DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
This Office Action has been issued in response to amendment filed 03/11/2026. Applicant's arguments have been carefully and fully considered; and they are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made. Accordingly, this action has been made FINAL.
Claim Status
Claims 1, 16, and 28 -29 have been amended. Claims 1-16 and 28-31 remain pending and are ready for examination.
Claim Objections
Claim 28 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding Claim 28, line 8 recites “the threshold” which should be “the new threshold sensor value”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
Claim(s) 1-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donofrio et al. (US20070179739A1 -hereinafter Donofrio) in view of Kelly et al. (US20210389342A1 -hereinafter Kelly) in view of Stockdale et al. (US20190209258A1 -hereinafter Stockdale).
Regarding Claim 1, Donofrio teaches a surgical implant, comprising:
an accelerometer; (see [0044]; Donofrio: “An accelerometer can be utilized to detect vibrations.”)
a sensor; (see [0043]; Donofrio: “It is contemplated that the implantable pedometer 100 may use a variety of sensors”)
a processor, the processor configured to: receive a first accelerometer value from the accelerometer based on a movement of the surgical implant; (see [0044]; Donofrio: “the sensor 110 is an acoustic sensor. Thus, the sensor 110 is configured for detecting sounds and acoustic waves indicative of using the hip implant 30 such as walking. It is fully contemplated that the acoustic sensor may be an accelerometer. An accelerometer can be utilized to detect vibrations. In relation to acoustic sounds and waves detected, it is contemplated that the vibrations detected by an accelerometer may be a result of the acoustic emissions, the producing cause of the acoustic emissions, or the acoustic emissions themselves. Each time the sensor 110 detects a sound or wave indicating use of the hip implant 30, it sends a signal to the signal processor 120.”)
determine a type of movement of the surgical implant based on the first accelerometer value… (see [0068]; Donofrio: “by utilizing an accelerometer or gyroscope for the sensor 410 to measure implant usage the type of motion detected may be indicative of a certain type of movement such as walking, running, swaying side-to-side, riding a bicycle, or swimming.”)
However, Donofrio does not explicitly teach: determine a type of movement… based on the first accelerometer value exceeding a threshold, wherein the threshold is adjusted for different types of movements; and adjust power to the sensor based on the determined type of movement of the surgical implant.
Kelly from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches determine a type of movement …based on the first accelerometer value exceeding a threshold (see [0007]; Kelly: “The apparatus and method receive acceleration data from an accelerometer (or other motion data from a motion sensor) that is carried by a user. The data is divided into a sequence of epochs and a determination is made as to whether the user is walking within each epoch.” See [0068]: “If the RMS amplitude is greater than the threshold value, the process continues to step 455 where the walking determination unit 106-2-3 determines that the current epoch corresponds to walking.”), wherein the threshold is adjusted for different types of movements; (see [0104]; Kelly: “In the above embodiments, the device was configured to determine periods of walking of the user. By adjusting the thresholds and other parameters used (e.g. using a higher threshold for magnitude of acceleration, and shorter expected step/stride periods), the device could be configured to detect periods of running.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Donofrio to include Kelly’s features of determining a type of movement based on the first accelerometer value exceeding a threshold, wherein the threshold is adjusted for different types of movements. Doing so would determine the correct amount of activity of a user. (Kelly, [0002])
However, it does not explicitly teach: and adjust power to the sensor based on the determined type of movement of the surgical implant.
Stockdale from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches and adjust power to the sensor based on the determined type of movement of the surgical implant. (see [0091]; Stockdale: “when sensor 62 detects movement or motion, signals from sensor 62 are used to change the state of tracking device 44 from an asleep-mode, wherein all or some of the electronic components of tracking device 44 are turned off or placed on reduced power consumption to conserve power, to an awake-mode” See [0046]: “medical devices 14 may include a medical implant 18.”) [That is, tracking device 44 reads on ‘the sensor’]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Donofrio and Kelly to include Stockdale’s features of adjusting power to the sensor based on the determined type of movement of the surgical implant. Doing so would improve the efficiency of medical procedures and saves time, money and potentially lives. (Stockdale, [0014] and [0032])
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, Stockdale further teaches wherein the sensor is powered off during a first movement. (see [0091]; Stockdale: “wherein all or some of the electronic components of tracking device 44 are turned off”)
The same motivation to combine Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale a set forth for Claim 1 equally applies to Claim 2.
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale teaches all the limitations of claim 2 above, Stockdale further teaches wherein the sensor is powered on during a second movement. (see [0091]; Stockdale: “In one arrangement, when sensor 62 detects movement or motion, signals from sensor 62 are used to change the state of tracking device 44 from an asleep-mode, wherein all or some of the electronic components of tracking device 44 are turned off or placed on reduced power consumption to conserve power, to an awake-mode, wherein all or some of the electronic components of tracking device 44 are turned on or placed on full power so as to facilitate functioning of the tracking device 44.”)
The same motivation to combine Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale a set forth for Claim 1 equally applies to Claim 3.
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, Stockdale further teaches wherein sensor processing is off during a first movement. (see [0091]; Stockdale: “In one arrangement, when sensor 62 detects movement or motion, signals from sensor 62 are used to change the state of tracking device 44 from an asleep-mode, wherein all or some of the electronic components of tracking device 44 are turned off or placed on reduced power consumption to conserve power, to an awake-mode, wherein all or some of the electronic components of tracking device 44 are turned on or placed on full power so as to facilitate functioning of the tracking device 44.”)
The same motivation to combine Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale a set forth for Claim 1 equally applies to Claim 4.
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale teaches all the limitations of claim 4 above, Stockdale further teaches wherein sensor processing is on during a second movement. (see [0091]; Stockdale: “In one arrangement, when sensor 62 detects movement or motion, signals from sensor 62 are used to change the state of tracking device 44 from an asleep-mode, wherein all or some of the electronic components of tracking device 44 are turned off or placed on reduced power consumption to conserve power, to an awake-mode, wherein all or some of the electronic components of tracking device 44 are turned on or placed on full power so as to facilitate functioning of the tracking device 44.”)
The same motivation to combine Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale a set forth for Claim 1 equally applies to Claim 5.
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale teaches wherein the sensor is multiple sensors. (see [0091]; Stockdale: “tracking device 44 includes one or more sensors 62. Sensors 62 are formed of any suitable size, shape and design and is configured to sense states or environmental conditions applicable to tracking device 44.”)
The same motivation to combine Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale a set forth for Claim 1 equally applies to Claim 6.
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, Donofrio further teaches wherein the sensor is at least one of a temperature sensor, a load sensor, and a gyroscope. (see [0043]; Donofrio: “a gyroscope”)
Stockdale further teaches wherein the sensor is at least one of a temperature sensor (see [0091]: Stockdale: “a temperature sensor,”),
The same motivation to combine Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale a set forth for Claim 1 equally applies to Claim 7.
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, Stockdale further teaches wherein in a first movement the sensor is deactivated. (see [0091]; Stockdale: “wherein all or some of the electronic components of tracking device 44 are turned off”)
The same motivation to combine Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale a set forth for Claim 1 equally applies to Claim 8.
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale teaches all the limitations of claim 8 above, Stockdale further teaches wherein in a second movement the sensor is activated. (see [0091]; Stockdale: “In one arrangement, when sensor 62 detects movement or motion, signals from sensor 62 are used to change the state of tracking device 44 from an asleep-mode, wherein all or some of the electronic components of tracking device 44 are turned off or placed on reduced power consumption to conserve power, to an awake-mode, wherein all or some of the electronic components of tracking device 44 are turned on or placed on full power so as to facilitate functioning of the tracking device 44.”)
The same motivation to combine Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale a set forth for Claim 1 equally applies to Claim 9.
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, Donofrio further teaches wherein the determined type of movement is walking. (see [0068]; Donofrio: “by utilizing an accelerometer or gyroscope for the sensor 410 to measure implant usage the type of motion detected may be indicative of a certain type of movement such as walking, running, swaying side-to-side, riding a bicycle, or swimming.”)
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, Donofrio further teaches wherein the determined type of movement is at least one of ascending stairs, descending stairs, changing position between horizontal and vertical, and aerobic activity. (see [0068]; Donofrio: “by utilizing an accelerometer or gyroscope for the sensor 410 to measure implant usage the type of motion detected may be indicative of a certain type of movement such as walking, running, swaying side-to-side, riding a bicycle, or swimming.”)
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, Donofrio further teaches wherein the surgical implant is a knee implant. (see [0002]; Donofrio: “The invention may have particularly useful application to joint prostheses including hip, knee, shoulder, ankle, wrist, jaw, and spinal prostheses”)
Regarding Claim 13, the combination of Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, Donofrio further teaches wherein the surgical implant is a shoulder implant. (see [0002]; Donofrio: “The invention may have particularly useful application to joint prostheses including hip, knee, shoulder, ankle, wrist, jaw, and spinal prostheses”)
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, Donofrio further teaches wherein the surgical implant is a spine implant. (see [0002]; Donofrio: “The invention may have particularly useful application to joint prostheses including hip, knee, shoulder, ankle, wrist, jaw, and spinal prostheses”)
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, Donofrio further teaches wherein the surgical implant is a hip implant. (see [0002]; Donofrio: “The invention may have particularly useful application to joint prostheses including hip, knee, shoulder, ankle, wrist, jaw, and spinal prostheses”)
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donofrio et al. (US20070179739A1 -hereinafter Donofrio) in view of Kelly et al. (US20210389342A1 -hereinafter Kelly) in view of Stockdale et al. (US20190209258A1 -hereinafter Stockdale) in view of Brownhill et al. (US20200297244A1 -hereinafter Brownhill).
Regarding Claim 16, Donofrio teaches:
A method for measuring movement of an implant via a measurement device (see [0002]; Donofrio: “The present invention relates to instrumentation and methods for measuring the amount of use of a joint in a skeletal system. The invention is useful as applied to natural joints and artificial implants.”), the method comprising:
receiving, via at least one processor, a first accelerometer value from a first sensor, (see [0044]; Donofrio: “the sensor 110 is an acoustic sensor. Thus, the sensor 110 is configured for detecting sounds and acoustic waves indicative of using the hip implant 30 such as walking. It is fully contemplated that the acoustic sensor may be an accelerometer. An accelerometer can be utilized to detect vibrations. In relation to acoustic sounds and waves detected, it is contemplated that the vibrations detected by an accelerometer may be a result of the acoustic emissions, the producing cause of the acoustic emissions, or the acoustic emissions themselves. Each time the sensor 110 detects a sound or wave indicating use of the hip implant 30, it sends a signal to the signal processor 120.”)
However, Donofrio does not explicitly teach: wherein the measurement device is coupled to a musculoskeletal system of a patient; determining a patient movement based on the first accelerometer value exceeding a threshold, wherein the threshold is adjusted for different types of movements; and adjusting power supplied to a second sensor based on the determined patient movement.
Kelly from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches determining a patient movement based on the first accelerometer value exceeding a threshold (see [0007]; Kelly: “The apparatus and method receive acceleration data from an accelerometer (or other motion data from a motion sensor) that is carried by a user. The data is divided into a sequence of epochs and a determination is made as to whether the user is walking within each epoch.” See [0068]: “If the RMS amplitude is greater than the threshold value, the process continues to step 455 where the walking determination unit 106-2-3 determines that the current epoch corresponds to walking.”), wherein the threshold is adjusted for different types of movements; (see [0104]; Kelly: “In the above embodiments, the device was configured to determine periods of walking of the user. By adjusting the thresholds and other parameters used (e.g. using a higher threshold for magnitude of acceleration, and shorter expected step/stride periods), the device could be configured to detect periods of running.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Donofrio to include Kelly’s features of determining a type of movement based on the first accelerometer value exceeding a threshold, wherein the threshold is adjusted for different types of movements. Doing so would determine the correct amount of activity of a user. (Kelly, [0002])
However, it does not explicitly teach: wherein the measurement device is coupled to a musculoskeletal system of a patient; and adjusting power supplied to a second sensor based on the determined patient movement.
Stockdale from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches adjusting power supplied to a second sensor based on the determined patient movement. (see [0091]; Stockdale: “when sensor 62 detects movement or motion, signals from sensor 62 are used to change the state of tracking device 44 from an asleep-mode, wherein all or some of the electronic components of tracking device 44 are turned off or placed on reduced power consumption to conserve power, to an awake-mode” See [0046]: “medical devices 14 may include a medical implant 18.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Donofrio and Kelly to include Stockdale’s features of adjusting power supplied to a second sensor based on the determined patient movement. Doing so would improve the efficiency of medical procedures and saves time, money and potentially lives. (Stockdale, [0014] and [0032])
However, it does not explicitly teach: wherein the measurement device is coupled to a musculoskeletal system of a patient;
Brownhill from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the measurement device is coupled to a musculoskeletal system of a patient; (see Abstract; Brownhill: “A sensing insert device (100) is disclosed for measuring a parameter of the muscular-skeletal system.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Donofrio, Kelly, and Stockdale to include Brownhill’s features of the measurement device is coupled to a musculoskeletal system of a patient. Doing so would assure accurate measurement of the applied load, force, pressure, or displacement. (Brownhill, [0045])
Claim(s) 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donofrio et al. (US20070179739A1 -hereinafter Donofrio) in view of Kelly et al. (US20210389342A1 -hereinafter Kelly) in view of Janna (US11937896B1 -hereinafter Janna).
Regarding Claim 28, Donofrio teaches a method of determining a movement of a patient, the method comprising:
determining a threshold sensor value of a first sensor associated with a first movement type using one or more prior patient datasets; (see [0044]; Donofrio: “It is contemplated that the patient may be instructed through a series of movements such as walking, climbing stairs, or cycling with the sensor detecting the associated indicators of movement. Then based on the sensed signals, the sensor threshold(s) may be set for initial operation.”)
receiving a first data from a first sensor of an implantable measurement device; (see [0044]; Donofrio: “the sensor 110 is configured for detecting sounds and acoustic waves indicative of using the hip implant 30 such as walking.”)
However, Donofrio does not explicitly teach: determining a new threshold sensor value using one or more prior patient data sets and the first data, wherein the threshold is adjusted for different types of movements; and adjust power to a second sensor when a first sensor value of the first sensor exceeds the new threshold sensor value.
Kelly from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches determining a new threshold sensor value using one or more prior patient data sets and the first data (see [0007]; Kelly: “The apparatus and method receive acceleration data from an accelerometer (or other motion data from a motion sensor) that is carried by a user. The data is divided into a sequence of epochs and a determination is made as to whether the user is walking within each epoch.” See [0068]: “If the RMS amplitude is greater than the threshold value, the process continues to step 455 where the walking determination unit 106-2-3 determines that the current epoch corresponds to walking.” See [0104]: “In the above embodiments, the device was configured to determine periods of walking of the user. By adjusting the thresholds and other parameters used (e.g. using a higher threshold for magnitude of acceleration, and shorter expected step/stride periods), the device could be configured to detect periods of running.”)), wherein the threshold is adjusted for different types of movements; (see [0104]; Kelly: “In the above embodiments, the device was configured to determine periods of walking of the user. By adjusting the thresholds and other parameters used (e.g. using a higher threshold for magnitude of acceleration, and shorter expected step/stride periods), the device could be configured to detect periods of running.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Donofrio to include Kelly’s features of determining a new threshold sensor value using one or more prior patient data sets and the first data, wherein the threshold is adjusted for different types of movements. Doing so would determine the correct amount of activity of a user. (Kelly, [0002])
However, it does not explicitly teach: and adjust power to a second sensor when a first sensor value of the first sensor exceeds the new threshold sensor value.
Janna from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches and adjust power to a second sensor when a first sensor value of the first sensor exceeds the new threshold sensor value. (see column 2, lines 50-60; Janna: “In some embodiments, a method may include providing a first sensor and a second sensor each associated with an orthopedic implant and a controller, wherein each of the first sensor and the second sensor includes an internal power source, and providing the internal power source of the first sensor in an active mode and the internal power source of the second sensor in a standby mode. The method may further include detecting, by the first sensor, a triggering event, and activating, in response to the triggering event, the internal power source of the second sensor from the standby mode.” See column 7, lines 14-16: “As used herein, a recognized triggering events may occur upon a deviation from any number of physiological, pathological and/or environmental predetermined thresholds.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Donofrio and Kelly to include Janna’s features of adjusting power to a second sensor when a first sensor value of the first sensor exceeds the new threshold sensor value. Doing so would manage power consumption leads to a longer life of implanted sensors. (Janna, column 3, lines 24-25)
Claim(s) 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donofrio in view of Kelly in view of Janna in view of Bhat et al. (US20230082702A1 -hereinafter Bhat).
Regarding Claim 29, the combination of Donofrio, Kelly, and Janna teaches all the limitations of claim 28 above, wherein the first sensor is an accelerometer and the second sensor is a gyroscope.
Bhat from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the first sensor is an accelerometer and the second sensor is a gyroscope. (see [0034]; Bhat: “In one embodiment, the electronic contact lens 110 furthermore disables the gyroscope in the low power state. In this case, the electronic contact lens 110 uses only the accelerometer and magnetometer data to detect an eye gesture that activates the full power state, which then enables the gyroscope, the femtoimager 130, and femtoprojector 120, or other components.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Donofrio, Kelly, and Janna to include Bhat’s features of the first sensor is an accelerometer and the second sensor is a gyroscope. Doing so would detect gestures mapped to specific actions such as changing a power state and provide a quality user experience. (Bhat, [0012]-[0013])
Claim(s) 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donofrio in view of Kelly in view of Janna in view of Bae (US 20190150835 A1 -hereinafter Bae)
Regarding Claim 30, the combination of Donofrio, Kelly, and Janna teaches all the limitations of claim 28 above; however, it does not explicitly teach: wherein the implantable measurement device includes a battery, and the method further comprising: monitoring a power level of the implantable measurement device.
Bae from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the implantable measurement device includes a battery (see [0022]; Bae: “Referring to FIGS. 1 and 2, an embodiment of the system 10 includes an implantable device 12 for implantation in a subject or patient 2, particularly a human.”. See Fig. 2 and [0028]: the implantable device 12 includes a battery.), and the method further comprising: monitoring a power level of the implantable measurement device. (see [0030]; Bae: “Data reliability transmitted from the transmitter at these power levels may be at least 95%, at least 98%, at least 99%, at least 99.9%, or 100%”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Donofrio, Kelly, and Janna to include Bae’s features of determine a type of movement of the surgical implant based on the first data. Doing so would achieve an accurate and non-invasive means of in vivo measurement of conditions. (Bae, [0004])
Claim(s) 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Donofrio in view of Kelly in view of Janna in view of Bae in view of Aubin et al. (US 20230022710 A1 -hereinafter Aubin).
Regarding Claim 31, the combination of Donofrio, Kelly, Janna, and Bae teaches all the limitations of claim 30 above; however, it does not explicitly teach: further comprising adjusting a sample rate of the first sensor.
Aubin from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches further comprising adjusting a sample rate of the first sensor. (see [0876]; Aubin: “an assigned sample rate is changed from a first lower sample rate of the plurality of sample rates to a second higher sample rate of the plurality of sample rates in response to a movement detection event.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Donofrio, Kelly, Janna, and Bae to include Aubin’s features of adjusting a sample rate of the first sensor. Doing so would achieve an accuracy level. (Aubin, [0393])
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim rejection(s) of the independent claim(s) have been fully considered and are persuasive because of the amendments. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Alt (US5447524A) discloses the first triggering threshold is set at 0.08 g of acceleration in this example, consistent with the commencement of acceleration forces experienced with bicycle exercise by the patient.
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 VI N TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1108. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:00.
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, ROBERT FENNEMA can be reached at (571) 272-2748. 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.
/V.N.T./Examiner, Art Unit 2117
/ROBERT E FENNEMA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2117
Prosecution Insights