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 .
Application Status
Claims 4-7, 9-10, and 12-14 are pending and have been examined in this application.
An information disclosure statement (IDS) has been filed on 12/13/2023 and reviewed by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 13, 4, 6-7, 10, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Specifically, claim 13 recites “the mobile toy raising and lowering the fabric of the hollow tube as it travels through the hollow tube to thereby stimulate physical activity in the pet” in lines 15-17. There was no previous disclosure of this limitation in the Applicant’s specification, drawings, or claims, as originally filed. Figs. 1A and 15 show the hollow tube in an open and upstanding configuration, which would not allow for the raising and lowering the fabric as described in the aforementioned limitation. The specification further states on page 10 lines 17-20 “Such multiple oblong see-through ports 106 ensure that the pet is able to view the mobile toy moving inside the hollow tube…the pet remains interested in playing”. The specification provides that the visual from within the tube is required to ensure interest with the toy and how the animal views movement of the toy which indicates that absent the see-through ports, the animal would loose interest lending to the lack of disclosure of movement visible outside of the ports such as through the raising and lowering of the fabric in the hollow tube.
Claims 4, 6-7, 10, and 12 are rejected according to their respective dependency to claim 13.
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.
Claims 13, 6, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Verfuerth (U.S. Pub. 20180126291) in view of Cheung (U.S. Pub. 20160220915), Zangle et al. (U.S. Pub. 20010022159), and Murray (U.S. Pub. 20050193919).
In regard to claim 13, Verfuerth discloses an interactive pet toy for stimulating physical activity in a pet comprising: a length of hollow tube having an axial opening in the hollow tube and the hollow tube is collapsible (Figs. 1-7 and Paragraph [0019-0020], where there is a length of hollow tube 12 comprising an axial opening in the hollow tube 12 and where the hollow tube is collapsible via couplers 30), multiple track portions detachably coupled to each other to form a continuous track through the hollow tube (Figs. 1-7 and Paragraph [0019-0025], where the track 50 includes multiple track portions at least detachably coupled (via couplers 30) to each other to form a continuous track 50), a mobile toy with a motor driven roller on the underside of the mobile toy (Figs. 1-7 and Paragraphs [0025-0029], where there is a mobile toy with a motor driven roller 78/64 on the underside of the mobile toy), the motor driven roller driving the mobile toy along the track through the length of the hollow tube (Figs. 1-7 and Paragraphs [0025-0029], where the motor driven roller 78/64 drives the mobile toy along the track through the length of the hollow tube); multiple aligners projecting from the underside of the mobile toy to align and maintain the mobile toy on the track (Figs. 1-7 and Paragraphs [0029-0031], where there are multiple aligners 80 projecting from the underside of the mobile toy to align and maintain the mobile toy on the track). Verfuerth is silent on the hollow tube forming a continuous closed shape; a battery powered mobile toy; wherein portions of the hollow tube include a see-through port through which the pet can observe the mobile toy moving on the track through the length of the hollow tube. Cheung discloses wherein the hollow tube forming a continuous closed shape that is collapsible (Fig. 1A-4D and Paragraph [0046], where the length of hollow tube 101 forms a closed loop wherein the mobile toy 300 mounted on the continuous track 100 can continuously travel through the hollow tube 101 and where the hollow tube is at least collapsible via coupling sleeves 1022); a battery powered mobile toy (Paragraph [0075], where the toy vehicle is powered by a battery); wherein portions of the hollow tube include a see-through port through which the pet can observe the mobile toy moving on the track through the length of the hollow tube (Fig. 1A-4D and Paragraph [0075], where portions of the hollow tube include a see-through port in the hollow tube (“the tube sessions should be transparent”) through which the pet can at least observe the mobile toy moving on the track through the length of the hollow tube). Verfuerth and Cheung are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include toys. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Verfuerth such that the hollow tube forming a continuous closed shape; a battery powered mobile toy; wherein portions of the hollow tube include a see-through port through which the pet can observe the mobile toy moving on the track through the length of the hollow tube in view of Cheung. The motivation would have been to create a system which allows the toy to circulate the track multiple times without intervention from the user, thereby relatively decreasing time used to reset the toy. Additionally, the motivation would have been to ensure the toy can be operated via a battery, when a direct power line is not available to power the device.
Verfuerth is silent on a fabric hollow tube. Zangle et al. discloses wherein the hollow tube is a fabric (Fig. 1, Claim 3, Abstract, and Paragraph [0025-0028], where the hollow tube 102 is at least made of a fabric 122). Verfuerth and Zangle et al. are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include toys. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Verfuerth such that there is a fabric hollow tube in view of Zangle et al. The motivation would have been to increase a level of comfort for the cat, as well as improve the aesthetic appearance of the device (Zangle et al., Abstract).
Verfuerth is silent on wherein each track portion includes a first traction surface projecting upward mounted on each track portion along the length of the track portion and a stabilizing lip projecting upward on each side of the track portion along the length of the track, a mobile toy with a motor driven roller on the underside of the mobile toy having a second traction surface that directly meshes with the first traction surface mounted to the track; multiple aligners projecting from the underside of the mobile toy cooperating with the stabilizing lips to align and maintain the mobile toy on the track. Murray discloses wherein each track portion includes a first traction surface projecting upward mounted on each track portion along the length of the track portion and a stabilizing lip projecting upward on each side of the track portion along the length of the track (Figs. 1-9, where each track portion includes a first traction surface 143 projecting upward mounted on each track portion along the length of the track portion and a stabilizing lip 141 projecting upward on each side of the track portion along the length of the track), a mobile toy with a motor driven roller on the underside of the mobile toy having a second traction surface that directly meshes with the first traction surface mounted to the track (Figs. 1-9, where there is a mobile toy 27 with a motor driven roller on the underside of the mobile toy having a second traction surface 55 that directly meshes with the first traction surface 143 mounted to the track); multiple aligners projecting from the underside of the mobile toy cooperating with the stabilizing lips to align and maintain the mobile toy on the track (Figs. 1-9, where there are multiple aligners 56 projecting from the underside of the mobile toy cooperating with the stabilizing lips 141 to align and maintain the mobile toy on the track). Verfuerth and Murray are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include toys. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Verfuerth such that wherein each track portion includes a first traction surface projecting upward mounted on each track portion along the length of the track portion and a stabilizing lip projecting upward on each side of the track portion along the length of the track, a mobile toy with a motor driven roller on the underside of the mobile toy having a second traction surface that directly meshes with the first traction surface mounted to the track; multiple aligners projecting from the underside of the mobile toy cooperating with the stabilizing lips to align and maintain the mobile toy on the track in view of Murray. The motivation would have been to further ensure that the toy does not topple over and continues forward on the track.
In regard to claim 6, Verfuerth as modified by Cheung, Zangle et al., and Murray wherein the hollow tube is a fabric (Zangle et al., Fig. 1, Claim 3, Abstract, and Paragraph [0025-0028], where the hollow tube 102 is at least made of a fabric 122). Verfuerth as modified by Cheung, Zangle et al., and Murray is silent on wherein the hollow tube is a scratch resistant fabric. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the hollow tube be made of a scratch resistant fabric, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. See also Ballas Liquidating Co. v. Allied industries of Kansas, Inc. (DC Kans) 205 USPQ 331. The motivation would have been to use a fabric for the device which is not easily damaged by the cat during play, thereby increasing the durability of the device.
In regard to claim 12, Verfuerth as modified by Cheung, Zangle et al., and Murray discloses the interactive pet toy of Claim 13, wherein the multiple portions of the track are detachably coupled to each other using a snap-fitting joint at each end of the track (Verfuerth, Figs. 1-7 and Paragraph [0021-0022], where the multiple portions of the track (on each section 18) are detachably coupled to each other using at least a snap-fitting joint 38/40/42 at each end and additionally secured by pin 46 and channel 48).
Claims 14 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Verfuerth (U.S. Pub. 20180126291) in view of Cheung (U.S. Pub. 20160220915), and Murray (U.S. Pub. 20050193919).
In regard to claim 14, Verfuerth discloses an interactive pet toy for stimulating physical activity in a pet comprising: a length of hollow tube having an axial opening in the hollow tube (Figs. 1-7 and Paragraph [0019-0020], where there is a length of hollow tube 12 comprising an axial opening in the hollow tube 12 and where the hollow tube is collapsible via couplers 30), multiple track portions detachably coupled to each other to form a continuous track through the hollow tube (Figs. 1-7 and Paragraph [0019-0025], where the track 50 includes multiple track portions at least detachably coupled (via couplers 30) to each other to form a continuous track 50), a mobile toy with a motor driven roller on the underside of the mobile toy (Figs. 1-7 and Paragraphs [0025-0029], where there is a mobile toy with a motor driven roller 78/64 on the underside of the mobile toy), the motor driven roller driving the mobile toy along the track through the length of the hollow tube (Figs. 1-7 and Paragraphs [0025-0029], where the motor driven roller 78/64 drives the mobile toy along the track through the length of the hollow tube); multiple aligners projecting from the underside of the mobile toy to align and maintain the mobile toy on the track (Figs. 1-7 and Paragraphs [0029-0031], where there are multiple aligners 80 projecting from the underside of the mobile toy to align and maintain the mobile toy on the track). Verfuerth is silent on the hollow tube forms a continuous closed shape; a battery powered mobile toy; wherein portions of the hollow tube overlie each other to provide a raised portion of the tube, the raised portion of the tube including a see-through port in the hollow tube through which the pet can observe the mobile toy moving on the track through the length of the hollow tube to thereby stimulate physical activity in the pet. Cheung discloses the hollow tube forms a continuous closed shape (Fig. 1A-4D and Paragraph [0046], where the length of hollow tube 101 forms a closed loop wherein the mobile toy 300 mounted on the continuous track 100 can continuously travel through the hollow tube 101); a battery powered mobile toy (Paragraph [0075], where the toy vehicle is powered by a battery); wherein portions of the hollow tube overlie each other to provide a raised portion of the tube, the raised portion of the tube including a see-through port in the hollow tube through which the pet can observe the mobile toy moving on the track through the length of the hollow tube to thereby stimulate physical activity in the pet (Fig. 1A-4D and Paragraph [0075], where portions of the hollow tube overlie each other to provide a raised portion of the tube, the raised portion of the tube including a see-through port in the hollow tube (“the tube sessions should be transparent”) through which the pet can at least observe the mobile toy moving on the track through the length of the hollow tube to thereby stimulate physical activity in the pet). Verfuerth and Cheung are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include toys. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Verfuerth such that the hollow tube forms a continuous closed shape; a battery powered mobile toy; wherein portions of the hollow tube overlie each other to provide a raised portion of the tube, the raised portion of the tube including a see-through port in the hollow tube through which the pet can observe the mobile toy moving on the track through the length of the hollow tube to thereby stimulate physical activity in the pet in view of Cheung. The motivation would have been to create a system which allows the toy to circulate the track multiple times without intervention from the user, thereby relatively decreasing time used to reset the toy. Additionally, the motivation would have been to ensure the toy can be operated via a battery, when a direct power line is not available to power the device. Lastly, overlaying portions allow for a compact configuration while relatively increasing track length and complexity on a set surface area.
Verfuerth is silent on wherein each track portion includes roller-teeth projecting upward mounted on each track portion along the length of the track portion and a stabilizing lip projecting upward on each side of the track portion along the length of the track; a mobile toy with a motor driven roller on the underside of the mobile toy having teeth that directly engage with and mesh with the roller-teeth mounted to the track; multiple aligners projecting from the underside of the mobile toy cooperating with the stabilizing lips to align and maintain the mobile toy on the track. Murray discloses wherein each track portion includes roller-teeth projecting upward mounted on each track portion along the length of the track portion and a stabilizing lip projecting upward on each side of the track portion along the length of the track (Figs. 1-9, where each track portion includes roller-teeth 143 projecting upward mounted on each track portion along the length of the track portion and a stabilizing lip 141 projecting upward on each side of the track portion along the length of the track); a mobile toy with a motor driven roller on the underside of the mobile toy having teeth that directly engage with and mesh with the roller-teeth mounted to the track (Figs. 1-9, where there is a mobile toy 27 with a motor driven roller on the underside of the mobile toy having teeth 55 that directly engage with and mesh with the roller-teeth 143 mounted to the track); multiple aligners projecting from the underside of the mobile toy cooperating with the stabilizing lips to align and maintain the mobile toy on the track (Figs. 1-9, where there are multiple aligners 56 projecting from the underside of the mobile toy cooperating with the stabilizing lips 141 to align and maintain the mobile toy on the track). Verfuerth and Murray are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include toys. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Verfuerth such that wherein each track portion includes roller-teeth projecting upward mounted on each track portion along the length of the track portion and a stabilizing lip projecting upward on each side of the track portion along the length of the track; a mobile toy with a motor driven roller on the underside of the mobile toy having teeth that directly engage with and mesh with the roller-teeth mounted to the track; multiple aligners projecting from the underside of the mobile toy cooperating with the stabilizing lips to align and maintain the mobile toy on the track in view of Murray. The motivation would have been to further ensure that the toy does not topple over and continues forward on the track.
In regard to claim 9, Verfuerth as modified by Cheung and Murray discloses the interactive pet toy of Claim 14, wherein the motor driven roller includes a drive motor wherein the speed of travel of the mobile toy over the continuous track can be programmed into the mobile toy (Verfuerth, Figs. 1-7, Claim 1, and Paragraph [0028-0034], where the motor driven roller 62/64 includes a drive motor 78 wherein the speed of travel of the mobile toy 62 over the continuous track 50 can be programmed into the mobile toy 62 (i.e. motor 78 is positioned in the toy 62 and must be at least programmed to move the toy 62 at a certain speed); Murray, Figs. 1-9, where there is a motor driven roller).
Claims 4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Verfuerth (U.S. Pub. 20180126291) in view of Cheung (U.S. Pub. 20160220915), Zangle et al. (U.S. Pub. 20010022159), and Murray (U.S. Pub. 20050193919) as applied to claim 13, and further in view of Siklosi (U.S. Pub. 20100058994).
In regard to claim 4, Verfuerth as modified by Cheung, Zangle et al., and Murray discloses the interactive pet toy of Claim 13, wherein the length of the hollow tube forms the continuous shape (Cheung, Fig. 1A-4D and Paragraph [0046]). Verfuerth as modified by Cheung, Zangle et al., and Murray is silent on wherein the length of the hollow tube forms a figure 8. Siklosi discloses wherein the track forms a figure 8 (Fig. 1 and Paragraph [0017], where the track forms a figure 8). Verfuerth and Siklosi are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include toys. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Verfuerth as modified by Cheung, Zangle et al., and Murray such that wherein the length of hollow tube forms a figure 8 in view of Siklosi, since the length of hollow tube of Verfuerth as modified by Cheung, Zangle et al., and Murray could be shaped in the form of a figure 8 as shown in Siklosi. The motivation would have been to have a compact, yet continuous configuration for the track that allows the toy to circulate the track multiple times without intervention from the user, thereby relatively decreasing time used to reset the toy
In regard to claim 7, Verfuerth as modified by Cheung, Zangle et al., and Murray discloses the interactive pet toy of Claim 13. Verfuerth as modified by Cheung, Zangle et al., and Murray is silent on wherein the hollow tube further comprises weighted feet on each side of the hollow tube to maintain a stable position for the hollow tube. Siklosi discloses wherein the track further comprises weighted feet on each side of the track to maintain a stable position for the track (Fig. 2, where there are two feet structures (with at least a weight) on either side of the center portion of the track to stabilize the track when it is placed on the ground). Verfuerth and Siklosi are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include toys. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Verfuerth as modified by Cheung, Zangle et al., and Murray such that wherein the hollow tube further comprises weighted feet on each side of the hollow tube to maintain a stable position for the hollow tube in view of Siklosi, since the hollow tube of Verfuerth as modified by Cheung, Zangle et al., and Murray could have the feet shown in Siklosi. The motivation would have been to further stabilize the track as it sits on the ground, preventing the hollow tube from rolling into an unwanted position.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Verfuerth (U.S. Pub. 20180126291) in view of Cheung (U.S. Pub. 20160220915), and Murray (U.S. Pub. 20050193919) as applied to claim 14, and further in view of Zangle et al. (U.S. Pub. 20010022159).
In regard to claim 5, Verfuerth as modified by Cheung and Murray discloses the interactive pet toy of Claim 14. Verfuerth as modified by Cheung and Murray is silent on wherein the hollow tube is a fabric. Zangle et al. discloses wherein the hollow tube is a fabric (Fig. 1, Claim 3, Abstract, and Paragraph [0025-0028], where the hollow tube 102 is at least made of a fabric 122). Verfuerth and Zangle et al. are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include toys. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Verfuerth as modified by Cheung and Murray such that wherein the hollow tube is a fabric in view of Zangle et al. The motivation would have been to increase a level of comfort for the cat, as well as improve the aesthetic appearance of the device (Zangle et al., Abstract).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Verfuerth (U.S. Pub. 20180126291) in view of Cheung (U.S. Pub. 20160220915), Zangle et al. (U.S. Pub. 20010022159), and Murray (U.S. Pub. 20050193919) as applied to claim 13, and further in view of Peavey (U.S. Pub. 20150237828).
In regard to claim 10, Verfuerth as modified by Cheung, Zangle et al., and Murray discloses the interactive pet toy of Claim 13. Verfuerth as modified by Cheung, Zangle et al., and Murray is silent on wherein the mobile toy includes an output for visual, auditory, or olfactory stimuli. Peavey discloses wherein the mobile toy includes an output for visual, auditory, or olfactory stimuli (Paragraph [0014] and Claim 6, where the mobile toy 10 includes an output for visual stimuli via laser light 36). Verfuerth and Peavey are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor which include toys. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device body of Verfuerth as modified by Cheung, Zangle et al., and Murray such that wherein the mobile toy includes an output for visual, auditory, or olfactory stimuli in view of Peavey. The motivation would have been to use a toy that interacts with the pet with multiple different mechanisms, specifically using laser-based stimulation, in order to further encourage the pet to play with the toy.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments (filed 07/12/2025) with respect to the rejection of the claims have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Verfuerth (U.S. Pub. 20180126291) in view of Cheung (U.S. Pub. 20160220915), Zangle et al. (U.S. Pub. 20010022159), and Murray (U.S. Pub. 20050193919) discloses the applicant’s claim 13, as specified under Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 above. Verfuerth (U.S. Pub. 20180126291) in view of Cheung (U.S. Pub. 20160220915), and Murray (U.S. Pub. 20050193919) discloses the applicant’s claim 14, as specified under Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 above.
Specifically, Cheung teaches that portions of the hollow tube include a see-through port through which the pet can observe the mobile toy moving on the track in Fig. 1A-4D and Paragraph [0075], where portions of the hollow tube include a see-through port in the hollow tube (“the tube sessions should be transparent”) through which the pet can at least observe the mobile toy moving on the track through the length of the hollow tube. Cheung also teaches that portions of the hollow tube overlie each other to provide a raised portion of the tube and a battery powered mobile toy in Fig. 1A-4D and Paragraph [0075].
Furthermore, Murray has been brought into the rejections to teach the newly added limitations regarding the drive mechanism for the device in claims 13 and 14. See 35 USC § 103 rejections above for details.
Lastly, the limitation of “the mobile toy raising and lowering the fabric of the hollow tube as it travels through the hollow tube to thereby stimulate physical activity in the pet” in claim 13 has been determined to be new matter. See 35 USC § 112 rejections above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee 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 date of this final action.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892, Notice of References Cited, for the full list of prior art made of record. Particularly the references were cited because they pertain to the state of the art of toys.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN M DENNIS whose telephone number is (571)270-7604. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 7:30 am to 4:30 pm.
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, Kimberly Berona can be reached on (571) 272-6909. 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.
/KEVIN M DENNIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3647
/KIMBERLY S BERONA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3647