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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 20-38 are pending in the current application.
Claims 32-38 are withdrawn from consideration in the current application.
Claim 20-24, 26-29, and 31 are amended in the current application.
Claims 1-19 are canceled in the current application.
Foreign Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
The certified Foreign Priority document EP21185927.7 has been provided in English. Therefore, Foreign Priority has been perfected, and the effective US filing date of the application is July 15, 2021.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's remarks and amendments filed September 10, 2026 have been fully considered.
Applicant argues that the previously applied prior art, alone or in combination, does not teach the claimed combination of (i) an aqueous pressure-sensitive adhesive (PSA) composition having a tackifier with Tg of less than 5oC, (ii) an emulsion-polymerized PSA with a first Tg of -30oC or less and a second Tg of at least 0oC, and (iii) the claimed monomer framework/composition.
This is not persuasive for the following reasons. The grounds of rejection have been updated to reflect the claims as necessitated by the present amendments. As set forth below, Blackwell in view of Gerst teaches (i) an aqueous pressure-sensitive adhesive (PSA) composition having a tackifier with Tg of less than 5oC (Gerst, [0063]-[0065]), (ii) an emulsion-polymerized PSA with a first Tg of -30oC or less (Gerst, [0005]-[0009], [0015]), and (iii) the claimed monomer framework/composition (Gerst, [0005]-[0009], [0021]-[0027]). Although Blackwell in view of Gerst does not expressly discuss emulsion pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer has a second Tg of at least 0oC, Blackwell in view of Gerst discloses an emulsion pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer that is substantially identical to the pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer dispersed in water of the present invention (Specification as originally filed, Pgs 5-9). The specification as originally filed identifies that the claimed monomer (b) should have content of more than 1 wt% and up to 10 wt% to achieve a second Tg of at least 0oC, and discloses examples having monomer (b) content of 0.5-0.99 wt% having one Tg and examples having monomer (b) content of 2-4 wt% having two Tg values (Specification as originally filed, Pg 10 Lines 21-29; Pgs 19-20). Blackwell in view of Gerst discloses monomer content equivalent to the claimed monomer (b) being preferably 0.5-6 wt% (Gerst, [0007], [0022]); where this content range falls within the claimed (b) monomer range of at least 0.4 wt%, and therefore, satisfies the claimed range (MPEP 2131.03). Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP 2112.01, I & II. In view of the foregoing, Blackwell in view of Gerst’s emulsion pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer is considered to necessarily include embodiments that exhibit a second Tg of at least 0oC, and therefore, establishes a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness over the claimed pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer (MPEP 2112.01, I & II).
Applicant argues that the combination lacks an articulated reason to select the claimed features with a reasonable expectation of success.
This is not persuasive for the following reasons. The examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, since Blackwell and Gerst both disclose pressure-sensitive adhesive compositions for producing labels comprising emulsion pressure-sensitive adhesive polymers formed with acrylate-based monomers and tackifiers, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have utilized Gerst’s aqueous dispersion pressure-sensitive adhesive composition to form Blackwell’s recyclable labels to yield adhesive articles that do not utilize organic solvents, exhibit self-adhesiveness, exhibit good adhesive properties, and achieve improved cohesion (Gerst, [0004], [0066]).
Additionally, there are no explicit prohibitions discussed by either Blackwell or Gerst that would dissuade, discourage, or forbid one skilled in the art from considering and combining the applicable teachings of the prior as set forth in the grounds of rejection.
In view of the forgoing, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to review, understand, apply, and combine the applicable teachings of the prior art of record with a predictable and reasonable expectation of success.
Applicant asserts that the claimed invention exhibits unexpected and superior results.
This is not persuasive for the following reasons. Whether the unexpected results are the result of unexpectedly improved results or a property not taught by the prior art, the "objective evidence of nonobviousness must be commensurate in scope with the claims which the evidence is offered to support." In other words, the showing of unexpected results must be reviewed to see if the results occur over the entire claimed range. In re Clemens, 622 F.2d 1029, 1036, 206 USPQ 289, 296 (CCPA 1980). See MPEP 716.02(d). The nonobviousness of a broader claimed range can be supported by evidence based on unexpected results from testing a narrower range if one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to determine a trend in the exemplified data which would allow the artisan to reasonably extend the probative value thereof. In re Kollman, 595 F.2d 48, 201 USPQ 193 (CCPA 1979). See MPEP 716.02(d), I. The present claims are not found to be sufficiently commensurate in scope with the inventive examples in the specification as originally filed. For example:
Pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer dispersions P1 and P2 only exhibit one Tg value (Spec, Pg 19). Therefore, all inventive examples solely utilizing P1 and P2 are not within the scope of the claimed pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer dispersion that requires a first Tg of -30oC of less and a second Tg of at least 0oC.
Pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer dispersions P1-P5 all utilize the specific monomers of acrylic acid, acrylamide, n-butyl acrylate, and 2-ethylhexyacrylate (Spec, Pgs 19-20).
N-butyl acrylate and 2-ethylhexylacrylate fall within the scope of the claimed (a) acrylic acid alkyl ester monomers with 2-12 carbon atoms in the alkyl group. However, the specific combination of N-butyl acrylate and 2-ethylhexylacrylate is but one subset of a vast quantity of viable monomers set forth by the claimed (a) monomer group, where one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to determine a trend from this one subset which would allow the artisan to reasonably extend the probative value thereof.
Acrylic acid falls within the scope of the claimed (b) ethylenically unsaturated, copolymerizable monomer having at least one acid group. However, acrylic acid is but one species of a vast quantity of viable monomers set forth by the claimed (b) monomer group, where one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to determine a trend from this one species which would allow the artisan to reasonably extend the probative value thereof.
Acrylamide falls within the scope of the claimed (d) ethylenically unsaturated monomers different from groups (a), (b), and (c). However, acrylamide is but one species of a vast quantity of viable monomers set forth by the claimed (d) monomer group, where one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to determine a trend from this one species which would allow the artisan to reasonably extend the probative value thereof. Additionally, claim 20 identifies the (d) monomer group as optional.
The inventive pressure-sensitive adhesive compositions only utilize 1 specific tackifier of T1: Dermulsene 222 that has a Tg of -2oC that falls within the claimed tackifier Tg range of 5oC or less (Spec, Table 1). Dermulsene 222 is but one species of a vast quantity of viable tackifiers set forth by the claims, where one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to determine a trend from this one species which would allow the artisan to reasonably extend the probative value thereof.
The inventive pressure-sensitive adhesive compositions utilize a tackifier content range of 70-80 parts by weight relative to 100 parts by weight of the pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer dispersions of P3-P5 (Spec, Table 2). However, claim 20 does not recite any content range requirements for the tackifier.
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to determine with certainty that all other species and subsets with the claimed scope would also necessarily yield the asserted unexpected and superior properties from the very limited scope of the inventive examples. In view of the foregoing, when all of the evidence is considered, the totality of the rebuttal evidence of nonobviousness fails to outweigh the evidence of obviousness.
Claim Interpretations
Claims 20 and 21 recite the phrase “recycling-compatible.” The specification as originally filed defines the phrase as “the aqueous pressure-sensitive composition and the adhesive label … can be removed by washing treatment from substrates which are intended to be recycled” at Page 4.
Claims 30 and 31 recite the phrase “bio-based.” The specification as originally filed defines the phrase as “the material is of biological origin and comes from biomaterial/renewable resources” at Page 9.
Claim Objections
Claim 28 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 28 recites “after complete contactas.” This appears to contain a typographical error, and should likely instead recite “after complete contact
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 20-28, 30, and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blackwell et al. (US 2013/0048221 A1) in view of Gerst et al. (US 2019/0390091 A1).
Regarding Claim 20, Blackwell teaches an emulsion pressure-sensitive adhesive composition for recycling-compatible pressure-sensitive adhesive labels (Blackwell, Abstract, [0002], [0007], [0020]). Blackwell teaches the emulsion pressure-sensitive adhesive composition is formed with acrylate-based emulsion polymers that can include tackifiers, where the glass transition temperature (T-g) of the emulsion polymer is less than about -30oC to yield a good balance of adhesion and tack at room temperature (Blackwell, [0025]-[0035]).
Blackwell remains silent regarding a specific aqueous pressure-sensitive adhesive composition as recited by claim 20.
Gerst, however, teaches an aqueous dispersion pressure-sensitive adhesive composition for producing labels comprising an emulsion pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer formed with acrylate-based monomers and tackifiers, where the emulsion pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer has a Tg of preferably less than -20oC determined by differential scanning calorimetry ASTM D 3418-08 mid-point temperature (Gerst, Abstract, [0001], [0005]-[0009], [0015]). Gerst’s Tg range encompasses the claimed range of -30oC or less, and therefore, renders obvious the claimed range (MPEP 2144.05). Gerst teaches the emulsion pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer is formed from preferably 65 to 99.5 wt% of a soft (meth)acrylic ester monomer such as ethyl acrylate (Gerst, [0006], [0021]); preferably 0.5 to 6 wt% of methacrylic acid monomer (Gerst, [0007], [0022]); optionally styrene (Gerst, [0008], [0023]); and optionally other monomers (Gerst, [0009], [0024]-[0027]). Gerst’s soft (meth)acrylic ester monomer content range encompasses the claimed (a) monomer range of 70 to 99.5 wt%, and therefore, renders obvious the claimed range (MPEP 2144.05). Gerst’s preferred methacrylic acid monomer content range falls within the claimed (b) monomer range of at least 0.4 wt%, and therefore, satisfies the claimed range (MPEP 2131.03). Gerst teaches a tackifier is included in the aqueous dispersion pressure-sensitive adhesive composition, and has a Tg of -40oC to 0oC (Gerst, [0063]-[0065]). Gerst’s tackifier Tg range falls within the claimed range of 5oC or less, and therefore, satisfies the claimed range (MPEP 2131.03). Gerst does not discuss or require the inclusion of 15 to 45 weight parts of a water-dispersible halogen-free flame retardant in combination with a pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer made of 1 to 8 wt% of phosphorous-containing monomers; therefore, Gerst is considered to completely satisfy this negative limitation recited by claim 20. Although Gerst does not expressly discuss emulsion pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer has a second Tg of at least 0oC, Gerst discloses an emulsion pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer that is substantially identical to the pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer dispersed in water of the present invention (Specification as originally filed, Pgs 5-9). The specification as originally filed identifies that the claimed monomer (b) should have content of more than 1 wt% and up to 10 wt% to achieve a second Tg of at least 0oC, and discloses examples having monomer (b) content of 0.5-0.99 wt% having one Tg and examples having monomer (b) content of 2-4 wt% having two Tg values (Specification as originally filed, Pg 10 Lines 21-29; Pgs 19-20). Gerst discloses monomer content equivalent to the claimed monomer (b) being preferably 0.5-6 wt% (Gerst, [0007], [0022]); where this content range falls within the claimed (b) monomer range of at least 0.4 wt%, and therefore, satisfies the claimed range (MPEP 2131.03). Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). See MPEP 2112.01, I & II. In view of the foregoing, Gerst’s emulsion pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer is considered to necessarily envisage embodiments that exhibit a second Tg of at least 0oC, and therefore, establishes a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness over the claimed pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer (MPEP 2112.01, I & II).
Since Blackwell and Gerst both disclose pressure-sensitive adhesive compositions for producing labels comprising emulsion pressure-sensitive adhesive polymers formed with acrylate-based monomers and tackifiers, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized Gerst’s aqueous dispersion pressure-sensitive adhesive composition to form Blackwell’s recyclable labels to yield adhesive articles that do not utilize organic solvents, exhibit self-adhesiveness, exhibit good adhesive properties, and achieve improved cohesion as taught by Gerst (Gerst, [0004], [0066]).
Regarding Claim 21, modified Blackwell teaches the aqueous dispersion pressure-sensitive adhesive composition is designed for being removable from label substrates to allow for recycling of the label substrates such as polyethylene terephthalate, where the aqueous dispersion pressure-sensitive adhesive composition can be removed without leaving any residue (i.e., detachable to a degree of at least 50%) (Blackwell, Abstract, [0002], [0020]-[0021], [0024], [0092]-[0098]; Gerst, [0066]). In view of the foregoing, modified Blackwell’s teachings are considered to at least render obvious the scope of claim 21 with a predictable and reasonable expectation of success (MPEP 2143, MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding Claim 22, modified Blackwell teaches the tackifier is included in an amount of 5 to 40 parts by weight based on 100 parts by weight of adhesive polymer (Gerst, [0063]). Modified Blackwell’s tackifier content is encompassed within the claimed range of 5 to 100 parts by weight, and therefore, satisfies the claimed range (MPEP 2131.03).
Regarding Claim 23, modified Blackwell teaches the emulsion pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer is formed from preferably 65 to 99.5 wt% of a soft (meth)acrylic ester monomer such as ethyl acrylate (Gerst, [0006], [0021]). Modified Blackwell’s soft (meth)acrylic ester monomer content range encompasses the claimed (a) monomer range of 75 to 99.5 wt%, and therefore, renders obvious the claimed range (MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding Claim 24, modified Blackwell teaches the emulsion pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer is formed from preferably 0.5 to 6 wt% of methacrylic acid monomer (Gerst, [0007], [0022]). Modified Blackwell’s methacrylic acid monomer content range encompasses the claimed (b) monomer range of more than 1 to 4.5 wt%, and therefore, renders obvious the claimed range (MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding Claim 25, modified Blackwell teaches the emulsion pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer is formed from 0 to 10 wt% of optionally other monomers that include C1 to C20 alkyl (meth)acrylates that include methyl acrylate and methyl methacrylate (Gerst, [0009], [0024]-[0027]). Modified Blackwell’s other monomer content range is encompassed within the claimed (c) monomer range of 0 to 20 wt%, and therefore, satisfies the claimed range (MPEP 2131.03).
Regarding Claim 26, modified Blackwell teaches the emulsion pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer is formed from 0 to 30 wt% of optionally styrene (i.e., a vinyl aromatic having 8 C atoms) (Gerst, [0008], [0023]). Modified Blackwell’s styrene monomer content range encompasses the claimed (d) monomer range of 0 to 20 wt%, and therefore, renders obvious the claimed range (MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding Claim 27, modified Blackwell teaches the emulsion pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer is formed from preferably 65 to 99.5 wt% of a soft (meth)acrylic ester monomer such as ethyl acrylate (Gerst, [0006], [0021]); preferably 0.5 to 6 wt% of methacrylic acid monomer (Gerst, [0007], [0022]); from 0 to 30 wt% of optionally styrene (Gerst, [0008], [0023]); and from 0 to 10 wt% of optionally other monomers that include C1 to C20 alkyl (meth)acrylates such as methyl acrylate and methyl methacrylate, and hydroxyalkyl (meth)acrylates having C1 to C10 atoms in the hydroxyalkyl groups (Gerst, [0009], [0024]-[0027]). Modified Blackwell’s soft (meth)acrylic ester monomer content range encompasses the claimed (a) monomer range of 80 to 99.5 wt%, and therefore, renders obvious the claimed range (MPEP 2144.05). Modified Blackwell’s methacrylic acid monomer content range encompasses the claimed (b) monomer range of more than 1 to 4.5 wt%, and therefore, renders obvious the claimed range (MPEP 2144.05). Modified Blackwell’s other monomers (that include methyl acrylate and hydroxyalkyl (meth)acrylates) content range of 0 to 10 wt% overlaps the claimed (c) 0 to 15 wt% and (d) 0.1 to 10 wt% monomer ranges (0.1 to 25 wt% combined), and therefore, renders obvious the claimed ranges (MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding Claim 28, modified Blackwell teaches the loop tack (quickstick) was 2.7 to 15.0 N/25mm measured by pulling off a 25 mm wide strip of the adhesive composition that was laminated to a polyethylene carrier material with a loop lowered and pulled off at 300 mm/min after complete contact (Gerst, [0099]-[0100], [0122], [0128], [0134], [0144], Tables 1c, 3b, 4c, 6b). Modified Blackwell’s example loop tack values all fall within the claimed range of at least 2 N/25mm, and therefore, satisfy the claimed range (MPEP 2131.03).
Regarding Claims 30 and 31, the specification as originally filed at Page 9 defines “bio-based” as material being of biological origin and coming from biomaterial/renewable resources. The specification as originally filed identifies “bio-based” monomers as including esters of (meth)acrylic acid at Page 9. Modified Blackwell teaches the emulsion pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer is formed from preferably 65 to 99.5 wt% of a soft (meth)acrylic ester monomer such as ethyl acrylate (an ester of (meth)acrylic acid) (Gerst, [0006], [0021]). Modified Blackwell’s (meth)acrylic ester monomer content falls within the claimed range of at least 50% of monomers, and therefore, satisfies the claimed range (MPEP 2131.03). Although modified Blackwell remains silent regarding “bio-based” materials, the origin and formation of the precursor monomer materials is considered to be a product-by-process limitation. "[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). See MPEP 2113. Therefore, modified Blackwell’s esters of (meth)acrylic acid are considered to satisfy the “bio-based” esters of (meth)acrylic acid disclosed by the specification as originally filed with a predictable and reasonable expectation of success.
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blackwell et al. (US 2013/0048221 A1) in view of Gerst et al. (US 2019/0390091 A1) as applied to claim 20 above, and further in view of Tonhauser et al. (US 2018/0258322 A1).
Regarding Claim 29, modified Blackwell teaches the emulsion pressure-sensitive adhesive composition as discussed above for claim 20. Modified Blackwell teaches the composition comprises 0.05 to 5 parts by weight of crosslinkers (Gerst, [0062], [0065]; Blackwell, [0035]).
Modified Blackwell remains silent regarding at least one crosslinking agent in an amount of 0.01 to 5 parts by weight that can include isocyanates or aziridines.
Tonhauser, however, teaches a pressure-sensitive adhesive composition comprising an emulsion polymerized pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer formed with soft (meth)acrylic acid ester monomers having a low Tg of less than 0oC and other monomers, and at least one crosslinker selected from polyisocyanates or polyaziridines (Tonhauser, [0001], [0006]-[0011], [0024]-[0028], [0042]). Tonhauser teaches the crosslinker is included in an amount of preferably 0.5 to 5 parts by weight (Tonhauser, [0043]-[0061]). Tonhauser’s crosslinker content falls within the claimed range of 0.1 to 5 parts by weight, and therefore, satisfies the claimed range (MPEP 2131.03).
Since modified Blackwell and Tonhauser both disclose pressure-sensitive adhesive compositions comprising an emulsion pressure-sensitive adhesive polymer formed with acrylate-based monomers and crosslinkers, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized Tonhauser’s crosslinkers to form modified Blackwell’s adhesive composition to yield adhesive articles that improve blushing characteristics when in contact with water as taught by Tonhauser (Tonhauser, [0061]).
Conclusion
Prior art made of record considered pertinent, but not currently relied upon is:
Li et al. (US 2011/0313093 A1) that teaches a microdomain aqueous emulsion polymer for pressure sensitive adhesives that exhibits a first Tg from -80oC to -10oC and a second Tg from 50oC to 120oC (Li, Abstract, [0006]-[0027]); and
Di Stefano (US 2003/0143409 A) that teaches a blend of a high Tg polymer and a low Tg polymer emulsion for pressure sensitive adhesives (Di Stefano, Abstract, [0012]-[0032]).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any 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 ELI D STRAH whose telephone number is (571)270-7088. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am - 7 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, Aaron Austin can be reached at 571-272-8935. 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.
/Eli D. Strah/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1782
