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 .
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it exceeds 150 words in length. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Page 5, line 18: “the underside of the connection plate to be adapted…” Examiner believes this is referring to the “connector plate” corresponding to part 115. This is the only point when the term “connection plate” is used in the specification, but the corresponding term “connector plate” is used at all other points in the specification. This conclusion was reached based on Fig. 1b and page 7, lines 30-32 of the specification.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
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(s) mentioned in the description: Label 100, as described on page 7, line 26. 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.
Claim Objections
Claim 17 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 17, recites the limitation “an upper surface of a connection plate” in lines 3-4 of the claim. As explained above in the objection to the specification, Examiner believes this is referring to the “connector plate” corresponding to part 115. This is the only point when the term “connection plate” is used in the claims, but the corresponding term “connector plate” is used at all other points in the specification. This conclusion was reached based on Fig. 1b and page 7, lines 30-32 of the specification.
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 11-20 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 11 recites the limitation "whereby each channel accommodates a plunger and has an opening that is fluidically connected to the internal passageway of a corresponding connector" in line 7 of the claim. It is unclear if this is a different connector from the "each connector" of the array of connectors as recited previously in the same claim. Examiner believes them to be the same connector. Examiner recommends amending the claim to recite "the corresponding connector" or an equivalent thereof.
Claims 12-20 are rejected based on their dependence to claim 11.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “wherein portions of said opposing surface are in contact with a surface of each protrusion” in lines 2-3 of the claim. Claim 11 previously recites “the at least one sealing mat is arranged on a corresponding at least one receiving surface, which is provided with protrusions that are shaped to pass through the cut-out regions of the at least one sealing mat” in lines 16-18. The structural element of protrusions are established in claim 11 as being on the corresponding at least one receiving surface. When turning to claim 12, the structural element of the protrusions are on the sealing mat. It is unclear whether or not these are the same or different protrusions, particularly due to the term “each” in claim 12.
Based on the disclosure of the present application as a whole, Examiner understands that both the sealing mat and the receiving surface comprise their own protrusions and will be examined as such. Appropriate correction to indicate that the protrusions of claims 11 and 12 are distinctly different protrusions located on distinctly different surfaces.
Claim 19, recites the limitation “the upper surface of the connector plate” in line 3 of the claim. There is no antecedent basis for “the connector plate” as a connector plate is not previously recited in claims 11 or 18 from which claim 19 depends. Examiner recommends amending the claim to recite either “the connector block” or “a connector plate.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 11-13, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cote (US 20170354965 A1) in view of Carlson, et. al. (US 20100080733 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Cote teaches a multichannel pipetting system for aspirating and dispensing liquids (Abstract) by detachably connectable pipette tips (par. 0002) (multichannel head of a pipetting device for aspirating and dispensing a liquid via a plurality of pipetting tips). Cote teaches the pipetting system comprises:
A tip adapter assembly 10 with an 8x12 array of openings 14 on a top surface 16 of planar base 12, the openings 14 aligned with tip mounting tubes 22 on the opposite surface wherein pipette tips 26 are attached (Fig. 11; par. 0056) (a connector block comprising an array of m*n connectors, whereby each connector comprises an internal passageway that is fluidically connectable to a pipetting tip)
A piston drive assembly 27 and cylinder block assembly 31 drive air displacement (Fig. 6; par. 0048) and comprise and array of pistons 42 that pass through piston seals 33 and cylinders 38 which are fluidically connected to tip adapter assembly 10 with the cylinder block located between upper 74 and lower 76 bushings terminating in lower cylinder block plate 64 (Fig. 4, 16; par. 0047, 0060) (a plunger block comprising a corresponding array of m*n channels, whereby each channel accommodates a plunger and has an opening that is fluidically connected to the internal passageway of a corresponding connector)
A seal compression plate 66 located between the lower surface of block assembly 31, just below lower bushing 76 and above tip adapter assembly 10 upper surface 16, wherein the aligned arrays of the tip adapter assembly 10 and cylinder block 31 are additionally fluidically aligned with the receiving ports 49 of compression plate 66 (Fig. 14-17; par. 0058-0059) (wherein the multichannel head further comprises at least one sealing mat arranged between the connector block and the plunger block, which comprises a corresponding array of m*n annular sealing elements). Cote teaches wherein at the receiving ports 49 of seal compression plate 66 are O-rings 47 are located at each port to fluidically seal all parts together (Fig. 15; par. 0058) (a corresponding array of m*n annular sealing elements made of an elastomeric material, for sealing the fluidic connection between the internal passageway of each connector and each opening of the corresponding channel of the plunger block).
