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 .
DETAILED ACTION
1. This office action is in response to the filing of the application on February 02, 2024. Since the initial filing, no claims have been amended, added, or canceled. Therefore, claims 1-10 are pending in the application.
Specification Objections
2. The specification is objected to for the following informalities. Appropriate corrections are required. No new matter should be added.
(a) Inconsistent terminology: “outer circumferential surface” versus “outer circumference surface” ([0013], [0014], [0016], and [0025])
The surface on which the buttons are located is called the “outer circumferential surface” in [0013] and [0016] but the “outer circumference surface” in [0014]. The same inconsistency appears in claim 8. Consistent terminology, preferably “outer circumferential surface”, should be adopted throughout the specification and claims. A corresponding claim objection is set forth below.
(b) Inconsistent terminology: “mode button” versus “mode key” ([0035])
The mode selecting control is designated the “mode button 2” throughout the specification but is twice called the “mode key 2” in [0035], in the passage describing a mechanical toggle switch. The term “mode button” should be adopted consistently.
(c) Internally inconsistent description of the self-locking button ([0032] and [0033])
Paragraph [0032] introduces only two categories of button, namely “buttons without a self-locking mechanism” and “self-locking buttons with a rebound mechanism”. Paragraph [0033] then attributes the same press to lock and press again to release operation both to “the self-locking button with the rebound mechanism” and to “the self-locking button without the rebound mechanism”, and the latter category has no antecedent support in [0032]. The description should be corrected so that the modifier is used consistently and so that each category of button is introduced before it is relied upon.
(d) Grammatical informality ([0042])
In [0042], the phrase “the main control board 4 controls a motor for spraying water to work or not to spray water or not spray water” is grammatically incorrect and redundant, and should read, for example, “the main control board 4 controls a motor to spray water or to not spray water.”
Claim Interpretation - 35 USC § 112 – Sixth Paragraph/35 USC § 112(f)
3. 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.
4. 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.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Applying the foregoing, no claim limitation of claims 1-10 uses the term “means” or “step” or a generic placeholder therefor coupled with functional language and unmodified by sufficient structure. Accordingly, at present no claim is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objections
5. Claims 7 and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 7, the phrase “arranged at a same circumferential position” should read “arranged at the same circumferential position”.
Regarding claim 8, the phrase “the outer circumference surface” should read “the outer circumferential surface”, consistent with claim 7, claim 10, and the specification objection set forth above.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
6. 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.
7. Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the claim is directed to “An operating method of a water flosser, comprising a spot spraying mode and a pause mode”. A process claim must set forth the acts to be performed, but the claim recites two operating modes, which are states or conditions of a device rather than acts, and the body of the claim then recites what the water flosser does rather than what the user does, namely that the water flosser “does not perform water flossing by default after being powered on” and that an operation “enables the water flosser to perform the water flossing”. It therefore cannot be determined whether the claim is infringed by performing the recited operations in both modes, by performing them in either mode alone, or merely by providing a water flosser that is capable of operating in the two modes. A claim that recites a device together with the manner in which the device functions, without setting forth the steps that must be carried out, does not apprise a person of ordinary skill of the metes and bounds of the claimed process. For purposes of examination, claim 1 is interpreted as a method requiring performance of the recited operations in each of the spot spraying mode and the pause mode. Claims 2-5 depend from claim 1 and are rejected for the same reason.
Regarding claim 2, the claim recites that “continuously pressing or toggling” the button performs one function and that “releasing the pressing or toggling” of that button performs the opposite function. Toggling is described in the specification as the operation of a self-locking or toggle button that is activated by pressing and maintains its activated state even if released, being reset only by a further press ([0032] and [0033]). A toggled button therefore has no released state that reverses its function, and it is unclear how the recited release step is to be performed when the button is toggled rather than pressed. For purposes of examination, claim 2 is interpreted as reciting a momentary operation in which the recited function is performed while the button is held and is reversed when the button is released.
Regarding claim 4, the claim recites that “an operating logic of the same button is changed to be different from another operating logic before switching the operating mode”. The term “operating logic” is not defined in the claims or the specification, and it cannot be determined whether it refers to the physical response of the button, the function assigned to the button, the underlying control circuitry or program, or some combination of these. The recitation of “another operating logic” further leaves unclear whether a second, distinct operating logic is being positively recited or whether the phrase refers to the prior state of the same operating logic. For purposes of examination, “operating logic” is interpreted as the function that the water flosser performs in response to an operation of the button.
Regarding claim 6, the claim recites “A water flosser operating in accordance with the operating method according to claim 1.” The claim is directed to a product, a water flosser, but defines that product solely by reference to the method of claim 1 and recites no structure of the water flosser. It cannot be determined whether infringement requires only that a water flosser be constructed so as to be capable of carrying out the method of claim 1, or whether it further requires that the water flosser actually be operated in accordance with that method. A claim that is unclear as to whether it is directed to a product or to a process, and that recites a manner of operating a device without reciting the corresponding structure, does not set forth the metes and bounds of the claimed subject matter. For purposes of examination, claim 6 is interpreted as a product claim directed to a water flosser configured to perform the method of claim 1.
Claim 6 is further indefinite because it does not contain a transitional phrase. A transitional phrase, such as “comprising,” “consisting essentially of,” or “consisting of,” defines the scope of a claim with respect to what unrecited additional components or steps, if any, are excluded from the scope of the claim. Because claim 6 recites no transitional phrase, it cannot be determined whether the claimed water flosser is open to additional, unrecited components or is closed to them, which is a further reason that the metes and bounds of claim 6 cannot be determined. Applicant may amend claim 6 into independent form, reciting a transitional phrase together with the structure of the water flosser, or otherwise place the claim in a form that particularly points out and distinctly claims the subject matter regarded as the invention. Claims 7-10 depend from claim 6 and are rejected for the same reasons.
Any remaining claims are rejected as being dependent upon a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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.
9. Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luettgen et al. (US 2014/0272782 A1; hereinafter “Luettgen”) in view of Schepis (US 2014/0261534 A1; hereinafter “Schepis”).
Regarding claim 1, Luettgen discloses an operating method of a water flosser. Luettgen’s oral irrigator 100 comprises a base, a reservoir, and a handle, and may alternatively be embodied as a handheld irrigator with the reservoir and handle connected together (Luettgen [0034], [0037]). Luettgen further discloses a cleaning or normal mode and a massage mode that the user switches between by an input to one of the control actuators (Luettgen [0028], [0073]). Luettgen discloses the pause mode recited in claim 1 as follows:
(a) in the pause mode, the water flosser directly performs the water flossing by default after being powered on. An input to the power button (second control actuator 112) activates the oral irrigator, whereupon fluid is drawn from the reservoir and exits the tip, and the normal or clean mode is the default mode activated when the device is initially powered on (Luettgen [0068], [0070]);
(b) performing a first operation on a second button by the user enables the water flosser to pause the water flossing. A fourth control actuator 124 disposed on the handle acts to pause the device, and when the user hits it a valve within the handle reduces or substantially prevents fluid from exiting the tip (Luettgen [0045], [0072]); and
(c) performing a second operation on the second button by the user enables the water flosser to resume the water flossing, the pause actuator being described as temporarily stopping movement of the motor so that the interruption of the fluid flow is temporary (Luettgen [0072]).
Luettgen does not expressly disclose the spot spraying mode recited in claim 1, namely a mode in which the water flosser does not perform water flossing by default after being powered on, in which performing a first operation on a first button enables the water flosser to perform the water flossing, and in which performing a second operation on the first button enables the water flosser to pause the water flossing.
PNG
media_image1.png
1011
1268
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Luettgen, FIG. 1A (annotated). Power button 112 and mode button 113 are adjacent on base 102; pause actuator 124 is on handle 108.
However, Schepis teaches a hand-held water flosser, carrying an on-off button and an off/on button valve, that operates in the manner of the claimed spot spraying mode: the user depresses a button to make water flow and releases the button to stop the flow, directing the nozzle tip at the teeth, between the teeth, or at the gums and depressing the button to begin the flow (Schepis [0067], [0070]-[0071], claim 10). In Schepis, no water is dispensed by default, depressing the button enables the water flossing, and releasing the button pauses it.
PNG
media_image2.png
560
1027
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Schepis, Figure 5A (annotated). Button 19 is depressed to make water flow and released to stop the flow.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the oral irrigator of Luettgen with a further user selectable operating mode that operates as taught by Schepis, that is, a spot spraying mode in which no water is dispensed by default after power on, in which depressing a button starts the water flossing, and in which a second operation on that button pauses the water flossing, and to make that mode and Luettgen’s default on mode selectable through Luettgen’s mode button (third control actuator 113), in order to give the user the convenience of on demand spraying of individual teeth taught by Schepis while retaining the continuous flossing with a readily accessible pause that Luettgen provides. Luettgen already contemplates a plurality of user-selectable modes and multi-function control actuators (Luettgen [0043], [0046]), and Schepis shows that momentary, press to dispense control was a known and predictable manner of operating a water flosser. The combination applies a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield the predictable result of a water flosser offering both operating modes, with a reasonable expectation of success. The water flosser of Luettgen as so modified is referred to below as the modified operating method of Luettgen, or, where the apparatus claims are addressed, as the modified water flosser of Luettgen.
Regarding claim 2, and as set forth for claim 1, the modified operating method of Luettgen has, in the spot spraying mode, “continuously pressing or toggling” the first button enabling the water flosser to perform the water flossing and “releasing the pressing or toggling” of the first button enabling the water flosser to pause the water flossing, and has, in the pause mode, “continuously pressing or toggling” the second button enabling the water flosser to pause the water flossing and “releasing the pressing or toggling” of the second button enabling the water flosser to resume the water flossing, as recited in claim 2 and as that claim is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) above.
The momentary, press to dispense control taught by Schepis and incorporated into the modified operating method of Luettgen for the reasons given for claim 1 performs the water flossing while the button is continuously pressed and stops the water flossing when the button is released (Schepis [0067], [0070]- [0071]). In the pause mode, hitting the pause actuator closes a valve within the handle that reduces or substantially prevents fluid from exiting the tip, the interruption of the fluid flow being temporary (Luettgen [0045], [0072]).
Regarding claim 3, the modified operating method of Luettgen has a first button that is operated in the spot spraying mode to start and to pause the water flossing, as taught by Schepis and incorporated for the reasons given for claim 1, and a second button that is operated in the pause mode to pause and to resume the water flossing, namely the handle mounted fourth control actuator 124 of Luettgen (Luettgen [0045], [0072]).
The modified operating method of Luettgen does not expressly disclose that the first button and the second button are a same button, as recited in claim 3.
However, Luettgen teaches that a single control actuator may perform more than one function, the power button being able both to activate and to deactivate the oral irrigator and to select settings, and that any of the control actuators may be configured to activate a mode of the device (Luettgen [0043], [0046]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the single handle mounted pause actuator 124 of the modified operating method of Luettgen as both the first button operated in the spot spraying mode and the second button operated in the pause mode, that is, as a same button, in order to reduce the number of controls and to permit the user to start, stop, and pause the water flossing without changing grip, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 4, and as set forth for claims 1 and 3, the modified operating method of Luettgen has, when the operating mode is switched, “an operating logic of the same button” that is “changed to be different from another operating logic before switching the operating mode”, as recited in claim 4 and as that claim is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) above, “operating logic” being interpreted as the function that the water flosser performs in response to an operation of the button. The same button starts the water flossing when actuated in the spot spraying mode and pauses the water flossing when actuated in the pause mode, the effect of actuating a control actuator depending on the operating mode currently selected (Luettgen [0073]).
Regarding claim 5, and as set forth for claim 1, the modified operating method of Luettgen has the operating mode switched before or after the water flosser is powered on, as recited in claim 5. Luettgen discloses that the user selects the operating mode after the device has been powered on (Luettgen [0093]), which satisfies the second of the two alternatives recited in the claim.
In the alternative, and to the extent claim 5 is read to require that the operating mode also be selectable while the water flosser is unpowered, Luettgen further discloses that the control actuators may be provided as switches or sliders rather than momentary buttons (Luettgen [0041]), and a switch or a slider, unlike a momentary button, retains its set position while the device is off. It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the mode selecting control of the modified operating method of Luettgen as such a switch or slider, so that the operating mode may be selected either before or after the water flosser is powered on, this being an obvious design choice yielding predictable results, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 6, the modified operating method of Luettgen provides the water flosser itself, namely the oral irrigator comprising a base, a reservoir, and a handle (Luettgen [0034], [0037]). As interpreted above under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), claim 6 is directed to a water flosser configured to perform the method of claim 1, and the modified water flosser of Luettgen is so configured for the reasons given for claim 1. Claim 6 is therefore obvious over the combination.
10. Claims 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luettgen in view of Schepis, as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Thomas et al. (US 2008/0008979 A1; hereinafter “Thomas”).
Regarding claim 7, the modified water flosser of Luettgen has a power button, a mode button, and a pause button. The power button (second control actuator 112) is “configured to selectively power the oral irrigator 100” and may “activate and deactivate the oral irrigator 100” (Luettgen [0043]). The mode button (third control actuator 113) is configured to select the operating mode and is “positioned adjacent to the second control actuator 112” (Luettgen [0044]). The pause button (fourth control actuator 124) is disposed on the handle 108 and acts to pause the device (Luettgen [0045]). As set forth for claim 1, the mode button switches the water flosser between the spot spraying mode and the pause mode, and, as set forth for claim 3, the first button and the second button are the same pause button.
The modified water flosser of Luettgen does not expressly disclose that the power button and the mode button are arranged at a same circumferential position on an outer circumferential surface of the water flosser, as recited in claim 7.
However, Thomas teaches a handheld oral irrigator 10 comprising a handle portion 15 having a narrow gripping area 35 (Thomas [0048]), wherein “a control side of the gripping area 35 includes an on/off control 52, a pressure control 54” and a removable faceplate 56 that surrounds the locations of the two controls (Thomas [0052]). Thomas thus groups the two controls that configure the device together at a common circumferential position on the outer surface of the handheld body, within a single faceplate.
PNG
media_image3.png
918
934
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Thomas, Fig. 3 (annotated). On/off control 52 and pressure control 54 are grouped within faceplate 56 on one control side of gripping area 35.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange the adjacent power button and mode button of the modified water flosser of Luettgen at a same circumferential position on an outer circumferential surface of the water flosser, as taught by Thomas, in order to group, on a single control side, the controls that the user sets when beginning use, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 8, the modified water flosser of Luettgen has the power and mode controls 112, 113 and the pause control 124 located at different positions on the device, the former on the base and the latter on the handle (Luettgen [0043]), the power button 112 and the mode button 113 being provided as separate inputs to the controller 148 of the water flosser (Luettgen, FIG. 7D).
PNG
media_image4.png
683
1220
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Luettgen, FIG. 7D (rotated and annotated). Mode switch 113 and on/off switch 112 are separate inputs to controller 148.
The modified water flosser of Luettgen does not expressly disclose that both the power button and the mode button are located opposite to the pause button on the outer circumferential surface of the water flosser, as recited in claim 8.
However, Thomas teaches placing a further button on the side of the handheld body opposite the controls: the nozzle release button 25 “is located on the reservoir side opposite from the controls”, an arrangement that “helps limit accidental release of the nozzle 20 by accidental pressing” of that button when the user operates the controls (Thomas [0053]; see also Thomas, claim 29, reciting a nozzle disconnect button located on a side of the handle portion opposite the control). Thomas further teaches that the side of the gripping area opposite the controls carries the grip area 58 engaged by the user’s fingers (Thomas [0058]).
PNG
media_image5.png
979
910
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Thomas, Fig. 4 (annotated). Nozzle release button 25 and grip area 58 are on the side of handle portion 15 opposite the controls.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to locate the pause button of the modified water flosser of Luettgen on the outer circumferential surface opposite the power button and the mode button, as taught by Thomas, in order to separate the button that is repeatedly engaged during flossing from the controls that are set beforehand, so as to avoid inadvertent actuation of the power and mode buttons and to place the pause button on the finger side of the grip for one handed operation, with a reasonable expectation of success. In the alternative, such a placement is a rearrangement of known parts that does not modify their operation and would have been obvious.
Regarding claim 9, the modified water flosser of Luettgen has the pause button (fourth control actuator 124) disposed on the handle 108 and has the power button 112 and the mode button 113 disposed on the base 102 (Luettgen [0043], [0045]).
The modified water flosser of Luettgen does not expressly disclose that the pause button is arranged closer to an axial front end of the water flosser than the power button and the mode button, as recited in claim 9.
However, Thomas teaches that the handle portion 15 narrows from a wide base 30, which Thomas identifies as the proximal end of the irrigator, to the gripping area 35 and widens to a top 40, which Thomas identifies as the distal end, with the nozzle 20 extending from the top end (Thomas [0047]). Thomas locates the on/off control 52 and the pressure control 54 on the gripping area (Thomas [0052]) and locates the nozzle release button 25 “on the top of the handle portion 15” (Thomas [0047]), that is, closer to the distal end from which the nozzle extends than the two controls.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to position the pause button of the modified water flosser of Luettgen closer to an axial front end of the water flosser than the power button and the mode button, as taught by Thomas, so that the button operated by the forefinger during flossing lies nearer the water dispensing end while the controls set before use lie nearer the handheld end, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 10, the modified water flosser of Luettgen has the pause actuator 124 disposed on the handle 108 so that the user may more easily pause the oral irrigator while using it (Luettgen [0045]), and further has, for the reasons given for claims 7 and 9, a button of the handheld body located “on the top of the handle portion 15” as taught by Thomas (Thomas [0047]).
Claim 10 recites the pause button arranged on the outer circumferential surface of the water flosser or, in the alternative, on a top of a main body of the water flosser. Each alternative is met by the modified water flosser of Luettgen, Luettgen supplying the handle mounted actuator on the outer surface and Thomas supplying the top mounted button. Claim 10 is therefore obvious over the combination of Luettgen, Schepis, and Thomas relied upon for claim 7.
Conclusion
11. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. The following references were located during the search and are made of record, but are not applied in a rejection:
(a) Yu (US 11,648,098 B2) discloses a portable oral irrigator having a handheld body in which a push button assembly carrying several push buttons of different functions is grouped together on one side of the handle, opposite a curved anti-slip gripping portion, with indicator lights below the push button assembly. Yu is pertinent to the arrangement of the power button and the mode button at a same circumferential position and opposite the gripping surface, as recited in claims 7-9.
(b) Boyd et al. (US 8,808,209 B2) discloses a dental water jet handle carrying a pause button connected to a stop plunger received within the fluid conduit, wherein depressing the pause button halts the flow of fluid through the conduit to the nozzle tip. Boyd is pertinent to the momentary, press to pause control recited in claim 2 and to the location of the pause button on the handle recited in claim 10.
(c) Taylor et al. (US 10,022,207 B2) discloses an oral irrigator handle carrying a slide pause switch that is moved by the user between an irrigate position and a pause position, the switch mechanically rotating a valve spool to interrupt fluid flow and retaining its set position once moved. Taylor is pertinent to the pause operation recited in claim 2, to the use of a retaining switch rather than a momentary button recited in claim 5, and to the location of the pause control recited in claim 10.
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAVAUN L HARRIOTT whose email is jharriott@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Fri 9:00-6:00.
If attempts to reach the examiner are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, TIMOTHY A 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JAVAUN L HARRIOTT/
Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/TIMOTHY A STANIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights