DETAILED ACTION
Applicant canceled claims 1-17. Claims 18-34 are pending and hereby under examination.
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 § 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.
Claims 18-19 and 28-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cortelazzo (US 20170265847).
Regarding claim 18, Cortelazzo teaches a biological sample collection system, the system comprising:
a containment vessel (Fig. 3, containment device 10) comprising:
a first end for receiving a biological sample (Fig. 3, second vessel 14), a
second end comprising a sample storage chamber (Fig. 3, first vessel 11), and
a connection member disposed at the first end (Fig. 3, external threading 22);
a sample collection reservoir disposed toward the first end of the containment vessel (Fig. 3, second vessel 14), wherein the sample collection reservoir comprises:
an opening for receiving the biological sample (Fig. 2, second vessel 14 with filling opening 15),
one or more walls defining a sample receiving area (Fig. 2, second vessel 14 with external perimetric shoulder 16 and walls shoulder 16 is coupled on top of), and
a valve disposed in the sample receiving area (Fig. 2, pre-facture 19), the valve comprising:
a closed configuration, wherein when the valve is in the closed configuration the biological sample is retained in the sample collection reservoir (Paragraph 0061, “The preservative is therefore in the chamber 13 defined between the lid 12 and the second vessel 14, hermetically sealed off from the external environment and from the risk of contact by a technician”), and
an open configuration, wherein when the valve is in the open configuration the biological sample is released from the sample collection reservoir into the sample storage chamber of the containment vessel (Paragraph 0064, “During the screwing, at a certain point the presser 20 begins to press on the region 18 with a pre-fracture 19, and by continuing the screwing the region 18 ruptures and the preservative flows from the chamber 13 down into the first vessel 11, while remaining separated from contact with the operator”); and
a cap (Fig. 1, lid 12) comprising:
a top end (Fig. 3, top of lid 12),
an open end (Fig. 1, lid 12 with open end defined by walls defined by internal threading 23),
a pusher comprising a first end extending from an inner portion of the cap and an opposing second end, the second end of the pusher extending a distance from the inner portion of the cap towards the open end of the cap and being configured to engage with the valve of the sample collection reservoir (Figs. 3-4, pusher 20 extending from the top of the lid 12 towards pre-fracture 19; Paragraph 0064, “During the screwing, at a certain point the presser 20 begins to press on the region 18 with a pre-fracture 19, and by continuing the screwing the region 18 ruptures and the preservative flows from the chamber 13 down into the first vessel 11”), and
a connection member complementary to the connection member of the containment vessel and configured to engage the open end of the cap with the first end of the containment vessel (Fig. 1, internal threading 23; Paragraph 0038, “The coupling means between the first vessel 11 and the lid 12 are constituted, in the present embodiment of the invention, by an external threading 22 around the inlet portion of the vessel 11 and by a corresponding internal threading 23 defined in the lid 12”);
wherein,
when the biological sample collection system is closed by engagement of the connection member of the containment vessel with the connection member of the cap, the second end of the pusher engages with the valve of the sample collection reservoir, thereby moving the valve from the closed configuration to the open configuration to permit the fluid to be released from the sample collection reservoir into the sample storage chamber of the containment vessel (Paragraph 0064, “During the screwing, at a certain point the presser 20 begins to press on the region 18 with a pre-fracture 19, and by continuing the screwing the region 18 ruptures and the preservative flows from the chamber 13 down into the first vessel 11, while remaining separated from contact with the operator”).
Regarding claim 19, Cortelazzo further teaches wherein the connection members comprise a threaded connection (Fig. 1, internal threading 23 and external threading 22).
Regarding claim 28, Cortelazzo further teaches wherein the sample collection reservoir is connected toward the first end of the containment vessel via a press-fit connection between a lip extending from the one or more walls of the sample collection reservoir (Fig. 5, perimetric shoulder 16 of the second vessel 14) and a complementary groove disposed at the first end of the containment vessel (Fig. 5, wherein the perimetric shoulder 16 sits on corresponding rim 17 of the first vessel 11 and engages by snap action with an annular anti-extraction ridge 41 of lid 12, see also paragraph 0048).
