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 .
Priority
This application is a 371 of PCT/IL2022/050879 filed 08/11/2022. This application further claims foreign priority to application IL293114 filed 05/18/2022 and IL285798 filed 08/23/2021. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) were filed on 02/20/2024 and 02/03/2025. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Examiner notes that the non-patent literature document “PEREIRA ISABEL ET AL” listed in the IDS filed 02/03/2025 is missing and therefore is not considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character not mentioned in the description: reference character 140 in figures 14(a) and 14(b). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informality:
“probe tip is selected from detachable, disposable, or single use”
Should be corrected to:
“probe tip is detachable, disposable, or single use”
Since the term “selected from” implies selection from a user
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informality:
“wherein the smart device is selected from smartphones, tablets, and laptops” should be corrected to:
“wherein the smart device is a smartphone, tablet, or a laptop”
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informality:
“wherein the instructions are selected from printed, displayed, or audible instructions” should be corrected to:
“wherein the instructions are printed, displayed, or audible instructions”
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“The system of claim 15” should be corrected to:
“The system of claim 18” as claim 18 has antecedent basis for “the remote healthcare practitioner or technician”
Appropriate correction is required.
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)(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.
Claims 1-2, 4-7, 10-12, and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Prisant (US20240268784, provisional priority filed in US on 06/11/2021).
Regarding claim 1, Prisant teaches a device (902) adapted to self-monitor follicles and to assess a thickness of an endometrium of a subject, the device (902) comprising a grip (908) and an elongated probe (904), the elongated probe provided with an ultrasound array (906) located at its distal end (Fig. 9A, [0057], [0059], “In some embodiments, the transducer comprising an array of transducer elements”, [0130], “According to some embodiments, the system is used for follicle monitoring”, [0162], “the ultrasound probe is configured to allow self-examination”, [0167], [0201], “detects and measures the ultrasound images and translate them into numerical data such as but not limited to ovaries, endometrial thickness, ovarian follicles…”, [0286]);
the grip (908) angularly configured for self-handling by a user during a self-monitoring activity (Fig. 9A, [0098], “According to some embodiments, the system is a comprehensive system, allowing a patient to self-perform a vaginal or rectal examination, without any particular skills”, [0150], [0162], “the ultrasound probe is configured to allow self-examination”, wherein figure 9A shows the handle 908 angled with respect to the probe body 904);
the grip (908) and elongated probe (904) each having an axis of symmetry, the axis of symmetry of the grip (908) being at an angle with respect to the axis of symmetry of said elongated probe (904) (Fig. 9A, annotated figure 9A shown below for clarity).
PNG
media_image1.png
290
210
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Prisant teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 1.
Prisant further teaches wherein the device (902) is adapted to be coupled to a hand-held device (406) (Figs. 4A & 4C, [0053], “In some embodiments, the device coupled to the probe comprises at least one of a, wearable device for example a smartwatch or a smart band, a virtual personal assistant device, a cellular phone”, [0175], [0189], [0200], [0202], wherein the probe being configured to send and receive data from a cellular phone comprises the device being adapted to be coupled to a hand-held device (phone); and figure 4C shows information flow between the probe and a phone).
Regarding claim 4, Prisant teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 1.
Prisant further teaches wherein electronics (312) that operate the ultrasound array (310) and image acquisition and transferring elements (328) are housed within a body (304) of the device (Fig. 3A, [0163-0164], [0168], [0175], wherein figure 3A is a block diagram of an ultrasound probe according to embodiments of the invention).
Regarding claim 5, Prisant teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 1.
Prisant further teaches wherein the device is adapted to transmit a raw ultrasound image or a signal representative thereof to a hand-held device that includes electronic processing components and a display ([0059], wherein the images acquired are ultrasound images, [0200], “…for transferring images and/or measurements to external devices…In some embodiments, it is configured to send and receive data from a cellular phone”, wherein a cellular phone comprises a hand-held device that includes electronic processing components and a display).
Regarding claim 6, Prisant teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 5.
Prisant further teaches wherein data received by the hand-held device include information indicative of a positioning of a probe tip relative to a desired location in the subject’s body ([0050], wherein the images include a target or desired location in the subject’s body, i.e. uterus, ovary, follicle, [0200], wherein the images are sent to a cellular phone; since the ultrasound transducer is positioned at the probe tip, ultrasound images of a target are indicative of a positioning of the probe tip relative to the target since the coordinate origin of the image is the tip of the probe).
Regarding claim 7, Prisant teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 1.
Prisant further teaches wherein the hand-held device is connected to a monitoring device via wire or wirelessly ([0053], wherein the system includes the ultrasound probe, “the device coupled to the probe comprises at least one of a, wearable device for example a smartwatch or a smart band, a virtual personal assistant device, a cellular phone device or any other device functionally coupled to the probe via wires or via wireless communication”, [0090], “the system is configured to monitor reproductive health”, wherein the ultrasound probe device comprises a monitoring device).
Regarding claim 10, Prisant teaches a method for self-monitoring ([0098], [0150], [0162], [0316]) follicles and to assess a thickness of an endometrium of a subject ([0130], “the system is used for follicle monitoring”, [0201], “detects and measures the ultrasound images and translate them into numerical data such as but not limited to ovaries, endometrial thickness, ovarian follicles”), the method comprising allowing a subject to, using a device (902) comprising a grip (908) and an elongated probe (904), self-scan to obtain specific ultrasound images based on an orientation of the elongated probe (Figs. 9A-9D, [0162], “the ultrasound probe is configured to allow self-examination, for example self-scanning of tissue within a body cavity. by the female subject”, [0286]);
the elongated probe (904) provided with an ultrasound array (906) located at its distal end (Figs. 9A-9B, [0057], [0059], “In some embodiments, the transducer comprising an array of transducer elements”, [0167], [0286]);
the grip (908) angularly configured for self-handling by a user during a self-monitoring activity (Fig. 9A, [0098], “According to some embodiments, the system is a comprehensive system, allowing a patient to self-perform a vaginal or rectal examination, without any particular skills”, [0150], [0162], “the ultrasound probe is configured to allow self-examination”, wherein figure 9A shows the handle 908 angled with respect to the probe body 904);
the grip (908) and elongated probe (904) each having an axis of symmetry, the axis of symmetry of the grip (908) being at an angle with respect to the axis of symmetry of said elongated probe (904) (Fig. 9A, annotated figure 9A shown below for clarity).
PNG
media_image1.png
290
210
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Prisant teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 10.
Prisant teaches the invention further comprising monitoring natural ovulation ([0093], “tracking of ovulatory cycles”, [0185], “determining a time period until ovulation”, [0272], “predicted time to ovulation”, [0302], “the system is used to provide indications and/or predictions regarding at least one of, number of eggs in an ovary, maturation of an egg within a follicle, release of an egg from a follicle”).
Regarding claim 12, Prisant teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 10.
Prisant teaches the invention further comprising performing an offline scan by the subject ([0008], “Optionally, a network connection is provided as well”, wherein a network connection is not provided comprises the device being offline, and, [0045], [0150], wherein self-examination is performed without an expert comprises performing an offline scan by the subject, [0162], “self-scanning of tissue within a body cavity. by the female subject”).
Regarding claim 14, Prisant teaches a system (402) (Fig. 4A, [0188]) for self-monitoring ([0098], [0150], [0162], [0316]) follicles and to assess a thickness of an endometrium of a subject ([0130], “the system is used for follicle monitoring”, [0201], “detects and measures the ultrasound images and translate them into numerical data such as but not limited to ovaries, endometrial thickness, ovarian follicles”), the system (402) (Fig. 4A, [0188]) comprising:
a) a device (902) comprising an elongated probe (904) and a grip (908) (Fig. 9A, [0286]), the elongated probe (904) provided with an ultrasound array (906) located at its distal end (Figs. 9A-9B, [0057], [0059], “In some embodiments, the transducer comprising an array of transducer elements”, [0167], [0286]) and the grip (908) angularly configured for self-handling by a user during a self-monitoring activity (Fig. 9A, [0098], “According to some embodiments, the system is a comprehensive system, allowing a patient to self-perform a vaginal or rectal examination, without any particular skills”, [0150], [0162], “the ultrasound probe is configured to allow self-examination”, wherein figure 9A shows the handle 908 angled with respect to the probe body 904), the grip (908) and elongated probe (904) each having an axis of symmetry, the axis of symmetry of the grip (908) being at an angle with respect to the axis of symmetry of the elongated probe (904) (Fig. 9A, annotated figure 9A shown below for clarity);
PNG
media_image1.png
290
210
media_image1.png
Greyscale
b) instruction displayable to said subject to obtain specific ultrasound images using a smart device (406), based on an orientation of the elongated probe ([0053], [0071], [0125], [0210], wherein providing visual indications comprises displaying instructions, [0156], “In some embodiments, the indication is generated based on signals received from at least one position and/or orientation sensor of the probe”, [0161], wherein indications comprising how to modify parameters of the scanning session, i.e. position/orientation of the probe, in order to proceed/continue with the scanning session comprises instructions to obtain specific ultrasound images, [0053], “the device coupled to the probe comprises at least one of a, wearable device for example a smartwatch or a smart band, a virtual personal assistant device, a cellular phone device”, [0189-0190], wherein smartwatches, smart bands, cellular devices (i.e. smartphone), and computers comprise smart devices);
c) at least one communication channel adapted to transmit the acquired ultrasound images, or data representative thereof, to a remote location (410) (Fig. 4A, [0191], [0193], [0235], [0239], [0249]).
Regarding claim 15, Prisant teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 14.
Prisant further teaches wherein the device (902; 302; 404) comprises electronic elements (312) adapted to perform an ultrasound scan (Fig. 3A, [0168-0169]), and electronic elements (328) adapted to allow communication between said device (902; 302; 404) and the smart device (406) (Fig. 3A, [0175-0176], “In some embodiments, the at least one different device comprises a close device that is located in the vicinity of the probe, for example a cellular phone, a computer, a virtual assistant device”, [0189], “In some embodiments, the probe 404 is in communication with the local device using a communication circuitry, for example communication circuitry 328 shown in FIG. 3A”).
Regarding claim 16, Prisant teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 15.
Prisant further teaches wherein the smart device is selected from smartphones, tablets, and laptops ([0053], “a smartwatch or a smart band, a virtual personal assistant device, a cellular phone device”, [0125], “the system generates indications and provides information that can be visualized using computers, tablets, and/or AR/VR solutions”, [0175]).
Regarding claim 17, Prisant teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 15.
Prisant further teaches wherein the instructions are selected from printed, displayed, or audible instructions ([0053], “an audio indication, a visual indication”, [0071], [0210]).
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prisant (US20240268784) in view of Culjat (US20130060144).
Regarding claim 3, Prisant teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 1.
Prisant teaches the invention further comprising a probe tip (906) (Fig. 9A, [0286]).
However, Prisant fails to teach wherein the probe tip is selected from detachable, disposable, or single use.
In an analogous ultrasound device field of endeavor, Culjat teaches such a feature. Culjat teaches an ultrasound probe (100) including a probe tip (102) having a scanning ultrasound transducer (120) located therein (Figs. 3 & 5, [0042]). Culjat teaches the probe tip (102) may be detachable for cleaning and sterilization (Fig. 6, [0048-0049]). Moreover, Culjat teaches wherein the probe tip may alternatively be disposable for improved sterility ([0049]). Culjat therefore teaches a probe tip which is detachable and/or disposable.
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 invention of Prisant to have the probe tip be detachable and/or disposable as taught by Culjat (Fig. 6, [0048-0049]). The detachable probe tip may be removed for cleaning and sterilization as recognized by Culjat ([0049]). Moreover, the tip being disposable may improve sterility as further recognized by Culjat ([0049]). In addition, probe tips of different types or sizes may be employed by having the probe tip be detachable as recognized by Culjat ([0049]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prisant (US20240268784) in view of Eugley (US6379305).
Regarding claim 8, Prisant teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 1.
However, Prisant fails to explicitly teach wherein a length of a probe shell is between 12 and 30 cm.
In an analogous ultrasound device field of endeavor, Eugley teaches such a feature. Eugley teaches an intravaginal ultrasound probe (1) (Fig. 1, Abstract, Column 4 lines 15-21). Eugley teaches wherein the probe includes an elongated body portion (3) having a length greater than 12.5 cm (Fig. 1, Column 4 lines 30-44). Figure 1 shows wherein the elongated body (3) comprises a probe shell. Eugley therefore teaches wherein a length of a probe shell may be between 12 and 30 cm.
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 invention of Prisant to have the shaft of the probe be greater than 12.5 cm in length as taught by Eugley (Fig. 1, Column 4 lines 30-44). This length may minimize patient discomfort and may enable greater range of manipulation of the probe as recognized by Eugley (Column 4 lines 36-42).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prisant (US20240268784) in view of Singh (US20160183913).
Regarding claim 9, Prisant teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 1.
Prisant teaches the invention further comprising a probe tip (206), the probe tip comprising a diameter (Figs. 9A-9B, [0286], wherein the scanner 906 is located at a probe tip having a diameter as shown in figures 9A-9B).
However, Prisant fails to explicitly teach wherein the diameter of the probe tip is up to 30 mm.
In an analogous ultrasound device field of endeavor, Singh teaches such a feature. Singh teaches an ultrasound probe (10) including transducers positioned at the probe tip (22) (Fig. 1, [0073], [0089-0090]). Singh teaches the probe tip (22) may have a diameter ranging between 1 mm and 50 mm ([0074]), therefore teaching wherein a diameter of a probe tip may be up to 30 mm. Singh further teaches wherein the ultrasound probe (10) may be used for transvaginal imaging ([0205]).
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 invention of Prisant to have the diameter of the probe tip be between 1 mm and 50 mm as taught by Singh ([0074]). By having a diameter of such a size, the probe may pass through tissue without tearing or disrupting surrounding anatomy as recognized by Singh ([0074]).
Claims 13 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prisant (US20240268784) in view of Randall (US20230270389).
Regarding claim 13, Prisant teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 10.
However, Prisant fails to teach the invention further comprising performing a healthcare professional online guided scan.
In an analogous self-examination field of endeavor, Randall teaches such a feature. Randall teaches a telemedicine system enabling for remote care for patients when a health professional and patient are not physically present with each other ([0002]). Randall teaches wherein users may perform self-examinations and assisted examinations ([0193]) and wherein patients may examine themselves at home ([0264]). Randall teaches wherein a virtual examination may be performed in which a healthcare professional may guide a patient to move a medical device such as a stethoscope to specific areas to obtain data ([0370]). Randall teaches wherein this is performed using a virtual examination room hosted on a remote web server ([0370]), and therefore comprises performing a healthcare professional online guided scan. Moreover, Randall teaches wherein the medical device may alternatively be an ultrasound device rather than a stethoscope ([0296]). Randall further teaches several examination modes including a self-examination mode and a guided examination mode, i.e. online guided by a healthcare professional (Fig. 21, [0107], [0217], wherein “HPC” in figure 21 should be “HCP” for “healthcare professional” as stated in [0107]).
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 invention of Prisant to further include performing an online scan with healthcare professional guidance as recognized by Randall (Fig. 21, [0107], [0217], [0296], [0370]). By doing an online scan, the more experienced healthcare professional may predictably direct a patient to acquire better scans for diagnosis than if they performed the scans themselves.
Regarding claim 18, Prisant teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 15.
Prisant further teaches wherein the instructions may be provided remotely ([0192], “the remote device 410 is configured to transmit one or more indications, for example guidance, instructions, reminders, reports, recommendations, feedback and/or results of processing to the local device 406”).
However, Prisant fails to explicitly teach wherein the instructions are provided by a remote healthcare practitioner or technician via a communication channel.
In an analogous self-examination field of endeavor, Randall teaches such a feature. Randall teaches a telemedicine system enabling for remote care for patients when a health professional and patient are not physically present with each other ([0002]). Randall teaches wherein users may perform self-examinations and assisted examinations ([0193]) and wherein patients may examine themselves at home ([0264]). Randall teaches wherein a virtual examination may be performed in which a healthcare professional may guide a patient to move a medical device such as a stethoscope to specific areas to obtain data ([0370]). Randall therefore teaches wherein instructions may be provided by a remote healthcare practitioner. Randall teaches wherein this is performed using a virtual examination room hosted on a remote web server ([0370]), wherein the virtual examination room and/or web server comprises a communication channel. Moreover, Randall teaches wherein the medical device may alternatively be an ultrasound device rather than a stethoscope ([0296]). Randall further teaches several examination modes including a self-examination mode and a guided examination mode, i.e. online guided by a healthcare professional (Fig. 21, [0107], [0217], wherein “HPC” in figure 21 should be “HCP” for “healthcare professional” as stated in [0107]).
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 invention of Prisant to further include allowing for instructions to be provided by a remote healthcare professional via a communication channel or remote web server as taught by Randall (Fig. 21, [0107], [0217], [0296], [0370]). The more experienced, remote, healthcare professional may predictably direct/guide a patient to acquire better scans for diagnosis than if they performed the scans themselves at home.
Regarding claim 19, Prisant in view of Randall teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 18.
Prisant further teaches wherein the communication channel adapted to transmit the acquired ultrasound images, or data representative thereof, to a remote location (410), is independent of the communication channel between the remote healthcare practitioner or technician and the subject (Fig. 4A, [0175], [0191], wherein the remote device 410 is a remote computer, with communication paths to the probe 404 and local device 406 for receiving ultrasound images shown in figure 4A, via wireless communication [0053], [0189]; Randall above teaches wherein the communication channel, i.e. virtual examination room, between the remote healthcare practitioner and the subject comprises a unique web-link ([0009], [0370] of Randall); therefore, Prisant in view of Randall teach wherein the communication channels are independent of one another).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prisant (US20240268784) in view of Mienkina (US20180344286).
Regarding claim 20, Prisant teaches the invention as claimed above in claim 15.
However, Prisant fails to teach wherein the invention is adapted to: (a) store one or more baseline image(s) of areas of interest; (b) when a patient performs a self-scan, display the stored image to assist the patient in locating and scanning a correct image.
In an analogous system for self-monitoring follicles field of endeavor, Mienkina teaches such a feature. Mienkina teaches an ultrasound system (100) including a transvaginal ultrasound probe (101) for performing self-examinations at home (Fig. 1, Abstract, [0013], [0017]). Mienkina teaches user interfaces (500; 600) which display a reference image (502; 602), i.e. a baseline image, and a real time image (504; 604) and wherein the user interface may include instructions to guide a user in adjusting the ultrasound probe (Figs. 5-6, [0050], [0053]). Mienkina teaches wherein the reference image is an image of a desired target plane taken during a prior imaging session ([0040], [0048], [0050], [0053]). Mienkina teaches the reference images, i.e. ultrasound image data at the target scan plan acquired during a prior imaging session, are stored ([0015], [0061], “Then, once at the target probe position, the acquired ultrasound image data may be compared to stored ultrasound image data at the target scan plane acquired during a prior imaging session”). Mienkina therefore teaches storing baseline images of areas of interest (reference image at a target scan plane). Mienkina teaches wherein the reference image is used as a guide to assist a user in aligning the real time image to the same scan plane as the reference image (Figs. 5-6, [0015], [0054]). Mienkina therefore teaches when a patient performs a self-scan, i.e. a scan at home, displaying the stored baseline image to assist the patient in locating and scanning a correct image.
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 invention of Prisant to store reference images and to display the reference image side-by-side with real-time images being acquired as taught by Mienkina (Figs. 5-6, [0015], [0050], [0053-0054], [0061]). The reference images may predictably provide an indication to the patient that the current position/orientation of the probe is aligned with the target scan plane which is the reference image as recognized by Mienkina (Fig. 6, [0054]), and the image acquired of the target scan plane may be sent to a remote device accessibly by a clinician for evaluation as further recognized by Mienkina ([0015]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TOMMY T LY whose telephone number is (571) 272-6404. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12:00pm-8:00pm eastern time.
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, Anhtuan Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-4963. 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.
/TOMMY T LY/ Examiner, Art Unit 3797
/SERKAN AKAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797