a) of the America Invents Act as being directed to or encompassing a human organism. See also Animals - Patentability, 1077 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 24 (April 21, 1987) (indicating that human organisms are excluded from the scope of patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101).
The following claim(s) appear to positively recite part of the human body in combination with the structure of the claimed invention:
Claim 1, line 3, “a body massage unit which massages at least a portion of a user’s body”.
Claim 13, line 4, “wherein the light irradiation device irradiates light onto at least one of the scalp and the face of the user”.
Applicant needs to clearly state using inferential language (e.g. configured to, adapted to, etc.) so that the human anatomy is not claimed.
Claims 2-12 are rejected for being either directly or indirectly depending from a rejected claim base.
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.
(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.
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Goto (2009/0306555).
Regarding claim 1, Goto discloses a massage apparatus comprising: a body massage unit (1) (massaging apparatus) which massages at least a portion of a user's body (massaging apparatus (1) includes a massaging mechanism or a plurality of air bags constituting massaging units for massaging body parts of the user with physical pressing stimulus (para [0056]), including a massaging mechanism (30) for a backrest (para [0063])); and a light irradiation device coupled to the body massage unit (1) (para [0048]), the light irradiation device comprising: a mount part having a slide rail (rail, not shown through which caster (6a) is in contact with); a slide part (5) (hood) connected to the mount part and configured to slide along the slide rail (via caster (6a) (para [0050]); and an optical module (10) (light emitting device) provided on one side of the slide part (5) to irradiate light onto a user's body (para [0054]).
Regarding claim 2, Goto discloses the slide part (5) comprises: a lower slide housing (7) (inner shell member); an upper slide housing (6) (outer shell member) coupled to an upper portion of the lower slide housing (7) (para [0049]); and a roller assembly (6a) (caster) having one side coupled to the upper slide housing (6) and the other side penetrating the lower slide housing (7) (via rectangular hole (7a)) and connected to the slide rail (para [0050]).
Regarding claim 3, Goto discloses an optical module coupler (7b) (cut portion) into which the optical module (10) is inserted and coupled is provided on one side of the lower slide housing (7) (para [0055]), and a roller assembly through hole (7a) (rectangular hole) through which the roller assembly (6a) penetrates is provided on the other side (para [0050]).
Regarding claim 13, Goto discloses the light irradiation device (10) irradiates light onto at least one of the scalp and the face of the user while the slide part (5) slides along the slide rail (para [0054]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goto as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Marton et al (2017/0106249).
Regarding claim 4, Goto discloses a lower slide housing and an upper slide housing.
Goto does not disclose at least one first rigidity reinforcing rib is protrudingly formed on one side of the lower slide housing, and at least one second rigidity reinforcing rib is protrudingly formed on one side of the upper slide housing.
However, Marton teaches a massage device including a lower housing (120) (lower inner shell) (para [0045]) and an upper housing (200) (upper inner shell) (para [0048]), wherein at least one first rigidity reinforcing rib (602, 604) (first, second inner ribs on support frame) (fig 8, para [0068]) is protrudingly formed on one side (inner side) of the lower housing (120) (para [0068]), and at least one second rigidity reinforcing rib (370) (engagement ribs) is protrudingly formed on one side (inner side) of the upper housing (para [0059]), and wherein additional reinforcing ribs may be provide to the two shells (120, 200) (para [0076]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of modified Goto by providing at least one first rigidity reinforcing rib is protrudingly formed on one side of the lower slide housing, and at least one second rigidity reinforcing rib is protrudingly formed on one side of the upper slide housing as taught by Marton in order to support the components disposed in the housing (Marton, para [0069]), and to provide additional reinforcement to the housing (Marton, para [0076])
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goto as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Liang (2008/0077060).
Regarding claim 5, modified Goto discloses a roller assembly coupled to the upper slide housing
Modified Goto does not disclose the roller assembly comprises: a coupling panel coupled to the upper slide housing; side panels provided on both sides of the coupling panel in the width direction, and having at least one shaft protruding outwardly in the width direction; and a roller rotatably connected to the shaft and connected to the slide rail.
However, Liang teaches a massage device including a mechanism for sliding a kneading device (3) (para [0044]) along a rail (12) (para [0045]), and in fig 2 discloses the kneading device (3) includes a roller assembly (2) (elevating base) including a coupling panel (as shown in fig 2, elevating base (2) is U-shaped (para [0044]) and therefore includes a base connected to sidewalls) coupled to kneading device (3)) (para [0044]); side panels provided on both sides of the coupling panel in the width direction (l (as shown in fig 2, elevating base (2) is U-shaped (para [0044]) and therefore include a pair of side walls connected to the middle portion of the elevating base), and having at least one shaft protruding outwardly in the width direction; and a roller (21) rotatably connected to the shaft and connected to the slide rail (12) (as shown in fig 2, rollers (21) are shown to be connected to respective shafts extending outwardly from the side walls, and engaging the rails (12)) (para [0044])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to substitute the caster and rail sliding mechanism of Goto with a sliding mechanism including a pair of U-shaped slide rails, and a roller assembly comprising a coupling panel coupled to the upper slide housing; side panels provided on both sides of the coupling panel in the width direction, and having at least one shaft protruding outwardly in the width direction; and a roller rotatably connected to the shaft and connected to the slide rail as taught by Liang, as it would be a simple substitution of one known sliding mechanism for a massage device for another, and as a sliding mechanism comprising coupling panel, side panels, and a roller attached to the side panels is known in the art and it appears that the device of Goto would work equally well to allow the hood to slide using the mechanism taught by Liang. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goto and Liang as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of You et al (2024/0197558)
Regarding claim 6, modified Goto discloses the roller comprises: at least one first roller part (21 of Liang) (roller) provided on a lower portion of the side panel and arranged on the inside of the slide rail (as shown in fig 4, roller (21) is arranged within the U-shaped rail (12 of Liang)) (Liang, para [0044]).
Modified Goto does not disclose at least one second roller part provided on an upper portion of the side panel and arranged on the upper portion of the slide rail.
However, You teaches a massage device including a mechanism for sliding a massage module (1400) along a rail (130) (para [0121]), wherein the mechanism includes a roller assembly including a coupling panel (1410) (module body) coupled to a massage unit (1420) (para [0122]); side panels provided on both sides of the coupling panel in the width direction (as shown in fig 5, flat horizontal panel of carrier (1410) includes a pair of side panels extending downwardly and containing moving unit (1430), at least one first roller part (1431) (driving roller) provided on a first portion of a side panel and arranged on a first side of a slide rail (130) (para [0128]), and at least one second roller part (1432) (first support roller) provided on an opposite portion of the side panel and arranged on a second opposite side of the support rail (130) so that the rail (130) may be inserted into a gap between the first roller part (1431) and the second roller part (1432). (para 0132]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of modified Goto by providing at least one second roller part provided on an upper portion of the side panel and arranged on the upper portion of the slide rail so that the slide rail may be inserted into a gap between the first roller part and the second roller part as taught by You in order to allow the first roller part to be stably connected to the rail when the first roller part rotates (You, para [0131]).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goto as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Barolet et al (2005/0197681).
Regarding claim 8, Goto in figs 10-11 discloses the optical module comprises: a diffusion plate (62) (diffusion member) which is coupled to the lower slide housing (61) (para [0090]), and the lower surface of which penetrates the lower slide housing (61) and is exposed outside (para [0090]); a light-emitting module (66) (lighting source) which is provided inside the diffusion plate (62) and includes at least one light-emitting element (66b) (LED light); and a light-emitting module cover (66a) (casing) which is coupled to an upper portion of the diffusion plate (62) (para [0092]).
Goto does not disclose the light-emitting module a printed circuit board on which the light-emitting element is mounted.
However, Barolet teaches a device to provide light treatment to a user including a light-emitting module (154) (light source), wherein the light-emitting module (154) is a Chip on Board type including a light source (136) (LEDs) and a printed circuit board on which the light-emitting element is mounted (the electronic light generating component mounted directly on the mounting surface of a corresponding Printed Circuit Board (PCB)) (para [0117]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Goto by providing light emitting module with a printed circuit board on which the light-emitting element is mounted as taught by Barolet, as the use of an LED light emitting module including a printed circuit board on which the light-emitting element is mounted to form a Chip on Board light source is known in the art, and it appears that the device of modified Goto would perform equally well to provide LED light to a user if the light-emitting module includes a printed circuit board on which the light-emitting element is mounted. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goto and Barolet as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Bruto (2006/0265033).
Regarding claim 9, modified Goto discloses a light-emitting module cover.
