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
This Action is in response to the Amendment filed June 2, 2026.
In view of the amendments, the drawing objections as set forth in the Office Action dated 02/02/2026, are withdrawn.
Claims 9 and 21 are canceled.
Claim 22 is amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/02/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
PNG
media_image1.png
278
346
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In response to Applicant’s argument that Mulholland does not teach heating a skin treatment zone and applying a fractional energy to the same treatment zone, the Examiner disagrees. The claims do not define location of the skin treatment area/tissue zone and it’s the Office Action’s position that the skin treatment area/tissue zone covers the area/zone where both electrodes treat the skin as shown in the annotated Fig. 4 of Mulholland.
In response to Applicant’s argument that Mulholland does not teach or suggest a first energy source and a second energy source, the Examiner disagrees. The claims do not preclude that the energy sources are external electrode 41 and internal electrode 12 of Mulholland as illustrated in the annotated figure above.
With respect to Applicant’s assertion that Mulholland does not teach or suggest “micro-needle electrodes”, the Examiner disagrees as Mulholland expressly teaches that conductive sub-elements 52 of the external electrode are needle shaped with the area of each needle shaped conductive sub-electrode having an area up to 0.5 mm2. (see rejection of claim 12 spanning pages 6-7 in the 02/02/2026 Office Action). The Examiner notes that the last line of the passage of Mulholland reproduced on page 11 of the Amendment does not recite “In the preferred embodiment”. Since it does not, the conductive sub-elements being needle shaped are of one embodiment and the movable external element is another preferred embodiment.
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.
Claim 22 is 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 17 recites a fractional laser, and claim 22, which depends from claim 17, recites an optical element configured to fractionate a laser beam from a laser into multiple micro-beams applied to a treatment area. It is unclear, if the optical element is part of the fractional laser of claim 1, or if it refers to an additional laser. The Office Action considers that the optical element is part of the fractional laser.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4-6, 8, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent No. 8,103,355 to Mulholland.
Regarding claim 1, Mulholland discloses a method for fractional tissue treatment comprising: using a first energy source to heat a skin treatment zone to a sub-necrotic temperature level (e.g., column 3, lines 4-9: RF generator connected to external electrodes where RF energy is delivered to the external electrodes at a level sufficient to heat the skin below the external electrode to a sub-necrotic level); and using a second energy source to apply fractional energy to said skin treatment zone to create a matrix of ablation and/or coagulation micro-zones (e.g., column 3, lines 27-33: the device also comprises a RF generator (another portion thereof) connected to internal and external electrodes where the RF generator delivers energy to the internal electrodes at a level to destroy adipose tissue in vicinity of the internal electrode tip and delivers energy to the external electrodes at a level sufficient to create coagulation zones on the skin surface; column 5, lines 58-62: external electrode may be structured from a plurality of small conductive elements for fractional skin treatment; column 9, lines 27-35: external electrode 51 has an RF conductive element positionable on a skin surface above the treatment area of the internal electrode and has a fractured structure that would create a matrix small zones; and column 6, lines 3-9: external electrodes can be structured from a plurality of conductive elements that have a small enough area to create small coagulation zones on the skin surface on the order of 50 microns to 300 microns).
With respect to claim 4, Mulholland discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein said first energy source is an RF energy source (e.g., column 3, lines 4-9: RF generator connected to external electrodes where RF energy is delivered to the external electrodes at a level sufficient to heat the skin below the external electrode to a sub-necrotic level).
As to claim 5, Mulholland discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein said first energy source creates tissue bulk heating up to a temperature in a range of 40° C. to 50° C (e.g., column 8, lines 1-6: temperature for collagen remodeling depends on heating time; if treatment time is a few minutes, temperature should be in the range of 40 -45 degrees C to cause collagen remodeling without skin damage).
With respect to claim 6, Mulholland discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein said second energy source is an RF energy source (e.g., column 3, lines 27-33: the device also comprises a RF generator (another portion thereof) connected to internal and external electrodes where the RF generator delivers energy to the internal electrodes at a level to destroy adipose tissue in vicinity of the internal electrode tip and delivers energy to the external electrodes at a level sufficient to create coagulation zones on the skin surface).
As to claim 8, Mulholland discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein said second energy source comprises a RF micro-needling device (e.g., column 9, lines 27-38: external electrode 51 comprises a RF conductive element with needle shaped sub-elements having an area up to 0.5 mm2).
