The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 28, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues on pages 24-26 of the remarks dated July 28, 2026 that “The Examiner has not pointed to any portion of the cited references that discloses the particular combination of features recited in amended Claim 1.” The examiner agrees, because the claims as have changed, per the amendments. However, the examiner respectfully disagrees that the claims, as amended, read over the prior art, as is outlined in the updated rejections below.
It is noted that the invoking of 35 USC 112(f) in claim 1 for “a securement device” is now moot in view of the amendments. However, the invoking of “an attachment device” in claim 6 remains and is repeated below. Additionally, the previous rejection under 35 USC 112(b) is obviated in view of the amendments to the claims.
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.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
The following claim limitations have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (any paragraphs cited come from PGPUB 2024/0238604, representative of the specification of the instant application):
Claim 6
An attachment device… configured to secure the sensing electrode to the garment
This limitation utilizes the generic placeholder “device”, transitional phrase “configured to” and functional language “secure”. The preceding term “attachment” does not apply specific structure that performs the function.
The specification states the following in paragraph 165: “Referring again to FIG. 5A, in certain examples, the attachment device 504 is made of a flexible material, such as a fabric, Nylon, polymer, or flexible plastic, for example. The holder 502 may be made of a rigid or semi-rigid material.” And also, “In some examples, the holder 502 is made of a thermoplastic or polymer material. In other examples, the holder 502 is made from another type of plastic material or metal.” Paragraph 166 continues to describe the manner by which the attachment device is secured to the garment.
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 1-6, 9 and 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Freeman et al. (US Patent Pub. No. 2019/0298987) in view of Komoto et al. (US Patent Pub. No. 2017/0279230).
Regarding claim 1, Freeman discloses “a wearable cardiac monitoring and treatment device includes a garment, a plurality of ECG electrodes and a plurality of therapy electrodes supported by the garment” (see Abstract). Specifically, Freeman teaches an ambulatory cardiac device (see at least Figures 1, 4A-4B, 12A-12B and paragraph 160, “FIG. 1 illustrates an example medical device 100 that is external, ambulatory, and wearable by a patient”) for providing comfortable, long-term continuous cardiac monitoring and treatment for arrythmia conditions (note: this is intended use and not structurally limiting the device), the device comprising:
a sensing electrode assembly including a sensing electrode configured to detect electrocardiogram (ECG) signals of an ambulatory patient (see numerals 112 in Figure 1, 112a-d in Figures 4A and 12A-12B, 112b-c in Figure 15B, 112 in Figure 16sA-F; see paragraph 188, “plurality of sensing electrodes 112 (e.g., 112a-g)”; see paragraph 201, “the ECG sensing electrodes 112 can be disposed at various predetermined locations”)…;
a garment configured to be worn about the ambulatory patient’s thorax (see at least Figure 1 illustrating the garment of Freeman being worn around a patient’s thorax, note that paragraph 160 teaches that medical device 100 “is external, ambulatory, and wearable by a patient”);
a sensing electrode receptacle (see paragraph 192-197, “In examples, the garment 110 includes receptacles, such as pockets or compartments, for receiving one or more of the therapy electrodes 114 and sensing electrodes 112”) configured to
dispose, via the garment, the sensing electrode at a predetermined anatomical location on the ambulatory patient’s thorax (see paragraph 201, “the ECG sensing electrodes 112 can be disposed at various predetermined locations”; see at least Figures 1, 4A-4B and 12A-12B illustrating said predetermined location(s));
maintain, via the garment, contact between the sensing electrode and the predetermined anatomical location despite movement of the patient’s thorax (see paragraph 23, which states that Freeman teaches “a wearable cardiac monitoring and treatment device includes a garment configured to be worn about a torso of a patient for an extended period of time, a plurality of ECG sensing electrodes supported by the garment and configured to be in electrical contact with the patient”; also see paragraph 152, “These configurations, for example, prevent the sensors from excessive lateral movement, flipping over, or losing contact with the patient during wear”), wherein the sensing electrode receptable forms an opening in the garment (see the addition of Komoto below),
…
the sensing electrode, when the sensing electrode assembly is engaged with the sensing electrode receptable, is configured to detect the ECG signals of the ambulatory patient (see at least paragraph 163, “The sensing electrodes 112 can be configured to detect one or more cardiac signals such as ECG signals”)…; and
a plurality of removable therapy electrodes (see Figures 1, 4A-4B and 12A-12B; see paragraph 188, “FIGS. 4A and 4B are front and rear views respectively of a patient wearing an example garment 110. As shown, in this example, the plurality of therapy electrodes 114 (e.g., 114a-c)”, and note the teaching of receptacles in paragraphs 192-197, “the garment 110 includes receptacles, such as pockets or compartments, for receiving one or more of the therapy electrodes 114”) configured to deliver a treatment to the ambulatory patient in response to the ambulatory cardiac device detecting a cardiac arrhythmia condition indicated by the ECG signals (see at least paragraph 36, “The controller is configured to detect an arrhythmia condition of the patient based on the monitored ECG signal of the patient, and cause the therapy delivery circuit to deliver the one or more therapeutic pulses to the patient on detecting the arrhythmia condition.”).
It is noted that Freeman teaches that “the sensing electrodes 112 are assembled into the garment 110 or removably attached to the garment, using, for example, hook and loop fasteners, thermoform press fit receptacles, snaps, and magnets, among other restraints” (see paragraph 162). Figures 16A-F illustrate the use of button holes 2105, in which case there is a neck portion 2106 of the sensing electrode which fits tightly into the elasticized button holes (see paragraph 234-235). Freeman also teaches in paragraphs 192-197 that receptacles can be used to hold sensing electrode(s), which will allow them to be removable and replaceable (see paragraph 194, “The receiving receptacle or receptacles may be formed on or in the garment and may be sized to tautly hold the received electrical component. For example, the receiving receptacle or receptacles may be pockets formed of an elastomeric fabric or polymer that stretches to receive an electrical component and then contracts around the component to prevent dislodging”). However, the use of button holes and the specific receptacles of Freeman do not comprise the claimed “a base and a locking tab extending from the base”, nor the specifics of how the base and locking tab interacts with a tab opening of the claimed sensing electrode receptacle (i.e., lines 5-6 and lines 16-27 of claim 1), or that the sensing is “from the location through the opening in the garment” (see 4th-to-last line of claim 1).
Komoto teaches “a slide connector that is to be connected to a wearable device” (see paragraph 1). “Such a wearable device is electrically connected to a device like a measuring device … to be used to transmit detected information … . While the electrical connection can be established via a connector attached to a garment, the connection via a connector has to be disconnected, for example, when the wearable device is removed and when the garment is washed” (see paragraph 2). The slide connector of Komoto comprises
A module-side connector 31 (i.e., akin to a sensor that would be used to transmit detected information, as indicated in the quote above from paragraph 2) having a base (see the entirety of the module-side connector 31) and a locking tab extending from the base (see numerals 34, best illustrated in Figure 11 which shows a bottom view), and
the sensing electrode receptacle (see garment-side connector portion 11 in Figure 1 and frame member 16 in Figures 6-7, and specifically see elements 16 and 15 in Figure 8 which create a sandwich around garment C) comprises a tab opening (see notches 19 in Figures 6-7) configured to receive the locking tab extending from the base of the sensing electrode assembly (see Figure 15 and paragraphs 69-71),
receiving the locking tab into the tab opening (see Figure 15 and paragraphs 69-71), and rotating the sensing electrode assembly with respect to the sensing electrode receptable (see paragraphs 69-74 and Figures 13, 15, 17 and 19), causes the sensing electrode assembly to (a) engage with the sensing electrode receptable, thereby inhibiting movement of the sensing electrode separate from the sensing electrode receptacle (see paragraphs 69-74 and Figures 13, 15, 17 and 19), and (b) remain aligned with the opening in the garment (see paragraphs 69-74 and Figures 13, 15, 17 and 19), and positioned at the predetermined anatomical location (see paragraph 23 and paragraph 152 of Freeman, “These configurations, for example, prevent the sensors from excessive lateral movement, flipping over, or losing contact with the patient during wear”), during movement of the ambulatory patient’s thorax while the ambulatory patient is wearing the garment (see paragraph 23 and 152 of Freeman),
Also, it is noted that Freeman in combination with the receptacle taught by Komoto reads on the sensing from the location through the opening in the garment (see Figure 8 and paragraph 54, “The cloth C is preliminarily provided with an opening portion 23 in a similar size to the opening portion 17 of the frame member 16”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to utilize the electrode slide connector, as taught by Komoto, within the system and methods of Freeman because Freeman teaches that “the sensing electrodes 112 are assembled into the garment 110 or removably attached to the garment, using, for example, hook and loop fasteners, thermoform press fit receptacles, snaps, and magnets, among other restraints”. Therefore, Freemen teaches removably attachable sensing electrodes including multiple connection means “among other restraints”, and rotational locking connectors having the claimed features are well known in the art for electrode connectors within garments as taught by Komoto; accordingly, thus the use of either one to perform the method taught by Freeman would amount to choosing from a finite number of electrode connector mechanisms available in the art at the time of the invention, which has previously been held as unpatentable (KSR v. Teleflex).
Regarding claim 2, Komoto teaches a securement device that includes a first annular holder (see numeral 16 in Figure 8) at least partially surrounding the opening (see opening in garment C within Figure 8).
Regarding claim 3, Komoto teaches notches 19 and corresponding locking surfaces 20 within the holder (see Figures 6-7), as well as step 25 (which is another groove), which therefore teaches a plurality of grooves as claimed, and within which “the portions to be locked 34 correspond to the locking portions 14 of the garment-side connector portion 11 and also to the notches 19” (see paragraph 61-62 and Figure 11), where “the portions to be locked 34” are on the housing of the electrode housing 31 itself.
Regarding claim 4, it can be seen in Figure 8 of Komoto that there is a first annular holder portion 16 located on a top side (i.e., a side facing away from the patient) and a second annular holder portion 15 located on a bottom side (i.e., a side facing the patient). Both of these annular holder portions fully surround the opening in the garment.
Regarding claim 5, Freeman teaches that “the embodiment of the device 100 of FIG. 12A includes a plurality of soft-molded mounting pods 113a-h (collectively 113) configured to receive the plurality of sensing electrodes 112 and therapy electrodes 114… The soft-molded mounting pods 113 may be manufactured of a flexible thermoform material for holding an inserted element securely in tension on or within the garment 110” (see paragraph 223). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use a thermoplastic as the specific thermoform material, as thermoplastics are flexible and provide for the requirements described by Freeman in paragraph 223.
Regarding claim 6, while Komoto does not explicitly teach how the garment-side connector portion 11 is attached to the cloth C (see Figure 8 of Komoto), Freeman teaches that “The mounting pods 113 may be sewn, glued, or welded to the garment 110 of the device 100” (see paragraph 223 of Freeman).
PNG
media_image1.png
509
736
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Freeman teaches the configuration of the garment as claimed, as illustrated in the annotated reproduction of Figure 12A to the right.
Regarding claim 12, it is noted that Figure 12A of Freeman (illustrated immediately above) clearly illustrates “a cabling harness coupled to the plurality of sensing electrodes, the cabling harness including at least one wire electrically connected to each respective sensing electrode”, as claimed. Also see paragraph 228 which mentions “Concealing the wire 121 and/or routing the wire 121 elsewhere other than against the skin of the patient improves comfort during the prescribed duration of wear. In implementations, the garment 110 includes one or more wire compartments and/or retention loops for routing one or more wire or wires 121”.
Regarding claim 13, it is noted that Komoto teaches that the frame member 16 includes a plurality of fitting holes 21,22 that correspond to external connection portions 13 (see Figures 4 and 5A), which are shown in Figure 8 as connecting to wiring within the cloth C. As such, Komoto teaches a cable guide, as the cables in Komoto are the combination of connectors 13 and wiring 24, which are guided by the fitting holes and the general configuration of the device as shown in Figures 3-8.
Regarding claim 14, Freeman teaches that “In some examples, at least some of the components of the medical device 100 can be configured to be affixed to the garment 110 (or in some examples, permanently secured into the garment 110), which can be worn about the patient's torso. Additional implementations of sensing electrode arrangements and therapy electrode arrangements on a patient-worn medical device are provided herein in subsequent sections” (see paragraph 161). Additionally, Freeman teaches that “In some implementations, the sensing electrodes 112 can be a permanent portion of the garment 110” and “the therapy electrodes 114 can be a permanent portion of the garment 110” (see paragraph 162). Additionally, “In embodiments, the sensing electrodes 112 are assembled into the garment 110 or removably attached to the garment” (see paragraph 161), and “In these examples components of the device, such as the sensing electrodes 112 and therapy electrodes 114, are removably disposed on the garment 110 at selective positions of engagement” (see paragraph 264). As such, Freeman contemplates both permanently affixed and removable sensing electrodes, and therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application that to provide one (i.e., permanent), the other (i.e., removable), or a combination of both (i.e., any combination of permanent and removable) sensing electrodes as deemed necessary or desirable by one of ordinary skill in the art, as such a modification amounts to substitution of known equivalents to yield predictable results (KSR v. Teleflex).
Regarding claim 15, Freeman teaches that “In some implementations, the therapy electrodes 114 and sensing electrodes 112 are supported between layers of the garment 110, for example, by stitching the layers around the edges of the therapy electrodes 114 or sensing electrodes 112” (see paragraph 188).
Regarding claim 16, Freeman teaches that “In examples, the garment 110 includes receptacles, such as pockets or compartments, for receiving one or more of the therapy electrodes 114 and sensing electrodes 112” (see paragraph 192).
Regarding claim 17, Freeman teaches “The medical device 100 can include one or more of the following: a garment 110, one or more sensing electrodes 112 (e.g., ECG sensing electrodes) configured to be in electrical contact with the patient” (see paragraph 161, emphasis added). Additionally, Freeman teaches that “some embodiments, such as that of FIG. 18, the device 100 includes a garment 110 comprised of or including compartments 152, 153 configured to receive one or more components, such as the sensing electrodes 112… the compartments 152, 153 include one or more conductive resealable closures 104, such as a snap. The one or more resealable closures 104 mate with the component, such as the sensing electrode 112 of FIG. 18C, received in the compartment 152, 153. The one or more resealable closures 104 simultaneously fasten the sensing electrode 112 to the garment 110 and completes an electrical circuit” (see paragraph 240). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application that this compartment illustrated in Figure 18C housing a sensing electrode would comprise an additional opening that allows the sensing electrode to “be in electrical contact with the patient” (see paragraph 161), because if this did not occur then it would not result in the stated garment 100 described in paragraph 161. In paragraph 229, Freeman also teaches that in another embodiment with a sensing electrode enclosure, “the sensing electrode 112, for example an ECG sensing electrode, is configured to be held in a resealable compartment 152 and pressed through an aperture 105, or opening, in the garment 110 to contact the skin of the patient.”
Regarding claim 18, Freeman teaches that “receiving receptacle or receptacles may be pockets formed of an elastomeric fabric or polymer that stretches to receive an electrical component and then contracts around the component to prevent dislodging” (see paragraph 194).
Regarding claim 19, Freeman teaches that “some embodiments, such as that of FIG. 18, the device 100 includes a garment 110 comprised of or including compartments 152, 153 configured to receive one or more components, such as the sensing electrodes 112… the compartments 152, 153 include one or more conductive resealable closures 104, such as a snap. The one or more resealable closures 104 mate with the component, such as the sensing electrode 112 of FIG. 18C, received in the compartment 152, 153. The one or more resealable closures 104 simultaneously fasten the sensing electrode 112 to the garment 110 and completes an electrical circuit” (see paragraph 240).
Regarding claim 20, Freeman teaches that “In some examples, the receiving receptacle or receptacles are shells formed of a polymer and sized and shaped to receive an electrical component in only one direction and orientation. The formed receptacle may include one or more features for accommodating orienting features on the surface of the electrical component, such a surface bevel or a protruding electrical connector” (see paragraph 197). These protruding electrical connectors are illustrated as numerals 5012a and 5012b in Figures 41A and 41B, respectively. This reads on “at least one protrusion formed on an interior of the pouch at an end of the pouch opposing the first opening, the at least one protrusion configured to engage the respective sensing electrode to secure the respective sensing electrode within the pouch.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Freeman in view of Komoto as applied to claim 9 above, further in view of Divinksy et al. (WO 2019/159009).
Freeman in combination with Komoto is described above with respect to claim 6. However, it is noted that neither Freeman nor Komoto teaches an attachment device made of fabric.
Divinsky teaches a garment that includes a sensor attachment portion including a sensor mount configured to receive and retain a sensor therein (see Abstract). “FIG. 18 shows a top view of a portion of the sensor attachment portion 1750. The sensor attachment portion 1750 is surrounded by a multi-layered structure including a first fabric layer 1800, a second fabric layer 1810, a flexible printed circuit board 1820, an elastic polymer sheet 1830, a third fabric layer 1840, and a fourth fabric layer 1850” (see paragraph 55).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use fabric located at the outer perimeter of a sensor or electrode holder/mount, as taught by Divinsky, within the system and methods of Freeman with Komoto to add additional securing measures to ensure the electrodes remain securely on the garment and in contact with the patient (see Title of Divinsky).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Freeman in view of Komoto as applied to claim 9 above, further in view of Skeros et a. (CN 205163920 U).
Freeman in combination with Komoto is described above with respect to claim 1. Freeman teaches “the device 100 includes relational numbering for pairing electronic components (e.g., sensing electrodes 112, therapy electrodes 114, and connection pod 130, among others) with associated soft-molded mounting pods 113. The patient assembles the device 100 from left to right in numbered order” (see paragraph 223), and also that “The wire interface 2104 of the electrode 112 may be color coded to assist with identifying a similarly color coded button hole on the garment 110” (see paragraph 233).
However, in order to further prosecution, Skeros teaches a vest-type garment and electrode assembly (see Abstract and Figures 1-4). “In one embodiment, as the example mark, the side of four hook-and-loop fastener fitting 106 on 114 are color-coded red, yellow, green and blue. guiding patient sensing electrode such as energy transmitting device may use hook-and-loop fastener fitting various colours 114 to match the corresponding color of a cardiac sensor, as shown in FIG. 2B” (see page 5, the first paragraph starting with the number “100”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use color-coding of mounting members to electrode pairs, as taught by Skeros, in place of or in addition to the number-coding taught by Freeman, thereby removing the need for the patient to “assemble the device 100 from left to right in numbered order” and provide more ease of use.
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Freeman in view of Komoto as applied to claim 9 above, further in view of Itagaki et al. (WO 2021/177171).
Freeman in combination with Komoto is described above with respect to claim 9. However, there is no teaching of a flap in either of these references as required by claim 10.
Itagaki teaches a biosignal monitoring wearable item (see Abstract and Title) which is a vest type garment (see Figure 1). “As shown in FIG. 4, the front body 31 includes a cloth mount 38 to which the conduction unit 10 is attached, a unit cover 39 that covers the conduction unit 10, and a fixing portion 41” (see page 7, last paragraph). In Itagaki, the cloth mount 38 connects to the conduction unit 10, to which the electrodes are connected. As seen in Figure 5, the conduction unit 10 is covered by the unit cover 39, which reads on the claimed “belt flap”, and within which “electrode connector hole 58 exposes the electrode connector 2b from the unit cover 39” (see page 9, second full paragraph beginning “The electrode connector holes 57-59…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to provide a unit cover (i.e., flap), as taught by Itagaki, within the system and methods of Freeman as combined with Komoto in order to provide additional protection from electrical components (see page 9, paragraph beginning “FIG. 5 is a diagram…”).
PNG
media_image2.png
707
790
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, it is re-iterated that Itagaki teaches “a unit cover 39 that covers the conduction unit 10” (see page 7, last paragraph; see rejection of claim 10 immediately above). Specifically, it is noted that the purpose of this unit cover (i.e., a covering component) is to cover the electrical components that provide connectivity to the electrodes. In a first interpretation of the claim and prior art, the flap of Itagaki reads on the claimed subject matter of claim 11, because based on the reproduced Figure 12A of Freeman above, the corresponding locations of the Itagaki garment would be as shown to the left. However, in the event that the applicant disagrees with this characterization and application of Itagaki, then it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to provide either a single larger unit cover 39 when Itagaki is combined with the teachings of Freeman, or to provide additional unit cover(s) 39, because Freeman includes additional electrodes on an upper body portion of its garment, to which electrical connectivity will be required. When additional electrodes and connectivity are required by Freeman in this way, then the teaching of the unit cover 39 of Itagaki would make it obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the benefit of covering the electrical components anywhere/everywhere the additional electrodes are located, including on the body region, the shoulder portion(s) the side portion(s), or any other location of electrodes, to provide the same benefits to those electrodes and locations as is provided to the region expressly illustrated and taught by Itagaki.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES KISH whose telephone number is (571)272-5554. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00a - 6p 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, Unsu Jung can be reached at (571) 272-8506. 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.
/JAMES KISH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792
