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 .
Disposition of Claims
Claims 1-8 are pending and rejected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2 & 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 2, Claim 2 recites the limitation “the narrowing sector” on Line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. For the purpose of examination, “the narrowing sector” is being interpreted as “a narrowing sector”.
Regarding Claim 6, Claim 6 recites the limitation “wherein the light guide further comprises, along a portion of the expanding sector, a narrowing sector having cross-sectional areas that decrease in size in the direction from the light reception end toward the window [emphasis added]” on Lines 1-3. It is unclear how the expanding sector, defined as having “cross-sectional areas… increase in size in a direction from the light reception end toward the window [emphasis added]” (see Lines 17-19 of Claim 1), must also include a narrowing sector having “cross-sectional areas that decrease in size in the direction from the light reception end toward the window”. For the purpose of examination, “wherein the light guide further comprises, along a portion of the expanding sector, a narrowing sector having cross-sectional areas that decrease in size in the direction from the light reception end toward the window” is being interpreted as “wherein the light guide further comprises
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3 & 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iijima (US 2009/0048490) in view of Hatano (US 2017/0251906).
Regarding Claim 1, Iijima discloses a vision device (Fig. 1, 1; [0018]) comprising:
an insertion tube (Fig. 1, 8; [0019]);
an articulated bending section (Fig. 1, 9; [0019]) connected to the insertion tube ([0019]); and
a tip part (Fig. 1, 10; [0019]) affixed to, and extending distally from, the articulated bending section ([0019]), the tip part including:
an electronic vision receptor (Fig. 3, 20; [0019]);
a lens assembly (Fig. 3, 15a; [0023]) positioned distally of, and longitudinally aligned with, the electronic vision receptor (see Fig. 3);
a light emitting diode (Fig. 3, 21a wherein 21a is an LED; [0033] & [0068]);
a housing (Fig. 3, a housing assembly comprising 11 and 19; [0030]) accommodating the light emitting diode (see Fig. 3), the lens assembly (see Fig. 3) and the electronic vision receptor (see Fig. 3), the housing comprising a window (Fig. 2, 16; [0023]) including a proximal surface (see Fig. 3) and a distal surface opposite the proximal surface (see Fig. 2); and
a light guide (Fig. 3, 16a; [0023]) molded in one-piece with the window (Fig. 3, 16a is attached to 16 —which could be molded together in one-piece (see MPEP § 2113); [0023]) and extending proximally from the proximal surface of the window (see Fig. 3), the light guide being positioned aside from the lens assembly (see Fig. 3), the light guide including an expanding sector (16a is plano-convex lens and thus has a convex proximal portion which expands to form a planar portion; see Fig. 3) and a light reception end (a proximal most part of the convex proximal portion of 16a; see Fig. 3) adjacent to the light emitting diode and configured to receive light emanated therefrom (see Fig. 3), the expanding sector comprising cross-sectional areas that increase in size in a direction from the light reception end toward the window (see Fig. 3).
Iijima fails to explicitly disclose wherein the articulated bending section includes segments including a distal end segment; and the tip part is affixed to, and extends distally from, the distal end segment of the articulated bending section.
However, Hatano teaches a vision device (Fig. 1, 1; [0023]) comprising:
an insertion tube (Fig. 1, 8; [0024]);
an articulated bending section (Fig. 1, 7; [0024]) connected to the insertion tube ([0024]), the articulated bending section including segments (Fig. 12, 25; [0029]) including a distal end segment (Fig. 12, 20; [0026]); and
a tip part (Fig. 12, 6; [0026]) affixed to, and extending distally from, the distal end segment of the articulated bending section ([0026]), the tip part including:
an electronic vision receptor (Fig. 13, 11; [0025]);
a lens assembly positioned distally of, and longitudinally aligned with, the electronic vision receptor (see Fig. 12); and
a housing (Fig. 12, 10; [0025]) accommodating the lens assembly and the electronic vision receptor (see Fig. 12).
The advantage of the plurality of bending pieces is to permit bending in at least two directions (Hatano; [0008]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to someone with ordinary skill in the art to modify the articulating bending section as disclosed by Iijima, to include the plurality of bending pieces taught by Hatano, to permit bending in at least two directions (Hatano; [0008]).
Regarding Claim 2, Iijima, as previously modified by Hatano, teaches the vision device of Claim 1. Iijima further discloses wherein the expanding sector or the narrowing sector is surrounded by air (an area around the proximal most part of the convex proximal portion of 16a is hollow; see Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 3, Iijima, as previously modified by Hatano, teaches the vision device of Claim 1. Iijima further discloses wherein the expanding sector comprises a proximal surface perpendicular to a longitudinal axis (the proximal most part of the convex proximal portion of 16a; see Fig. 3) and having a proximal cross-sectional area that is smaller than any other of the cross-sectional areas of the expanding sector (see Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 7, Iijima, as previously modified by Hatano, teaches the vision device of Claim 1. Iijima further discloses wherein the housing comprises a proximal housing part (Fig. 3, 19; [0029]) and a distal housing part (Fig. 3, 11; [0023]), wherein the distal housing part comprises the window and the light guide (see Fig. 3), and wherein the distal housing is fused with the proximal housing part (Fig. 3, 11 covers 19 —which could be fused together (see MPEP § 2113); [0030]).
Regarding Claim 8, Iijima, as previously modified by Hatano, teaches the vision device of Claim 1. Iijima further discloses wherein the light guide comprises a sector of constant cross-sectional areas (a planar portion of 16a; see Fig. 3).
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iijima (US 2009/0048490) in view of Hatano (US 2017/0251906) as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Grotsch (US 2009/0129230).
Regarding Claims 4-5, Iijima, as previously modified by Hatano, teaches the vision device of Claim 1. Iijima further discloses wherein the expanding sector comprises a proximal cross-sectional area perpendicular to a longitudinal axis (the proximal most part of the convex proximal portion of 16a; see Fig. 3) that is smaller than any other of the cross-sectional areas of the expanding sector (see Fig. 3), a distal cross-sectional area (a distal most part of the convex proximal portion of 16a; see Fig. 3) that is larger than any other of the cross-sectional areas of the expanding sector (see Fig. 3).
Iijima, as previously modified by Hatano, fails to explicitly disclose a lateral surface extending from the proximal cross-sectional area to the distal cross-sectional area at an alpha angle, from the longitudinal axis, ranging between about 4 and 16 degrees; and wherein the expanding sector is shaped as a truncated pyramid with rounded edges.
However, Grotsch teaches a light guide (Fig. 1A, 10; [0069]) comprising:
an expanding sector (Fig. 3, a second portion; [0073]) shaped as a truncated pyramid with rounded edges ([0086] & Fig. 2B) and comprising:
a light reception end (Fig. 1A, 6; [0069]) adjacent to a light emitting diode (Fig. 1A, 2; [0069]) and configured to receive light emanated therefrom ([0069]);
a distal end (Fig. 1A, 7; [0079]); and
cross-sectional areas ([0074]) that increase in size in a direction ([0072]) from the light reception end toward the distal end ([0079]);
the cross-sectional areas comprising:
a proximal cross-sectional area (Fig. 3, 11; [0074]);
a distal cross-sectional area (Fig. 3, 7; [0079]); and
a lateral surface (Fig. 3, 5; [0074]) extending from the proximal cross-sectional area to the distal cross-sectional area at an alpha angle, from a longitudinal axis (Fig. 3, an inclined angle of 5 wherein the inclined angle is φ2 – 90°; [0077]), ranging between about 4 and 16 degrees (Fig. 3, the inclined angle of 5 is 5°; [0077]).
The advantage of the frustopyramidal expanding sector is to permit coupled light to remain in the light guide longer thereby increasing the effective range of the light guide (Grotsch; [0012] & [0033]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to someone with ordinary skill in the art to modify the light guide as disclosed by Iijima, as previously modified by Hatano, to include the frustopyramidal expanding sector taught by Grotsch, to permit coupled light to remain in the light guide longer thereby increasing the effective range of the light guide (Grotsch; [0012] & [0033]).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iijima (US 2009/0048490) in view of Hatano (US 2017/0251906) as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Krupa et al. (hereinafter "Krupa") (US 2009/0185392).
Regarding Claim 6, Iijima, as previously modified by Hatano, teaches the vision device of Claim 1. Iijima, as previously modified by Hatano, fails to explicitly disclose wherein the light guide further comprises, along at least a portion of the expanding sector, a narrowing sector having cross-sectional areas that decrease in size in the direction from the light reception end toward the window.
However, Krupa teaches a vision device (an endoscope; [0052]) comprising:
a light emitting diode (Fig. 6, 55; [0045]);
a light guide (Fig. 6, a light guiding assembly comprising 150 and 200; [0052]) having a light reception end (Fig. 5, 162; [0045]) and a distal end (Fig. 6, 220; [0052]), the light guide comprising:
an expanding sector (Fig. 6, 160; [0045]) having cross-sectional areas that increase in size in a direction from the light reception end toward the distal end ([0045]); and
a narrowing sector (Fig. 6, 210; [0052]) having cross-sectional areas that decrease in size in the direction from the light reception end toward the distal end ([0052]).
The advantage of the distal narrowing sector is to properly match the light emission area of the window (Krupa; [0009]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to someone with ordinary skill in the art to modify the light guide as disclosed by Iijima, as previously modified by Hatano, to include the distal narrowing sector taught by Krupa, to properly match the light emission area of the window (Krupa; [0009]).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-8 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1-22 of U.S. Patent No. U.S. 11,779,197 in view of Iijima (US 2009/0048490), Hatano (US 2017/0251906) and Grotsch (US 2009/0129230).
The claims of ‘197 disclose all the limitations of the instant claims except for an insertion tube; an articulated bending section connected to the insertion tube, the articulated bending section including segments including a distal end segment; wherein the tip part is affixed to, and extending distally from, the distal end segment of the articulated bending section; wherein the expanding sector or the narrowing sector is surrounded by air; wherein the expanding sector comprises a proximal cross-sectional area perpendicular to a longitudinal axis that is smaller than any other of the cross-sectional areas of the expanding sector, a distal cross-sectional area that is larger than any other of the cross-sectional areas of the expanding sector, and a lateral surface extending from the proximal cross-sectional area to the distal cross-sectional area at an alpha angle, from the longitudinal axis, ranging between about 4 and 16 degrees; and wherein the light guide comprises a sector of constant cross-sectional areas.
Regarding Claims 1-8, Iijima discloses a vision device (Fig. 1, 1; [0018]) comprising:
an insertion tube (Fig. 1, 8; [0019]);
an articulated bending section (Fig. 1, 9; [0019]) connected to the insertion tube ([0019]); and
a tip part (Fig. 1, 10; [0019]) affixed to, and extending distally from, the articulated bending section ([0019]), the tip part including:
an electronic vision receptor (Fig. 3, 20; [0019]);
a lens assembly (Fig. 3, 15a; [0023]) positioned distally of, and longitudinally aligned with, the electronic vision receptor (see Fig. 3);
a light emitting diode (Fig. 3, 21a wherein 21a is an LED; [0033] & [0068]);
a housing (Fig. 3, a housing assembly comprising 11 and 19; [0030]) accommodating the light emitting diode (see Fig. 3), the lens assembly (see Fig. 3) and the electronic vision receptor (see Fig. 3), the housing comprising a window (Fig. 2, 16; [0023]) including a proximal surface (see Fig. 3) and a distal surface opposite the proximal surface (see Fig. 2); and
a light guide (Fig. 3, 16a; [0023]) molded in one-piece with the window (Fig. 3, 16a is attached to 16 —which could be molded together in one-piece (see MPEP § 2113); [0023]) and extending proximally from the proximal surface of the window (see Fig. 3), the light guide being positioned aside from the lens assembly (see Fig. 3), the light guide including an expanding sector (16a is plano-convex lens and thus has a convex proximal portion which expands to form a planar portion; see Fig. 3) and a light reception end (a proximal most part of the convex proximal portion of 16a; see Fig. 3) adjacent to the light emitting diode and configured to receive light emanated therefrom (see Fig. 3), the expanding sector comprising cross-sectional areas that increase in size in a direction from the light reception end toward the window (see Fig. 3);
wherein the expanding sector or the narrowing sector is surrounded by air (an area around the proximal most part of the convex proximal portion of 16a is hollow; see Fig. 3);
wherein the light guide comprises a sector of constant cross-sectional areas (a planar portion of 16a; see Fig. 3).
The advantage of the plano-convex light guide is to provide a wide angle of illumination (Iijima; [0008]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to someone with ordinary skill in the art to modify the light guide as disclosed by '197, to be the plano-convex light guide taught by Iijima, to provide a wide angle of illumination (Iijima; [0008]).
Regarding Claims 1-8, Hatano discloses a vision device (Fig. 1, 1; [0023]) comprising:
an insertion tube (Fig. 1, 8; [0024]);
an articulated bending section (Fig. 1, 7; [0024]) connected to the insertion tube ([0024]), the articulated bending section including segments (Fig. 12, 25; [0029]) including a distal end segment (Fig. 12, 20; [0026]); and
a tip part (Fig. 12, 6; [0026]) affixed to, and extending distally from, the distal end segment of the articulated bending section ([0026]), the tip part including:
an electronic vision receptor (Fig. 13, 11; [0025]);
a lens assembly positioned distally of, and longitudinally aligned with, the electronic vision receptor (see Fig. 12); and
a housing (Fig. 12, 10; [0025]) accommodating the lens assembly and the electronic vision receptor (see Fig. 12).
The advantage of the plurality of bending pieces is to permit bending in at least two directions (Hatano; [0008]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to someone with ordinary skill in the art to modify the articulating bending section as disclosed by ‘197, to include the plurality of bending pieces taught by Hatano, to permit bending in at least two directions (Hatano; [0008]).
Regarding Claims 1-8, Grotsch discloses a light guide (Fig. 1A, 10; [0069]) comprising:
an expanding sector (Fig. 3, a second portion; [0073]) shaped as a truncated pyramid with rounded edges ([0086] & Fig. 2B) and comprising:
a light reception end (Fig. 1A, 6; [0069]) adjacent to a light emitting diode (Fig. 1A, 2; [0069]) and configured to receive light emanated therefrom ([0069]);
a distal end (Fig. 1A, 7; [0079]); and
cross-sectional areas ([0074]) that increase in size in a direction ([0072]) from the light reception end toward the distal end ([0079]);
the cross-sectional areas comprising:
a proximal cross-sectional area (Fig. 3, 11; [0074]);
a distal cross-sectional area (Fig. 3, 7; [0079]); and
a lateral surface (Fig. 3, 5; [0074]) extending from the proximal cross-sectional area to the distal cross-sectional area at an alpha angle, from a longitudinal axis (Fig. 3, an inclined angle of 5 wherein the inclined angle is φ2 – 90°; [0077]), ranging between about 4 and 16 degrees (Fig. 3, the inclined angle of 5 is 5°; [0077]).
The advantage of the frustopyramidal expanding sector is to permit coupled light to remain in the light guide longer thereby increasing the effective range of the light guide (Grotsch; [0012] & [0033]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to someone with ordinary skill in the art to modify the light guide as disclosed by ‘197, to include the frustopyramidal expanding sector taught by Grotsch, to permit coupled light to remain in the light guide longer thereby increasing the effective range of the light guide (Grotsch; [0012] & [0033]).
Claims 1-8 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over Claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. U.S. 12,053,152 in view of Iijima (US 2009/0048490).
The claims of ‘152 disclose all of the limitations of the instant claims except for wherein the expanding sector or the narrowing sector is surrounded by air; and wherein the light guide comprises a sector of constant cross-sectional areas.
Regarding Claims 1-8, Iijima discloses a vision device (Fig. 1, 1; [0018]) comprising:
an insertion tube (Fig. 1, 8; [0019]);
an articulated bending section (Fig. 1, 9; [0019]) connected to the insertion tube ([0019]); and
a tip part (Fig. 1, 10; [0019]) affixed to, and extending distally from, the articulated bending section ([0019]), the tip part including:
an electronic vision receptor (Fig. 3, 20; [0019]);
a lens assembly (Fig. 3, 15a; [0023]) positioned distally of, and longitudinally aligned with, the electronic vision receptor (see Fig. 3);
a light emitting diode (Fig. 3, 21a wherein 21a is an LED; [0033] & [0068]);
a housing (Fig. 3, a housing assembly comprising 11 and 19; [0030]) accommodating the light emitting diode (see Fig. 3), the lens assembly (see Fig. 3) and the electronic vision receptor (see Fig. 3), the housing comprising a window (Fig. 2, 16; [0023]) including a proximal surface (see Fig. 3) and a distal surface opposite the proximal surface (see Fig. 2); and
a light guide (Fig. 3, 16a; [0023]) molded in one-piece with the window (Fig. 3, 16a is attached to 16 —which could be molded together in one-piece (see MPEP § 2113); [0023]) and extending proximally from the proximal surface of the window (see Fig. 3), the light guide being positioned aside from the lens assembly (see Fig. 3), the light guide including an expanding sector (16a is plano-convex lens and thus has a convex proximal portion which expands to form a planar portion; see Fig. 3) and a light reception end (a proximal most part of the convex proximal portion of 16a; see Fig. 3) adjacent to the light emitting diode and configured to receive light emanated therefrom (see Fig. 3), the expanding sector comprising cross-sectional areas that increase in size in a direction from the light reception end toward the window (see Fig. 3);
wherein the expanding sector or the narrowing sector is surrounded by air (an area around the proximal most part of the convex proximal portion of 16a is hollow; see Fig. 3);
wherein the light guide comprises a sector of constant cross-sectional areas (a planar portion of 16a; see Fig. 3).
The advantage of the plano-convex light guide is to provide a wide angle of illumination (Iijima; [0008]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to someone with ordinary skill in the art to modify the light guide as disclosed by '152, to be the plano-convex light guide taught by Iijima, to provide a wide angle of illumination (Iijima; [0008]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Shinji et al. (US 2017/0215714) teaches an endoscope illumination device.
Vasylyev (US 2017/0045666) teaches a face-lit waveguide illumination system.
Wei et al. (US 2008/0106914) teaches a point light source having a light guide portion and backlight module.
Harada et al. (U.S. 6,049,558) teaches an optical element for guiding laser light.
Ito (U.S. 5,305,736) teaches a distal end part of an endoscope.
Ohkuwa et al. (U.S. 4,802,460) teaches an endoscope illuminating optical system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN FLOYD LONDON whose telephone number is (571)272-4478. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 10:00 am ET - 6:00pm ET.
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, MICHAEL CAREY can be reached at (571)270-7235. 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.
/STEPHEN FLOYD LONDON/Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/MICHAEL J CAREY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795