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 .
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 1-5 and 8-11, and 16-24 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.
As to claims 1 and 16, the examiner finds the language “correspond to a different respective range associated with the selected image mode” unclear. Specifically in each claim it is unclear what “respective range” applicant is referring to. In the previous dependent claims where the limitations were drawn from the range was clearly distinguished as a range depth. However applicant has broadened out the claim to include a range of effectively anything that could be linked with the image mode, such as a range of intensity measured, phase shift, depth, signal-to-noise etc. As such it is unclear what respective range applicant is referring to. For examination purposes the examiner is interpreting the respective range to be one of depth which is the inherent result of using varying optical paths in the reference arm as known in the interferometric art. Claims 2-11 and 17-24 are rejected for their dependency on instant claims 1 and 16.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Preciado et al. (U.S. PGPub No. 2021/0348912 A1) in view of Gao et al. (WO 2020237584 where the examiner has provide a machine translation hereinwith for citations) further in view of Fercher et al. (U.S. PGPub No. 2008/0285043 A1).
As to claims 1 and 16, Preciado discloses and shows in figure 16, an optical coherence tomography, OCT, imaging system for imaging an imaging target, the OCT imaging system comprising:
a light source (10) ([0026], ll. 6-8);
an interferometer comprising a sample arm (arm going towards eye 70 downstream of splitter 20), a reference arm (arm going towards mirror 30, downstream of splitter 20), and an optical splitter (20) arranged to split light from the light source into sample light propagating along the sample arm and reference light propagating along the reference arm (explicitly shown in figure 16) ([0003], ll. 3-13; where the examiner notes that the citations are from figure 1, however the structures are similar and used in the same configuration as cited in figure 16),
wherein the OCT imaging system is operable in multiple imaging modes to image different respective ranges of depths of the imaging target along a propagation direction of the sample light towards the imaging target, wherein the imaging target is an eye, and wherein the multiple imaging modes comprise two or more of: a second imaging mode to image a first portion of a posterior segment of the eye ([0061]; [0077], where Preciado explicitly discloses imaging modes of varying depths deeper and shallower in the retina area of the eye);
wherein the reference arm comprises: an optical switch to guide light on multiple optical paths with varying optical path lengths ([0097], ll. 23-32).
a photodetector (50) arranged to detect an interference light resulting from an interference between the at least some of the reference light propagating via the output optical fibre (modified in below, but also disclosed in the embodiment of figure 5) and the sample light propagating via the sample arm after having been scattered by the imaging target ([0003], ll. 13-19).
Preciado does disclose and show in the embodiment of figure 5, where the reference arm guides reference light via an optical fiber ([0047], ll. 8-14),
Preciado does not explicitly disclose wherein the reference arm comprises:
a reference arm optical fibre arranged to guide the reference light; an optical switch controllable to guide at least some of the reference light from the reference arm optical fibre to a selected optical path of N optical paths, where N is an integer greater than or equal to 2, each of the N optical paths having a respective at least one of an optical path length or a chromatic dispersion that differs from the respective at least one of the optical path length or the chromatic dispersion of each of the other optical paths of the N optical paths; and an optical coupler arranged to guide the at least some of the reference light propagating along the selected optical path to an output optical fibre.
However, Gao does disclose and show in the figure and in ([0020]; [0023]) the use of a reference arm of an OCT interferometer with a 1x3 optical switch that relays light along 3 distinct reference paths with 3 varying delays shown via increasing fiber delay loops (guide tubes in the machine translation). Subsequently the 3 reference paths are combined at 3x1 optical coupler and output in a general manner to that of the interferometer for recombining with the sample paths for measurement of varying desired sample detection areas (H1-H3). The examiner notes for clarity of the record that the reference arm of Gao lends itself more readily to a Mach-Zehnder interferometer configuration, using Michelson as is done in Preciado or Mach-Zehnder is an obvious matter of design choice as both are two of the most well-known and used interferometric configurations.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Preciado where the reference arm comprises: a reference arm optical fibre (disclosed arranged to guide the reference light; an optical switch controllable to guide at least some of the reference light from the reference arm optical fibre to a selected optical path of N optical paths, where N is an integer greater than or equal to 2, each of the N optical paths having a respective at least one of an optical path length or a chromatic dispersion that differs from the respective at least one of the optical path length or the chromatic dispersion of each of the other optical paths of the N optical paths; and an optical coupler arranged to guide the at least some of the reference light propagating along the selected optical path to an output optical fibre in order to provide the advantage of expected results and increased accuracy in using a common fiber based optical switch/coupler in place of the free-space system of Preciado one can obviously remove unwanted noise in the form of ambient light being prevented from interfering with the reference arm of the interferometer.
Preciado does explicitly disclose that it is well-known to image not only the depth profile of the retina but also an “other part of an eye” in ([0002]). The examiner is however for compact prosecution provided further evidence with Fercher to show the following limitations as obvious. Further the examiner notes that limitations following “OCT imaging system is operable” is merely intended use and the prior art need be capable of the noted use. However for compact prosecution these limitations are being treated as positively limiting in the rejection below.
Preciado in view of Gao does not explicitly disclose a first imaging mode to image a first portion of an anterior segment of the eye or a third imaging mode to image a second portion of the anterior segment of the eye and a second portion of the posterior segment of the eye; and a controller that, during operation of the OCT imaging system in each of the imaging modes, controls the optical switch according to a selected imaging mode of the multiple imaging modes to guide the reference light from the reference arm optical fibre to one or more paths of the N optical paths, wherein the one or more paths each: correspond to a different respective range associated with the selected imaging mode, and has a respective optical path length such that differences in phase of the sample light that is received at the photodetector after having been scattered from depths within a respective range of depths of the imaging target and the reference light that is received at the photodetector after having propagated via the output optical fibre is less than a predetermined threshold.
However, Fercher does disclose and show in figure 3 and in ([0014], ll. 10-19; [0033], ll. 5-20; [0034]; [0084], ll. 15-24; [0109], ll. 14-18) the use of selecting a fiber length or reflector position of a reference arm location. That adjustment can be done electrically, which obviously can be done by computer/controller 200 which as explicitly shown in figure 3 is linked to each respective reference arm reflector adjustment mechanism. This is also disclosed as explicitly done by the computer 200 relative to the multiple reference mirrors of figure 7. Further Fercher discloses but does not clearly show a switching mechanism designed to switch between the two reference beam paths with varying path lengths as explicitly disclosed (which can be reflectors or varying fiber lengths as explicitly disclosed in the citations). Further Fercher sets the path length difference (which defines the phase difference) to within a “certain tolerance”. This is done as known in the interferometric art to ensure the highest intensity interference fringes by matching the sample depth desired to be measured with a corresponding reference arm distance. Specifically this predetermined threshold is set relative to each respective area desired to be measured, specifically anterior or posterior areas of an eye under test.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Preciado in view of Gao with a first imaging mode to image a first portion of an anterior segment of the eye or a third imaging mode to image a second portion of the anterior segment of the eye and a second portion of the posterior segment of the eye; and a controller that, during operation of the OCT imaging system in each of the imaging modes, controls the optical switch according to a selected imaging mode of the multiple imaging modes to guide the reference light from the reference arm optical fibre to one or more paths of the N optical paths, wherein the one or more paths each: correspond to a different respective range associated with the selected imaging mode, and has a respective optical path length such that differences in phase of the sample light that is received at the photodetector after having been scattered from depths within a respective range of depths of the imaging target and the reference light that is received at the photodetector after having propagated via the output optical fibre is less than a predetermined threshold in order to provide the advantage of expected results and increased versatility in one of the other parts of an eye being measured being the anterior as well as the posterior so one can achieve a more complete picture of the eye under test for health analysis. Further the basic concept of linking these two measurements to varying path length reference arms obviously results in a more rapid means by which one capture multiple images at varying depths ([0046]).
The examiner notes that claim 16’s limitations are arranged in a different manner than claim 1, however every limitation from claim 16 has been addressed in the rejection of claim 1 above.
As to claims 2, 5, 17 and 18, Preciado does not explicitly disclose an OCT imaging system, wherein the optical switch is a 1×N optical switch which comprises N output ports, the optical coupler is a N×1 optical coupler which comprises N input ports, and each of the N optical paths comprises a respective optical fibre connecting a respective one of the N output ports to a respective one of the N input ports or wherein the N×1 optical coupler comprises one of: an N×1 optical fibre coupler; and an N×1 optical switch controllable to couple, to the output optical fibre, an input port of the N input ports corresponding to the output port of the N output ports to which the reference light has been coupled by the 1×N optical switch.
However, Gao does disclose and show in the figure and in ([0020]; [0023]) where the switch is a 1xN(3) optical switch that has 3 output ports, and the optical coupler is a N(3)x1 optical fiber coupler that has 3 input ports. Where fibers (i.e. guide tubes L1-L3) connect the respective ports.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Preciado does not explicitly disclose an OCT imaging system, wherein the optical switch is a 1×N optical switch which comprises N output ports, the optical coupler is a N×1 optical coupler which comprises N input ports, and each of the N optical paths comprises a respective optical fibre connecting a respective one of the N output ports to a respective one of the N input ports in order to provide the advantage of expected results and increased accuracy in using a common fiber based optical switch/coupler in place of the free-space system of Preciado one can obviously remove unwanted noise in the form of ambient light being prevented from interfering with the reference arm of the interferometer, and the particular of matching the input to output ports is obvious so that light isn’t lost along any of the switch channels.
As to claims 3 and 19, Preciado does not explicitly disclose an OCT imaging system, wherein at least some of the optical fibres have different optical path lengths.
However, Gao does disclose and show in the figure and in ([0019]) that the three optical fibers L1-L3 each have required guide tube lengths (i.e. fiber lengths) which is explicitly shown as different in the figure by distinct numbers of fiber coils (1-3).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify to provide the advantage of increased efficiency in having three length fibers as disclosed one can measure three detection areas to avoid having to replace the OCT imager by having to modulate reference arm paths ([0023]).
Claim(s) 4 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Preciado et al. in view of Gao et al. in view of Fercher further in view Rubio Guivernau et al. (U.S. PGPub No. 2014/0328556 A1).
As to claims 4 and 20, Preciado in view of Gao further in view of Fercher does not explicitly disclose an OCT imaging system, wherein each of one or more of the N optical paths comprises a respective dispersive element, wherein each dispersive element of the dispersive elements is arranged to provide a respective level of chromatic dispersion of the reference light propagating through the optical path that comprises the dispersive element.
However, Rubio Guivernau does disclose and show in figure 3 and in ([0002], ll. 1-5; [0039]; [0043]; [0046], ll. 5-7) the use of multiple dispersive elements 2, on multiple switched optical fiber paths. Each provided to have varying levels of chromatic dispersion compensation to compensate for various sample arm depth levels of chromatic dispersion.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Preciado in view of Gao further in view of Fercher with an OCT imaging system, wherein each of one or more of the N optical paths comprises a respective dispersive element, wherein each dispersive element of the dispersive elements is arranged to provide a respective level of chromatic dispersion of the reference light propagating through the optical path that comprises the dispersive element in order to provide the advantage of increased accuracy as noted in Rubio Guivernau if compensating for the chromatic dispersion mismatch between the interferometer arms is performed the resolution during measurement can be increased ([0002], ll. 1-5).
Claim(s) 8-9, 21 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Preciado et al. in view of Gao et al. in view of Fercher in view Rubio Guivernau et al. further in view of Breitenstein et al. (U.S. PGPub No. 2012/0200859 A1).
As to claims 8 and 21, Preciado in view of Gao further in view of Fercher does not explicitly disclose an OCT imaging system, wherein; where the OCT imaging system is operable in the first imaging mode, the controller is arranged to control the optical switch to guide the reference light from the reference arm optical fibre to a first optical path of the N optical paths, which comprises a first dispersive element configured such that a level of chromatic dispersion of the sample light that is received at the photodetector after having been scattered by the first portion of the anterior segment of the eye, matches a level of chromatic dispersion of the reference light that is received at the photodetector after having propagated via the output optical fibre, where the OCT imaging system is operable in the second imaging mode, the controller is arranged to control the optical switch to guide the reference light from the reference arm optical fibre to a second optical path of the N optical paths, which comprises a second dispersive element configured such that a level of chromatic dispersion of the sample light that is received at the photodetector after having been scattered by the first portion of the posterior segment of the eye, matches a level of chromatic dispersion of the reference light that is received at the photodetector after having propagated via the output optical fibre, and where the OCT imaging system is operable in the third imaging mode, the controller is arranged to control the optical switch to guide the reference light from the reference arm optical fibre to a third optical path of the N optical paths, which provides a level of chromatic dispersion of the reference light that is received at the photodetector after having propagated via the output optical fibre, which is greater than a level of chromatic dispersion of the sample light that is received at the photodetector after having been scattered by the second portion of the anterior segment of the eye and/or the second portion of the posterior segment.
However, Rubio Guivernau as already addressed above does disclose in ([0002], ll. 1-5; [0039]; [0043]; [0046], ll. 5-7) the use of multiple dispersive elements 2, on multiple switched optical fiber paths. Each provided to have varying levels of chromatic dispersion compensation to compensate for various sample arm depth levels of chromatic dispersion. Further as evidenced by Breitenstein in figure 1 and in ([0085]; [0091], ll. 1-9) the use of dispersion compensation is known relative to eye measurement. Further Breitenstein disclose using a similar OCT measurement system to measure anterior (MB1) and posterior (MB2) portions of a human eye. Obviously the dispersion compensation of Rubio Guivernau in the reference arm fibers can be added to that of Preciado as modified by Gao in order to allow in each imaging mode with varying imaging depths which result in varying dispersion to be compensated for by using the varying dispersion compensation elements 2 of Rubio Guivernau.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Preciado in view of Gao further in view of Fercher wherein; where the OCT imaging system is operable in the first imaging mode, the controller is arranged to control the optical switch to guide the reference light from the reference arm optical fibre to a first optical path of the N optical paths, which comprises a first dispersive element configured such that a level of chromatic dispersion of the sample light that is received at the photodetector after having been scattered by the first portion of the anterior segment of the eye, matches a level of chromatic dispersion of the reference light that is received at the photodetector after having propagated via the output optical fibre, where the OCT imaging system is operable in the second imaging mode, the controller is arranged to control the optical switch to guide the reference light from the reference arm optical fibre to a second optical path of the N optical paths, which comprises a second dispersive element configured such that a level of chromatic dispersion of the sample light that is received at the photodetector after having been scattered by the first portion of the posterior segment of the eye, matches a level of chromatic dispersion of the reference light that is received at the photodetector after having propagated via the output optical fibre, and where the OCT imaging system is operable in the third imaging mode, the controller is arranged to control the optical switch to guide the reference light from the reference arm optical fibre to a third optical path of the N optical paths, which provides a level of chromatic dispersion of the reference light that is received at the photodetector after having propagated via the output optical fibre, which is greater than a level of chromatic dispersion of the sample light that is received at the photodetector after having been scattered by the second portion of the anterior segment of the eye and/or the second portion of the posterior segment in order to provide the advantage of increased accuracy as noted above it is well-known that varying depths have varying dispersion each of which need compensation for, as such obviously each corresponding fiber arm of the switch can obviously have the accurate dispersion compensation element for each respective depth to result in a higher resolution image of the area under test as noted by Rubio Guivernau in ([0002], ll. 1-5).
As to claims 9 and 23, Preciado discloses and shows in figure 16 a lens (40, as disclosed has lenses) and a lens movement mechanism ([0038], ll. 8-10; [0049], where implicitly to scan the beam as disclosed the lens is moved by some type of movement mechanism).
Preciado in view of Gao in view of Fercher further in view of Rubio Guivernau does not explicitly disclose an OCT imaging system, further comprising: a lens and a lens movement mechanism for moving the lens into and out of an optical path in the sample arm of the interferometer, wherein in the first imaging mode, the controller is arranged to control the lens movement mechanism to move the lens into the optical path in the sample arm of the interferometer, to allow the first portion of the anterior segment of the eye to be imaged via the lens during operation of the OCT imaging system in the first imaging mode; and in the second imaging mode, the controller is further arranged to control the lens movement mechanism to move the lens out of the optical path in the sample arm of the interferometer, to allow the first portion of the posterior segment of the eye to be imaged without use of the lens during operation of the OCT imaging system in the second imaging mode.
However, Breitenstein does disclose in ([0095], ll. 1-13) the basic concept in OCT analysis of using a lens on a lens movement mechanism (e.g. piezo-actuator as disclosed) to pivot the lens into and out of the sample optical path to allow imaging of the posterior and anterior area of the eye in two distinct imaging modes (i.e. switched positions). Obviously whether the lens is in or out is simply a matter of design choice as to whether or not the focal length is designed to be at MB1 or MB2 with or without the lens.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Preciado in view of Gao in view of Fercher further in view of Rubio Guivernau with an OCT imaging system, further comprising: a lens and a lens movement mechanism for moving the lens into and out of an optical path in the sample arm of the interferometer, wherein in the first imaging mode, the controller is arranged to control the lens movement mechanism to move the lens into the optical path in the sample arm of the interferometer, to allow the first portion of the anterior segment of the eye to be imaged via the lens during operation of the OCT imaging system in the first imaging mode; and in the second imaging mode, the controller is further arranged to control the lens movement mechanism to move the lens out of the optical path in the sample arm of the interferometer, to allow the first portion of the posterior segment of the eye to be imaged without use of the lens during operation of the OCT imaging system in the second imaging mode in order to provide the advantage of increased accuracy in using a basic controllable lens one can ensure light in the measurement arm with the use of only a single lens/movement mechanism combination ends up at each particular desired measurement area with the highest intensity of light possible.
Claim(s) 10 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Preciado et al. in view of Gao et al. in view of Fercher in view Rubio Guivernau et al. in view of Breitenstein et al. further in view of Chong (U.S. PGPub No. 2018/0008143 A1).
As to claims 10 and 22, Preciado in view of Gao in view of Fercher in view of Rubio Guivernau further in view of Breitenstein does not explicitly disclose an OCT imaging system, further comprising: a pupil alignment module arranged to bring a focal point of the OCT imaging system into alignment with a pupil of the eye based on images of the anterior ocular segment, wherein the OCT imaging system is arranged to operate in the first imaging mode during operation of the pupil alignment module to bring the focal point of the OCT imaging system into alignment with the pupil of the eye, and in the second imaging mode after the operation of the pupil alignment module to bring the focal point of the OCT imaging system into alignment with the pupil of the eye.
However, Chong does disclose in ([0050]) the use of aligning the OCT system to the pupil of a patients eye. In doing so one can reduce mechanical movement of the OCT system for more accurate scans of the eye. Further Chong notes that various fixation points can be used to align the system to the various parts of the patients eye, obviously these points can be the posterior and anterior of the eye as taught by Breitenstein. Where the examiner is interpreting mirror 511 as equivalent to applicant’s pupil alignment module for performing the same function. The images as claimed are shown in figures 5a-5b.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Preciado in view of Gao in view of Fercher in view of Rubio Guivernau further in view of Breitenstein with an OCT imaging system, further comprising: a pupil alignment module arranged to bring a focal point of the OCT imaging system into alignment with a pupil of the eye based on images of the anterior ocular segment, wherein the OCT imaging system is arranged to operate in the first imaging mode during operation of the pupil alignment module to bring the focal point of the OCT imaging system into alignment with the pupil of the eye, and in the second imaging mode after the operation of the pupil alignment module to bring the focal point of the OCT imaging system into alignment with the pupil of the eye in order to provide the advantage of increased efficiency as disclosed in Chong providing a system for said pupil alignment results in an OCT system that can be more accurate by requiring less mechanical movement.
Claim(s) 11 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Preciado et al. in view of Gao et al. in view of Fercher further in view of Swanson (U.S. PGPub No. 2021/0356249 A1).
As to claims 11 and 24, Preciado in view of Gao further in view of Fercher does not explicitly disclose an OCT imaging system according to claim 1, further comprising an optical power monitor, wherein the optical switch is controllable to: simultaneously guide a first portion of the reference light from the reference arm optical fibre to the selected optical path of the N optical paths, and a second portion of the reference light from the reference arm optical fibre to the optical power monitor, and/or switch between guiding the at least a portion of the reference light from the reference arm optical fibre to the selected optical path of the N optical paths, and guiding the at least a portion of the reference light from the reference arm optical fibre to the optical power monitor.
However, Swanson does disclose in ([0061]) the use of an optical power sensor (306) connected on a line of a switch to optimize the state of a switch 302.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Preciado in view of Gao further in view of Fercher with an OCT imaging system, further comprising an optical power monitor, wherein the optical switch is controllable to: simultaneously guide a first portion of the reference light from the reference arm optical fibre to the selected optical path of the N optical paths, and a second portion of the reference light from the reference arm optical fibre to the optical power monitor, and/or switch between guiding the at least a portion of the reference light from the reference arm optical fibre to the selected optical path of the N optical paths, and guiding the at least a portion of the reference light from the reference arm optical fibre to the optical power monitor in order to provide the advantage of increased efficiency in optimizing the switch by constantly monitoring the power output from it to ensure losses are being appropriately compensated for as disclosed in Swanson.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-5, 8-11 and 16-24 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Prior art made of record
Ozawa (U.S. Patent No. 8,124,645 B2) discloses in (col. 14, ll. 44-51) and shows in figure 3A-B, the use of a similar optical fiber based switch/coupler in the reference arm of an OCT interferometer.
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 MICHAEL P LAPAGE whose telephone number is (571)270-3833. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5:30.
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, Tarifur Chowdhury can be reached at 571-272-2287. 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.
/Michael P LaPage/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights