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 .
Claims filed 2-27-2024. Claims 15-20 new.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application, filed on 2-27-2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3-31-2025 was filed after the mailing date of the application filed on 2-27-2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim 14 is rejected under U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because:
Claim 14 recites “A non-transient computer”, and the Claim’s language does not comply with the requirements of MPEP 2106.01.1. Since “computer-readable instructions’, “computer program” or “software” is merely a set of instructions.
Computer program is data structure. Data structures not claimed as computer or machine executed instructions embodied in machine-readable memory device(s) or non- transitory computer-readable medium are descriptive material per se and are not statutory because they are not capable of causing functional change in the computer or machine. See, e.g., Warmerdam, 33 F.3d at 136131 USPQZd at 1754 (claim to a data structure per se held nonstatutory). Therefore, since the claimed computer program product fails to recite the language such as a memory device component or a non-transitory computer readable medium is encoded/stored with instructions when executed by a processor/computer perform the following functions of the claim then the Applicant(s) have not complied with S&S. 101, and claim 14 is interpreted as software claim which are non-statutory claim(s) does /do not fall within at least one of the four patent eligible subject matter). Software, or logic, or any type of “functional descriptive material”, is not statutory when claimed as descriptive material, perse. See MPEP 2106 - Patent Subject Matter Eligibility, MPEP 2106.01. Computer-Related Nonstatutory Subject Matter, and see Interim Examination Instructions For Evaluating Subject Matter Eligibility Under 35 U.S.C. § 101, August 24, 2009.
Applicant is suggested to replace “A non-transient computer-readable…” with “non-transitory computer-readable…”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Elofsson 2013/0245362
Regarding claim 1, Elofsson discloses a hearing aid intraoral device (Fig 1, hearing prosthesis 101, abstract, para [22, 32, 61]) configured to be mounted to a bone conduction sound-transmitting organ in a mouth (Fig 3c, para [3] discloses vibration mechanisms to transmit sound via direct vibration of a recipient’ teeth, para [32, 61] discloses a vibration-based hearing prosthesis 372 that is molded to conform to fit one or more of a recipient’s 370 teeth),
the hearing aid intraoral device comprising a vibration apparatus configured to be able to drive the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ to vibrate (para [19] discloses electromechanical transducer, output signals are mechanical vibrations, para [32] discloses vibration via teeth) and
a detection apparatus (Fig 1 vibration sensor 102, para [22] configured to detect a vibration signal of the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elofsson 2013/0245362 in view by Popescu 2018/0113181
Regarding claim 2, Elofsson does not explicitly discloses the claimed limitation as recited in claim 2.
Popescu teaches the hearing aid intraoral device according to claim 1, wherein the detection apparatus comprises at least one acceleration sensor (para [22] teaches vibration sensor unit may include at least one multi-axis acceleration sensor (e.g., a three-axis acceleration sensor)) configured to detect vibration in at least one of a first direction a second direction, and a third direction (para [22-24] teaches multi-axis acceleration sensor may be used to acquire three signal. For example X -direction, Y-direction and Z-direction are each orientated at right angles to one another),
wherein the first direction, the second direction, and the third direction are pairwise perpendicular to each other (para [22] teaches ] teaches multi-axis acceleration sensor may be used to acquire three signal. For example X -direction, Y-direction and Z-direction are each orientated at right angles to one another. Perpendicular is the relationship between the two things that form the 90 degree angle. If two lines intersect to form a right angle, then those lines are perpendicular to each other).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Popescu in Elofsson’s invention, the signal detected by the vibration sensor unit may be used to take more effective corrective action to achieve noise reduction. See Popsecu’s para [18].
Regarding claim 3, Elofsson does not explicitly discloses the claimed limitation as recited in claim 3.
Popescu teaches the hearing aid intraoral device according to claim 2, wherein the acceleration sensor is a uniaxial acceleration sensor, a biaxial acceleration sensor, or a triaxial acceleration sensor (para [22] teaches vibration sensor unit may include at least one multi-axis acceleration sensor (e.g., a three-axis acceleration sensor)) configured to detect vibration in at least one of a first direction, a second direction, and a third direction (para [22-24] teaches multi-axis acceleration sensor may be used to acquire three signal. For example X -direction, Y-direction and Z-direction are each orientated at right angles to one another).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Popescu in Elofsson’s invention, the signal detected by the vibration sensor unit may be used to take more effective corrective action to achieve noise reduction. See Popsecu’s para [18].
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elofsson 2013/0245362 in view by Sapozhnykov 2020/0404415
Regarding claim 4, Elofsson does not explicitly discloses the claimed limitation as recited in claim 4.
Sapozhnykov teaches the hearing aid intraoral device according to claim 1, wherein the detection apparatus comprises a plurality of acceleration sensors with different bandwidths (para [66, 81] teaches a plurality of subband accelerometers for picking up acoustic signals, such as wind noise in a hearing device. Moreover, it is generally known that for accelerometers a trade-off exists between bandwidth and sensitivity. Therefore, it would have been obvious to the skilled person to provide several subband accelerometers) for detecting vibrations in the same direction. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Sapozhnykov in Elofsson’s invention, for detecting and estimating wind and reducing wind noise using an accelerometer.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elofsson 2013/0245362 in view by Vermeiren 2016/0112812
Regarding claim 5, Elofsson discloses in para [23-25] vibration sensor 102 may be a piezo-electric element, a piezo-resistive element.
Elofsson does not specifically disclose the hearing aid intraoral device according to claim 1, wherein the vibration apparatus comprises a piezoelectric oscillator.
Vermeiren teaches wherein the vibration apparatus comprises a piezoelectric oscillator (para [39, 41, 51] teaches oscillation of the piezoelectric element that generates vibration that is delivery to the recipient). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Vermeiren in Elofsson’s invention, advantage of using the piezoelectric oscillator for lower energy consumption.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elofsson 2013/0245362 in view by Rader 2009/0052698
Regarding claim 6, Elofsson discloses the hearing aid intraoral device according to claim 1, further comprising a power supply apparatus and a circuit board (Fig 1 circuit board/circuitry 107, para [17]), wherein the vibration apparatus and the detection apparatus both are electrically connected to the circuit board (para [17] discloses hearing prosthesis 101 includes a vibration sensor 102, a microphone 103, a sound processor 104, an output signal interface 105, and data storage 106, all of which are connected directly or indirectly via circuitry 107).
Elofsson discloses electromechanical transducer, output signals are mechanical vibrations, para [3, 32] discloses vibration via teeth), a detection apparatus (Fig 1 vibration sensor 102, para [22] configured to detect a vibration signal of the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ), the circuit board and the detection apparatus are assembled and fixed together (para [17] discloses hearing prosthesis 101 includes a vibration sensor 102, a microphone 103, a sound processor 104, an output signal interface 105, and data storage 106, all of which are connected directly or indirectly via circuitry 107).
Elofsson does not explicitly disclose the power supply apparatus is configured to supply power to the vibration apparatus.
Rader teaches the power supply apparatus (Fig 1, battery 10, para [33] is configured to supply power to the vibration apparatus (Fig 1 transducer 9, para [14-1-15, 18, 33, 43, 45] teaches transducer 9 is powered by a battery 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Rader in Elofsson’s invention for providing power to the hearing aid intraoral device.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elofsson 2013/0245362 in view by Shanjani 2018/0000565
Regarding claim 8, Elofsson discloses the hearing aid intraoral device according to claim 1, wherein the hearing aid intraoral device further comprising a vibration apparatus configured to be able to drive the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ to vibrate (para [19] discloses electromechanical transducer, output signals are mechanical vibrations, para [32] discloses vibration via teeth) and a detection apparatus (Fig 1 vibration sensor 102, para [3, 22] configured to detect a vibration signal of the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ).
