DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: the specification does not provide specific antecedent basis for the limitations of “a first subframe element, a second subframe element, a third subframe element, and a fourth subframe element”. Applicant’s arguments submitted on 07/18/2025 indicate these elements correspond to structures 51, 36, 5, and 13 described in the originally filed specification. However, Applicant’s specification does not explicitly recite the claimed limitations. To overcome this objection, Applicant should either amend the specification to recite that the indicated structures correspond to the claimed elements respectively (i.e. alterable distal end 51 is a first subframe element), or should amend the claims by removing the elements, and instead recite the specific structure consistent with the specification.
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: the specification does not provide support for the claimed subject matter of “a second locking mechanism… the third subframe is not rotatable around the second axis when the second locking mechanism is engaged”. The specification does not disclose any connection of the third subframe element (structure 5,5a as suggested by Applicant in their remarks) which would allow the third subframe element to rotate around the axis defined by the longitudinal extent of the third subframe. Furthermore, it would appear that the third subframe is incapable of such a rotation around said axis due to the two connections of the third subframe to the second subframe.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 41-58 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 41 recites the limitation “the brace” in line 1. This limitation, while not unclear, should be amended to recite “the arm stabilization brace” to maintain consistency in the claims.
Claim 41 recites the limitation “adjusts the upper arm portion of the rigid frame for an arm length of the wearer” in line 17. This limitation should be amended to include configured to/for language to avoid positively reciting a human organism.
Claim 41 recites the limitation “about first and second axes” in line 22. This limitation should be amended to recite “about a first axis and a second axis” to properly present the limitations.
Claims 42-49 each recite the limitation “the brace” in their preambles. These limitations should be amended to recite “the arm stabilization brace” to maintain consistency in the claims.
Claim 43 recites the limitation “the third subframe” in lines 4 and 6. These limitations, while not unclear, should be amended to recite “the third subframe element” to maintain consistency in the claims.
Claim 44 recites the limitation “prevent rotation” in line 3. This limitation should be amended to recite “prevent a rotation” to properly present the limitation.
Claim 49 recites the limitation “the brace” in line 1. This limitation, while not unclear, should be amended to recite “the arm stabilization brace” to maintain consistency in the claims.
Claim 50 recites the limitation “the method” in line 1. This limitation, while not unclear, should be amended to recite “the method of stabilizing an arm” to maintain consistency in the claims.
Claim 50 recites the limitation “the brace” in line 2. This limitation, while not unclear, should be amended to recite “the arm stabilization brace” to maintain consistency in the claims.
Claim 50 recites the limitation “about first and second axes” in line 23. This limitation should be amended to recite “about a first axis and a second axis” to properly present the limitations.
Claims 51-58 each recite the limitation “the method” in their preambles. These limitations should be amended to recite “the method of stabilizing an arm” to maintain consistency in the claims.
Claim 51 recites the limitation “the brace” in line 1. This limitation, while not unclear, should be amended to recite “the arm stabilization brace” to maintain consistency in the claims.
Claim 52 recites the limitation “the third subframe” in lines 4 and 6. These limitations, while not unclear, should be amended to recite “the third subframe element” to maintain consistency in the claims.
Claim 53 recites the limitation “prevent rotation” in line 3. This limitation should be amended to recite “prevent a rotation” to properly present the limitation.
Claim 58 recites the limitation “the brace” in line 1. This limitation, while not unclear, should be amended to recite “the arm stabilization brace” to maintain consistency in the claims.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 43-44, 46-48, 52-53 and 55-57 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 43 recites the limitation “the third subframe is not rotatable around the second axis when the second locking mechanism is engaged” which renders the claim indefinite in view of the specification and figures of the application because it is unclear as to how the third subframe element (5,5a) is capable of rotating around the axis defined along the longitudinal aspect of the third subframe element due to the two connections (38a and 38b) to the torso portion (see figure 6). Additionally Applicant’s specification does not provide a description of how this rotation around the second axis can occur. In view of Applicant’s remarks filed 07/18/2025, it would appear the claim has a typographical error as page 10 discusses that the second locking mechanism corresponds to hub lock down 10, which based on the specification does not lock the third subframe element (5,5a) from rotating around the second axis, but instead prevents the upper arm portion (20) from rotating about the second axis (i.e. internally and externally rotating). Thus, for the purpose of examination, Examiner will interpret this limitation as “the first arm support is not rotatable around the second axis when the second locking mechanism is engaged”.
Claim 46 recites the limitation "the waist" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of examination, Examiner will interpret this limitation as “a waist”.
Claim 47 recites the limitation “the first and second arm supports” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the second arm support” in the claim. For the purpose of examination, Examiner will interpret this limitation as “the first arm support and a second arm support”.
Claim 47 recites the limitation “the upper and lower arm” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the lower arm” in the claim. For the purpose of examination, Examiner will interpret this limitation as “the upper arm a lower arm”.
Claim 52 recites the limitation “the third subframe is not rotatable around the second axis when the second locking mechanism is engaged” which renders the claim indefinite in view of the specification and figures of the application because it is unclear as to how the third subframe element (5,5a) is capable of rotating around the axis defined along the longitudinal aspect of the third subframe element due to the two connections (38a and 38b) to the torso portion (see figure 6). Additionally Applicant’s specification does not provide a description of how this rotation around the second axis can occur. In view of Applicant’s remarks filed 07/18/2025, it would appear the claim has a typographical error as page 10 discusses that the second locking mechanism corresponds to hub lock down 10, which based on the specification does not lock the third subframe element (5,5a) from rotating around the second axis, but instead prevents the upper arm portion (20) from rotating about the second axis (i.e. internally and externally rotating). Thus, for the purpose of examination, Examiner will interpret this limitation as “the first arm support is not rotatable around the second axis when the second locking mechanism is engaged”.
Claim 55 recites the limitation "the waist" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of examination, Examiner will interpret this limitation as “a waist”.
Claim 56 recites the limitation “the first and second arm supports” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the second arm support” in the claim. For the purpose of examination, Examiner will interpret this limitation as “the first arm support and a second arm support”.
Claim 56 recites the limitation “the upper and lower arm” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the lower arm” in the claim. For the purpose of examination, Examiner will interpret this limitation as “the upper arm a lower arm”.
Claims 44, 48, 53, and 57 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being dependent on a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Section 33(a) of the America Invents Act reads as follows:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no patent may issue on a claim directed to or encompassing a human organism.
Claims 45-48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 and section 33(a) of the America Invents Act as being directed to or encompassing a human organism. See also Animals - Patentability, 1077 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 24 (April 21, 1987) (indicating that human organisms are excluded from the scope of patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101).
In regards to claim 45, the limitation “a waist of the wearer” positively recites part of the human body.
In regards to claim 46, the limitation “the waist” positively recites part of the human body.
In regards to claim 47, the limitation “the upper and lower arm of the wearer” positively recites part of the human body.
In regards to claim 48, the limitation “the upper arm” positively recites part of the human body.
To obviate a rejection under 35 USC 101, the Office suggests that any claim that would include a human being, or part thereof, within its scope should use “adapted to___” or “adapted for ___” or “configured to” or configured for” to define the metes and bounds of the claimed subject matter which is a permissible form of expression.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 41-48, and 50-57 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schwenn (US 5,487,724 A).
In regards to claim 41, Schwenn discloses an arm stabilization brace (brace seen in figure 1), the brace comprising:
a rigid frame (102; see [col 3 ln 1-5]; see figure 1) comprising:
a torso portion (117 and 103; see [col 3 ln 13-15] and [col 4 ln 5-10]; see figure 3), configured to be disposed against a torso of a wearer (see figure 1), the torso portion (117 and 103) comprising:
a first subframe element (103), and
a second subframe element (117) modifiably coupled to the first subframe element (103; see [col 4 ln 17-23]),
wherein modifying the coupling between the first and second subframe elements adjusts a height of the torso portion of the rigid frame (see [col 4 ln 17-23]); and
an upper arm portion (141 and 159; see [col 5 ln 5] and [col 5 ln 59]; see figure 3), comprising:
a third subframe element (141) rotatably attached to the second subframe (117) element via a hinge (139; see [col 4 ln 60]; see figure 3), and
a fourth subframe element (159) slidably coupled to the third subframe element (141; see [col 5 ln 59-col 6 ln 9]),
wherein adjusting the slidable coupling between the third and fourth subframe elements adjusts the upper arm portion of the rigid frame for an arm length of the wearer (see [col 5 ln 59-col 6 ln 9]); and
a first arm support (163; see [col 5 ln 64]; see figure 3) supported by the upper arm portion (141 and 159; see figure 3) of the rigid frame and configured to contact an upper arm of the wearer (see figure 5),
wherein a relative orientation of the first arm support (163) is rotatable, with respect to the second subframe element (117) of the rigid frame, about first and second axes (axis defined horizontally through 139 and axis defined along the length of 141), wherein:
the first axis (axis defined horizontally through 139) is defined by a line passing axially through the hinge (139; see figure 3), and
the second axis (axis defined along the length of 141) is defined by a line passing perpendicular to the first axis through the hinge and along a longitudinal extent of the third subframe (141; see figure 3 below that the two defined axis are perpendicular to one another; see also figures 1 and 5).
PNG
media_image1.png
566
587
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 42, Schwenn discloses the invention as discussed above.
Schwenn further discloses further comprising a second arm support (181; see [col 6 ln 54]; see figure 3), configured to contact a lower arm of the wearer (see [col 6 ln 56]), slidingly coupled to the first arm support (163; 181 is slidable along 179 (see [col 6 ln 59-60]), and is indirectly coupled to 163 via 159 and 179) such that a distance between the first and second arm supports is adjustable (sliding of 181 adjusts the distance between 181 and 163).
In regards to claim 43, Schwenn discloses the invention as discussed above.
Schwenn further discloses further comprising: at least one of a first locking mechanism (143, 145, 147, 149; see [col 5 ln 3-20]; see figure 4) and a second locking mechanism, wherein:
the third subframe (141) is not rotatable around the first axis (axis defined horizontally through 139) when the first locking mechanism is engaged (see [col 5 ln 3-20]); and
the third subframe is not rotatable around the second axis when the second locking mechanism is engaged.
In regards to claim 44, Schwenn discloses the invention as discussed above.
Schwenn further discloses wherein the first locking mechanism (143, 145, 147, 149) comprises a shaft (149) coupled between the second subframe element (117) and the third subframe (141) element to, thereby, prevent rotation of the third subframe (141) with respect to the second subframe element (117) about the first axis (axis defined horizontally through 139; see [col 5 ln 3-20]).
In regards to claim 45, Schwenn discloses the invention as discussed above.
Schwenn further discloses wherein the torso portion (117 and 103) of the rigid frame is securable around a waist of the wearer (see figure 1 and 5).
In regards to claim 46, Schwenn discloses the invention as discussed above.
Schwenn further discloses wherein the torso portion (117 and 103) of the rigid frame is secured to the waist via a strap (see figure 5 that an anterior aspect of 103 comprises a strap which secures the rigid frame to the waist).
In regards to claim 47, Schwenn discloses the invention as discussed above.
Schwenn further discloses wherein the first and second arm supports (163 and 181) are securable around the upper and lower arm of the wearer (see [col 6 ln 5-13] and [col 6 ln 65-67]; see figures 1 and 5-6), respectively.
In regards to claim 48, Schwenn discloses the invention as discussed above.
Schwenn further discloses wherein the first arm support (163) is secured to the upper arm via a strap (165; see [col 6 ln 5-13]; see figure 1 and 5).
In regards to claim 50, Schwenn discloses a method of stabilizing an arm (see [col 3 ln 1-12] that the invention supports (i.e. stabilizes a user’s arm); see figure 1 that the device is provided to a user; thereby disclosing a method of stabilizing an arm) , the method comprising steps of: at an initial time, providing an arm stabilization brace (brace seen in figure 1 provided at an initial time), the brace comprising:
a rigid frame (102; see [col 3 ln 1-5]; see figure 1) comprising:
a torso portion (117 and 103; see [col 3 ln 13-15] and [col 4 ln 5-10]; see figure 3), configured to be disposed against a torso of a wearer (see figure 1), the torso portion (117 and 103) comprising:
a first subframe element (103), and
a second subframe element (117) modifiably coupled to the first subframe element (103; see [col 4 ln 17-23]),
wherein modifying the coupling between the first and second subframe elements adjusts a height of the torso portion of the rigid frame (see [col 4 ln 17-23]); and
an upper arm portion (141 and 159; see [col 5 ln 5] and [col 5 ln 59]; see figure 3), comprising:
a third subframe element (141) rotatably attached to the second subframe (117) element via a hinge (139; see [col 4 ln 60]; see figure 3), and
a fourth subframe element (159) slidably coupled to the third subframe element (141; see [col 5 ln 59-col 6 ln 9]),
wherein adjusting the slidable coupling between the third and fourth subframe elements adjusts the upper arm portion of the rigid frame for an arm length of the wearer (see [col 5 ln 59-col 6 ln 9]); and
a first arm support (163; see [col 5 ln 64]; see figure 3) supported by the upper arm portion (141 and 159; see figure 3) of the rigid frame and configured to contact an upper arm of the wearer (see figure 5),
wherein a relative orientation of the first arm support (163) is rotatable, with respect to the second subframe element (117) of the rigid frame, about first and second axes (axis defined horizontally through 139 and axis defined along the length of 141), wherein:
the first axis (axis defined horizontally through 139) is defined by a line passing axially through the hinge (139; see figure 3), and
the second axis (axis defined along the length of 141) is defined by a line passing perpendicular to the first axis through the hinge and along a longitudinal extent of the third subframe (141; see figure 3 above that the two defined axis are perpendicular to one another; see also figures 1 and 5)
In regards to claim 51, Schwenn discloses the invention as discussed above.
Schwenn further discloses wherein the brace further comprises a second arm support (181; see [col 6 ln 54]; see figure 3), configured to contact a lower arm of the wearer (see [col 6 ln 56]), slidingly coupled to the first arm support (163; 181 is slidable along 179 (see [col 6 ln 59-60]), and is indirectly coupled to 163 via 159 and 179) such that a distance between the first and second arm supports is adjustable (sliding of 181 adjusts the distance between 181 and 163).
In regards to claim 52, Schwenn discloses the invention as discussed above.
Schwenn further discloses wherein the brace further comprises: at least one of a first locking mechanism (143, 145, 147, 149; see [col 5 ln 3-20]; see figure 4) and a second locking mechanism, wherein:
the third subframe (141) is not rotatable around the first axis (axis defined horizontally through 139) when the first locking mechanism is engaged (see [col 5 ln 3-20]); and
the third subframe is not rotatable around the second axis when the second locking mechanism is engaged.
In regards to claim 53, Schwenn discloses the invention as discussed above.
Schwenn further discloses wherein the first locking mechanism (143, 145, 147, 149) comprises a shaft (149) coupled between the second subframe element (117) and the third subframe (141) element to, thereby, prevent rotation of the third subframe (141) with respect to the second subframe element (117) about the first axis (axis defined horizontally through 139; see [col 5 ln 3-20]).
In regards to claim 54, Schwenn discloses the invention as discussed above.
Schwenn further discloses wherein the torso portion (117 and 103) of the rigid frame is securable around a waist of the wearer (see figure 1 and 5).
In regards to claim 55, Schwenn discloses the invention as discussed above.
Schwenn further discloses wherein the torso portion (117 and 103) of the rigid frame is secured to the waist via a strap (see figure 5 that an anterior aspect of 103 comprises a strap which secures the rigid frame to the waist).
In regards to claim 56, Schwenn discloses the invention as discussed above.
Schwenn further discloses wherein the first and second arm supports (163 and 181) are securable around the upper and lower arm of the wearer (see [col 6 ln 5-13] and [col 6 ln 65-67]; see figures 1 and 5-6), respectively.
In regards to claim 57, Schwenn discloses the invention as discussed above.
Schwenn further discloses wherein the first arm support (163) is secured to the upper arm via a strap (165; see [col 6 ln 5-13]; see figure 1 and 5).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 49 and 58 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwenn in view of Bastyr et al. (US 5,407,420 A) (hereinafter Bastyr).
In regards to claim 49, Schwenn discloses the invention as discussed above.
Schwenn further discloses that the affected arm (i.e. the arm to be supported) may be the left or the right side (see [col 3 ln 1-12]) which suggests that the device is intended to be reconfigurable to support either a left or a right arm, but Schwenn does not explicitly disclose wherein the brace is reconfigurable such that the torso portion of the rigid frame is configured to contact an opposite side of the torso of the wearer and the first arm support is configured to contact an opposite upper arm of the wearer.
However, Bastyr teaches an analogous arm stabilization brace (10; see [col 4 ln 10-15]; see figure 1) comprising a rigid frame (see figure 3) which comprises a torso portion (16 and 48; see [col 4 ln 24] and [col 5 ln 13]; see figure 3) and a first arm support (54; see [col 5 ln 20]; see figure 3); wherein the brace (10) is reconfigurable such that the torso portion (16 and 48) of the rigid frame is configured to contact an opposite side of the torso of the wearer and the first arm support (54) is configured to contact an opposite upper arm of the wearer (see [col 4 ln 20-21]) for the purpose of allowing the brace to be readily adapted for similar rehabilitative treatment of the opposite shoulder (see [col 4 ln 20-21]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the arm stabilization brace as disclosed by Schwenn and to have configured the arm stabilization brace to be reconfigurable to be utilized on either side of the wearer’s torso, and either arm as taught by Bastyr in order to have provided an improved arm stabilization brace that would add the benefit of allowing the brace to be readily adapted for similar rehabilitative treatment of the opposite shoulder (see [col 4 ln 20-21]).
In regards to claim 58, Schwenn discloses the invention as discussed above.
Schwenn further discloses that the affected arm (i.e. the arm to be supported) may be the left or the right side (see [col 3 ln 1-12]) which suggests that the device is intended to be reconfigurable to support either a left or a right arm, but Schwenn does not explicitly disclose wherein the brace is reconfigurable such that the torso portion of the rigid frame is configured to contact an opposite side of the torso of the wearer and the first arm support is configured to contact an opposite upper arm of the wearer.
However, Bastyr teaches an analogous arm stabilization brace (10; see [col 4 ln 10-15]; see figure 1) comprising a rigid frame (see figure 3) which comprises a torso portion (16 and 48; see [col 4 ln 24] and [col 5 ln 13]; see figure 3) and a first arm support (54; see [col 5 ln 20]; see figure 3); wherein the brace (10) is reconfigurable such that the torso portion (16 and 48) of the rigid frame is configured to contact an opposite side of the torso of the wearer and the first arm support (54) is configured to contact an opposite upper arm of the wearer (see [col 4 ln 20-21]) for the purpose of allowing the brace to be readily adapted for similar rehabilitative treatment of the opposite shoulder (see [col 4 ln 20-21]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the arm stabilization brace as disclosed by Schwenn and to have configured the arm stabilization brace to be reconfigurable to be utilized on either side of the wearer’s torso, and either arm as taught by Bastyr in order to have provided an improved arm stabilization brace that would add the benefit of allowing the brace to be readily adapted for similar rehabilitative treatment of the opposite shoulder (see [col 4 ln 20-21]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Brown (US 1,257,297 A) which discloses an arm stabilization brace (apparatus; see [pg 1 ln 44]; see figure 1) comprising a rigid frame (see [pg 1 ln 15-16]) comprising a torso portion (upper and lower aspects of 4) configured to be positioned as claimed (see figure 1); comprising a first subframe element (lower aspect of 4) and second subframe element (upper aspect of 4) modifiably coupled to the first subframe element (see figure 1 that the upper and lower aspects of 4 are modifiably coupled via the slot and screw engagement which is similar to the sliding engagement described on [pg 2 ln 1-5]), an upper arm portion (lateral extending aspect of 9 and 15; see figure 1) comprising a third subframe element (lateral extending aspect of 9), and fourth subframe element (15) slidably coupled to the third subframe element for an arm length of the wearer (see [pg 2 ln 1-13]), a first arm support (7) supported by the upper arm portion configured to contact an upper arm of the wearer (see figure 1), wherein a relative orientation of the first arm support (7) is rotatable with respect to first and second axes (first axis defined through 9, second axis defined along 15). Thereby, Brown also discloses the independent claims 41 and 50 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL MILLER whose telephone number is (571)270-5445. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8am-4pm.
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, Alireza Nia can be reached at 571-270-3076. 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.
/DANIEL A MILLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3786