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 .
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.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 6, 9, 28 and 30 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1: “wherein an increase or decreased vaginal lipid ratio” should recite “wherein an increased or decreased vaginal lipid ratio” for proper grammar;
Claim 6: “Hosphatidylcholine” will be interpreted as “Phosphatidylcholine” (see Table 1 of disclosure);
Claim 8: several of the ratios cited comprise periods where there should be a colon;
Claim 9: “wherein the vaginal lipid profile comprises comprises” should have one of the “comprises” removed for proper grammar;
Claim 28: “the diagnostic test comprising” should recite “the diagnostic test kit comprising” for consistency with the rest of the claims and “identify a surrogate dam” should recite “identifying a surrogate dam” for proper grammar; and
Claim 30: “The diagnostic test of claim 28” should recite “the diagnostic test kit of claim 28” for consistency with the rest of the claims.
Appropriate correction is required.
Novelty
Claims 11, 21, 23 and 27 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
None of the cited prior art below teaches nor fairly suggests “wherein the vaginal lipid profile comprises Cer(d18:1/16:0), SM(d16:1/24:0), SM(d18:1/16:0), PE(36:1), PCo(32:0), PC(38:2), 18:2 cholesteryl ester, 20:1 cholesteryl ester, TAG(50:4)_FA 16:1, and/or TAG(52:3)_FA 16:0” as recited in instant claims 11, 21 and 23. In other words, none of the cited prior art teaches nor renders obvious a lipid profile comprising each and every one of the metabolites above obtained from a vaginal sample for establishing successful embryo implantation and pregnancy in a candidate bovine surrogate dam.
None of the cited prior art below teaches nor fairly suggest “wherein the intervention that is administered to the bovine surrogate dam is effective to provide a lipidome profile of the vaginal fluid exhibiting one or more lipid ratios and/or levels that are associated with high success of pregnancy after embryo transfer, including increased Cer(d18:1/16:0), SM(d16:1/24:0), SM(d18:1/16:0), PE(36:1), PCo(32:0), PC(38:2), 18:2 cholesteryl ester, 20:1 cholesteryl ester, TAG(50:4)_FA 16:1, and/or TAG(52:3)_FA 16:0” as recited in instant claim 27. United States Patent Application Publication US 2020/0348316 to Huynh et al. (herein Huynh) discloses biomarkers that can be used to predict diabetes and detect presence of disease (see abstract), wherein high glucose levels are known to cause pregnancy complications (see [0122]). Huynh discloses the lipid biomarkers analyzed to predict diabetes include Cer(d18:1/16:0), PE(36:1), and PCo(32:0), however it is an increase of these markers that are associated with diabetes and thus higher risk of pregnancy complications. Therefore, there would be no reason nor motivation to want to increase the level of these biomarkers to improve pregnancy outcomes.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 8 recites “wherein the phosphatidylethanolamine is selected from the group consisting of …”, however claim 8 depends from claim 7 which defines the second vaginal lipid as phosphatidylcholine. It is unclear if phosphatidylethanolamine is meant to be the first vaginal lipid or if “phosphatidylethanolamine” should recite “phosphatidylcholine” as the second vaginal lipid. Furthermore the group recited in the claim comprises several different types of vaginal lipids beyond phosphatidylethanolamine.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-10, 12-14, 16-18, 20, 22, 24-25, 28-31, and 33-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Modulation of Uterine Function in Beef Cattle” to Da Silva as cited on the 12 June 2024 IDS in view of Internation Publication WO 2022140192 to Purdue Research Foundation (herein Purdue) as cited on the 12 June 2024 IDS.
Regarding claim 1, Silva discloses a method for predicting in a candidate bovine surrogate dam an ability to establish a successful embryo implantation and pregnancy following embryo transfer (see method to identify changes in the concentration of lipid metabolites at key time points for embryonic development and establishment of pregnancy in cows on pg. 4, 3rd paragraph; pg. 11, 1st paragraph, and pg. 28 1st paragraph of provided copy). The method comprises: (a) obtaining fluids from a bovine surrogate dam, wherein the fluids comprise a lipidome (see pg. 9, 2nd paragraph; pg. 11, 1st paragraph; and pg. 17, 3rd paragraph – pg. 18, 1st paragraph of copy provided); and (b) performing lipidome analysis on the fluids to obtain a lipid profile comprising lipid ratios (see pg. 9, 2nd paragraph; pg. 11, 1st paragraph of copy provided); wherein an increased or decreased lipid ratio and/or individual lipid concentration in the candidate bovine surrogate dam animal is predictive of a candidate bovine dam possessing an environment that is suitable for achieving a successful embryo implantation and pregnancy or that is unsuitable for achieving a successful embryo implantation and pregnancy (see wherein an increased concentration of sphingomyelin and phosphatidylcholine on d14 was found to support pregnancy and embryo development following embryo transfer (see pg. 27, 2nd paragraph – pg. pg. 31, 1st paragraph; pg. 33, 2nd paragraph; pg. 35, 1st paragraph; and Fig. 4-3 of copy provided).
Da Silva fails to disclose “vaginal fluids” as recited in the instant claim.
Purdue discloses a method of eliminating a gilt from selection for breeding, the method comprising: (i) obtaining a vaginal lipidome profile from a gilt and (ii) using the vaginal lipidome profile to assign the gilt as probable fertile or infertile based on decreased or increased levels in the lipidome profile (see [006]).
Purdue and Da Silva are analogous in the field of analyzing fertility in farm animals. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Silva to use vaginal fluids instead of uterine fluids in view of Purdue as vaginal swabs are suitable for the intended purpose of determining fertility success based on lipidome profiles (see [006] of Purdue and MPEP 2144.07 Art Recognized Suitability for an Intended Purpose). Furthermore, it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art that vaginal swabs would be less invasive than intrauterine (see Example 2 of Purdue and pg. 17, 3rd paragraph – pg. 18, 1st paragraph of Da Silva).
Regarding claims 2-5 and 6-7 the combination of references above render obvious the invention of claim 1, and Da Silva discloses wherein the lipid profile comprises a lipid ratio for a first lipid and a second lipid, wherein the first lipid is sphingomyelin and the second lipid is phosphatidylcholine (see pg. 11, 1st paragraph and pg. 27, 2nd paragraph).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of references above render obvious the invention of claim 4, and Da Silva discloses wherein the sphingomyelin is SM(d18:1/26:0) (see Fig. 4-3).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of references above render obvious the invention of claim 7, and Fig. 4-3 of Da Silva discloses the examined lipid metabolites include SM(d18:1/26:0) and PC(ae C38:5); and wherein ratios of said lipid metabolites are analyzed (see pg. 11, 1st paragraph).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of references above render obvious the invention of claim 1, and Da Silva discloses wherein the lipid profile comprises multiple lipid ratios of sphingomyelin and phosphatidylcholine (i.e., at least two vaginal lipid ratios) (see pg. 11, 1st paragraph and pg. 27, 2nd paragraph).
Regarding claims 10 and 12, the combination of references above render obvious the invention of claim 1, and Da Silva discloses an increased concentration of sphingomyelin and phosphatidylcholine on d14 was found to support pregnancy and embryo development following embryo transfer (see pg. 27, 2nd paragraph – pg. pg. 31, 1st paragraph; pg. 33, 2nd paragraph; pg. 35, 1st paragraph; and Fig. 4-3), therefore an increase in concentration of the levels of sphingomyelin and phosphatidylcholine would be predictive of a candidate bovine surrogate dam possessing an environment that is suitable for achieving a successful embryo implantation and pregnancy and, similarly, if an increased level was not detected this would be predictive of an environment that is not suitable.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of references above render obvious the invention of claim 1, and Da Silva discloses wherein the lipidome analysis comprises mass spectroscopy (see pg. 19, 1st paragraph).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of references above render obvious the invention of claim 13, and Da Silva discloses wherein the fluid sample is delivered to the mass spectrometer from a handheld device (see pg. 17, 3rd paragraph – pg. 19, 2nd paragraph).
Regarding claim 16, Silva discloses a method for generating a lipidome database for identifying a bovine surrogate dam for embryo transfer (see method to identify changes in the concentration of lipid metabolites at key time points for embryonic development and establishment of pregnancy in cows after embryo transfer that results in a lipid profile on pg. 4, 3rd paragraph; pg. 11, 1st paragraph, and pg. 28 1st paragraph of provided copy). The method comprises: (a) obtaining fluids from a bovine surrogate dam, wherein the fluids comprise a lipidome (see pg. 9, 2nd paragraph; pg. 11, 1st paragraph; and pg. 17, 3rd paragraph – pg. 18, 1st paragraph of copy provided); (b) performing lipidome analysis on the fluids to obtain a lipid profile comprising lipid ratios (see pg. 9, 2nd paragraph; pg. 11, 1st paragraph of copy provided); wherein an increased or decreased lipid ratio and/or individual lipid concentration in the candidate bovine surrogate dam animal is predictive of a candidate bovine dam possessing an environment that is suitable for achieving a successful embryo implantation and pregnancy or that is unsuitable for achieving a successful embryo implantation and pregnancy (see wherein an increased concentration of sphingomyelin and phosphatidylcholine on d14 was found to support pregnancy and embryo development following embryo transfer (see pg. 27, 2nd paragraph – pg. pg. 31, 1st paragraph; pg. 33, 2nd paragraph; pg. 35, 1st paragraph; and Fig. 4-3 of copy provided); (c) delivering an embryo to at least one bovine animal (see pg. 28 of copy provided); and (d) identifying an association of lipids in the vaginal lipidome profile with an increased probability of successful embryo implantation and pregnancy following embryo delivery ((see pg. 27, 2nd paragraph – pg. pg. 31, 1st paragraph; pg. 33, 2nd paragraph; pg. 35, 1st paragraph; and Fig. 4-3 of copy provided).
Da Silva fails to disclose “vaginal fluids” as recited in the instant claim.
Purdue discloses a method of eliminating a gilt from selection for breeding, the method comprising: (i) obtaining a vaginal lipidome profile from a gilt and (ii) using the vaginal lipidome profile to assign the gilt as probable fertile or infertile based on decreased or increased levels in the lipidome profile (see [006]).
Purdue and Da Silva are analogous in the field of analyzing fertility in farm animals. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Silva to use vaginal fluids instead of uterine fluids in view of Purdue as vaginal swabs are suitable for the intended purpose of determining fertility success based on lipidome profiles (see [006] of Purdue and MPEP 2144.07 Art Recognized Suitability for an Intended Purpose). Furthermore, it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art that vaginal swabs would be less invasive than intrauterine (see Example 2 of Purdue and pg. 17, 3rd paragraph – pg. 18, 1st paragraph of Da Silva).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of references above render obvious the invention of claim 16, and Da Silva discloses wherein the lipidome analysis comprises mass spectroscopy (see pg. 19, 1st paragraph).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of references above render obvious the invention of claim 17, and Da Silva discloses wherein the fluid sample is delivered to the mass spectrometer from a handheld device (see pg. 17, 3rd paragraph – pg. 19, 2nd paragraph).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of references above render obvious the invention of claim 16, and Da Silva discloses an increased concentration of sphingomyelin and phosphatidylcholine on d14 was found to support pregnancy and embryo development following embryo transfer (see pg. 27, 2nd paragraph – pg. pg. 31, 1st paragraph; pg. 33, 2nd paragraph; pg. 35, 1st paragraph; and Fig. 4-3), therefore an increase in concentration of the levels of sphingomyelin and phosphatidylcholine would be predictive of a candidate bovine surrogate dam possessing an environment that is suitable for achieving a successful embryo implantation and pregnancy and, similarly, if an increased level was not detected this would be predictive of an environment that is not suitable.
Regarding claim 22, Silva discloses a method for improving success rate of embryo transfer after in vitro fertilization in one or more bovine animals (see method to identify changes in the concentration of lipid metabolites at key time points for embryonic development and establishment of pregnancy in cows after embryo transfer on pg. 4, 3rd paragraph; pg. 11, 1st paragraph, and pg. 28 1st paragraph of provided copy). The method comprises: (a) obtaining fluids from a bovine surrogate dam, wherein the fluids comprise a lipidome (see pg. 9, 2nd paragraph; pg. 11, 1st paragraph; and pg. 17, 3rd paragraph – pg. 18, 1st paragraph of copy provided); (b) performing lipidome analysis on the fluids to obtain a lipid profile comprising lipid ratios (see pg. 9, 2nd paragraph; pg. 11, 1st paragraph of copy provided); wherein an increased or decreased lipid ratio and/or individual lipid concentration in the candidate bovine surrogate dam animal is predictive of a candidate bovine dam possessing an environment that is suitable for achieving a successful embryo implantation and pregnancy or that is unsuitable for achieving a successful embryo implantation and pregnancy following in vitro fertilization (see wherein an increased concentration of sphingomyelin and phosphatidylcholine on d14 was found to support pregnancy and embryo development following embryo transfer (see pg. 27, 2nd paragraph – pg. pg. 31, 1st paragraph; pg. 33, 2nd paragraph; pg. 35, 1st paragraph; and Fig. 4-3 of copy provided); and (c) feeding prepartum choline chloride (i.e., administering an intervention) leading to a tendency for greater pregnancy at first artificial insemination in diary cows (see pg. 33, 2nd paragraph of copy provided).
Da Silva fails to disclose “vaginal fluids” as recited in the instant claim.
Purdue discloses a method of eliminating a gilt from selection for breeding, the method comprising: (i) obtaining a vaginal lipidome profile from a gilt and (ii) using the vaginal lipidome profile to assign the gilt as probable fertile or infertile based on decreased or increased levels in the lipidome profile (see [006]).
Purdue and Da Silva are analogous in the field of analyzing fertility in farm animals. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Silva to use vaginal fluids instead of uterine fluids in view of Purdue as vaginal swabs are suitable for the intended purpose of determining fertility success based on lipidome profiles (see [006] of Purdue and MPEP 2144.07 Art Recognized Suitability for an Intended Purpose). Furthermore, it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art that vaginal swabs would be less invasive than intrauterine (see Example 2 of Purdue and pg. 17, 3rd paragraph – pg. 18, 1st paragraph of Da Silva).
Regarding claim 24, the combination of references above render obvious the invention of claim 22, and Da Silva discloses wherein the lipidome analysis comprises mass spectroscopy (see pg. 19, 1st paragraph).
Regarding claim 25, the combination of references above render obvious the invention of claim 24, and Da Silva discloses wherein the fluid sample is delivered to the mass spectrometer from a handheld device (see pg. 17, 3rd paragraph – pg. 19, 2nd paragraph).
Regarding claim 28, Silva discloses a diagnostic test kit for identifying a bovine surrogate dam having a high probability or low probability of establishing a successful embryo implantation and pregnancy following embryo transfer via in vitro fertilization (see method to identify changes in the concentration of lipid metabolites at key time points for embryonic development and establishment of pregnancy in cows after embryo transfer on pg. 4, 3rd paragraph; pg. 11, 1st paragraph, and pg. 28 1st paragraph and “targeted metabolomics analysis of these samples were performed using MxP® Quant 500 kit” on pg. 19, 1st paragraph of provided copy). The diagnostic kit comprises: (a) mass spectrometer (i.e., one or more analytical tools) for determining a lipid profile comprising lipid ratios and/or levels from a bovine animal (see pg. 9, 2nd paragraph; pg. 11, 1st paragraph; and pg. 19, 1st paragraph of copy provided); (b) mass spectrometry software (i.e., transmitter) capable of communicating with a database of one or more lipid levels and/or ratios of the fluid (see pg. 19, 2nd paragraph); and (c) Biocrates’ Met/DQTM software for further analysis capable of comparing the lipid ratios and/or levels of the fluid from the surrogate dam with a database of vaginal lipid ratios identifying a surrogate having a lipid ratio that is predictive of a high pregnancy success rate or a low pregnancy success rate after receiving an in vitro fertilization derived embryo (see pg. 19 2nd paragraph; pg. 27, 2nd paragraph – pg. pg. 31, 1st paragraph; pg. 33, 2nd paragraph; pg. 35, 1st paragraph; and Fig. 4-3 of copy provided).
Da Silva fails to disclose “vaginal fluids” as recited in the instant claim.
Purdue discloses a method of eliminating a gilt from selection for breeding, the method comprising: (i) obtaining a vaginal lipidome profile from a gilt and (ii) using the vaginal lipidome profile to assign the gilt as probable fertile or infertile based on decreased or increased levels in the lipidome profile (see [006]).
Purdue and Da Silva are analogous in the field of analyzing fertility in farm animals. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of Silva to use vaginal fluids instead of uterine fluids in view of Purdue as vaginal swabs are suitable for the intended purpose of determining fertility success based on lipidome profiles (see [006] of Purdue and MPEP 2144.07 Art Recognized Suitability for an Intended Purpose). Furthermore, it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art that vaginal swabs would be less invasive than intrauterine (see Example 2 of Purdue and pg. 17, 3rd paragraph – pg. 18, 1st paragraph of Da Silva).
Regarding claim 29 the combination of references above render obvious the invention of claim 28, and Da Silva discloses wherein the lipid profile comprises a lipid ratio for a first lipid and a second lipid, wherein the first lipid is sphingomyelin and the second lipid is phosphatidylcholine (see pg. 11, 1st paragraph and pg. 27, 2nd paragraph).
Regarding claim 30, the combination of references above render obvious the invention of claim 28, and Da Silva discloses wherein the lipidome analysis comprises mass spectroscopy (see pg. 19, 1st paragraph).
Regarding claim 31, the combination of references above render obvious the invention of claim 30, and Da Silva discloses wherein the fluid sample is delivered to the mass spectrometer from a handheld device (see pg. 17, 3rd paragraph – pg. 19, 2nd paragraph).
Regarding claim 33, the combination of references above render obvious the invention of claim 1, and Da Silva discloses wherein the candidate bovine surrogate dam is a beef female (see pg. 4, 2nd paragraph).
Regarding claim 34, the combination of references above render obvious the invention of claim 1, and Da Silva discloses wherein the candidate bovine surrogate dam is a diary female (see pg. 33, 2nd paragraph).
Claims 15, 19, 26, and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Modulation of Uterine Function in Beef Cattle” to Da Silva as cited on the 12 June 2024 IDS in view of Internation Publication WO 2022140192 to Purdue Research Foundation (herein Purdue) as cited on the 12 June 2024 IDS and in further view of United States Patent Application Publication US 2019/0033313 to Gravenstein et al. (herein Gravenstein) as cited on the 12 June 2024 IDS.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of references above render obvious the invention of claim 13, however, fails to disclose “wherein the mass spectrometry is conducted through a portable device” as recited in the instant claim.
Gravenstein discloses analyzing a sample by a portable mass spectrometer (see [0077]) for the presence of lipids that correlate to melanoma (see [0005]).
Gravenstein and Da Silva are analogous in the field of analyzing lipids of sample to determine a biological condition of a subject. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the method of Silva to conduct mass spectrometry through a portable device for the benefit of real-time diagnosis without need for additional sample preparation (see [0077] of Gravenstein.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of references above render obvious the invention of claim 17, however, fails to disclose “wherein the mass spectrometry is conducted through a portable device” as recited in the instant claim.
Gravenstein discloses analyzing a sample by a portable mass spectrometer (see [0077]) for the presence of lipids that correlate to melanoma (see [0005]).
Gravenstein and Da Silva are analogous in the field of analyzing lipids of sample to determine a biological condition of a subject. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the method of Silva to conduct mass spectrometry through a portable device for the benefit of real-time diagnosis without need for additional sample preparation (see [0077] of Gravenstein.
Regarding claim 26, the combination of references above render obvious the invention of claim 24, however, fails to disclose “wherein the mass spectrometry is conducted through a portable device” as recited in the instant claim.
Gravenstein discloses analyzing a sample by a portable mass spectrometer (see [0077]) for the presence of lipids that correlate to melanoma (see [0005]).
Gravenstein and Da Silva are analogous in the field of analyzing lipids of sample to determine a biological condition of a subject. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the method of Silva to conduct mass spectrometry through a portable device for the benefit of real-time diagnosis without need for additional sample preparation (see [0077] of Gravenstein.
Regarding claim 32, the combination of references above render obvious the invention of claim 30, however, fails to disclose “wherein the mass spectrometry is conducted through a portable device” as recited in the instant claim.
Gravenstein discloses analyzing a sample by a portable mass spectrometer (see [0077]) for the presence of lipids that correlate to melanoma (see [0005]).
Gravenstein and Da Silva are analogous in the field of analyzing lipids of sample to determine a biological condition of a subject. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date for the method of Silva to conduct mass spectrometry through a portable device for the benefit of real-time diagnosis without need for additional sample preparation (see [0077] of Gravenstein.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHRYN E LIMBAUGH whose telephone number is (571)272-0787. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:00-5:00.
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, Lyle Alexander can be reached at (571) 272-1254. 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.
/KATHRYN ELIZABETH LIMBAUGH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1797
Prosecution Insights