Elofsson does not explicitly discloses a fixing sleeve to which both the vibration apparatus and the detection apparatus are fixed, the hearing aid intraoral device according to claim 1, wherein the hearing aid intraoral device further comprises a fixing sleeve to which both the vibration apparatus and the detection apparatus are fixed, the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ is a tooth, and the fixing sleeve is configured to be sleeved onto the tooth
Shanjani teaches a fixing sleeve (para [119-120] and Figs 5A- 5B, a fixing sleeve/a shell 504 having a plurality of teeth receiving cavities, the monitoring device 502 (can be varied as desired), communication unit 514, sensor 510, power source 512 (battery) are fixing inside the shell 504/fixing sleeve and the fixing sleeve/shell 504 is configured to be sleeve onto the tooth).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the fixing sleeve/shell 504 as taught by Shanjani in Elofsson’s invention for fixing and securing the vibration apparatus and the detection apparatus on the tooth of the recipient.
Or the hearing aid intraoral device further comprises a clamping member to which both the vibration apparatus and the detection apparatus are fixed, the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ is a tooth, and the clamping member is configured to be clamped on the tooth and in interference fit with a surface of the tooth;
Or the vibration apparatus and the detection apparatus each are provided with a bonding portion, the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ is a tooth, and the vibration apparatus and the detection apparatus are configured to be bonded to the tooth.
Claim 15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elofsson 2013/0245362 in view by Popescu 2018/0113181 further in view of Vermeiren 2016/0112812
Regarding claim 15, Elofsson discloses in para [23-25] vibration sensor 102 may be a piezo-electric element, a piezo-resistive element
Elofsson does not specifically disclose the hearing aid intraoral device according to claim 2, wherein the vibration apparatus comprises a piezoelectric oscillator.
Vermeiren teaches wherein the vibration apparatus comprises a piezoelectric oscillator (para [39, 41, 51] teaches oscillation of the piezoelectric element that generates vibration that is delivery to the recipient). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Vermeiren in Elofsson’s invention, advantage of using the piezoelectric oscillator for lower energy consumption.
Claim 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elofsson 2013/0245362 in view by Popescu 2018/0113181 further in view of Rader 2009/0052698
Regarding claim 17, Elofsson discloses the hearing aid intraoral device according to claim 2, further comprising a power supply apparatus and a circuit board (Fig 1 circuit board/circuitry 107, para [17]),
wherein the vibration apparatus and the detection apparatus both are electrically connected to the circuit board (para [17] discloses hearing prosthesis 101 includes a vibration sensor 102, a microphone 103, a sound processor 104, an output signal interface 105, and data storage 106, all of which are connected directly or indirectly via circuitry 107).
Elofsson discloses electromechanical transducer, output signals are mechanical vibrations, para [32] discloses vibration via teeth), a detection apparatus (Fig 1 vibration sensor 102, para [22] configured to detect a vibration signal of the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ), the circuit board and the detection apparatus are assembled and fixed together (para [17] discloses hearing prosthesis 101 includes a vibration sensor 102, a microphone 103, a sound processor 104, an output signal interface 105, and data storage 106, all of which are connected directly or indirectly via circuitry 107).
Elofsson does not explicitly disclose the power supply apparatus is configured to supply power to the vibration apparatus.
Rader teaches the power supply apparatus (Fig 1 battery 10, para [33] is configured to supply power to the vibration apparatus (Fig 1 transducer 9, para [14-1-15, 18, 33, 43, 45] teaches transducer 9 is powered by a battery 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Rader in Elofsson’s invention for providing power to the hearing aid intraoral device.
Claim 19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elofsson 2013/0245362 in view by Popescu 2018/0113181 further in view of Shanjani 2018/0000565
Regarding claim 19, Elofsson discloses the hearing aid intraoral device according to claim 2, wherein the hearing aid intraoral device further comprising a vibration apparatus configured to be able to drive the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ to vibrate (para [19] discloses electromechanical transducer, output signals are mechanical vibrations, para [32] discloses vibration via teeth) and a detection apparatus (Fig 1 vibration sensor 102, para [22] configured to detect a vibration signal of the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ).
Elofsson does not explicitly discloses wherein the hearing aid intraoral device further comprises a fixing sleeve to which both the vibration apparatus and the detection apparatus are fixed, the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ is a tooth, and the fixing sleeve is configured to be sleeved onto the tooth; wherein the hearing aid intraoral device further comprises a fixing sleeve to which both the vibration apparatus and the detection apparatus are fixed, the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ is a tooth, and the fixing sleeve is configured to be sleeved onto the tooth;
Shanjani teaches a fixing sleeve (Figs 5A- 5B, a fixing sleeve/a shell 504 having a plurality of teeth receiving cavities, the monitoring device 502 (can be varied as desired), communication unit 514, sensor 510, power source 512 (battery) are fixing inside the shell 504/fixing sleeve and the fixing sleeve/shell 504 is configured to be sleeve onto the tooth), the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ is a tooth, and the fixing sleeve is configured to be sleeved onto the tooth; [119-120]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the fixing sleeve/shell 504 as taught by Shanjani in Elofsson’s invention for fixing the vibration apparatus and the detection apparatus on the tooth of the recipient.
Or the hearing aid intraoral device further comprises a clamping member to which both the vibration apparatus and the detection apparatus are fixed, the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ is a tooth, and the clamping member is configured to be clamped on the tooth and in interference fit with a surface of the tooth;
Or the vibration apparatus and the detection apparatus each are provided with a bonding portion, the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ is a tooth, and the vibration apparatus and the detection apparatus are configured to be bonded to the tooth.
Claim 16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elofsson 2013/0245362 in view by Popescu 2018/0113181 further in view of Vermeiren 2016/0112812
Regarding claim 16, Elofsson discloses in para [23-25] vibration sensor 102 may be a piezo-electric element, a piezo-resistive element
Elofsson does not specifically disclose the hearing aid intraoral device according to claim 3, wherein the vibration apparatus comprises a piezoelectric oscillator.
Vermeiren teaches the hearing aid intraoral device according to claim 3, wherein the vibration apparatus comprises a piezoelectric oscillator (para [39, 41, 51] teaches oscillation of the piezoelectric element that generates vibration that is delivery to the recipient). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Vermeiren in Elofsson’s invention, advantage of using the piezoelectric oscillator for lower energy consumption.
Claim 18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elofsson 2013/0245362 in view by Popescu 2018/0113181 further in view of Rader 2009/0052698
Regarding claim 18, Elofsson discloses the hearing aid intraoral device according to claim 3, further comprising a power supply apparatus and a circuit board (Fig 1 circuit board/circuitry 107, para [17]),
wherein the vibration apparatus and the detection apparatus both are electrically connected to the circuit board (para [17] discloses hearing prosthesis 101 includes a vibration sensor 102, a microphone 103, a sound processor 104, an output signal interface 105, and data storage 106, all of which are connected directly or indirectly via circuitry 107).
Elofsson discloses electromechanical transducer, output signals are mechanical vibrations, para [32] discloses vibration via teeth), a detection apparatus (Fig 1 vibration sensor 102, para [22] configured to detect a vibration signal of the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ), the circuit board and the detection apparatus are assembled and fixed together (para [17] discloses hearing prosthesis 101 includes a vibration sensor 102, a microphone 103, a sound processor 104, an output signal interface 105, and data storage 106, all of which are connected directly or indirectly via circuitry 107).
Elofsson does not explicitly disclose the power supply apparatus is configured to supply power to the vibration apparatus.
Rader teaches the power supply apparatus (Fig 1 battery 10, para [33] is configured to supply power to the vibration apparatus (Fig 1 transducer 9, para [14-1-15, 18, 33, 43, 45] teaches transducer 9 is powered by a battery 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Rader in Elofsson’s invention for providing power to the hearing aid intraoral device.
Claim 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elofsson 2013/0245362 in view by Popescu 2018/0113181 further in view of Shanjani 2018/0000565
Regarding claim 20, Elofsson discloses the hearing aid intraoral, wherein the hearing aid intraoral device further comprising a vibration apparatus configured to be able to drive the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ to vibrate (para [19] discloses electromechanical transducer, output signals are mechanical vibrations, para [32] discloses vibration via teeth) and a detection apparatus (Fig 1 vibration sensor 102, para [22] configured to detect a vibration signal of the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ).
Elofsson does not explicitly disclose the hearing aid intraoral device according to claim 3, wherein the hearing aid intraoral device further comprises a fixing sleeve to which both the vibration apparatus and the detection apparatus are fixed, the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ is a tooth, and the fixing sleeve is configured to be sleeved onto the tooth;
Shanjani teaches a fixing sleeve (Figs 5A- 5B, a fixing sleeve/a shell 504 having a plurality of teeth receiving cavities, the monitoring device 502 (can be varied as desired), communication unit 514, sensor 510, power source 512 (battery) are fixing inside the shell 504/fixing sleeve and the fixing sleeve/shell 504 is configured to be sleeve onto the tooth), the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ is a tooth, and the fixing sleeve is configured to be sleeved onto the tooth; [119-120]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the fixing sleeve/shell 504 as taught by Shanjani in Elofsson’s invention for fixing the vibration apparatus and the detection apparatus on the tooth of the recipient.
Or the hearing aid intraoral device further comprises a clamping member to which both the vibration apparatus and the detection apparatus are fixed, the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ is a tooth, and the clamping member is configured to be clamped on the tooth and in interference fit with a surface of the tooth;
Or the vibration apparatus and the detection apparatus each are provided with a bonding portion, the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ is a tooth, and the vibration apparatus and the detection apparatus are configured to be bonded to the tooth.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-13 allowed.
Claim 14 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101, set forth in this Office action.
The prior art references Elofsson in view of Rader further in view of Popescu fail to disclose the claimed limitation as recited in independent claim 12, “a control method for a hearing aid, comprising: controlling a voice collection apparatus of a hearing aid external device to collect a sound signal; controlling a detection apparatus of a hearing aid intraoral device to detect a vibration signal of a bone conduction sound-transmitting organ in a mouth; inversely processing the vibration signal detected by the detection apparatus and then superimposing the inversely processed vibration signal with the signal collected by the voice collection apparatus; and controlling a vibration apparatus of the hearing aid intraoral device to vibrate according to the superimposed signal.”
Claims 7, 9-11 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 7 objected because the prior art references fail to disclose the claimed limitation, “the hearing aid intraoral device according to claim 6, wherein the bone conduction sound-transmitting organ is a tooth, the power supply apparatus, the circuit board, and the detection apparatus are configured to be mounted to one side of the tooth,
the vibration apparatus is configured to be mounted to the other side of the tooth, and the vibration apparatus and the detection apparatus are configured to synchronously transmit vibration to a surface of at least one tooth and detect a vibration signal of the at least one tooth.”
Claim 9 objected because the prior art references fail to disclose the claimed limitation, “a hearing aid external device comprising a voice collection apparatus and a control apparatus, the control apparatus being configured to be electrically connected with the voice collection apparatus and the hearing aid intraoral device according to claim 1;
wherein the control apparatus is configured to be able to receive a signal collected by the voice collection apparatus and a vibration signal detected by the detection apparatus of the hearing aid intraoral device, and inversely process the vibration signal detected by the detection apparatus and then superimpose the inversely processed vibration signal with the signal collected by the voice collection apparatus, so as to control the vibration apparatus of the hearing aid intraoral device to vibrate according to the superimposed signal.”
Claim 11 objected because the prior art references fail to disclose the claimed limitation, “ a hearing aid comprising the hearing aid intraoral device according to claim 1 and a hearing aid external device, wherein the hearing aid external device comprises a voice collection apparatus and a control apparatus, the control apparatus is configured to be electrically connected with the voice collection apparatus and the hearing aid intraoral device; wherein the control apparatus is configured to be able to receive a signal collected by the voice collection apparatus and a vibration signal detected by the detection apparatus of the hearing aid intraoral device, and inversely process the vibration signal detected by the detection apparatus and then superimpose the inversely processed vibration signal with the signal collected by the voice collection apparatus, so as to control the vibration apparatus of the hearing aid intraoral device to vibrate according to the superimposed signal.”.
Claims 10 objected because it is depending on the objected claim 9.
Claims 13-14 allowed because they are depending on the allowed claim 12.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIE X DANG whose telephone number is (571)272-0040. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5.
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, Carolyn R Edwards can be reached at 571-270-7136. 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.
/JULIE X DANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2692
/CAROLYN R EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2692