As to claim 11, Mulholland discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein said second energy source creates tissue coagulation to a depth of 0.1 mm up to 10 mm (e.g., column 6, lines 3-10: the area of the coagulation zone should not exceed 0.5 mm2 to provide fast healing of the lesion; and column 7, lines 63-67: to create thermal effect in the dermis, the depth of the internal electrode is less than 5 mm and would necessarily create tissue coagulation at a depth within the range of 0.1 to up to 10 mm).
Regarding claim 12, Mulholland discloses a device for fractional tissue treatment comprising: one or more RF electrodes connected to a first RF energy source, configured to heat a tissue zone to a sub-necrotic temperature (e.g., column 3, lines 4-9: RF generator connected to external electrodes where RF energy is delivered to the external electrodes at a level sufficient to heat the skin below the external electrode to a sub-necrotic level, and Fig. 1, external electrode 51); micro-needle electrodes arranged for insertion into said tissue zone and coupled to a second RF source and operative to create a matrix of coagulation and/or ablation zones in said tissue zone (e.g., column 3, lines 27-33: the device also comprises a RF generator (another portion thereof) connected to internal and external electrodes where the RF generator delivers energy to the internal electrodes at a level to destroy adipose tissue in vicinity of the internal electrode tip and delivers energy to the external electrodes at a level sufficient to create coagulation zones on the skin surface; column 9, lines 1-38: RF generator delivers energy to internal electrode 21 at a level to destroy adipose tissue where the external electrodes has a fractional structure including conductive sub-elements 52 that are needle shaped where the area of each conductive sub-electrode is less than 0.5 mm2; and column 9, lines 53-59: coagulation zones are created under the sub-conductive elements); and a microcontroller coupled to said first and second RF energy sources, said one or more RF electrodes and said micro-needle electrodes, configured to control heating and micro-needles treatment (e.g., column 9, lines 60 to column 10, line 17: Fig. 6 is a device unit for powering and controlling RF energy delivered to the RF electrodes where controller 63 is used to control output from the generator and gets inputs from a monitoring circuit 65 to adjust output parameters according to inputs) to be delivered essentially simultaneously (e.g., column 5, lines 28-31 and 47-50: method for adipose tissue destruction and simultaneous skin tightening where inner electrode creates adipose tissue destruction and skin tightening is achieved by the external electrode) .
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.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mulholland in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0066237 to Smotrich et al. (hereinafter referred to as “Smotrich”).
With respect to claim 2, Mulholland discloses the method according to claim 1, but does not expressly disclose that said first energy source is a laser that emits energy to a skin penetration depth greater than 0.5 mm. However, Smotrich, in a related art: methods and devices for controlled mediation and/or improvement of inflammation/damage of tissue by delivering non-ablative thermal tissue damage to portions of the tissue including the inflamed tissue (e.g., abstract and paragraph [0079] of Smotrich), teaches that the first energy source may be a function of the treatment type to be performed, the tissue to be heated, the depth with the tissue at which treatment is desired, and of the absorption of that energy in the desired area, and that the energy source may be a laser (e.g., paragraph [0118] of Smotrich); and that the non-ablative thermal tissue damage is delivered to a depth of about 1000 microns (i.e., 1 mm, which is greater than 0.5 mm) (e.g., paragraph [0029] of Smotrich). Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the benefits of the first energy source being a laser that emits energy to a skin penetration depth greater than 0.5 mm in view of the teachings of Smotrich. Consequently, one of ordinary skill in the art would have modified the method of Mulholland so that the first energy source is a laser and the penetration depth of the delivered laser thermal treatment is greater than 0.5 mm in view of the teachings of Smotrich that such was well-known engineering expedient in the fractional tissue treatment art to improved tissue damage, and because the combination would have yielded a predictable result.
With respect to the penetration depth of 0.5 mm caused by the laser, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Mulholland, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art [In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233] and Applicant does not appear to provide criticality for penetration depth being greater than 0.5 mm.
As to claim 3, Mulholland discloses the method according to claim 1, but does not expressly disclose that said first energy source is laser, light emitting diode, a vertical-cavity surface-emitting laser, a filament lamp or a flash lamp. However, Smotrich, in a related art, teaches that an energy source for delivering heat to a skin treatment zone at sub-necrotic temperature levels can be any of those energy devices (e.g., paragraph [0118] of Smotrich). Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the benefits of the first energy source being any device recited in claim 3 in view of the teachings of Smotrich. Consequently, one of ordinary skill in the art would have modified the method of Mulholland so that the first energy source is any of the energy devices of claim 3 in view of the teachings of Smotrich that such were well-known engineering expedients in the fractional tissue treatment art to improved tissue damage, and because the combination would have yielded a predictable result.
Claims 7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mulholland in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0364229 to Kawakubo et al. (hereinafter referred to as “Kawakubo”).
With respect to claim 7, Mulholland discloses the method according to claim 1, but does not expressly disclose that said second energy source is a fractional laser. However, Kawakubo, in a related art: fractional treatment of skin cancers (e.g., paragraphs [0002] and [0105] of Kawakubo), teaches that the second energy source to apply fractional energy to a skin treatment zone and coagulates the tissue can be a fractional laser (e.g., paragraph [0082] of Kawakubo). Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the benefits of the second energy source being a fractional laser in view of the teachings of Kawakubo. Consequently, one of ordinary skill in the art would have modified the method of Mulholland so that the second energy source is a fractional laser in view of the teachings of Kawakubo that such was well-known engineering expedient in the fractional tissue treatment art, and because the combination would have yielded a predictable result.
As to claim 10, Mulholland discloses the method according to claim 1, but does not expressly disclose that said second energy source creates tissue ablation to a depth of 0.1 mm up to 10 mm. However, Kawakubo, in a related art, teaches that the second energy source can create tissue ablation to a depth from 0.1 mm up to at least 5 mm (e.g., paragraphs [0105] and [0142] of Kawakubo where the tumor is a skin tumor). Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the benefits of the second energy source creating tissue ablation to a depth of 0.1 mm up to 5 mm (within the claimed range) in view of the teachings of Kawakubo. Consequently, one of ordinary skill in the art would have modified the method of Mulholland so that the second energy source creates tissue ablation within the claimed depth in view of the teachings of Kawakubo that such was well-known engineering expedient in the fractional tissue treatment art, and because the combination would have yielded a predictable result.
Claims 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawakubo in view of Mulholland.
Regarding claim 12, Kawakubo discloses a device for fractional tissue treatment (e.g., title and abstract: device inducing fractional tissue damage to treat cancer) comprising: one or more RF electrodes connected to a first RF energy source, configured to heat a tissue zone to a sub-necrotic temperature (e.g., paragraphs [0102]: RF energy can be used to form a plurality of microscopic treatment zones using surface or penetrating (e.g., needle-like) electrodes to induce fractional damage of the tumor; and [0112]: fractional tissue damage can be achieved using a RF device and inserting an array of needles to a predetermined depth where radio frequency pulses of electric current (heat) are applied to one or more of the needles to create regions of thermal damage and regions of necrosis in the tissue surrounding the needles; and [0114]: a second source of electrical current in the milliampere range can be applied to see if a motor response occurs indicating the presence of a nerve – thus, Kawakubo discloses a device that is capable of using one energy source to some needle electrodes apply thermal heat and another energy source connected to other electrodes to induce fractional damage); micro-needle electrodes arranged for insertion into said tissue zone and coupled to a second RF source and operative to create a matrix of coagulation and/or ablation zones in said tissue zone (e.g., paragraphs [0051]: radiofrequency energy delivery device comprises an ablative fractional radiofrequency delivery device and can be delivered to a RF microneedling device; [0112]-[0118]: Fig. 18C, tissue 305, electrode needles 350, energy source 320; and [0125]-[0126]: elongated damage regions are formed between several pairs of needles to form a desired damage pattern in tissue 305 where the regions of thermal damage patterns can be formed simultaneously, or alternatively, sequentially, using any combinations of needles through appropriate configuration of energy source 320 and control module 330 to deliver predetermined amounts of current between selected pairs of needles); and a microcontroller coupled to said first and second RF energy sources, said one or more RF electrodes and said micro-needle electrodes, configured to control heating and micro-needles treatment to be delivered essentially simultaneously (e.g., paragraphs [0125]-[0126]: elongated damage regions are formed between several pairs of needles to form a desired damage pattern in tissue 305 where the regions of thermal damage patterns can be formed simultaneously, or alternatively, sequentially, using any combinations of needles through appropriate configuration of energy source 320 and control module 330 to deliver predetermined amounts of current between selected pairs of needles).
Kawakubo differs from the claimed invention in that it implies that it has two different RF energy sources for heating the treatment zone to a sub-necrotic level and for creating a matrix of coagulation and/or ablation zones in the tissue zone. However, Mulholland, in a related art, teaches two different electrode types: one for heating the tissue zone to a sub-necrotic level e.g., column 3, lines 4-9: RF generator connected to external electrodes where RF energy is delivered to the external electrodes at a level sufficient to heat the skin below the external electrode to a sub-necrotic level, and Fig. 1, external electrode 51); and another for creating the matrix of thermal damage (e.g., column 3, lines 27-33: the device also comprises a RF generator (another portion thereof) connected to internal and external electrodes where the RF generator delivers energy to the internal electrodes at a level to destroy adipose tissue in vicinity of the internal electrode tip and delivers energy to the external electrodes at a level sufficient to create coagulation zones on the skin surface). Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the benefits of using two RF energy sources (different current levels or parameters) to heat tissue but not destroy; and to destroy adipose tissue in the treatment zone) in view of the teachings of Mulholland. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would have modified the device of Kawakubo to have two different RF energy sources for 1) heating, but not destroying tissue and 2) destroying tissue in the treatment area in view of the teachings of Mulholland that such was a well-known engineering expedient in the fractional tissue treatment art, and because the combination would have yielded a predictable result.
With respect to claim 13, Kawakubo in view of Mulholland teaches the device according to claim 12, wherein said microcontroller is configured to control the heating to be delivered prior to the micro-needling treatment (e.g., paragraphs [0125]-[0126] of Kawakubo: the regions of thermal damage patterns can be formed simultaneously, or alternatively, sequentially, using any combinations of needles through appropriate configuration of energy source 320 and control module 330 to deliver predetermined amounts of current between selected pairs of needles). In the absence of criticality, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to heat the tissue before the micro-needling treatment to prepare the tissue for the higher heat treatment. At the very least one of ordinary skill in the art, upon reading Kawakubo, would have recognized the desirability of alternating between heating tissue, without destroying the tissue and heating the tissue to destroy the tissue in view of the teachings of Kawakubo. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try heating of the tissue, prior to delivery of the micro-needle treatment in Kawakubo since a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense (See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc.).
As to claim 14, Kawakubo in view of Mulholland teaches the device according to claim 12, wherein said microcontroller is configured to control the heating to be delivered after to the micro-needling treatment (e.g., paragraphs [0125]-[0126] of Kawakubo: the regions of thermal damage patterns can be formed simultaneously, or alternatively, sequentially, using any combinations of needles through appropriate configuration of energy source 320 and control module 330 to deliver predetermined amounts of current between selected pairs of needles). In the absence of criticality, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to heat the tissue after the micro-needling treatment in view of the teachings of Kawakubo that the two heatings can be simultaneous or alternating. At the very least one of ordinary skill in the art, upon reading Kawakubo, would have recognized the desirability of alternating between heating tissue, without destroying the tissue and heating the tissue to destroy the tissue in view of the teachings of Kawakubo. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try heating of the tissue, after delivery of the micro-needle treatment in Kawakubo since a person with ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense (See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc.).
With respect to claim 15, Kawakubo in view of Mulholland teaches the device according to claim 12, wherein said microcontroller is configured so that a pulse of heating overlaps with an RF pulse delivered to the micro-needle electrodes (e.g., paragraphs [0125]-[0126] of Kawakubo – since heating electrodes can occur simultaneous with the heating of the microneedles to destroy tissue – an RF pulse of heating would overlap with an RF pulse delivered to the micro-needle electrodes).
As to claim 16, Kawakubo in view of Mulholland teaches the device according to claim 12, wherein said micro-needle electrodes are inserted into the tissue zone to a depth (e.g., paragraph [0118] of Kawakubo: this configuration permits reliable insertion of the array of needles to a predetermined depth) from 0.1 mm up to 10 mm (e.g., paragraph [0127] of Kawakubo: the length of the needles extend into the tissue depends on the targeted depth for damaging the tissue. A typical depth can be about 1500-2000 µm (1.5 mm to 2 mm, which is within the claimed range).
Claims 17-20 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawakubo.
Referring to claim 17, Kawakubo discloses a device for fractional tissue treatment (e.g., title and abstract: device inducing fractional tissue damage to treat cancer) comprising: a heat source, configured to heat a tissue zone to a sub-necrotic temperature (e.g., paragraphs [0078]: “fractional tissue damage” describes the generation of damage, heating, and/or ablation/vaporization of microscopic treatment zones (MTZs) [that is, fractional tissue damage may just be heating of a treatment zone]); [0121]-[0122]: RF current to needles 350 cause heating in the exposed tip region, inducing thermal damage regions 370 around the tip of each needle; [0150]-[0151]: fractional treatment of tumor tissue can be achieved with insertion of heated needles into tumor tissue and MTZ cells can be exposed to temperatures without significant bulk heating in fractionally-treated tissue); a fractional laser operative to create a matrix of coagulation and/or ablation zones in said tissue zone (e.g., paragraphs [0048]-[0049]: the device configured to induce fractional tissue damage comprises a fractional laser or an ablative fractional laser; [0072]: fractional laser devices generate a pattern of fractional tissue damage; [0167]: fractional laser device shown in Fig. 17 generates a pattern of microtreatment zones (MTZs) as shown in Fig. 17E and [0185]: Fig. 17E, 716 individual exposure areas); and a microcontroller coupled said fractional laser, configured to control heating and fractional laser treatment to be delivered essentially simultaneously (e.g., paragraphs [0135]-[0138]: multiple microtreatment zones can be exposed sequentially or simultaneously where sequential exposure is achieved by scanning or moving an energy source and simultaneous exposure can be achieved by an array or a multiple of sources; and [0168]-[0169] and [0171]: fractional laser device includes a control module (Fig. 17a, 102) where the control module provides specific settings to the EMR source (e.g., fractional laser) to achieve a temperature rise within the exposed areas to cause thermal damage and exposure times to cause thermal damage is the range of 60 degrees C to 1000 degrees C or ablation). Kawakubo differs from the claimed invention in that the it does not expressly disclose that the microcontroller is connected to the first heat source. However, in another embodiment, Kawakubo teaches that both the heating and the fractional laser treatment are coupled to the microcontroller (e.g., paragraphs [0125]-[0126]: elongated damage regions are formed between several pairs of needles to form a desired damage pattern in tissue 305 where the regions of thermal damage patterns can be formed simultaneously, or alternatively, sequentially, using any combinations of needles through appropriate configuration of energy source 320 and control module 330 to deliver predetermined amounts of current between selected pairs of needles). Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the benefits of coupling the first heat source to the microcontroller of the fractional laser embodiment in Kawakubo. Consequently, one of ordinary skill in the art would have modified the device of Kawakubo to couple the heat source to the microcontroller so that the amount of energy delivered to the heat source can be controlled as well as the fractional laser source when a desired damage matrix of tissue is created using heat only and an ablative fractional laser in view of the teachings in paragraphs [0125]-[0126] of Kawakubo, and because the combination would have yielded a predictable result.
With respect to claim 18, Kawakubo teaches the device according to claim 17, wherein said heat source comprises a one or more RF electrodes connected to an RF energy source (e.g., paragraphs [0102]: RF energy can be used to form a plurality of microscopic treatment zones using surface or penetrating (e.g., needle-like) electrodes to induce fractional damage of the tumor; and [0112]: fractional tissue damage can be achieved using a RF device and inserting an array of needles to a predetermined depth where radio frequency pulses of electric current (heat) are applied to one or more of the needles to create regions of thermal damage and regions of necrosis in the tissue surrounding the needles).
As to claim 19, Kawakubo teaches the device according to claim 17, wherein said heat source comprises one or more sources of optical energy (e.g., paragraph [0078]: fractional tissue damage (heating) can be achieved by exposing the tissue to energy, such as laser therapy (e.g., directed optical energy from a laser, such as a fractional laser).
With respect to claim 20, Kawakubo teaches the device according to claim 17, wherein said fractional laser is an Er: YAG laser, a CO.sub.2 laser, an Er: Glass laser or a thulium laser (e.g., fractional laser is an ER: YAG laser, a carbon dioxide laser).
With respect to claim 22, Kawakubo teaches the device according to claim 17, comprising an optical element configured to or capable of fractionating a laser beam from a laser into multiple micro-beams applied to a treatment area (e.g., paragraph [0138]: the fractional treatment can have a plurality of beams provided by splitting a single beam of energy into a plurality of beams using an optical arrangement).
Conclusion
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 CATHERINE M VOORHEES whose telephone number is (571)270-3846. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 AM to 4:30 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, Unsu Jung can be reached at 571 272-8506. 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.
/CATHERINE M VOORHEES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792
Prosecution Insights