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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: reference character 218 in Figs. 23-25. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign mentioned in the description: the shaft (209), see for example the specification ¶[0173]. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to because: Figs. 4A-4C and 9A-9C contain photographs; however, photographs are not the only practicable medium to show the depicted elements, see 37 C.F.R. 1.84(b)(1); Figs. 1B-8B, 11, and 15D-15E contain text that is too small/blurry, see 37 C.F.R. 1.84(p)(3).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 23 is objected to because of the following informalities:
in claim 23, line 7: insert “the” before “optoacoustic”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 25, 28, 30-31, 34-36, and 40 are 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 25 recites the limitation “the anchor” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It appears as if claim 25 should depend from claim 24. Amending the claim as such would overcome the present rejection. The claim is being interpreted as such for the purposes of examination.
Claim 28 recites the limitation “the anchor” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It appears as if claim 28 should depend from claim 24. Amending the claim as such would overcome the present rejection. The claim is being interpreted as such for the purposes of examination.
Claim 30 recites the limitation “the locked rotational position” in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It appears as if claim 30 should depend from claim 29. Amending the claim as such would overcome the present rejection. The claim is being interpreted as such for the purposes of examination.
Claim 31 recites the limitations “the shaft” in line 2 and “the anchor” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. It appears as if claim 29 should depend from claim 25, which as interpreted above, depends from claim 24. Amending the claims as such would overcome the present rejection. The claims are being interpreted as such for the purposes of examination.
Claim 34 recites the limitation “the proximal end” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Amending the recitation to “a proximal end” would overcome the present rejection. The claim is being interpreted as such for the purposes of examination.
Claim 35 is rejected by virtue of its dependence from claim 34.
Claim 36 recites “at least a distal portion of the ultrasound probe, an ultrasound probe extension, the optoacoustic probe, an optoacoustic probe extension, or a combination thereof comprise a same form factor” in lines 1-4. It is not clear whether “at least a distal portion” applies only to “the ultrasound probe”, or the other elements as well. Furthermore, as written, the listing appears to indicate that only one is required. However, if only one is required, it is not clear how only one could have “a same form factor” which appears to indicate at least two. Appropriate clarification is required.
Claim 40 recites the limitations “the shaft” in line 2 and “the anchor” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. It appears as if claim 39 should depend from claim 25, which as interpreted above, depends from claim 24. Amending the claims as such would overcome the present rejection. The claims are being interpreted as such for the purposes of examination.
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.
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.
The succeeding art rejections to the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 103 below are made with the claims as best understood and interpreted in light of the preceding rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112 above.
Claims 23-36 and 41-43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2011/0201914), hereinafter Wang, and in view of Tchang et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2018/0263597), hereinafter Tchang.
Regarding Claim 23, Wang teaches noninvasively imaging biological tissue utilizing a handheld device (see abstract and Fig. 1). Wang teaches a system for measurement of blood oxygenation of a subject or a blood vessel of the subject (see abstract and Fig. 1; see also ¶[0005], ¶[0041], and ¶[0066]), the system comprising:
(a) an ultrasound probe (¶[0045] and ¶[0069] the ultrasound and photoacoustic probe, ¶[0061] the ultrasonic transducer 813; Fig. 8);
(b) an optoacoustic probe (¶[0045] and ¶[0069] the ultrasound and photoacoustic probe, ¶[0061] the photoacoustic setup mounted within the cantilever beam 808; Fig. 8);
(c) a system controller operatively coupled to the ultrasound probe, the optoacoustic probe, or both (¶[0046]-[0048] the motor controller 306, the data acquisition system 305, the data analyzing PC 307, and other sensor control aspects, ¶[0072] the various computational and/or controller implements for the invention; Fig. 3);
(d) an apparatus configured to align one or both of the ultrasound probe and optoacoustic probe with at least one portion of the body of the subject (see abstract and ¶[0061], the photoacoustic scanner 800; Fig. 8), the apparatus comprising:
(i) a base configured for placement against the at least one portion of the body of the subject (¶[0061] the left and/or right portion of the container 801 which contacts the object (i.e., animal or human); Fig. 8);
(ii) an adapter rotatably coupled to the base, the adapter comprising a housing configured to couple to one or more of the ultrasound probe or the optoacoustic probe (¶[0061] the adapter and housing is the frame 804 coupled to the left and right (i.e., the second and third) flexure bearings 802, and the first flexure bearing 803, it is rotatable coupled (note the axis of rotation indicated by the arrow below the reference character 801) to the base via the left and right flexure bearings 802, and rotatably coupled (note the axis of rotation indicated by the arrow above the reference character 803) to the ultrasound/photoacoustic probe within the cantilever beam 808 via the flexure bearing 803; Fig. 8),
such that said one or more of the ultrasound probe or the optoacoustic probe is rotatable at a plurality of angles relative to the at least one portion of the body of the subject (¶[0061] the cantilever beam 808 is moved by an actuator 807, with its inclination angle controlled by the sensor 810; Fig. 8).
Wang does not specifically teach that the connections are removable, specifically that the housing is configured to removably couple to one or more of the ultrasound probe or the optoacoustic probe.
Tchang teaches a device for holding an interchangeable ultrasound probe for medical application (see abstract and Figs. 1-2), in which various components of the device may be removable and/or disposable (see generally ¶[0047], ¶[0091], ¶[0095], ¶[0097], ¶[0114]-[0115], and ¶[0120]; Figs. 6a-8), so that the various parts are removable and/or disposable so that they are easily cleanable so that they may be sterilized for hygienic purposes (see ¶[0125] and ¶[0130]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the removable coupling modality of Tchang with the couplings of Wang because (1) it is the application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results and/or (2) the removable couplings would make the parts easily cleanable so that they may be sterilized for hygienic purposes (see Tchang ¶[0125] and ¶[0130]).
Regarding Claim 24, Wang in view of Tchang teaches the device of claim 23 as stated above. Wang further teaches an anchor coupled to the base, wherein the adapter is rotatably coupled to the anchor (¶[0061] the anchor may be considered any of the first-third flexure bearings 802/803 coupled to the adapter frame 804; Fig. 8).
Regarding Claim 25, Wang in view of Tchang teaches the device of claim 23 as stated above. Wang further teaches a shaft extending from the adapter and at least partially through a cavity within the anchor, the shaft configured to rotate within the cavity (¶[0061] the flexure bearings 802 are the rotatable type, which has a shaft rotatable within a cavity, see for example “Flexure bearing”, Wikipedia, updated on 19 August 2025, accessed on 07 March 2026, accessed at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexure_bearing, the first picture labeled flexure pivot).
Regarding Claim 26, Wang in view of Tchang teaches the device of claim 25 as stated above. Wang further teaches the shaft rotates in concert with the adapter (¶[0061] the shaft portion of the flexure bearings 802 that rotate with the frame 804; Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 27, Wang in view of Tchang teaches the device of claim 25 as stated above. The modified Wang further teaches the shaft is detachably coupled with the adapter (see Tchang ¶[0125] and ¶[0130], the various parts are removable and/or disposable so that they are easily cleanable so that they may be sterilized for hygienic purposes). Here, the modified Wang teaches that the various components’ coupling may be removable/detachable, so as to support easy cleaning.
Regarding Claim 28, Wang in view of Tchang teaches the device of claim 23 as stated above. The modified Wang further teaches the anchor is detachably coupled with the base (see Tchang ¶[0125] and ¶[0130], the various parts are removable and/or disposable so that they are easily cleanable so that they may be sterilized for hygienic purposes). Here, the modified Wang teaches that the various components’ coupling may be removable/detachable, so as to support easy cleaning.
Regarding Claim 29, Wang in view of Tchang teaches the device of claim 23 as stated above. Wang further teaches a locking mechanism configured to lock a rotational position of the adapter relative to the base (¶[0061] the sensor 810 and the actuator 807 for controlling the angle of the cantilever beam 808 relative to the tissue, Fig. 8; alternatively and/or additionally, the locking mechanism may be the interior portion of the flexure bearings 802 that limit rotation of the bearing past a certain point, thus locking further movement of the bearing itself and the frame 804, Fig. 8; see for example “Flexure bearing”, Wikipedia, updated on 19 August 2025, accessed on 07 March 2026, accessed at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexure_bearing, the first picture labeled flexure pivot).
Regarding Claim 30, Wang in view of Tchang teaches the device of claim 23 as stated above. Wang further teaches the locked rotational position of the adapter corresponds to a desired angle of the plurality of angles between the ultrasound probe, the optoacoustic probe, or both and the at least one portion of the body of the subject (¶[0061] the sensor 810 and the actuator 807 for controlling the angle of the cantilever beam 808 relative to the tissue, the chosen/locked angle is the desired angle; Fig. 8).
Regarding Claim 31, Wang in view of Tchang teaches the device of claim 29 as stated above. The modified Wang does not specifically teach that the locking mechanism comprises a clamp that clamps the shaft with the anchor, such that the adapter is prevented from further rotation.
Tchang further teaches the usage of a friction element, such as a bolt or a screw, which is arranged for locking and/or unlocking rotation of the module by manipulating the locking element (see ¶[0028], ¶[0067], and ¶[0069]; Figs. 1-2 and 6a-6b).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the screw friction lock modality of Tchang with the rotation of the frame for the angle by the anchors (i.e., the flexure bearings 802) in the modified Wang because (1) it is the application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results and/or (2) screws are a cheap and reliable modality to lock moving parts, known in the art, capable to perform the claimed function.
Regarding Claim 32, Wang in view of Tchang teaches the device of claim 23 as stated above. Wang further teaches the ultrasound probe is coupled with an ultrasound probe extension (see Fig. 8, the connection/extension between the cantilever beam 808 to the flexure bearing 803).
Regarding Claim 33, Wang in view of Tchang teaches the device of claim 23 as stated above. Wang further teaches the optoacoustic probe is coupled with an optoacoustic probe extension (see Fig. 8, the connection/extension between the cantilever beam 808 to the flexure bearing 803).
Regarding Claim 34, Wang in view of Tchang teaches the device of claim 23 as stated above. Wang further teaches the adapter further comprises a proximal opening at the proximal end (see Fig. 8, the opening/coupling between the frame 804 and any of the flexure bearings 802/803).
Regarding Claim 35, Wang in view of Tchang teaches the device of claim 34 as stated above. Wang further teaches the proximal opening is configured to receive the ultrasound probe, an ultrasound probe extension, the optoacoustic probe, an optoacoustic probe extension, or a combination thereof (see Fig. 8, the opening/coupling between the frame 804 and the flexure bearing 803).
Regarding Claim 36, Wang in view of Tchang teaches the device of claim 34 as stated above. Wang further teaches at least a distal portion of the ultrasound probe, an ultrasound probe extension, the optoacoustic probe, an optoacoustic probe extension, or a combination thereof comprise a same form factor (see Fig. 8, the connection/extension between the cantilever beam 808 to the flexure bearing 803¸ as the cantilever beam 808 comprises both of the ultrasound and the optoacoustic probe, the distal end can be said to comprise the same form factor).
Regarding Claim 41, Wang in view of Tchang teaches the device of claim 23 as stated above. Wang further teaches a display interface operatively coupled to the system controller, the display interface configured to display an image captured by the ultrasound probe and/or blood oxygenation measurement data via the optoacoustic probe (¶[0040] the display, ¶[0047] and ¶[0052] the co-display of the data; see generally Figs. 10A-11C).
Regarding Claim 42, Wang in view of Tchang teaches the device of claim 23 as stated above. Wang further teaches the system controller is configured to activate and/or deactivate the ultrasound probe and/or the optoacoustic probe (¶[0046]-[0048] the motor controller 306, the data acquisition system 305, the data analyzing PC 307, and other sensor control aspects, ¶[0072] the various computational and/or controller implements for the invention, the various controllers would necessarily include activation/deactivation means, such as via input from medical professional to the controller and/or computer, as otherwise the probe wouldn’t do anything; Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 43, Wang in view of Tchang teaches the device of claim 23 as stated above. Wang further teaches the system controller is operatively coupled to a subject/user interface (¶[0040] and ¶[0072] i.e., the computer, which would necessarily include a subject/user interface).
Claim 37 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Tchang as applied to claim 23 above, and in view of Chen et al. (“Soft elastic hydrogel couplants for ultrasonography”, Materials Science & Engineering, C 119, available online 09 October 2020), hereinafter Chen.
Regarding Claim 37, Wang in view of Tchang teaches the device of claim 23 as stated above. Wang teaches the usage of coupling gel 815 with the container 801 of the photoacoustic scanner 800 (see ¶[0061] and Fig. 8); however, the modified Wang does not specifically teach the base comprises an adhesive to attach to the at least one portion of the body of the subject.
Chen teaches about couplants used between the skin surface and the ultrasound probe, and that current solid gels cannot maintain a conformal contact with the skin surface (see abstract), in which a bilayer hydrogel couplant is utilized (see § 2. Experimental, §§ 2.1. Fabrication of hydrogel pads, § 3. Result and discussion, ¶4-6, and § 4. Conclusion; Figs. 4-5), in which the bottom layer of the bilayer hydrogel is highly adhesive to the skin surface (see § 3. Result and discussion, ¶4 and Fig. 4a). As the bottom layer of the bilayer hydrogel is highly adhesive to the skin surface, it is being interpreted as an adhesive.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the bilayer hydrogel couplant of Chen in place of the coupling gel of the modified Wang because (1) it is the simple substitution of one known element for another to yield predictable results; and/or (2) the hydrogel is noncytotoxic and has good biocompatibility, while also being a good medium for sound transmission (see Chen § 1. Introduction, ¶3), the bilayer hydrogel couplant provides better adhesion to the skin surface than a monolayer or liquid gel, yielding clear and complete contour images rather than blurry as tested with liquid gel (see Chen § 3. Result and discussion, ¶4-6 and Figs. 4-5).
Claims 39-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Tchang as applied to claim 23 above, and in view of Fry (US Patent Application Publication 2015/0190111), hereinafter Fry.
Regarding Claim 39, Wang in view of Tchang teaches the device of claim 23 as stated above. Wang further teaches a first anchor (¶[0061] the first anchor may be either any of the second or third flexure bearings 802 coupled to the adapter frame 804, such as the left bearing; Fig. 8) and a second anchor (¶[0061] the second anchor may be the other one of the second or third flexure bearings 802 coupled to the adapter frame 804, such as the right bearing; Fig. 8), the second anchor coupled to the adapter via a second shaft (¶[0061] both of the flexure bearings 802 are the rotatable type, which has a shaft rotatable within a cavity, see for example “Flexure bearing”, Wikipedia, updated on 19 August 2025, accessed on 07 March 2026, accessed at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexure_bearing, the first picture labeled flexure pivot).
The modified Wang does not specifically teach a second base.
Fry teaches a non-invasive hand-held ultrasound probe for blood pressure measurement (see abstract and Fig. 1A), in which the housing may provide a clamshell design with the probe disposed inside (see ¶[0018] and ¶[0032]; Figs. 1A-1B).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the clamshell housing modality of Fry with the container 801 (i.e., the base) of the modified Wang because (1) it is the application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results and/or (2) the clam shell design would provide easy access to the interior for accessing the probe/electronics for maintenance/troubleshooting and/or for cleaning (see Tchang ¶[0125] and ¶[0130]). Here, the modified Wang teaches the first base (i.e., the left container 801 coupled to the left flexure bearing 802) and the second base (i.e., the right container 801 coupled to the right flexure bearing 802) as required by claim 39.
Regarding Claim 40, Wang in view of Tchang and Fry teaches the device of claim 39 as stated above. The modified Wang does not specifically teach a first screw configured to clamp the shaft to the anchor, and a second screw configured to clamp the second shaft to the second anchor, thereby preventing further rotation by the adapter.
Tchang further teaches the usage of a friction element, such as a bolt or a screw, which is arranged for locking and/or unlocking rotation of the module by manipulating the locking element (see ¶[0028], ¶[0067], and ¶[0069]; Figs. 1-2 and 6a-6b).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the screw friction lock modality of Tchang with the rotation of the frame for the angle by the anchors (i.e., the flexure bearings 802) in the modified Wang because (1) it is the application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results and/or (2) screws are a cheap and reliable modality to lock moving parts, known in the art, capable to perform the claimed function.
Claims 44-45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Tchang as applied to claim 23 above, and in view of Prough et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2019/0231239 – cited by Applicant), hereinafter Prough.
Regarding Claim 44, Wang in view of Tchang teaches the device of claim 23 as stated above. The modified Wang does not specifically teach that the at least one portion of the body comprises a chest region and/or a neck region.
Prough teaches apparatus and methods for ultrasound guided optoacoustic monitoring for clinical applications, such as blood oxygenation (see abstract and Fig. 16A), in which oxygenation may be measured at various positions on the patient’s body, including the anterior neck/clavicle (see ¶[0017], ¶[0076], and ¶[0080]-[0081]; Figs. 1A and 3A-3B).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the neck measurement location of Prough with the probe of the modified Wang because (1) it is the application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results; and/or (2) the modified Wang requires measurement locations and Prough teaches one such measurement location; and/or (3) such a measurement location would provide useful information to a medical professional treating the patient (see generally Prough ¶[0076] and ¶[0080]-[0082]; Figs. 1A and 3A-3B).
Regarding Claim 45, Wang in view of Tchang and Prough teaches the device of claim 44 as stated above. The modified Wang further teaches the at least one portion of the body comprises the chest region and wherein the chest region comprises an upper chest region, or wherein the at least one portion of the body comprises the neck region and wherein the neck region comprises a lower neck region (see Prough ¶[0017], ¶[0076], and ¶[0080]-[0081], the oxygenation measurement at the anterior neck/clavicle; Figs. 1A and 3A-3B).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Schwarz (US Patent Application Publication 2020/0069189) teaches an optoacoustic sensor configured to be brought into contact with an object (see abstract and Fig. 1), in which the object is human tissue (see ¶[0003], ¶[0021], ¶[0074], and ¶[0081]), and the optoacoustic sensor may comprise an alignment assembly 110 for contact with the object, secured with a glue (see ¶[0046] and ¶[0073]-[0075]; Fig. 2).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN D. MORONESO whose telephone number is (571)272-8055. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:30AM - 6:00 PM, MST.
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, JENNIFER M. ROBERTSON can be reached at (571)272-5001. 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.
/J.D.M./ Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/JENNIFER ROBERTSON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791