Modified Goto does not disclose at least one heat dissipation slit is formed in the light-emitting module cover.
However, Bruto teaches a device to provide light therapy to a user including a light-emitting module cover (6) (box-type body), wherein the light emitting module cover (6) is provided with a plurality of slits or grids, which constitute openings for the dissipation of the heat developed during the operation of light-emitting elements (3a) (lamps) (para [0028]),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of modified Goto by providing at least one heat dissipation slit in the light-emitting module cover as taught by Bruto in order to provide openings for the dissipation of heat during operation of the light-emitting elements (Bruto, para [0028]).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goto and Barolet as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Ogasawara (2010/0152645).
Regarding claim 10, modified Goto discloses a diffusion plate.
Modified Goto does not disclose the bottom surface of the diffusion plate comprises an inclined surface which is inclined upwards from the edge of the diffusion plate towards the center of the inner side of the diffusion plate.
However, Ogasawara teaches a light treatment system including a diffusion plate (12) (diffusion lens), wherein an outer surface of the diffusion plate (12) comprises an inclined surface which is inclined upwards from the edge of the diffusion plate towards the center of the inner side of the diffusion plate (as shown in fig 1, diffusions lens (12) is concave and therefore an outer surface is inclined upwardly towards the center of the diffusion lens (12) (para [0121]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of modified Goto so that the bottom surface of the diffusion plate comprises an inclined surface which is inclined upwards from the edge of the diffusion plate towards the center of the inner side of the diffusion plate as taught by Ogasawara so that light can be irradiated onto an irradiation target such as a face in an appropriate size (Ogasawara, para [0121]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 11-12 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 and/or 35 U.S.C. 101, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement for reasons for allowance: The closest prior art of the record, Goto (2009/0306555), Liang (2008/0077060), and You et al (2024/0197558) disclose the limitations of claim 6, and Goto and Barolet et al (2005/0197681) discloses the limitations of claim 8. However, neither Goto, Liang, You et al, Barolet et al, nor the other prior art of record, disclose a roller assembly positioning member, which is arranged on the inside of the slide rail and presses against the inner surface of the slide rail, is provided on the lower portion of the side panel, and wherein a positioning hole is formed in the slide rail such that the roller assembly positioning member is inserted or separated from the positioning hole as the roller assembly slides as recited in claim 7; or a flexible printed circuit board connecting the printed circuit board and a control unit, wherein the flexible printed circuit board penetrates the lower slide housing and extends into the mount part as recited in claim 11.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1 and 13 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 12 of copending Application No. 18/386,856 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Regarding claim 1, application claim 1 differs from reference application claim 12 in the following respect:
Application claim 1
Reference application claim 1
A massage apparatus comprising:
(1) a body massage unit which massages at least a portion of a user's body; and
(2) a light irradiation device coupled to the body massage unit,
(3) the light irradiation device comprising:
(4) a mount part having a slide rail; a slide part connected to the mount part and configured to slide along the slide rail; and
(5) an optical module provided on one side of the slide part to irradiate light onto a user's body.
(3) 1. A light irradiation device comprises:
(4) a mount part having a slide rail; a slide part connected to the mount part and configured to slide along the slide rail; and
(5) an optical module provided on one side of the slide part to irradiate light onto a user's body.
12. A massage apparatus comprising:
(1) a body massage unit which massages at least a portion of a user's body; and
(2) a light irradiation device according claim 1, which is coupled to the body massage unit,
wherein the light irradiation device irradiates light onto at least one of the scalp and the face of the user while sliding.
Reference application claim 1 differs from application claim 12 in that reference application claim 12 discloses additional limitations, such as the light irradiation device irradiates light onto at least one of the scalp and the face of the user while sliding. Thus, application claim 1 is not patentably distinct because it is “anticipated” by claim 12 of the reference application.
Regarding claim 13, reference application claim 12 discloses the limitations of application claim 1.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Tseng et al (2015/0088041), Lee et al (2022/0324356), and Langseth (2,392,485) disclose chairs with light therapy devices and/or head covers, and Spivak (2007/0139930), Xie et al (2023/0271003), and Blanche et al (2022/0266056) disclose light therapy devices.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS Y SUL whose telephone number is (571)270-5260. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 am-5:30 pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, TIMOTHY STANIS can be reached at 571-272-5139. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DOUGLAS Y SUL/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights