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 § 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) 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Chiu et al. (U.S. PGPub No. 2021/0016276 A1) in view of Meng et al (U.S. PGPub No. 2015/0077869 A1).
As to claim 1, Chiu discloses and shows in figures 17a and 19, a detection system for nanoparticles, comprising:
a light emitting unit comprising a plurality of light sources and a focusing lens (all optics upstream of the microscope labeled in figure 19 including the lasers at wavelengths 640, 561, 488, and 405, as shown more clearly in figure 17a, the microscope focus light onto the microfluidic sample channel), the light emitting unit configured to emit light beams (laser line or point as disclosed shown in figure 17a) and project the light beams onto a nanoparticle to be detected (as disclosed the system is for measuring nanoparticles) ([0088]; [0090]; [0480]; the examiner notes that the legend of figure 19 provides most of the disclosure of the optics present therewithin); and
a light collection unit comprising a lens and a detector (all optics downstream of the microscope in figure 19; which includes multiple lenses “FL” or “F=16” and detectors APD 1-3) configured to collect light beams from the nanoparticle so as to analyze the nanoparticle according to the collected light beams (i.e. the twenty-one APDs as disclosed) ([0472], ll. 1-5; [0473], ll. 1-3; [0480]);
the light beams emitted by the plurality of light sources are focused through the focusing lens on a single focus point in a sample channel (as disclosed the light can be focused as a point or line) through which the nanoparticle is to pass ([0220], ll. 12-22; [0471], ll. 21-33; whereas explicitly disclosed the lines are made co-linear also explicitly shown in the image of figure 17A).
In the alternative that Chiu does not explicitly wherein the light beams emitted by the plurality of light sources are focused through the focusing lens on a single focus point in a sample channel through which the nanoparticle is to pass.
Meng does disclose and show in figures 3A and 5A and in ([0026]; [0032]-[0033]) the use of a lens (16) that focuses light of multiple wavelengths from multiple sources (i.e. B2 and B3) on a single point (31) in the sample channel.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chiu wherein the light beams emitted by the plurality of light sources are focused through the focusing lens on a single focus point in a sample channel through which the nanoparticle is to pass in order to provide the advantage of increased accuracy as noted by Meng in doing so you can ensure if the particle under test is desired to be excited by two different wavelengths it can be done more efficiently if they are both focused to the same focus point.
As to claim 2, Chiu discloses and shows in figure 17a and 19 a detection system , wherein the light beams emitted by the plurality of light sources have wavelengths different from each other (e.g. 633, 405, 561, 488 nm as explicitly shown), and a dichroic mirror (labeled as D) is provided between each light source and the focusing lens (explicitly shown in figures 17a and 19) ([0472], ll. 1-3; [0480], ll. 3-7).
As to claim 3, Chiu discloses and shows in figures 17A and 19, a detection system, wherein the light beams emitted by the plurality of light sources are reflected or transmitted to be collinear beams via the dichroic mirrors ([0471], ll. 21-33; where the examiner notes that figure 17A does not appear to show the beams a exactly co-linear, however Chiu does explicitly disclose them as co-linear).
As to claim 4, Chiu discloses and shows a detection system, wherein an optical lens configured to adjust a position of the single focus point of the light beams (clearly shown as F or CL in figure 19, where the legend explicitly disclose that the focal lengths are 150 or 200 mm, further this is inherently an adjustment of focal position relative to that of unfocused light) ([0480], ll. 3-8).
As to claim 5, Chiu discloses and shows a detection system, wherein the dichroic mirrors and the optical lens are adjustable so as to adjust the position of the single focus point of the light beams in a direction perpendicular to an optical axis of the light beams directed toward the nanoparticle (Fig. 17A, where applicant has claimed what is essentially an intended use and the examiner is interpreting that the prior art is capable of the noted use. As nothing about the adjustment is tied to any particular structure that actually does any adjustment. As such clearly a person have ordinary skill in the art can move the claimed lenses of Chiu to adjust focus position, this is also implied as possible in [0471], ll. 28-33).
Claim(s) 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chiu et al.
As to claims 6 and 7, Chiu does not explicitly disclose a detection system, wherein a beam expander is provided between each light source and the corresponding optical lens, and the beam expander is configured according to a required size of a spot of the light beam, and further configured to adjust a waist position of the light beam in a direction along the optical axis or wherein the beam expander is composed of two optical parts, a distance between the two optical parts is adjustable, each of the two optical parts is selected from one of a convex lens, a convex lens group, a concave lens and a concave lens group.
However, Chiu does disclose and show in figure 1 and ([0427], ll. 1-7) the basic concept of using a set of convex lenses to expand the incoming beam from a light source. Obviously this could be added to the embodiment of figures 17A and 19, to likewise expand the beams from the light sources in those embodiments. Obviously the expanders purpose is to change the incoming light beam to the required size, in adjusting size obviously position overall of the beam waist is also adjusted to be a larger positional area along the optical axis. Again clearly said lenses are adjustable as they are the same structural components as claimed and can be moved by a user.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chiu does not explicitly disclose a detection system, wherein a beam expander is provided between each light source and the corresponding optical lens, and the beam expander is configured according to a required size of a spot of the light beam, and further configured to adjust a waist position of the light beam in a direction along the optical axis or wherein the beam expander is composed of two optical parts, a distance between the two optical parts is adjustable, each of the two optical parts is selected from one of a convex lens, a convex lens group, a concave lens and a concave lens group in order to provide the advantage of expected results and increased accuracy, in expanding the beam one can ensure that the desired area under test is fully illuminated with an even intensity beam.
Claim(s) 8, 9, 11, 13-14, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chiu et al. in view of Chen (U.S. PGPub No. 2015/0115174 A1).
As to claim 8, Chiu does disclose in ([0025]) that the system can measure essentially all types of scattering, specifically side-scattered, forward-scattered and fluorescence.
Chiu does not explicitly disclose a detection system, wherein the light collection unit comprises a side collection part comprising: an optical focusing lens group comprising a concave mirror and an aspheric lens and configured to focus a light beam emitted from the nanoparticle; a collection fiber into which the optical focusing lens group focuses the light beam; and a beam splitter configured to divide the incident light beam from the collection fiber into a side scattered light beam and a fluorescent light beam; a first wavelength division multiplexer configured to receive the side scattered light beam from the beam splitter via a first fiber; and a second wavelength division multiplexer configured to receive the fluorescent light beam from the beam splitter via a second fiber.
However, Chen does disclose and show in figure 32 and in ([0428]; [0444]) as explicitly shown in figure 32, Chen has a flow cell type system (channel 604) that has a focusing lens group with a concave mirror (601) and an aspheric lens (602). The focusing is an inherent result of impinging light on a concave surface like mirror 601 as well-known in the art, and would do so with the nanoparticles in Chiu. Chen does not explicitly disclose a collection fiber distinct from the fibers 852 to collect light from lens 602. However, the examiner takes Office Notice that the use of fibers as is already done in Chen also directly after lens 602 is obvious, as it relays light without the concern for ambient light noise. As disclosed in Chen the light beams relayed along fibers 852, are both light that is scattered (side scattered as explicitly shown in figure 32) and fluoresced from the particles under test. The use of a fiber holder (940), where the examiner notes that Chen discloses 940 as “a fiber holder”. However, figure 32 explicitly discloses where the fiber holder 940 splits light along three paths (i.e. fibers 852), as such it can be interpreted as a beam splitter. Where since each of the beams that travel along fibers 852, contain both scattered and fluoresced light, one fiber can be interpreted as having a side scattered light beam, and one a fluorescent light beam. Chiu also discloses the use of a first and second wavelength division multiplexers (90, which as shown comprises at least three in Chen) connected via their own distinct fibers 852.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chiu with a detection system, wherein the light collection unit comprises a side collection part comprising: an optical focusing lens group comprising a concave mirror and an aspheric lens and configured to focus a light beam emitted from the nanoparticle; a collection fiber into which the optical focusing lens group focuses the light beam; and a beam splitter configured to divide the incident light beam from the collection fiber into a side scattered light beam and a fluorescent light beam; a first wavelength division multiplexer configured to receive the side scattered light beam from the beam splitter via a first fiber; and a second wavelength division multiplexer configured to receive the fluorescent light beam from the beam splitter via a second fiber in order to provide the advantage of increased efficiency and expected results in using a common collection multiwavelength detection system, one can efficiently relay scattered and fluoresced light to the detectors with minimal losses in using fiber (i.e. increase the signal-to-noise ratio).
As to claim 9, Chiu does not explicitly disclose a detection system, wherein the collection fiber has a diameter different from diameters of the first and second fibers.
However, Chen does disclose in ([0411], ll. 3-13; [0430], ll. 32-37; [0448], ll. 1-4) that number of fibers are not limited to the ones disclosed. Further that a collection fiber can be multi-mode and have a larger diameter. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art that the collection fiber of all the light from the flow cell would be larger in diameter in receiving a greater amount of total light than that split to each of the first and second fibers. In doing so obviously one could prevent losses of not sufficiently receiving all the light focused from the flow cell.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chiu with a detection system, wherein the collection fiber has a diameter different from diameters of the first and second fibers in order to provide the advantage of increased efficiency in using a larger diameter collection fiber one can obviously reduce optical losses in the system by capturing as much light as possible from the sample via for example a multi-modal fiber with a large diameter as disclosed in Chen.
As to claim 11, Chiu does not explicitly disclose a detection system, wherein the first wavelength division multiplexer comprises a plurality of optical transmission paths corresponding to a plurality of optical channels and a first filter and a second filter for each of the plurality of optical channels, and wherein for each optical channel, the first filter and the second filter are arranged at a certain distance from each other along the optical transmission path of the optical channel in a non-parallel manner.
However, Chen does disclose and show in figure 27 and in ([0423]) the use of a wavelength division multiplexer that has a plurality of optical transmission paths each with a first (903) and second filter (0904’). Clearly the filters are at a certain distance from one another and as explicitly shown are tilted relative to each other and not oriented at the same parallel plane. In doing so the filters can relay light to either mirrors (907, or 910) in the case of the first filter, or to lenses 905’ in the case of the second filter.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chiu with a detection system, wherein the first wavelength division multiplexer comprises a plurality of optical transmission paths corresponding to a plurality of optical channels and a first filter and a second filter for each of the plurality of optical channels, and wherein for each optical channel, the first filter and the second filter are arranged at a certain distance from each other along the optical transmission path of the optical channel in a non-parallel manner in order to provide the advantage of increased efficiency in using the zig-zag architecture as taught by Chen one can use an array of detectors while make the system more compact and portable ([0416], ll. 14-17).
As to claim 13, Chiu does not explicitly disclose a detection system, wherein the light collection unit further comprises a forward collection part comprising: a concave mirror having an ellipsoidal surface, wherein a reflective material is coated on the ellipsoidal surface to reflect and focus the forward scattered light beam from the nanoparticle; and a forward detector that receives the light beam reflected from the concave mirror.
However, Chen does disclose and show in figure 37 and in ([0451]) the use of a forward scattering system coupled to the flow cell (409). The light is relayed to detector 408 via a concave mirror 406, where inherently in the configuration as shown there is a reflective material on mirror 406 in order for it to be reflective. This system could obviously be coupled to the system of Chiu in order to add another measurement of light from the nanoparticle under test. Lastly the examiner notes that because of the view of figure 37 it is unclear as to what geometric shape the mirror is constructed as. Chen does disclose and show in figure 11, where the concave mirror in being adapted to a rectangular flow cell can be in the form of ellipsoidal. Further the change in shape absent criticality or an unexpected result is within the level of ordinary skill in the art In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chiu with a detection system, wherein the light collection unit further comprises a forward collection part comprising: a concave mirror having an ellipsoidal surface, wherein a reflective material is coated on the ellipsoidal surface to reflect and focus the forward scattered light beam from the nanoparticle; and a forward detector that receives the light beam reflected from the concave mirror in order to provide the advantage of increased accuracy in using a common forward scattering light collection system one can accurately measure axial loss as another measure of particle size ([0452], ll. 1-3).
As to claim 14, Chiu does not explicitly disclose a sample processing instrument for nanoparticles, comprising: a fluidic system configured to transport various processing and cleaning fluids; a flow cell provided with a sample needle for supplying a sample containing nanoparticles therein, wherein sheath fluid supplied by the fluidic system wraps the sample in the flow cell to obtain a stable sample flow; and the detection system according to claim 1, wherein the detection system is configured to detect nanoparticles in a sample flowing through the flow cell, and instead uses a common microfluidics chip based flow cell implementation.
However, Chen does disclose and show in figures 8b and 14 and in ([0256]; [0315], ll. 1-14; [0376]) the use of a common fluidic system (70) that is capable of the intended use of transporting various processing and cleaning fluids. The examiner notes that applicant fails to claim any particular reservoirs that hold each of the noted fluids as such the “configured to transport” is being interpreted as intended use. A flow cell (619, or shown in part at 603 in figure 14) provided with a sample needle (part of tube not labeled but explicitly shown that is inserted into chamber (620). Where sheath fluid is supplied to wrap the sample in a flow cell to obtain a stable sample flow (i.e. hydro-dynamically focused).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chiu with a sample processing instrument for nanoparticles, comprising: a fluidic system configured to transport various processing and cleaning fluids; a flow cell provided with a sample needle for supplying a sample containing nanoparticles therein, wherein sheath fluid supplied by the fluidic system wraps the sample in the flow cell to obtain a stable sample flow; and the detection system according to claim 1, wherein the detection system is configured to detect nanoparticles in a sample flowing through the flow cell in order to provide the advantage of expected results, as exchanging one common fluidic arrangement with another produces the same expected result of efficient focusing of the particles under test into a small confined flow path for accurate optical measurement of particle size of samples under test.
As to claim 21, Chiu discloses a sample processing instrument, wherein the sample processing instrument is adapted to detect particles ranging from 40 nanometers to 1000 nanometers ([0250], where the examiner further notes that this limitation is merely the sample worked upon by the apparatus and fails to further limit the apparatus beyond the system of the prior art need be capable of use with the sample, please see MPEP 2115).
As to claim 22, Chiu as modified by Chen is capable of the intended use of a processing instrument, wherein the fluidic system is configured to supply sheath fluid at a flow rate of 0.5 mL/min to 1.5 mL/min, and supply the sample at a flow rate of 1 uL/min to 6 uL/min ([0376], [0378]; [0382] from Chen, the citation are merely for compact prosecution, as the noted limitation in merely intended use as it is not linked to any particular structure for performing the structure, as such both Chiu and Chen are found to be capable of the intended use as having met all the claimed structural requirements, further Chen explicitly discloses the ability to control and vary sheath flow rate).
Claim(s) 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chiu et al. in view of Chen further in view of Zhang et al. (CN 110118718 A, where the examiner has provided a machine translation hereinwith for citations).
As to claims 15 and 16, Chiu in view of Chen does not explicitly disclose a sample processing instrument, wherein the flow cell is provided with a bubble discharge passage through which bubbles in fluid in the flow cell are discharged or wherein the flow cell is provided with at least two bubble discharge passages at different levels, wherein two bubble discharge passages of the at least two bubble discharge passages are located at a bottom and a top of a fluid converging chamber of the flow cell, respectively.
However, Zhang does disclose and show in figure 1 and in (page 5, ll. 21-26) the use of a exhaust control valve 120 in the flow cell at the “bottom” of the flow cell. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to also have a second exhaust control valve 120 at the top of the flow cell to allow further bubble removal opportunity, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chiu in view of Chen with a sample processing instrument, wherein the flow cell is provided with a bubble discharge passage through which bubbles in fluid in the flow cell are discharged or wherein the flow cell is provided with at least two bubble discharge passages at different levels, wherein two bubble discharge passages of the at least two bubble discharge passages are located at a bottom and a top of a fluid converging chamber of the flow cell, respectively in order to provide the advantage of increased accuracy as extremely well-known bubbles create noise in the particle measurements in flow cell systems, removing them in as many areas as possible increases analysis accuracy as explicitly disclosed in Zhang.
Claim(s) 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chiu et al. in view of Chen further in view of Kanda (U.S. PGPub No. 2012/0308436 A1).
As to claims 18-20, Chiu does not explicitly disclose a sample processing instrument, wherein the fluidic system comprises: a pump comprising a cylinder and a piston reciprocating in the cylinder; and a switching device configured to selectively fluidly communicate the pump to the sample needle or a sample source or wherein the switching device comprises a three-way valve comprising a first port connected to the pump and a second port connected to the sample needle and a third port connected to the sample source, and wherein the three-way valve is switched between a first position where the pump is allowed to communicate with the sample needle and a second position where the pump is allowed to communicate with the sample source or wherein the switching device comprises a three-way connector and a two-way valve, the three-way connector comprises a first port connected to the pump, a second port connected to the sample needle and a third port connected to the sample source, the two-way valve is arranged between the third port and the sample source, and is switched between an opened position where the third port is allowed to communicate with the sample source and a closed position where the communication between the third port and the sample source is interrupted.
However, Chen does disclose and show in figure 14 and in ([0376]) the use of both a piston pump which is a cylinder and piston reciprocating in the cylinder, and arguable also a peristaltic pump as shown in figure 14, where 3 cylinders reciprocate around in a forwards or backwards motion inside a larger cylinder.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chiu with a sample processing instrument, wherein the fluidic system comprises: a pump comprising a cylinder and a piston reciprocating in the cylinder in order to provide the advantage of expected results in using one of many possible pumps as explicitly disclosed in Chiu to relay the sample to the flow cell measurement area in a low cost widely available manner.
Chen in view of Chiu still fails to disclose a sample processing instrument, wherein the fluidic system comprises: a switching device configured to selectively fluidly communicate the pump to the sample needle or a sample source or wherein the switching device comprises a three-way valve comprising a first port connected to the pump and a second port connected to the sample needle and a third port connected to the sample source, and wherein the three-way valve is switched between a first position where the pump is allowed to communicate with the sample needle and a second position where the pump is allowed to communicate with the sample source or wherein the switching device comprises a three-way connector and a two-way valve, the three-way connector comprises a first port connected to the pump, a second port connected to the sample needle and a third port connected to the sample source, the two-way valve is arranged between the third port and the sample source, and is switched between an opened position where the third port is allowed to communicate with the sample source and a closed position where the communication between the third port and the sample source is interrupted.
However, Kanda does disclose and show in figures 1 and 3 and in ([0045]) the basic concept of using a three-way valve/connector (38) to allow switching of the connection of the sample or a sheath fluid to be received at the sample needle. Specifically the valve is either open to the sample during measurement or open to the sheath fluid during cleaning where the sample obviously would not be in connection with the sample needle. Kanda does fail to disclose the two way valve, however this is just an obvious modification to what is already done with the same expected result. In other words moving the valve so it is on the sheath path tube so it becomes two way vs the three way valve as shown is an obvious and predictable modification to yield the same result of allowing cleaning of the sample pathway.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen in view of Chiu with a sample processing instrument, wherein the fluidic system comprises: a switching device configured to selectively fluidly communicate the pump to the sample needle or a sample source or wherein the switching device comprises a three-way valve comprising a first port connected to the pump and a second port connected to the sample needle and a third port connected to the sample source, and wherein the three-way valve is switched between a first position where the pump is allowed to communicate with the sample needle and a second position where the pump is allowed to communicate with the sample source or wherein the switching device comprises a three-way connector and a two-way valve, the three-way connector comprises a first port connected to the pump, a second port connected to the sample needle and a third port connected to the sample source, the two-way valve is arranged between the third port and the sample source, and is switched between an opened position where the third port is allowed to communicate with the sample source and a closed position where the communication between the third port and the sample source is interrupted in order to provide the advantage of increased accuracy as using sheath fluid to provide a simple cleaning function ensures measurement accuracy when moving through varied nanoparticle sample solutions.
Claim(s) 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chiu et al. in view of Chen further in view of Jones et al. (U.S. PGPub No. 2013/0095575 A1).
As to claim 23, Chiu does not explicitly disclose a sample processing instrument, wherein a filter with precision ranging from 5 nm to 20 nm is provided for the sheath fluid in the fluidic system.
However, Chen does disclose and show in figure 14 and in ([0032], ll. 8-11; [0380], ll. 7-10) the use of a filter cartridge on the sheath flow path. However, no particular precision is detailed in Chen. Jones provides evidence that a sheath fluid line filtering of 20nm is known in ([0016]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chiu with a sample processing instrument, wherein a filter with precision ranging from 5 nm to 20 nm is provided for the sheath fluid in the fluidic system in order to provide the advantage of increased accuracy in filtering the sheath fluid as disclosed in Jones one can reduce error (i.e. background noise) in the measurements of the sample under test ([0016]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/08/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The examiner notes that the arguments are also moot in view of the alternative rejection that uses Meng to teach the noted features.
As to applicant’s first argument that Chiu fails to disclose where the focusing lens focuses light on a single focus point in a sample channel, the examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner is unclear how applicant has interpreted Chiu to “merely describe that illumination may be focused to a spatial region, which may be a point or a line” and somehow subsequently interpreted the clear and explicit recitation of point illumination to not teach point illumination. Chiu explicitly states in [0220] “Single-molecule detection can include the detection of point illumination, or more preferably line illumination”, just because Chiu defines line as more preferable does not negate or somehow teach that point which is also disclosed as not being present. As such the examiner finds applicant’s argument unpersuasive, as the noted feature is explicitly recited in Chiu. The examiner lastly notes for compact prosecution that the term “point” can be defined as “A point is a particular place or position where something happens.”
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/pointionary. As such even a line can be broadly interpreted as a point (I.e. location/place) where light is focused.
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