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 .
The amendment filed on October 17, 2025 has been received and considered. By this amendment, claim 1 is amended and claims 1-53 are now pending in the application, with claims 24-52 withdrawn from further consideration as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7, 11, 12, 15, 16, 18, and 53 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Landers et al. (U.S. 2019/0133084, previously cited) in view of Brayer (U.S. 2019/0223408, previously cited) and Steinfort (WO 2009/062249, previously cited). Regarding claim 1, Landers discloses a health tracker device for animals (“The condition responsive indicating systems of the present invention monitor the specific condition of humans or animals.”, paragraph [0002]), comprising a single electronics and hardware portion 1/101 encased in a housing 10/110 operatively attached to an expandable and stretchable band 40 through at least one band receiving slot 12-15/112-115 (see Figures 1, 2, 5, 7, and 10), wherein said housing includes a convex portion 130 in a center of a bottom side housing sensors 132a-f of said electronics and hardware portion (see Figures 6 and 8) and allowing said electronics and hardware portion to be placed at a ventral face of a tail of said animal (it is respectfully submitted that the configuration shown in Figures 6 and 8 would “allow” said electronics and hardware portion to be placed at a ventral face of a tail of said animal, as it would be capable of being so placed), said convex portion being surrounded by substantially planar portions on said bottom surface (see Figure 8), said housing having a long side and a short side and said band having a long side and a short side, wherein said electronics and hardware portion is oriented along said long side within said housing (see Figure 6), said band wrapping entirely around a top side of said housing (see Figure 5, which shows band 40 wrapping entirely around a top side of said housing and through clips 12-15, and “As with first preferred embodiment collar-mounted location sensor and stimulation unit 1, and in similar manner, a suitable prior art dog collar 40 may be used to secure second preferred embodiment collar-mounted location sensor and stimulation unit 101 to the animal”, paragraph [0057]), wherein said electronics and hardware portion includes at least one mechanism for tracking a health parameter (“The impedance detector is coupled to the plurality of stimulation electrodes and is configured to detect an impedance of fur adjacent to the plurality of stimulation electrodes when the body first major inner surface is properly secured to a dog.”, paragraph [0027], where an impedance detector is considered “at least one mechanism for tracking a health parameter”, as an impedance monitor is capable of monitoring impedance, which may correspond to health parameters). However, Landers fails to disclose that the at least one band receiving slot is formed by at least one band receiving portion, said band receiving portion being continuous between opposing ends or that said long side of said housing is oriented longitudinally relative to said short side of said expandable band. Brayer teaches a portable device 1000 for attachment to an animal 150 including a housing 120 comprising band receiving slots 122A/B formed by at least one band receiving portion, said at least one band receiving portion being continuous between opposing ends and operatively attached to said housing at said opposing ends (see Figures 2A-B and 3A-3B). ). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Landers such that said at least one band receiving slot is formed by at least one band receiving portion, said band receiving portion being continuous between opposing ends, as taught by Brayer, as it has been held that use of a known technique (a band receiving portion that is continuous between opposing ends) to improve similar devices in the same way requires only routine skill in the art. Furthermore, there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions for the orientation of the housing, to include the long side of the housing oriented longitudinally relative to the long side of the band or the long side of the housing oriented longitudinal relative to the short side of the band. As such, it would have been obvious to choose from this finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at the claimed invention. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1742, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007).
Furthermore, Steinfort teaches a portable device 2 for attachment to a person including a housing 4 comprising band receiving slots 12/12’/14/14’, and a band 30, wherein said housing has a long side and a short side and the band has a long side and a short side, wherein said long side of said housing is oriented longitudinally relative to said short side of said band (see Figures 1 and 8). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Landers such that said long side of said housing is oriented longitudinally relative to said short side of said expandable band, as taught by Steinfort, as it has been held that use of a known technique (the orientation of the housing) to improve similar devices in the same way requires only routine skill in the art. Furthermore, there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions for the orientation of the housing, to include the long side of the housing oriented longitudinally relative to the long side of the band or the long side of the housing oriented longitudinal relative to the short side of the band. As such, it would have been obvious to choose from this finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success to arrive at the claimed invention. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1742, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007).
Regarding claim 2, Landers discloses that said band is made of stretchable material chosen from the group consisting of neoprene, elastane, nylon, and polypropylene (“Collar 40, if made of a flexible material such as nylon, leather and most other common collar materials”, paragraph [0052]).
Regarding claim 3, the band of Landers is described as “a standard nylon dog collar” (see paragraph [0049]) and, thus, would have a securing mechanism chosen from the group consisting of a buckle and hook and loop.
Regarding claim 53, Landers discloses that said at least one mechanism for tracking a health parameter is chosen from the group consisting of a mechanism for detecting and tracking heart rate (electrodes 132a-f are considered “a mechanism for detecting and tracking heart rate” because they are capable of performing such a function), a mechanism for detecting and tracking temperature (electrodes 132a-f are considered “a mechanism for detecting and tracking temperature” because they are capable of performing such a function), a mechanism for detecting and tracking position by GPS (“the fully self-contained apparatus is preferably operational with universally available location systems, including but not limited to satellite GPS”, paragraph [0030]), a mechanism for detecting respiratory rate (electrodes 132a-f are considered “a mechanism for detecting respiratory rate” because they are capable of performing such a function), a mechanism for detecting blood oxygen levels (electrodes 132a-f are considered “a mechanism for detecting blood oxygen levels” because they are capable of performing such a function), a mechanism for detecting and differentiating movement, a mechanism that vibrates to simulate a slow heart rate to calm an animal down (“stimulation will most preferably first comprise auditory or vibratory stimulation”, paragraph [0071]), and combinations thereof.
Regarding claim 4, Landers discloses the invention substantially as claimed, but fails to disclose that the band includes an under band for directly contacting an animals tail facing a bottom side of said housing, said under band including an opening through which said electronics and hardware portion contacts the tail and a securing mechanism, and an over band operably attached to said under band facing a top side of said housing, said over band wrapping around said under band and on top of said housing and including a second securing mechanism. Brayer teaches a smart monitoring tag for cows 1001 including a wearable sensor device 130 including a band that includes an under band 120 for directly contacting an animals tail facing a bottom side of said housing, said under band including an opening 121 through which said electronics and hardware portion 130 contacts the tail and a securing mechanism, and an over band 110 operably attached to said under band facing a top side of said housing, said over band wrapping around said under band and on top of said housing and including a second securing mechanism 122A/B (see Figures 3A-B). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Landers to include an under band for directly contacting an animals tail facing a bottom side of said housing, said under band including an opening through which said electronics and hardware portion contacts the tail and a securing mechanism, and an over band operably attached to said under band facing a top side of said housing, said over band wrapping around said under band and on top of said housing and including a second securing mechanism, as taught by Brayer, in order to be able to quickly attach and detach the sensor device from an animal, and as it has been held that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results requires only routine skill in the art. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1742, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007).
Regarding claim 5, Landers discloses that said mechanism for detecting and tracking heart rate is chosen from the group consisting of an LED light and an electrode (electrodes 132a-f are considered “a mechanism for detecting and tracking heart rate” because they are capable of performing such a function).
Regarding claim 7, Landers discloses that said mechanism for detecting and tracking position by GPS includes a micro-chip (“the fully self-contained apparatus is preferably operational with universally available location systems, including but not limited to satellite GPS, cellular telephone triangulation systems, and radio triangulation system such as Loran, but may alternatively be provided with a custom location system if so desired. By using universally available location systems, there is no limit on the locations where the apparatus may be used.”, paragraph [0030]).
Regarding claim 11, Landers discloses that said mechanism that vibrates to simulate a slow heart rate to calm an animal down is further defined as a vibration motor (“a “first alert” zone used to generate a vibration”, paragraph [0046]).
Regarding claim 12, it is respectfully submitted that the recitation “said electronics and hardware portion further includes BLUETOOTH® and LORAWAN® communication” fails to further define the claimed invention over the prior art because it is directed to an intended use for the device rather than further limiting the structural aspects of the device, as “further includes BLUETOOTH® and LORAWAN® communication” is directed to communication and not to any further limiting aspect of the device. It is suggested that the claim recite the structures which would provide the BLUETOOTH® and LORAWAN® communication.
Regarding claim 15, Landers discloses that said electronics and hardware portion is in electronic communication with a screen 121 for displaying parameters (see Figure 9 and “display 121”, paragraph [0056]).
Regarding claim 16, it is respectfully submitted that the recitation “wherein said health tracker continually detects and tracks heart rate, temperature, position, respiratory rate, blood oxygen levels, and movement” fails to further define the claimed invention over that of the prior art because it is directed to the intended use of the device rather than further limiting any further structural aspect of the device.
Regarding claim 18, it is respectfully submitted that the recitation “in electronic communication with a rider mobile device for viewing parameters detected while riding” fails to further define the claimed invention over that of the prior art because they are directed to something, a rider mobile device, that is not part of the claimed health tracker device.
Claims 6 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Landers (U.S. 2019/0133084) in view of Brayer (U.S. 2019/0223408) and Steinfort (WO 2009/062249), as applied to claims 1-5, 7, 11, 12, 15, 16, 18, and 53 above, and further in view of Räisänen (U.S. 2020/0312453, previously cited). Landers in view of Brayer and Steinfort discloses the invention substantially as claimed, but fails to disclose that said mechanism for detecting and tracking temperature is chosen from the group consisting of a metal probe, infrared light, and silicon temperature sensor, said mechanism for detecting respiratory rate is further defined as a sensor that detects change in heart rate variability, said mechanism for detecting blood oxygen levels is further defined as an SPO2 pulse oximeter, or said mechanism for detecting and differentiating movement is further defined as a 9-axis accelerometer, gyroscope, and magnetometer. Räisänen teaches a wearable sensor device including a mechanism for detecting and tracking temperature, wherein said mechanism for detecting and tracking temperature is chosen from the group consisting of a metal probe, infrared light, and silicon temperature sensor (paragraph [0162], “Skin temperature sensor 144 may be any suitable device, but is preferably configured to be an ST Microelectronics MEMS sensor mounted on or integrated with printed circuit board 124.”), said mechanism for detecting respiratory rate is further defined as a sensor that detects change in heart rate variability (paragraph [0242], “In a step 340, patient monitoring software 300 determines the heart rate variability (HRV)”), said mechanism for detecting blood oxygen levels is further defined as an SPO2 pulse oximeter (paragraph [0151], “wearable sensor 120 may comprise a sensor 140 in the form of a photoplethysmograph (PPG) sensor 143 for determining pulse oximetry as extracted quantitative data by sensing blood oxygen levels with the PPG sensor 143 as measurement data”), and said mechanism for detecting and differentiating movement is further defined as a 9-axis accelerometer, gyroscope, and magnetometer (paragraph [0168], “In accordance with one or more embodiments of the present invention, motion and position sensor 145 is an integrated single MEMS sensor providing both 9-axis accelerometer and gyroscope.”). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Landers in view of Brayer and Steinfort such that said mechanism for detecting and tracking temperature is chosen from the group consisting of a metal probe, infrared light, and silicon temperature sensor, said mechanism for detecting respiratory rate is further defined as a sensor that detects change in heart rate variability, said mechanism for detecting blood oxygen levels is further defined as an SPO2 pulse oximeter, and said mechanism for detecting and differentiating movement is further defined as a 9-axis accelerometer, gyroscope, and magnetometer, as taught by Räisänen, as it has been held that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results requires only routine skill in the art. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1742, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Landers (U.S. 2019/0133084) in view of Brayer (U.S. 2019/0223408) and Steinfort (WO 2009/062249), as applied to claims 1-5, 7, 11, 12, 15, 16, 18, and 53 above, and further in view of Shah et al. (U.S. 2019/0159739, previously cited). Landers in view of Brayer and Steinfort discloses the invention substantially as claimed, including that said electronics and hardware portion further includes antennas (necessarily present in Landers in order for the location sensing to function), a battery (Landers, “In one alternative embodiment, the collar-mounted location sensor and stimulation unit 1, 101 may have a manual setting in order to activate or deactivate in order to save battery or to prevent stimulation at an undesired time.”, paragraph [0064]), computer hardware (Landers, “suitable circuitry may incorporate components such as illustrated in U.S. published patent application 2007/0204804 by Swanson et al incorporated by reference, suitably modified and configured to function for exemplary and non-limiting purpose as set forth in commonly owned U.S. Pat. Nos. 9,795,118; 9,961,884; 10,064,390; and 10,080,346.”, paragraph [0053]), and computer storage (Landers, “suitable circuitry may incorporate components such as illustrated in U.S. published patent application 2007/0204804 by Swanson et al incorporated by reference, suitably modified and configured to function for exemplary and non-limiting purpose as set forth in commonly owned U.S. Pat. Nos. 9,795,118; 9,961,884; 10,064,390; and 10,080,346.”, paragraph [0053]). However, Landers in view of Brayer and Steinfort fails to disclose a thermistor. Shah, which is in the field of a viewing system that monitors a pet’s health and wellness (see paragraph [0001]) teaches a health tracker device (Figure 4, wearable device 101), comprising a thermistor as a temperature sensor (see paragraph [0043]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Landers in view of Brayer and Steinfort to include a thermistor to measure temperature, as taught by Shah, in order to facilitate temperature sensing and as it has been held that substituting one known element for another known element to arrive at a predictable result requires only routine skill in the art. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1742, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Landers (U.S. 2019/0133084) in view of Brayer (U.S. 2019/0223408) and Steinfort (WO 2009/062249), as applied to claims 1-5, 7, 11, 12, 15, 16, 18, and 53 above, and further in view of Hong et al. (U.S. 2014/0288390, previously cited) and Daoura (U.S. 2016/0126675, previously cited). Regarding claim 14, Landers in view of Brayer and Steinfort, discloses the invention substantially as claimed, including a user interface having a power button 122 and a reset button 124 (see Figure 6 and paragraph [0056], where the use as a ”power button” and a “reset button” is not positively recited and, thus, the switches as recited by Landers would be capable of such a use), but fails to disclose that said electronics and hardware portion further includes at least one multi-function RGB LED, and a 4-pin magnetic charging and data transfer connection. Hong is in the field of wearable fitness monitoring device (paragraph [0006]) and teaches a health tracker device (Figure 2A, portable monitoring device, paragraph [0046]), including at least one multi-function RGB LED (an RGB LED configuration, paragraph [0177]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Landers in view of Brayer and Steinfort to include the RGB LED, as taught by Hong, to provide the benefit of providing a signal-strength indicator, thereby facilitating notification to a user of acquisition of good signals (see Hong, paragraph [0177]).
Furthermore, Daoura is in the field of electrical connections for data and power (see paragraph [0002]) and teaches a device including a 4-pin (Figure 3B, contact arrays have as few as 2 pins or as many as 30 or 64 pins; paragraph [0064]) magnetic (individual pins are magnets and/or magnetically responsive members; paragraph [0064]) charging and data transfer connection (Figure 3B, quick connect USB adapter, paragraph [0058]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Landers in view of Brayer, Steinfort and Hong to include the quick connect USB adaptor as taught by Daoura, to enable a user to make a connection without constraint of proper orientation (Daoura, paragraph [0056]).
Claims 17 and 19-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Landers (U.S. 2019/0133084) in view of Brayer (U.S. 2019/0223408) and Steinfort (WO 2009/062249), as applied to claims 1-5, 7, 11, 12, 15, 16, 18, and 53 above, and further in view of Donnelly (U.S. 2020/0229707, previously cited). Regarding claim 17, Landers in view of Brayer and Steinfort discloses the invention substantially as claimed, but fails to disclose that said electronics and hardware portion further includes a mechanism for monitoring glucose, a mechanism for monitoring blood pressure, and a mechanism for monitoring electrolyte and hydration. Donnelly teaches a device for equine condition monitoring that includes an electronics and hardware portion including a mechanism for monitoring glucose, a mechanism for monitoring blood pressure, and a mechanism for monitoring electrolyte and hydration (paragraph [0036], “Such sensors 18 can include one or a combination of sensors from a group for sensing physiological characteristics including…fluid content sensors, blood sugar sensors, and other sensors as would occur to those skilled in the art which will output an electronic signal which may be correlated to a particular physiology such as oxygen levels in the blood, body temperature, respiration and the like.”). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Landers in view of Brayer and Steinfort to include a mechanism for monitoring glucose, a mechanism for monitoring blood pressure, and a mechanism for monitoring electrolyte and hydration, as taught by Donnelly, in order to monitor further health parameters for an animal of interested, and as it has been held that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results requires only routine skill in the art. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1742, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007).
Regarding claims 19-21, Landers in view of Brayer and Steinfort discloses the invention substantially as claimed, but fails to disclose that said antenna is further defined as a flexibly encased outwardly facing antenna for wireless electronic communication encased in said band, said antenna is dimensionally and flexibly configured and encased to wrap and conform to the sides and top of the tail covering transmission angles between minus 170 degrees and positive 170 degrees from tail top center vertical, or said antenna is dimensionally configured to wrap substantially around the animal’s tail to optimize transmission direction according to the diameter of the animal’s tail. Donnelly teaches a device for equine condition monitoring that includes an antenna 21 that is defined as a flexibly encased outwardly facing antenna for wireless electronic communication encased in said band (paragraph [0038], “an antenna 21 is positioned upon the belt and is operatively engaged to the device 10 using a lead 25 running from the housing 22 of the device 10 to the antenna 21”), is dimensionally and flexibly configured and encased to wrap and conform to the sides and top of the tail covering transmission angles between minus 170 degrees and positive 170 degrees from tail top center vertical (paragraph [0049], “As is also shown, the belt 12 is formed by two portions of a flexible member which communicate around the tail 17 to an engagement of distal ends using complimentary fasteners 31 (FIG. 7) to hold the distal ends engaged. This engagement cinches the belt 12 and biases the contact side 23 of the housing 22 against the skin of the underside of the tail 17. It also positions the preferred antenna 21, on a side or upper surface of the tail 17, where it can receive positioning signals from GPS satellites and/or positioning signals from local beacons, which are communicated to the microprocessor 26 or computer which has software running in electronic memory 28 to receive the positioning signals from the antenna 21, and correlate a current position of the horse on a track, with the data concerning the physiology of the horse 16 from the sensors 18.”), and is dimensionally configured to wrap substantially around the animal’s tail to optimize transmission direction according to the diameter of the animal’s tail (paragraph [0049], “As is also shown, the belt 12 is formed by two portions of a flexible member which communicate around the tail 17 to an engagement of distal ends using complimentary fasteners 31 (FIG. 7) to hold the distal ends engaged. This engagement cinches the belt 12 and biases the contact side 23 of the housing 22 against the skin of the underside of the tail 17. It also positions the preferred antenna 21, on a side or upper surface of the tail 17, where it can receive positioning signals from GPS satellites and/or positioning signals from local beacons, which are communicated to the microprocessor 26 or computer which has software running in electronic memory 28 to receive the positioning signals from the antenna 21, and correlate a current position of the horse on a track, with the data concerning the physiology of the horse 16 from the sensors 18.”). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Landers in view of Brayer and Steinfort to include an antenna defined as a flexibly encased outwardly facing antenna for wireless electronic communication encased in said band, said antenna is dimensionally and flexibly configured and encased to wrap and conform to the sides and top of the tail covering transmission angles between minus 170 degrees and positive 170 degrees from tail top center vertical, and is dimensionally configured to wrap substantially around the animal’s tail to optimize transmission direction according to the diameter of the animal’s tail, as taught by Donnelly, in order to have an antenna that conforms to the body of the animal, and as it has been held that simple substitution of one known element, the antenna of Donnelly, for another, the antenna of Landers in view of Brayer and Steinfort, to yield predictable results requires only routine skill in the art. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S.Ct. 1727, 1742, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (2007).
Regarding claim 22, the recitation “said antenna is created by printed undulating traces configured to optimize transmission strength and conformity according to the diameter of the animal’s tail” fails to further define the claimed invention over the prior art because it is directed to how a portion of the device, the antenna, is made rather than being directed to a further limitation of the device.
Regarding claim 23, the recitation “said expandable band contains the flexible portion of a rigid-flex PCB where the inner layer of the flexible circuit portion includes a reflective layer below the antenna traces” fails to further define the claimed invention over the prior art because it is directed to how a portion of the device, the antenna, is made rather than being directed to a further limitation of the device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAMMIE K MARLEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1986. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday from 8 am until 4 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, Carl Layno can be reached on 571-272-4949. 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.
/TAMMIE K MARLEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Prosecution Insights