Cote teaches seal compression plate 66 aligns with the sealing tubes 20 of planar base 12 of tip adapter assembly 10 which project upward (Fig. 11; par. 0056) aligning with receiving ports 49 of compression plate 66 and making recessed space between sealing tubes 20 on top surface 16 of planar base 12 align with the lower surface of seal compression plate 66 (Fig. 18-19) (the at least one sealing mat is arranged on a corresponding at least one receiving surface) (such that recessed portions are created in the receiving surface which locate the sealing mat).
Cote is silent to wherein the annular sealing elements are interconnected by a lattice of linkages that extend in lateral direction (x) and in longitudinal direction (y), such that a cut-out region is formed between two opposing lateral linkages and two opposing longitudinal linkages, and wherein the at least one sealing mat is arranged on a corresponding at least one receiving surface, which is provided with protrusions that are shaped to pass through the cut-out regions of the at least one sealing mat.
Carlson teaches a needle assembly for handling liquid through sealed receptacles and keeping the liquid sealed away from the external environment (Abstract). Carlson teaches an assembly comprising a plurality of subassemblies such as a filtration assembly 16 that comprises a series of stacked layers (Fig. 16). The filtration assembly further comprises a filtration subassembly 1630 that is a series of layers sealed together each layer with an array of aligned openings, the array of openings sealed by a sheet of O-rings (Fig. 16-18; 0275-0276). Carlson teaches the sheet of O-rings can be manufactured in any compatible size array to create a seal between each layer and each opening in the array (par. 0275-0276). Carlson teaches the sheet of O-rings comprises O-rings attached to one another in an array, with a series of links attached in lateral and longitudinal directions with a gap formed between the O-rings and the linkages (Fig. 18) (wherein the annular sealing elements are interconnected by a lattice of linkages that extend in lateral direction (x) and in longitudinal direction (y), such that a cut-out region is formed between two opposing lateral linkages and two opposing longitudinal linkages). Carlson teaches manufacturing the O-rings to be connected as a sheet allows for easier positioning with corresponding layers when creating seals (par. 0276). Carlson further teaches layers of filtration subsystem are sealed together with the O-rings assisting in providing a tight seal (Fig. 17; par. 0274-0275). The O-rings sit flush between two layers with one layer being sealing plate 1636, wherein sealing plate 1636 comprises supports for the O-rings 1740 and addition recessed areas between the array openings to accommodate the linkages of the O-ring sheet and raised areas to fit in the openings of the linkages (these areas are not labeled, but can best been seen in Fig. 17, layer 1636) (wherein the at least one sealing mat is arranged on a corresponding at least one receiving surface, which is provided with protrusions that are shaped to pass through the cut-out regions of the at least one sealing mat). Carlson teaches this arrangement forms a seal between adjacent layers and prevents fluid communication between each opening of the array within the same layer (par. 0275).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to substitute the compression plate with individual O-rings at each opening as taught by Cote with a series of linked O-rings in a lattice-like structure as taught by Carlson to fluidically seal layers because when the O-rings are manufactured in a sheet, it allows for easier positioning with corresponding layers when creating seals (Carlson, par. 0276). The claimed limitations are obvious because the simple substitution of one known element (a plate with individual O-rings, Cote) for another (a sheet of interconnected O-rings, Carlson) is likely to be obvious when predictable results (creating a fluidic seal between layers) are achieved. MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Further it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the layers adjacent to the sealing layer of Cote to comprise a series of protrusions and recesses to accommodate the shape of the sealing elements (sheet of O-rings) as taught by Carlson because doing so creates seals between layers and between each opening of the array in a single layer (Carlson, par. 0275) with a reasonable expectation of success. MPEP 2143(I)(G).
Regarding claim 12, Modified Cote in view of Carlson teaches wherein the O-rings are thicker in a vertical direction when as compared to the thickness of the links connecting the O-rings (Carlson, Fig. 18). This creates a series of protrusions and recesses on the sheet of O-rings 1850 that are mirror in the compression plate 1636 as seen by supports 1740 and other recessed connecting the supports and raised area between the array of opening (Carlson, Fig. 17-18). It is further suggested by Carlson that all surface areas of adjacent surfaces remain flush and sealed apart from one another to prevent crosstalk between openings (Carlson, par. 0275) (wherein the annular sealing elements of the at least one sealing mat are compressed against an opposing surface and wherein portions of said opposing surface are in contact with a surface of each protrusion).
Regarding claim 13, Modified Cote in view of Carlson teaches wherein the O-rings are thicker in a vertical direction when as compared to the thickness of the links connecting the O-rings (Fig. 18) (wherein the annular sealing elements of the at least one sealing mat have a thickness in vertical direction (z) which is greater than a thickness of the linkages of the interconnecting lattice).
Regarding claim 17, Modified Cote teaches cylinder block assembly 31 is directly attached to tip adapter assembly 10 through seal compression shafts 70 (Fig. 16) (wherein the plunger block is directly mounted to the connector block). Modified Cote teaches seal compression plate 66 aligns on a bottom side with top surface 16 of planar base 12 and seal compression plate 66 aligns on a top side with bottom surface of lower cylinder block plate 64 of cylinder block assembly 31 (Fig. 14-16, 18-19; par. 0068, 0071) (wherein the receiving surface on which the at least one sealing mat is arranged is formed by one of a lower surface of the plunger block and an upper surface of a connection plate in which the connectors are provided).
Regarding claim 20, Modified Cote teaches the array is a 12x8 array for matching a standard 96 well plate and "other common disposable and reusable labware" (par. 0044) (wherein: m = 12 and n = 8).
Claims 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cote (US 20170354965 A1) in view of Carlson, et. al. (US 20100080733 A1) as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Motadel, et. al. (US 20130323140 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Modified Cote teaches O-rings are used with compression plate 66 to seal the array of openings (Cote, par. 0061-0062). Carlson also teaches a sheet made up of O-rings are used to seal the array of opening (Carlson, 0275-076) (the elastomeric material of the annular sealing elements). Carlson also teaches other materials can be used to make the seals (Carlson, par. 0275).
Modified Cote, however, is silent to wherein the linkages of the interconnecting lattice are made of a second material, different from the elastomeric material of the annular sealing elements.
Motadel teaches an integrated card for holding pipette tips for the use with a multichannel pipette (Abstract). Motadel teaches a card 62 comprising an array of apertures 82 on a first, upper surface 64 that extend through the card 62 to form a fluidic channel with connected pipette tips 68 (Fig. 3B, 3C; par. 0064). Motadel specifically teaches surface 64 can further comprise annular protrusions surrounding the apertures 82, where the annular protrusions 32 are made of a thermoplastic elastomer (par. 0040, 0064). Carlson teaches the annular protrusions are made from a second material different from the first material, a moldable plastic, that makes the card (par. 0078, 0081) (wherein the linkages of the interconnecting lattice are made of a second material, different from the elastomeric material of the annular sealing elements). Motadel teaches making the annular protrusions 32 from a different material than the rest of the card 64 allows the annular protrusions, located at fluidic openings, can be made of a more resilient material (par. 0078).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the material of the annular sealing elements (O-rings) and the connecting links of modified Cote to be made of two different materials as taught by Motadel because doing so will allow the annular sealing elements (O-rings, annular protrusions) to be made of a more resilient, elastomer material that the connecting links made of a moldable plastic (Motadel, par. 0078). It is significant for the annular sealing elements to be more resilient because they are surrounding and do the sealing of the fluidic openings.
Regarding claim 16, Modified Cote in view of Carlson teaches wherein the O-rings are thicker in a vertical direction when as compared to the thickness of the links connecting the O-rings (Carlson, Fig. 18). This creates a series of protrusions and recesses on the sheet of O-rings 1850 that are mirror in the compression plate 1636 as seen by supports 1740 and other recessed connecting the supports and raised area between the array of opening (Carlson, Fig. 17-18). It is further suggested by Carlson that all surface areas of adjacent surfaces remain flush and sealed apart from one another to prevent crosstalk between openings (Carlson, par. 0275). Therefore it is under stood that the at least one receiving surface on which the at least one sealing mat is arranged comprises first recessed portions for accommodating the linkages and second recessed portions for accommodating the annular sealing elements, and wherein the first recessed portions are relatively deeper than the second recessed portions because the goal of the sealing arrangement is to not only seal adjacent layer together but also to seal openings within the same layer apart from one another (Carlson, par. 0275).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cote (US 20170354965 A1) in view of Carlson, et. al. (US 20100080733 A1) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Theran (US 6244119 B1).
Regarding claim 15, Modified Cote in view of Carlson teaches a sheet made up of O-rings are used to seal the array of opening (Carlson, 0275-076) (formed of a single piece). Modified Cote teaches the individual O-rings fit into counter-bore 94 of the seal compression plate 66 (Cote, Fig. 17); however, Cote teaches wherein the sealing O-rings project slightly above the counter-bore 94 in order for the O-rings to mate with corresponding opening at the coaxial cylinder 38 to create a seal (Cote, par. 0061).
Theran teaches a multichannel pipetting system with an array of pressure channels to aspirate and dispense liquid (Abstract). Theran teaches the pipetting system with a plurality of channels 102, with tubes 103 and plungers 104, between support plates 107 and 108, with a sealing means 110 between adapted pipette tip 111 and plate 108 (Fig. 1; col. 2, lines 48-67). Theran teaches sealing means 110 can be a sheet of an elastomer which can be secured to the channel support plate 108 or preferably, a gasket made of a silicone sheet having a thickness of about 1/16 to about 1/4 inch and which compresses (col. 3, lines 9-23; col. 4, lines 45-51) (wherein the at least one sealing mat is of uniform thickness in vertical direction (z) and is formed of a single piece). Theran teaches the elastomer sheet can be secured to adjacent plate 108 and remains flexible and elastic enough under pressure to seal pipette tips to the device without interrupting formed seal (col. 3, lines 9-23).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to substitute the O-rings of modified Cote to instead be a sheet of an elastomer as taught by Theran because elastomer sheets can form a secure seal while under pressure while still remaining flexible and elastic enough to not interrupt the formed seals (Theran, col. 3, lines 9-23) and the simple substitution of one known element (O-rings) for another (elastomer sheet) is likely to be obvious when predictable results (creating an air-tight seal between layers) are achieved. MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cote (US 20170354965 A1) in view of Carlson, et. al. (US 20100080733 A1) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Lehtinen, et. al. (US 20020086440 A1) and Moriarty, et. al. (US 20140199216 A1).
Regarding claim 18, Modified Cote teaches lower cylinder block plate 64 located between seal compression plate 66 and cylinder block assembly 31 with an array of opening corresponding the array of the pistons 42 of cylinder block assembly 31 and the openings 14 of tip adapter assembly 10 (Cote, Fig. 18, 19) (further comprising an isolation plate… which is arranged between the connector block and the plunger block, wherein the isolation plate comprises a corresponding array of m*n bores in fluidic connection with the opening of the corresponding channel in the plunger block and with the internal passageway of the corresponding connector). Modified Cote teaches seal compression plate 66 aligns on a bottom side with top surface 16 of planar base 12 and seal compression plate 66 aligns on a top side with bottom surface 53 of lower cylinder block plate 64 of cylinder block assembly 31 (Cote, Fig. 18-19) (the at least one sealing mat comprises a first sealing mat arranged between the connector block and the isolation plate) (the at least one corresponding receiving surface comprises a first receiving surface for the first sealing mat).
Modified Cote is silent to the at least one sealing mat comprises a second sealing mat arranged between the isolation plate and the plunger block and the at least one corresponding receiving surface comprises a second receiving surface for the second sealing mat.
Lehtinen teaches a multichannel pipetting apparatus that can be adapted to different pipette tips (Abstract). Lehtinen teaches the pipetting unit 10 comprises a frame 16 with pistons 11 and cylinders 12 (plunger block), a support plate 21a for holding pipette tips 20a (connector block), and adapter 30a (mislabeled 30c in Fig. 5) (isolation plate) that goes between the cylinders 12 in frame 16 and tips 20a in support 21a all aligned by orifices 13 (Fig. 5-6, par. 0085). Lehtinen teaches one either side of adapter 30a are seal 14a, between adapter 30a and frame 16, and seal 14b, between adapter 30a and support 21a, giving adapter 30a both a top and bottom surface each adjacent to a seal 14a, 14b (Fig. 5-6; par. 0086) (the at least one sealing mat comprises a second sealing mat arranged between the isolation plate and the plunger block) (the at least one corresponding receiving surface comprises a second receiving surface for the second sealing mat). Lehtinen teaches this embodiment of the pipetting device allows for layers to be detachable to accommodate a wider variety of pipette tips based on a wide variety of adapter blocks (see Fig. 19-22 for adapter block variations; par. 0025-0032) wherein the two seals between the changing layers are connecting elements so the pipette can be fluidically sealed and operable after changing parts (par. 0038-0039).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the layers of the pipetting device of modified Cote to further include a second sealing layer between the plunger block and an isolation plate layer as taught by Lehtinen because doing so allows for the pipetting device to use interchangeable and adaptable tip and adapter parts while still maintaining the necessary sealed configuration for the pipetting device to correctly operate (Lehtinen, par. 0025-0032, 0038-0039) with a reasonable expectation of success. MPEP 2143(I)(G).
Modified Cote is silent to the materials used to form the isolation plate. Specifically, modified Cote is silent to the isolation plate being made of an electrically non-conducting material.
Moriarty teaches multichannel air displacement pipette made primarily from molded plastic components (Abstract). Moriarty teaches a pipette that replaces traditional stainless steel portions with molded plastic counterparts (par. 0007), has a housing 122 made of a rigid polymer like PBT or polycarbonate (par. 0033), cylinders 230 and pistons 238 made from a chemical resistant polymer like PEI (par. 0041), seal retainers 364 from molded POM and seal skirts from EPDM rubber (par. 0047).
While Moriarty does not specifically disclose an element that corresponds with the isolation plate, or with cylinder block 64 of Cote or adapter 30a of Lehtinen, Moriarty teaches using molded plastic parts create a lightweight device with parts that are easy to service and replace while still maintaining desirable robustness and reliability, and finally less expensive to build (par. 0013).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to manufacture the pipette parts of modified Cote to be made from molded plastic as taught by Moriarty because molded plastic provides a lightweight, robust, reliable, and overall less expensive material to build parts of a multichannel pipetting device (Moriarty, par. 0013), and this involves applying a known manufacturing technique (of plastic molding) to yield predictable results (creating parts of a multichannel pipette). MPEP 2143(I)(C).
Regarding claim 19, Modified Cote in view of Lehtinen teaches one either side of adapter 30a are seal 14a, between adapter 30a and frame 16, and seal 14b, between adapter 30a and support 21a. This results in a top surface of adapter 30a and a top surface of frame 16 interfacing with seal 14a (the second receiving surface is formed by one of an upper surface of the isolation plate and the lower surface of the plunger block) and a bottom surface of adapter 30a and a top surface of support 21a interfacing with seal 14b (the first receiving surface is formed by one of a lower surface of the isolation plate and the upper surface of the connector plate) (Fig. 5-6; par. 0086).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Shoeneck, et. al. (US 20160016161 A1): Shoeneck teaches a pipettor device with a piston array aligned with a pipette tip retainer array (Abstract, Fig. 2).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MADISON T HERBERT whose telephone number is (571)270-1448. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30a-5:00p.
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, Maris Kessel can be reached at (571) 270-7698. 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.
/M.T.H./Examiner, Art Unit 1758
/MARIS R KESSEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1758
Prosecution Insights