Regarding claim 29, Cortelazzo further teaches wherein the sample collection reservoir is connected toward the first end of the containment vessel via a snap-fit connection between a lip extending from the one or more walls of the sample collection reservoir (Fig. 5, perimetric shoulder 16 of the second vessel 14) into a complementary groove disposed on an inner surface of the containment vessel (Fig. 5, wherein the perimetric shoulder 16 sits on corresponding rim 17 of the first vessel 11 and engages by snap action with an annular anti-extraction ridge 41 of lid 12, see also paragraph 0048; Examiner interprets the ridge 41 to be an inner surface of the containment vessel).
Regarding claim 30, Cortelazzo further teaches wherein the sample collection reservoir is connected toward the first end of the containment vessel via a press-fit connection between a lip extending from the one or more walls of the sample collection reservoir (Fig. 5, perimetric shoulder 16 of the second vessel 14) and a shoulder on an inner surface of the containment vessel (Fig. 5, wherein the perimetric shoulder 16 sits on corresponding rim 17 of the first vessel 11 and engages by snap action with an annular anti-extraction ridge 41 of lid 12, see also paragraph 0048; Examiner interprets the rim 17 to be a shoulder on an inner surface of the containment vessel).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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 20, 22, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cortelazzo (US 20170265847) as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Wickstead (US 7225689).
Regarding claims 20 and 22, Cortelazzo teaches the system of claim 18 as described above. While Cortelazzo as modified discloses inner and outer threads for screwing the cap to the first vessel (see Figs. 3-5), Cortelazzo fails to explicitly disclose the connection creates a fluid-tight seal. Regarding the limitations of claim 22, Cortelazzo discloses a sample collection reservoir that has a larger diameter at the top portion and a smaller diameter at the bottom portion (Fig. 3, second vessel 14). However, Cortelazzo does not disclose a “funnel-shaped” reservoir.
Cortelazzo and Wickstead are in the same field of sample collection. Wickstead teaches a funnel collector for use with a sample testing device (Abstract). The funnel collector 20 (Fig. 3) holds a sample before being directed onto a test-strip (Col 2, lines 21-31), wherein the funnel collector can have a threaded outer surface to engage matching threads on the inner surface of a test strip, forming a fluid tight connection (Col 4, lines 9-20). As Cortelazzo discloses a second vessel with a decreasing diameter, Wickstead discloses a similar collector that is a funnel. The substitution of the second vessel disclosed by Cortelazzo for the funnel with threads for a fluid tight connection as taught by Wickstead would have yielded the predictable result of collecting a sample to one of ordinary skill in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the second vessel of Cortelazzo with the funnel taught by Wickstead, yielding the predictable result of collecting a sample in a fluid-tight container to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 24, Cortelazzo teaches the system of claim 18 as described above. Cortelazzo further discloses wherein the valve has at least one pre-scored cut (Figs. 1-2, region 18 with a pre-fracture 19), wherein the at least one pre-scored cut does not fully penetrate through the valve, and when the biological sample collection system is closed by engagement of the connection member of the containment vessel with the connection member of the cap, the second end of the pusher engages with the valve to penetrate and extend through the valve to move the valve from the closed configuration to the open configuration (Paragraph 0064, “During the screwing, at a certain point the presser 20 begins to press on the region 18 with a pre-fracture 19, and by continuing the screwing the region 18 ruptures and the preservative flows from the chamber 13 down into the first vessel 11, while remaining separated from contact with the operator”; Examiner interprets the “pre-fracture” being ruptured through the screwing action as the pre-fracture not fully penetrating through the valve material).
Cortelazzo does not explicitly define the valve as being formed from a flexible material or a rigid plastic.
Cortelazzo and Wickstead are in the same field of sample collection. Wickstead teaches a pierceable membrane 38 of a buffer container 30 (Figs. 6-7). The pierceable membrane 38 forms a frangible, fluid impermeable barrier to retain the buffer. The membrane 38 may be formed from metal foil, polymeric membrane, glass, or plastic (Col 5, lines 12-24). As Cortelazzo uses region 18 with pre-fracture 19 to retain the liquid without explicitly defining the material, Wickstead uses a membrane made of polymer or plastic with a pre-stressed area/shaped score to retain the fluid. The substitution of the region 18 disclosed by Cortelazzo for the membrane made from plastic or polymer as taught by Wickstead would have yielded the predictable result of creating a seal to retain fluid. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the region of Cortelazzo with the plastic/polymer membrane taught by Wickstead, yielding the predictable result of a retaining seal to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 21, 31, and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cortelazzo (US 20170265847) in view of Theberge (US 11813605).
Regarding claim 21, Cortelazzo teaches the system of claim 18 as described above. Cortelazzo fails to explicitly disclose a marking on one or more walls that correspond to a fluid volume.
Cortelazzo and Theberge are in the same field of sample collection. Theberge teaches a biological sample container comprising a sample stabilizer tube 100 with fill indicators 312 and a stabilizer 106 in the tube (See Fig. 1). Cortelazzo would benefit from including fill indicators to inform a user when enough sample has been collected. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sample collection system of Cortelazzo with the fill indicators taught by Theberge, the benefit in informing a user when enough sample has been collected.
Regarding claim 31, Cortelazzo teaches the system of claim 18 as described above. While Cortelazzo discloses a preservative (Paragraph 0060), Cortelazzo fails to explicitly disclose the preservative in the sample storage chamber.
Cortelazzo and Theberge are in the same field of sample collection. Theberge teaches a biological sample container comprising a sample stabilizer tube 100 that is configured to connect with a sample tube and contain a biological sample that may mix with a sample stabilizer within the stabilizer tube (Col 5, lines 9-30). As Cortelazzo is concerned with releasing a preservative into a biological sample, Theberge discloses an alternative method, wherein the biological sample is released into a preservative in a tube with fill indicators. There are only a finite number of ways to mix a biological sample and a preservative, and a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp.. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sample collection system of Cortelazzo with the fill indicators taught by Theberge, the benefit in preserving the sample.
Regarding claim 33, Cortelazzo discloses a method of preserving a biomolecule in a biological sample, the method comprising:
obtaining a biological sample (Paragraph 0062, “In order to place a biological sample in the first vessel 11”),
obtaining the biological sample collection system of claim 18 (See rejection of claim 18 above);
placing the biological sample in the sample storage chamber (Paragraph 0063, “After insertion of the biological sample into the first vessel 11”),
placing the cap over the first end of the containment vessel (Paragraph 0060, containment device 10 is closed by screwing the lid 12 onto the first vessel 11),
engaging the connection member of the containment vessel with the connection member of the cap, which engages the second end of the pusher with the valve of the sample collection reservoir, thereby moving the valve from the closed configuration to the open configuration (Paragraph 0064, “During the screwing, at a certain point the presser 20 begins to press on the region 18 with a pre-fracture 19, and by continuing the screwing the region 18 ruptures and the preservative flows from the chamber 13 down into the first vessel 11, while remaining separated from contact with the operator”) to permit the stabilizing composition to be released from the sample collection reservoir into the sample storage chamber of the containment vessel (Paragraphs 0063-0065, “After insertion of the biological sample into the first vessel 11, one proceeds to remove the portion of seal 25 and to close the lid 12 by screwing it to the first vessel 11. During the screwing, at a certain point the presser 20 begins to press on the region 18 with a pre-fracture 19, and by continuing the screwing the region 18 ruptures and the preservative flows from the chamber 13 down into the first vessel 11, while remaining separated from contact with the operator. With the containment device 10 completely closed, the sample is immersed in the preservative, which has always remained separated from the external environment”); and
mixing the released biological sample with a stabilizing composition in the containment vessel for preserving the biomolecule within the biological sample (Paragraph 0065, “the sample is immersed in the preservative”).
Cortelazzo fails to explicitly disclose that the second vessel 14 contains the biological sample and, upon engagement of the pusher with the pre-facture 19, allows the biological sample to flow into the preservative contained in the first vessel 11.
Cortelazzo and Theberge are in the same field of sample collection. Theberge teaches a biological sample container comprising a sample stabilizer tube 100, the tube configured to connect with a sample tube and contain a biological sample that may mix with a sample stabilizer within the stabilizer tube (Col 5, lines 9-30). As Cortelazzo is concerned with releasing a preservative into a biological sample, Theberge discloses an alternative method, wherein the biological sample is released into a preservative in a tube with fill indicators. There are only a finite number of ways to mix a biological sample and a preservative, and a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sample collection system of Cortelazzo with the fill indicators taught by Theberge, the benefit in preserving the sample.
Claims 23 and 25-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cortelazzo (US 20170265847) as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Gombrich (US 5573951).
Regarding claim 23, Cortelazzo teaches the system of claim 18 as described above. Cortelazzo further discloses that when the biological sample collection system is closed by engagement of the connection member of the containment vessel with the connection member of the cap, the second end of the pusher engages with and extends through the valve to move the valve from the closed configuration to the open configuration (Paragraph 0064, “During the screwing, at a certain point the presser 20 begins to press on the region 18 with a pre-fracture 19, and by continuing the screwing the region 18 ruptures and the preservative flows from the chamber 13 down into the first vessel 11, while remaining separated from contact with the operator”).
Cortelazzo as modified fails to explicitly disclose the valve is a duck-bill valve.
Cortelazzo and Gombrich are in the same field of sample collection. Gombrich discloses a blood culture device 20 with duck bill valves 74/76 that allow fluid to enter into the sample vials (see Fig. 3). As Cortelazzo is concerned with collecting a sample, Gombrich introduces a duck-bill valve to move liquid between one container and another. Cortelazzo would benefit from such a valve as they are oriented to allow unidirectional fluid flow (Col 4, line 66 – Col 5, line 2), preventing fluid from exiting the storage chamber prematurely. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Cortelazzo with the duck-bill valve as taught by Gombrich, the benefit in preventing fluid from exiting the storage chamber prematurely due to unidirectional fluid flow.
Regarding claims 25 and 26, the combination of Cortelazzo and Gombrich disclose the system of claim 23 described above. Cortelazzo further discloses wherein the pusher comprises a groove in an outer surface thereof, wherein the groove extends along at least a portion of the second end of the pusher along a longitudinal axis of the pusher, wherein the groove extends from the first end of the pusher to the second end of the pusher (See Fig. 1 below, wherein the pusher comprises grooves that run along the longitudinal axis from the first end to the second end).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Grooves)]
PNG
media_image1.png
550
258
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cortelazzo (US 20170265847) as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Johnson (US 11284867).
Regarding claim 27, Cortelazzo teaches the system of claim 18 as described above. Cortelazzo further discloses the open and closed configurations, as described above. Cortelazzo fails to disclose the valve having a valve seat and face, wherein the valve face is movable with respect to the valve seat between the closed configuration, in which the valve seat sealingly engages the valve face, and the open configuration, in which the valve face is spaced from the valve seat to allow fluid flow between the valve face and the valve seat, and when the biological sample collection system is closed by engagement of the connection member of the containment vessel with the connection member of the cap, the second end of the pusher engages with the valve to move the valve face with respect to the valve seat from the closed configuration to the open configuration.
Cortelazzo and Johnson are in the same field of sample collection. Johnson teaches a biological sample collection system (Abstract) that includes a valve 104 with a moveable core 106 and a collar 108. The core 106 has a closed position, wherein the fluid vents 116 are not exposed and are sealed against the collar 108, creating a fluid tight connection (Col 8, lines 54-63). In the open configuration, the fluid vents 116 are exposed to allow fluid to move through into the collection chamber 103 (Figs. 2A-C). As Cortelazzo discloses the pusher/region combination, Johnson introduces a selectively movable valve. A The substitution of the region 18 disclosed by Cortelazzo for the movable valve taught by Johnson would have yielded the predictable result of creating a seal to retain fluid. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the region of Cortelazzo with the movable valve taught by Johnson, yielding the predictable result of a retaining seal to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claim 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cortelazzo (US 20170265847) as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of McIntosh (US 4340147).
Regarding claim 32, Cortelazzo teaches the system of claim 18 as described above. Cortelazzo further discloses the cap with an open end comprising an inner cap wall and the pusher extending therefrom (Fig. 1). Cortelazzo fails to disclose wherein the top end of the cap comprises a second open end, the second open end being separated from the open end of the cap by the inner portion of the cap, the inner cap wall of the inner portion separating the second open end of the cap from the open end of the cap, wherein the second open end of the cap comprises a second connection member complementary to the connection member of the containment vessel.
McIntosh is pertinent to the device of Cortelazzo as McIntosh teaches an improved cap. McIntosh teaches a dual function cap (Abstract), wherein one side of the cap has a sharp piercing peak or apex 40 (Fig. 5). The other end includes threads 24 without a piercing member (Figs. 3-4), and both ends are attachable to the container 10. As Cortelazzo discloses the cap with a pusher, McIntosh teaches a dual function cap, with an apex on one side, and wherein both sides may be attached to the container via threads 16 and 24. Cortelazzo would benefit from this cap as one side serves the purposes of closing the container, while the other is used to rupture the seal. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cap of Cortelazzo with the dual function cap taught by McIntosh, the benefit being a double sided cap for closure and seal puncture.
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cortelazzo (US 20170265847) and McIntosh (US 4340147) as applied to claim 32 above, and further in view of McIntosh (US 4340147) and Theberge (US 11813605).
Regarding claim 34, Cortelazzo discloses a method of preserving a biomolecule in a biological sample, the method comprising:
a) obtaining a biological sample (Paragraph 0062, “In order to place a biological sample in the first vessel 11”);
b) obtaining the biological sample collection system of claim 32 (the sample collection system of disclosed by the combination of Cortelazzo and McIntosh described above with respect to claim 32).
d) placing the biological sample in the sample storage chamber (Paragraph 0063, “After insertion of the biological sample into the first vessel 11”);
e) placing the cap over the first end of the containment vessel (Paragraph 0060, containment device 10 is closed by screwing the lid 12 onto the first vessel 11);
f) engaging the connection member of the containment vessel with the connection member of the cap, which engages the second end of the pusher with the valve of the sample collection reservoir, thereby moving the valve from the closed configuration to the open configuration to permit the preservative to be released from the sample collection reservoir into the sample storage chamber of the containment vessel (Paragraphs 0063-0065, “After insertion of the biological sample into the first vessel 11, one proceeds to remove the portion of seal 25 and to close the lid 12 by screwing it to the first vessel 11. During the screwing, at a certain point the presser 20 begins to press on the region 18 with a pre-fracture 19, and by continuing the screwing the region 18 ruptures and the preservative flows from the chamber 13 down into the first vessel 11, while remaining separated from contact with the operator. With the containment device 10 completely closed, the sample is immersed in the preservative, which has always remained separated from the external environment”); and
g) mixing the released preservative with the sample in the containment vessel for preserving the biomolecule within the biological sample (Paragraph 0065, “the sample is immersed in the preservative”).
Cortelazzo discloses that the preservative is received in the sample collection reservoir. Cortelazzo fails to explicitly disclose that the sample is received in the sample collection reservoir, and the pusher opens the valve to allow the sample to flow into the preservative.
Cortelazzo and Theberge are in the same field of sample collection. Theberge teaches a biological sample container comprising a sample stabilizer tube 100 with a stabilizer 106 in the tube (See Fig. 1) that is configured to connect with a sample tube and contain a biological sample that may mix with a sample stabilizer within the stabilizer tube (Col 5, lines 9-30). As Cortelazzo is concerned with releasing a preservative into a biological sample, Theberge discloses an alternative method, wherein the biological sample is released into a preservative. There are only a finite number of ways to mix a biological sample and a preservative, and a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Cortelazzo in combination with McIntosh with the biological sample releasing into the stabilizer as taught by Theberge, and one of ordinary skill would have a reasonable expectation of success in preserving the sample.
Cortelazzo, McIntosh, and Theberge fail to explicitly disclose wherein the second open end of the cap is connected to the containment vessel via engagement of the second connection member of the cap with the connection member of the containment vessel; disengaging the second connection member of the cap from the connection member of the containment vessel, and removing the cap from the containment vessel; placing the open end of the cap over the first end of the containment vessel, such that the cap is inverted relative to placement of the cap in step (b).
McIntosh is pertinent to the device of Cortelazzo, McIntosh, and Theberge as McIntosh teaches an improved cap. McIntosh teaches a dual function cap (Abstract), wherein one side of the cap has a sharp piercing peak or apex 40 (Fig. 5). The other end includes threads 24 without a piercing member (Figs. 3-4), and both ends are attachable to the container 10. McIntosh discusses that, in order to open the seal of the container, the cap initially stored and unscrewed from its position in Fig. 3. The cap is inverted such that the seal is pierced when it is screwed back on to the container as seen in Fig. 4 (Col 4, lines 38-68). As Cortelazzo as modified discloses the cap with a pusher, McIntosh teaches a dual function cap, with an apex on one side, and wherein both sides may be attached to the container via threads 16 and 24. The cap is stored such that the cap encloses the container, and the seal can be opened by inverting the cap to pierce the seal once engaged with the container again. Cortelazzo as modified would benefit from this cap as one side serves the purposes of closing the container, while the other is used to rupture the seal. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the cap of Cortelazzo, McIntosh, and Theberge with the dual function cap taught by McIntosh, the benefit being a double sided cap for closure and seal puncture.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAH MICHAEL HEALY whose telephone number is (703)756-5534. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am - 5:30pm 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, Jason Sims can be reached at (571)272-7540. 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.
/NOAH M HEALY/Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/ADAM J EISEMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights