DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 08/20/2025, in response to the Non-Final Office Action dated on 05/20/2025, has been received and made of record. Claims 1 and 16 have been amended. Claims 1-9, 12-13, 16-17, 19-22, 24, and 26-27 are pending in the current application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 08/20/2025, have been fully considered.
In the Arguments/Remarks:
Re: Objection of the Specification
Objection of the specification has been withdrawn in view of applicant’s amendments.
Re: Rejection of the Claims Under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)
Applicant’s arguments, beginning on page 7 of the remarks, and submitted affidavit have been fully considered. Applicant argues that Shelton fails to teach “container-based control scheme for its robotic control system” in regards for independent claims 1 and 16. However, examiner respectfully disagrees. Shelton in paragraph 83 discloses a cloud-based system “a computer-implemented interactive surgical system 100 includes one or more surgical systems 102 and a cloud-based system (e.g., the cloud 104 that may include a remote server 113 coupled to a storage device 105). Each surgical system 102 includes at least one surgical hub 106 in communication with the cloud 104 that may include a remote server 113. In one example, as illustrated in FIG. 1, the surgical system 102 includes a visualization system 108, a robotic system 110, and a handheld intelligent surgical instrument 112, which are configured to communicate with one another and/or the hub 106. In some aspects, a surgical system 102 may include an M number of hubs 106, an N number of visualization systems 108, an O number of robotic systems 110, and a P number of handheld intelligent surgical instruments 112, where M, N, O, and P are integers greater than or equal to one.” It is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that cloud-based systems normally utilize containers to improve efficiency. Atlantic.net (https://www.atlantic.net/vps-hosting/containers-cloud-computing/), a global cloud service provider, discloses “Container workloads are widely used throughout public cloud computing environments and are an increasingly popular way to deploy application code in production environments. Container technology is not necessarily a new technology; in fact, its roots can be traced back to the 1970s, when Unix systems were used to isolate application code. Today, containerization is much more advanced and synonymous with tools like Docker and Kubernetes. Cloud providers have adopted container runtimes into cloud computing because they are a more efficient way of deploying cloud resources across private, public, and multi-cloud environments.”
Examiner has augmented the rejection (see below) in view of the applicant’s amendments and arguments. Examiner believes under the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of the argued limitation that Shelton teaches or suggests the argued limitations by the sections provided here and shown below in the newest rejection, and therefore applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive. The same reasoning as applied to the independent claims above also apply to their corresponding dependent claims.
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 1-9, 12-13, 16-17, 19-22, 24 and 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelton (US 2020/0405417 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Shelton teaches a system comprising: a processing unit [(see at least paragraph 98) “Referring now to FIG. 3, a hub 106 is depicted in communication with a visualization system 108, a robotic system 110, and a handheld intelligent surgical instrument 112. The hub 106 includes a hub display 135, an imaging module 138, a generator module 140, a communication module 130, a processor module 132, and a storage array 134. In certain aspects, as illustrated in FIG. 3, the hub 106 further includes a smoke evacuation module 126 and/or a suction/irrigation module 128.”]; and a non-transitory computer-readable memory communicatively coupled to the processing unit and comprising computer-readable program instructions executable by the processing unit for: [(see at least paragraph 118) “The control device 13004 may include a central processing unit operably connected to memory. The memory may include transitory type memory (e.g., RAM) and/or non-transitory type memory (e.g., flash media, disk media, etc.). In some exemplifications, the memory is part of, and/or operably coupled to, the remote system “RS.””] operating movements of a robot arm with an operating system using native functions of the robot arm; executing a program from at least one container, the container received in a container environment included with a control system of the robot arm; receiving commands from the at least one container; and performing at least a function with the robot arm with the operating system using the commands from the at least one container. [(see at least paragraphs 83, 122, 202) As in 83 “Referring to FIG. 1, a computer-implemented interactive surgical system 100 includes one or more surgical systems 102 and a cloud-based system (e.g., the cloud 104 that may include a remote server 113 coupled to a storage device 105). Each surgical system 102 includes at least one surgical hub 106 in communication with the cloud 104 that may include a remote server 113. In one example, as illustrated in FIG. 1, the surgical system 102 includes a visualization system 108, a robotic system 110, and a handheld intelligent surgical instrument 112, which are configured to communicate with one another and/or the hub 106. In some aspects, a surgical system 102 may include an M number of hubs 106, an N number of visualization systems 108, an O number of robotic systems 110, and a P number of handheld intelligent surgical instruments 112, where M, N, O, and P are integers greater than or equal to one.” As in 122 “A simplified functional block diagram of a system architecture 13400 of the robotic surgical system 13010 is depicted in FIG. 5. The system architecture 13400 includes a core module 13420, a surgeon master module 13430, a robotic arm module 13440, and an instrument module 13450. The core module 13420 serves as a central controller for the robotic surgical system 13000 and coordinates operations of all of the other modules 13430, 13440, 13450. For example, the core module 13420 maps control devices to the arms 13002, 13003, determines current status, performs all kinematics and frame transformations, and relays resulting movement commands. In this regard, the core module 13420 receives and analyzes data from each of the other modules 13430, 13440, 13450 in order to provide instructions or commands to the other modules 13430, 13440, 13450 for execution within the robotic surgical system 13000. Although depicted as separate modules, one or more of the modules 13420, 13430, 13440, and 13450 are a single component in other exemplifications.” As in 202 “It is to be appreciated that the computer system 210 includes software that acts as an intermediary between users and the basic computer resources described in a suitable operating environment. Such software includes an operating system. The operating system, which can be stored on the disk storage, acts to control and allocate resources of the computer system. System applications take advantage of the management of resources by the operating system through program modules and program data stored either in the system memory or on the disk storage. It is to be appreciated that various components described herein can be implemented with various operating systems or combinations of operating systems.”] Examiner notes it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that cloud-based systems utilize the use of containers to improve efficiency and execute faster startup times within the cloud infrastructure. (see Atlantic.net article https://www.atlantic.net/vps-hosting/containers-cloud-computing/)
Regarding claim 2, Shelton teaches wherein the computer-readable program instructions are executable for operating movements of the robot arm in six degrees of freedom of movement. [(see at least Fig.4A, paragraph 163) “FIG. 4A illustrates an exemplification of a robotic arm 13120 and a tool assembly 13130 releasably coupled to the robotic arm 13120. The robotic arm 13120 can support and move the associated tool assembly 13130 along one or more mechanical degrees of freedom (e.g., all six Cartesian degrees of freedom, five or fewer Cartesian degrees of freedom, etc.).”]
Regarding claim 3, Shelton teaches wherein the computer-readable program instructions are executable for receiving and storing the at least one container. [(see at least paragraph 160) “In various aspects, the present disclosure provides a non-transitory computer readable medium storing computer readable instructions which, when executed, cause a machine to receive a first user input from a console and to receive a second user input from a mobile wireless control module for controlling a function of a robotic surgical tool, as described herein.”]
Regarding claim 4, Shelton teaches wherein the computer-readable program instructions are executable for receiving and storing the at least one container as a third-party container. [(see at least paragraph 202) “It is to be appreciated that the computer system 210 includes software that acts as an intermediary between users and the basic computer resources described in a suitable operating environment. Such software includes an operating system. The operating system, which can be stored on the disk storage, acts to control and allocate resources of the computer system. System applications take advantage of the management of resources by the operating system through program modules and program data stored either in the system memory or on the disk storage. It is to be appreciated that various components described herein can be implemented with various operating systems or combinations of operating systems.”]
Regarding claim 5, Shelton teaches wherein the computer-readable program instructions are executable for executing the program from a plurality of at least one container concurrently. [(see at least paragraphs 118, 202, 402) As in 402 “Also, although various operational flow diagrams are presented in a sequence(s), it should be understood that the various operations may be performed in other orders than those which are illustrated, or may be performed concurrently.”]
Regarding claim 6, Shelton teaches wherein the computer-readable program instructions are executable for controlling the execution of the programs of the plurality of containers as a function of performance capacity of the operating system. [(see at least paragraph 202) “The operating system, which can be stored on the disk storage, acts to control and allocate resources of the computer system. System applications take advantage of the management of resources by the operating system through program modules and program data stored either in the system memory or on the disk storage. It is to be appreciated that various components described herein can be implemented with various operating systems or combinations of operating systems.”]
Regarding claim 7, Shelton teaches wherein the computer-readable program instructions are executable for receiving the commands from the at least one container as associated with a tool and/or a peripheral. [(see at least paragraph 146) “A robotic hub can include a situational awareness module, which can be configured to synthesize data from multiple sources to determine an appropriate response to a surgical event. For example, a situational awareness module can determine the type of surgical procedure, step in the surgical procedure, type of tissue, and/or tissue characteristics, as further described herein. Moreover, such a module can recommend a particular course of action or possible choices to the robotic system based on the synthesized data. In various instances, a sensor system encompassing a plurality of sensors distributed throughout the robotic system can provide data, images, and/or other information to the situational awareness module. Such a situational awareness module can be incorporated into a control unit, such as the control unit 13004, for example. In various instances, the situational awareness module can obtain data and/or information from a non-robotic surgical hub and/or a cloud, such as the surgical hub 106 (FIG. 1), the surgical hub 206 (FIG. 10), the cloud 104 (FIG. 1), and/or the cloud 204 (FIG. 9), for example.”]
Regarding claim 8, Shelton teaches wherein the computer-readable program instructions are executable for performing at least the function with the robot arm and with the tool and/or peripheral. [(see at least paragraphs 118, 148) As in 148 “For example, a robotic surgical system can use one or more surgical tools during the surgical procedure. Additionally, one or more handheld instruments can also be used during the surgical procedure. One or more of the surgical devices can include a sensor. For example, multiple sensors can be positioned around the surgical site and/or the operating room. A sensor system including the one or more sensors can be configured to detect one or more conditions at the surgical site. For example, data from the sensor system can determine if a surgical tool mounted to the surgical robot is being used and/or if a feature of the surgical tool should be activated. More specifically, a sensor system can detect if an electrosurgical device is positioned in abutting contact with tissue, for example. As another example, a sensor system can detect if a suctioning element of a surgical tool is applying a sufficient suctioning force to fluid at the surgical site.”]
Regarding claim 9, Shelton teaches wherein the computer-readable program instructions are executable for performing at least the function with the robot arm and with the tool and/or peripheral, the function including a combination of the native functions and at least one function of the tool and/or peripheral. [(see at least paragraphs 118,162) As in 162 “In various instances, one or more sensors are attached to each robotic arm of a robotic surgical system. The one or more sensors are configured to sense a force applied to the surrounding tissue during the operation of the robotic arm. Such forces can include, for example, a holding force, a retracting force, and/or a dragging force. The sensor from each robotic arm is configured to communicate the magnitude and direction of the detected force to a control unit of the robotic surgical system. The control unit is configured to analyze the communicated forces and set limits for maximum loads to avoid causing trauma to the tissue in a surgical site. For example, the control unit may minimize the holding force applied by a first robotic arm if the retracting or dragging force applied by a second robotic arm increases.”]
Regarding claim 12, Shelton teaches wherein the computer-readable program instructions are executable for receiving commands from the at least one container, the commands being received from cloud computing and/or an artificial intelligence network. [(see at least paragraph 118) “The control device 13004 includes any suitable logic control circuit adapted to perform calculations and/or operate according to a set of instructions. The control device 13004 can be configured to communicate with a remote system “RS,” either via a wireless (e.g., Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, LTE, etc.) and/or wired connection. The remote system “RS” can include data, instructions and/or information related to the various components, algorithms, and/or operations of system 13000. The remote system “RS” can include any suitable electronic service, database, platform, cloud “C” (see FIG. 4), or the like. The control device 13004 may include a central processing unit operably connected to memory.”]
Regarding claim 13, Shelton teaches wherein the computer-readable program instructions are executable for performing at least a function with the robot arm with the operating system using the commands from the at least one container while limiting the function to native function capability of the robot arm. [(see at least paragraphs 118, 381) As in 381 “For example, a control algorithm could be executed to limit motion of the robotic arms 9152a-9152e or linkages thereof in one or more directions. As such, position, proximity or other suitable sensors (could be similar to mounted sensor assemblies 20180) mounted on the robotic surgical assembly 20030 can provide data to the base unit control circuit to stop arm motions in a certain direction when the data indicates that the arm motion exceeds a certain limit or threshold. This way, the base unit control circuit can prevent the stop-cock valve from injuring the patient. Additionally, the base unit control circuit can be situationally aware to facilitate such a control algorithm. For example, information about the particular surgical procedure being performed and/or input information from operating room staff can be used to inform the positioning of the patient relative to the surgical platform and robotic surgical assembly 20030 during performance of the surgical procedure. This information may help the surgical robots involved in executing the procedure to set control limits on robotic motions.”]
Regarding claim 16, Shelton teaches a robot system comprising: a robot arm [(see at least paragraph 113) “With reference to FIG. 4, the robotic surgical system 13000 includes robotic arms 13002, 13003”]; a robot controller system including a processing unit [(see at least paragraph 98) “Referring now to FIG. 3, a hub 106 is depicted in communication with a visualization system 108, a robotic system 110, and a handheld intelligent surgical instrument 112. The hub 106 includes a hub display 135, an imaging module 138, a generator module 140, a communication module 130, a processor module 132, and a storage array 134. In certain aspects, as illustrated in FIG. 3, the hub 106 further includes a smoke evacuation module 126 and/or a suction/irrigation module 128.”]; and a non-transitory computer-readable memory communicatively coupled to the processing unit and comprising computer-readable program instructions executable by the processing unit for operating [(see at least paragraph 118) “The control device 13004 may include a central processing unit operably connected to memory. The memory may include transitory type memory (e.g., RAM) and/or non-transitory type memory (e.g., flash media, disk media, etc.). In some exemplifications, the memory is part of, and/or operably coupled to, the remote system “RS.””]: an operating system performing native functions of the robot arm, and a container environment for at least one container, the container environment included with a control system of the robot arm, wherein the at least one container is executable to send commands from the at least one container, and wherein the robot arm performs at least a function using the commands from the at least one container. [(see at least paragraphs 83,122, 202) As in 83 “Referring to FIG. 1, a computer-implemented interactive surgical system 100 includes one or more surgical systems 102 and a cloud-based system (e.g., the cloud 104 that may include a remote server 113 coupled to a storage device 105). Each surgical system 102 includes at least one surgical hub 106 in communication with the cloud 104 that may include a remote server 113. In one example, as illustrated in FIG. 1, the surgical system 102 includes a visualization system 108, a robotic system 110, and a handheld intelligent surgical instrument 112, which are configured to communicate with one another and/or the hub 106. In some aspects, a surgical system 102 may include an M number of hubs 106, an N number of visualization systems 108, an O number of robotic systems 110, and a P number of handheld intelligent surgical instruments 112, where M, N, O, and P are integers greater than or equal to one.” As in 122 “A simplified functional block diagram of a system architecture 13400 of the robotic surgical system 13010 is depicted in FIG. 5. The system architecture 13400 includes a core module 13420, a surgeon master module 13430, a robotic arm module 13440, and an instrument module 13450. The core module 13420 serves as a central controller for the robotic surgical system 13000 and coordinates operations of all of the other modules 13430, 13440, 13450. For example, the core module 13420 maps control devices to the arms 13002, 13003, determines current status, performs all kinematics and frame transformations, and relays resulting movement commands. In this regard, the core module 13420 receives and analyzes data from each of the other modules 13430, 13440, 13450 in order to provide instructions or commands to the other modules 13430, 13440, 13450 for execution within the robotic surgical system 13000. Although depicted as separate modules, one or more of the modules 13420, 13430, 13440, and 13450 are a single component in other exemplifications.” As in 202 “It is to be appreciated that the computer system 210 includes software that acts as an intermediary between users and the basic computer resources described in a suitable operating environment. Such software includes an operating system. The operating system, which can be stored on the disk storage, acts to control and allocate resources of the computer system. System applications take advantage of the management of resources by the operating system through program modules and program data stored either in the system memory or on the disk storage. It is to be appreciated that various components described herein can be implemented with various operating systems or combinations of operating systems.”] Examiner notes it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that cloud-based systems utilize the use of containers to improve efficiency and execute faster startup times within the cloud infrastructure. (see Atlantic.net article)
Regarding claim 17, Shelton teaches wherein the robot arm is a serial mechanism having a working end displaceable in at least six degrees of freedom of movement. [(see at least Fig.4A, paragraph 163) “FIG. 4A illustrates an exemplification of a robotic arm 13120 and a tool assembly 13130 releasably coupled to the robotic arm 13120. The robotic arm 13120 can support and move the associated tool assembly 13130 along one or more mechanical degrees of freedom (e.g., all six Cartesian degrees of freedom, five or fewer Cartesian degrees of freedom, etc.).”]
Regarding claim 19, Shelton teaches wherein the computer-readable program instructions are executable for executing the program from a plurality of at least one container concurrently. [(see at least paragraphs 118, 202, 402) As in 402 “Also, although various operational flow diagrams are presented in a sequence(s), it should be understood that the various operations may be performed in other orders than those which are illustrated, or may be performed concurrently.”]
Regarding claim 20, Shelton teaches wherein the computer-readable program instructions are executable for controlling the execution of the programs of the plurality of containers as a function of performance capacity of the operating system. [(see at least paragraph 202) “The operating system, which can be stored on the disk storage, acts to control and allocate resources of the computer system. System applications take advantage of the management of resources by the operating system through program modules and program data stored either in the system memory or on the disk storage. It is to be appreciated that various components described herein can be implemented with various operating systems or combinations of operating systems.”]
Regarding claim 21, Shelton teaches wherein the computer-readable program instructions are executable for receiving the commands from the at least one container as associated with a tool and/or a peripheral. [(see at least paragraph 146) “A robotic hub can include a situational awareness module, which can be configured to synthesize data from multiple sources to determine an appropriate response to a surgical event. For example, a situational awareness module can determine the type of surgical procedure, step in the surgical procedure, type of tissue, and/or tissue characteristics, as further described herein. Moreover, such a module can recommend a particular course of action or possible choices to the robotic system based on the synthesized data. In various instances, a sensor system encompassing a plurality of sensors distributed throughout the robotic system can provide data, images, and/or other information to the situational awareness module. Such a situational awareness module can be incorporated into a control unit, such as the control unit 13004, for example. In various instances, the situational awareness module can obtain data and/or information from a non-robotic surgical hub and/or a cloud, such as the surgical hub 106 (FIG. 1), the surgical hub 206 (FIG. 10), the cloud 104 (FIG. 1), and/or the cloud 204 (FIG. 9), for example.”]
Regarding claim 22, Shelton teaches wherein the computer-readable program instructions are executable for performing at least the function with the robot arm and with the tool and/or peripheral. [(see at least paragraphs 118, 148) As in 148 “For example, a robotic surgical system can use one or more surgical tools during the surgical procedure. Additionally, one or more handheld instruments can also be used during the surgical procedure. One or more of the surgical devices can include a sensor. For example, multiple sensors can be positioned around the surgical site and/or the operating room. A sensor system including the one or more sensors can be configured to detect one or more conditions at the surgical site. For example, data from the sensor system can determine if a surgical tool mounted to the surgical robot is being used and/or if a feature of the surgical tool should be activated. More specifically, a sensor system can detect if an electrosurgical device is positioned in abutting contact with tissue, for example. As another example, a sensor system can detect if a suctioning element of a surgical tool is applying a sufficient suctioning force to fluid at the surgical site.”]
Regarding claim 24, Shelton teaches including the tool and/or peripheral. [(see at least paragraph 148)]
Regarding claim 26, Shelton teaches wherein the computer-readable program instructions are executable for receiving commands from the at least one container, the commands being received from cloud computing and/or an artificial intelligence network. [(see at least paragraph 118) “The control device 13004 includes any suitable logic control circuit adapted to perform calculations and/or operate according to a set of instructions. The control device 13004 can be configured to communicate with a remote system “RS,” either via a wireless (e.g., Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, LTE, etc.) and/or wired connection. The remote system “RS” can include data, instructions and/or information related to the various components, algorithms, and/or operations of system 13000. The remote system “RS” can include any suitable electronic service, database, platform, cloud “C” (see FIG. 4), or the like. The control device 13004 may include a central processing unit operably connected to memory.”]
Regarding claim 27, Shelton teaches wherein the computer-readable program instructions are executable for performing at least a function with the robot arm with the operating system using the commands from the at least one container while limiting the function to native function capability of the robot arm. [(see at least paragraphs 118, 381) As in 381 “For example, a control algorithm could be executed to limit motion of the robotic arms 9152a-9152e or linkages thereof in one or more directions. As such, position, proximity or other suitable sensors (could be similar to mounted sensor assemblies 20180) mounted on the robotic surgical assembly 20030 can provide data to the base unit control circuit to stop arm motions in a certain direction when the data indicates that the arm motion exceeds a certain limit or threshold. This way, the base unit control circuit can prevent the stop-cock valve from injuring the patient. Additionally, the base unit control circuit can be situationally aware to facilitate such a control algorithm. For example, information about the particular surgical procedure being performed and/or input information from operating room staff can be used to inform the positioning of the patient relative to the surgical platform and robotic surgical assembly 20030 during performance of the surgical procedure. This information may help the surgical robots involved in executing the procedure to set control limits on robotic motions.”]
The Examiner has cited particular paragraphs or columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested of the Applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner. See MPEP 2141.02 [R-07.2015] VI. A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed Invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert, denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984). See also MPEP §2123.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMED YOUSEF ABUELHAWA whose telephone number is (571)272-3219. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5:00 with flex.
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, Wade Miles can be reached at 571-270-7777. 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.
/MOHAMMED YOUSEF ABUELHAWA/Examiner, Art Unit 3656
/WADE MILES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3656
Prosecution Insights