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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, Claims 1-13 in the reply filed on August 5, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the currently amended claims require that the water distribution wall is connected to the cup-shaped capsule body such that the liner barrier layer and the wall barrier layer are united along a circumference of the body such that there is a continuity of matter between the liner barrier layer and the wall barrier layer that forms a sealing zone. This is not found persuasive because the common technical feature linking the three groups is the stricture of the water distribution wall, and not the combination of the capsule together with the water distribution wall. This structural feature has been taught by Abegglen, Talon263 and Talon831, as presented in the restriction requirement mailed June 24, 2026.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 14 and 15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on August 5, 2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 5 and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites, “wherein the water distribution wall and/or the bottom wall respectively comprise(s)” on line 19.
Claim 5 recites, “wherein the water distribution wall and/or the bottom wall has/have, respectively” on lines 1-2
For matters of form, it is suggested that the term, “respectively” should be deleted.
Claim 1 recites, “the body” on line 23. Claim 6 also recites, “the body” on line 2. For matters of form, this limitation should be amended to recite, “the cup-shaped capsule body.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "6" and "8" have both been used to designate “the top opening” (see page 13, lines 3-4 and 15-16 of the specification as filed.
Additionally, reference characters "6" and "10" have both been used to designate “the water distribution wall” (see page 13, lines 18-20) of the specification as filed.
The drawings are also objected to because the specification refers to reference character 8 as pointing to a “bottom opening” however from figure 1, it is not clear that reference character 8 is specifically pointing to an opening.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show “the inner liner layer 24 and the protection layers 34 and 31 are sealed to each other along said circumference” as described in the specification on page 16, lines 24-25. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d).
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: reference character “38” as presented on page 17, line 6 and reference character “110” as presented on page 19, line 14 cannot be found in the drawings. Additionally, reference character “112” in figure 6 cannot be found in the specification.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: On page 17, lines 8-9, the specification discloses that, “The water distribution wall 10 together with it’s the wall barrier layer 32 can be pushed against the uncovered line 20.” This sentence is unclear.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-13 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.
Claim 1 recites, “wherein the water distribution wall is connected to the cup-shaped capsule body such that the inner barrier layer and the respective wall barrier are united along a circumference.” (see lines 21-23). Since lines 19-20 recite that either the water distribution wall or the bottom wall comprise a wall barrier layer, it is not clear whether the recitation on lines 21-23 is intending to recite that the water distribution wall is the wall that comprises the wall barrier layer or whether the claim still allows for either of the water distribution wall and/or the bottom wall to comprise a wall barrier layer. In view of this, the particularly claimed structure required by the claim is not clear.
Claim 1 recites, “the respective wall barrier layer” on lines 22-23, which lacks proper antecedent basis.
Claim 4 recites that “an outer an outer joining layer is arranged to join the liner barrier layer and the outer liner layer, and wherein an inner joining layer is arranged to join the liner barrier layer and the inner liner layer.” Claim 2, from which claim 4 depends, recites in the alternative that the liner barrier layer can comprise an outer liner layer or an inner liner layer. Therefore, it is not clear whether claim 4 is intending to require both the outer liner layer and the inner liner layer or whether the outer and inner liner layer are also recited in the alternative.
Claim 6 recites, “the inner liner layer” on line 2, which lacks proper antecedent basis.
Additionally, claim 5, from which claim 6 depends, recites that the water distribution wall and/or the bottom wall can comprise a main layer or at least one protection layer and another protection layer. Claim 5 recites the main layer and the protection layers in the alternative. Therefore, it is not clear whether claim 6 intends to require the water distribution wall and/or the bottom wall to have the at least one protection layer or whether the claim intends to still refer to this limitation in the alternative.
Claims 7 and 8 recites, “one of the protection layers.” This limitation lacks proper antecedent basis because it is not clear whether this is referring to “at least one protection layer” or “another protection layer” as recited in claim 5.
Since claim 5 recites in the alternative “a main layer” or “at least one protection layer….and another protection layer…” it is not clear whether the protection layer recitations in claims 7 and 8 are intending to positively recite that is a protecting layer on each opposing face of the wall barrier layer.
Claim 8 recites, “wherein a main joining layer is arranged to join the wall barrier layer and the main layer arranged to join the wall barrier layer and one of the protection layers.” This limitation is not clear as to what structure is being claimed.
Claim 10 recites, “the injected fluid” and “the fluid injected” on lines 2 and 3, both of which lack proper antecedent basis.
Claims 2-3, 5, 9, and 11-13 are rejected based on their dependence to a rejected claim.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7 and 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dogan (US 20130216663) in view of Brockel (WO 2021224425) and in further view of Talon (US 20160107831 – cited on PTO892 mailed June 24, 2026).
US 20230192391 has been relied on as an English equivalent of Brockel (WO 2021224425).
Regarding claim 1, Dogan teaches a capsule for producing a beverage in a beverage production machine by injecting a fluid under pressure in said capsule, wherein the capsule comprises:
a cup-shaped capsule body with a cavity (figure 1, item 1, 3 and 6), a top opening (figure 1, near item 4) and a bottom opening (figure 1, near item 7), the top opening and the bottom opening being located at substantially opposite sides of the cup-shaped capsule body with respect to the cavity (see figure 1),
a water distribution wall connected to the cup-shaped capsule body (see figure 1, item 13 and paragraph 52) to delimit a chamber (figure 1, item 5; figure 2, item 16, 17) within the cavity, the water distribution wall being configured to allow passage of the fluid (see paragraph 49, 52), the chamber being configured for containing a substance for the production of the beverage (paragraph 40),
a top wall (Figure 1, item 4) for closing the top opening, and
a bottom wall (Figure 1, item 7) for closing the bottom opening, said bottom wall being adapted to be opened when pressure increases inside the capsule (paragraph 44), in order to allow the beverage produced in the chamber to flow out of the capsule.
Dogan also teaches that the water distribution wall and the bottom wall are connected to the cup shaped capsule body such that there is continuity between the inner surface of the capsule body and each of the water distribution wall and the bottom wall, because at paragraph 52, the reference teaches that the water distribution wall is welded against the internal surface of the hollow body and at paragraph 41, the reference teaches that the bottom wall is sealed onto an edge 8 of the lower part of the capsule. Continuity between these structures would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art for sealing the bottom of the capsule and for ensuring that the fluid was directed through the water distribution wall.
Claim 1 differs from Dogan in specifically reciting that wherein the cup-shaped capsule body has a layered structure comprising: a body layer moulded out of cellulose-based material, and a liner applied on an inner face of the body layer, wherein the liner comprises a liner barrier layer configured to provide a moisture and/or gas barrier function.
Brockel (WO 2021224425 / US 20230192391) teaches a capsule for producing a beverage that comprises a cup shaped capsule body (see the abstract and figure 2, item 12), that comprises a cellulosed based body layer (see figure 2, item 2 and paragraph 159, 163) and a liner applied on an inner face of the body layer (see figure 2, item 4 and paragraph 163, 169, 172). Brockel teaches that such a composite structure can be easier and less expensive to produce with improved shelf life and improved retention of flavor (see paragraph 16).
Talon (US 20160107831) also teaches providing a barrier liner (see figure 2, item 14; paragraph 67, “inner shell 14 which is a label having moisture and oxygen barrier properties”) to an inner face of a molded cup shaped capsule body used to produce beverages (see figure 1 and 2 and at least, the abstract, paragraph 67). Talon teaches that such a configuration can provide a cost effective and ecologic material to protect the contents against moisture and oxygen (see paragraph 4).
To therefore modify Dogan to use a cellulose based cup shaped body together with a liner having oxygen barrier properties, as taught by Brockel and Talon would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, for the purpose of providing improved shelf-life and improved flavor retention while providing a composite material that can be easier and less expensive to produce.
Claim 1 further differs from Dogan in specifically reciting that the water distribution wall and/or the bottom wall respectively comprise(s) a wall barrier layer configured to provide a moisture and/or gas barrier function, and wherein the water distribution wall is connected to the cup-shaped capsule body such that the liner barrier layer and the respective wall barrier layer are united along a circumference of the body, such that there is continuity of matter between the liner barrier layer and the wall barrier layer that form a sealing zone.
It is noted that claim 1 at lines 19-25 is not clear for the reasons already presented under 35 U.S.C. 112b. Therefore, at lines 19-20 the claim only requires for one of the water distribution wall or the bottom wall to comprise a wall barrier layer. The claim then recites on lines 21-22 that the water distribution wall is connected to the cup shaped capsule body and that the liner barrier layer and the respective wall barrier layer are united along a circumference of the body. The claim does not specifically recite that the water distribution wall comprises a wall barrier layer.
Talon teaches that a bottom wall (figure 2, item 16) can comprise a barrier layer (see paragraph 67: bottom barrier layer 16) which is connected to the cup-shaped capsule body such that Talon’s liner barrier layer and the wall barrier layer of the bottom wall overlap and guarantee that a proper barrier against moisture and oxygen is achieved to protect the contents (see paragraph 67: “…and a bottom barrier layer 16 that closes the lower dispensing opening of the capsule 11. Such an overlap between the barrier elements of the capsule guarantees that a proper barrier against moisture and oxygen is achieved, which protects the mixing ingredient contained within the capsule against oxidation and degradation of its organoleptic properties during storage.”). It is noted that Applicant’s specification refers to the liner barrier layer and the wall barrier layer as being united by either or both a physical connection or a material connection (see page 16, line 30 to page 17, line 3). In view of this, Talon teaches a continuity of matter via the seal between the liner barrier layer and the wall barrier layer. In view of this, to modify the combination such that the wall barrier layer of the bottom wall overlaps with and is sealed to the liner barrier layer on the inner face of Dogan’s capsule body would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, for the purpose of guaranteeing a proper barrier against moisture and oxygen is achieved. In view of the combination already teaching that the wall barrier layer and the liner barrier layer are sealed to each other, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art that the combination is teaching and suggesting continuity of matter between the liner barrier layer and the wall barrier layer that form a sealing zone. It is noted that Brockel also teaches continuity of matter between a barrier layer of a liner on an inner face of the capsule and a wall attached to the capsule because the reference is teaching that both the cover 21 and the capsule 11 comprise barrier layers that are in contact with one another (see paragraph 144-146) and the sealing, such as by ultrasonic or thermal welding (paragraph 160) results in contact between the barrier layers of both the capsule and the wall (see paragraph 161, 162 and 168). Layers 3 and 4 can also provide barrier properties (see paragraph 46, 169-170, 173). Brockel is teaching that this type of sealing is useful for ensuring a hermetically sealed and oxygen tight capsule (see paragraph 121, 178).
Regarding claim 2, in view of Brockel, the combination teaches the liner has a multi-layered structure comprising, in addition to the liner barrier layer (4): an outer liner layer covering the liner barrier layer at a side of the body layer (see figure 2, item 3 and paragraph 45-46). The limitations directed to “an inner liner layer” are recited in the alternative and therefore are not required.
Regarding claim 3, in view of Brockel, the combination teaches that the outer liner layer (figure 2, item 3) is arranged between the body layer (2) and the liner barrier layer (4), for applying the liner to the body layer.
Regarding claim 5, in view of Talon, the combination teaches that the bottom wall has, a multi-layered structure comprising, in addition to the wall barrier layer: a main layer. That is, at paragraph 67, Talon teaches that the barrier properties can be achieved using a combination of materials including barrier thermoplastic films having single or multiple layers, or aluminum or paper or a combination thereof. Therefore, the combination is teaching that the bottom wall can comprise a “main layer.”
Regarding claim 7, it is noted that the claim does not positively recite that the wall barrier layer comprises the at least one protection layer covering a face of the wall barrier layer and another protection layer covering an opposite face of the wall barrier layer” as recited in claim 5. And claim 5 recites this limitation in the alternative. Therefore, while claim 7 further limits claim 5, claim 7 is rejected based on its dependence to a rejected claim.
Regarding claim 9, Dogan teaches that the chamber is defined between the bottom wall and the water distribution wall (see figure 1).
Regarding claim 10, Dogan teaches that the water distribution wall (13) comprises a punctured wall section configured to break a jet of the injected fluid to reduce a speed of the fluid injected into the cavity, the punctured wall section being configured to distribute the fluid over and across the chamber at a reduced speed (see paragraph 49).
Regarding claim 11, Dogan teaches a rim portion arranged at the top opening so as to protrude laterally away from the top opening (see figure 1), the rim portion being integral with the cup-shaped capsule body (see figure 1). The top wall is sealed to the rim portion so as to close the top opening (see figure 1, item 4).
Regarding the limitation of, wherein the liner extends over the rim portion in a circumferentially closed manner, Talon teaches that the liner should extend over the rim portion in a circumferentially closed manner (see figure 3, item 14) for the purpose of also guaranteeing a proper moisture and oxygen barrier with the top of the capsule. Brockel also teaches that the liner extends to the flange (see figure 2, item 14 and paragraphs 161-163 disclosing that the flange 14 alco comprises the sealing layer 3 and the barrier layer 4).
To therefore modify Dogan so that the liner extends over the rim portion in a circumferentially closed manner would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, for the purpose of guaranteeing a proper moisture and oxygen barrier to protect the contents.
Regarding claim 12, Dogan teaches that the cup-shaped capsule body comprises a stepped portion facing towards the top opening (see figure 1, item 8), and wherein the bottom wall is connected to the stepped portion along said circumference of the cup-shaped capsule body (see figure 1, item 7).
Regarding claim 13, Dogan teaches that a head space is delimited within the cavity between the water distribution wall and the top opening (see figure 1, item 14). The remaining limitations are not required since the claim recites that there can be a head space or a dispensing space.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination, as applied to claim 2 above, and in further view of Eickhoff (US 20210245914), Andreae (US 20170008694) or Thibado (US 20170144813)
It is initially noted that in light of the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112b, claim 4 is unclear as to the particular required structure.
Nonetheless, claim 4 differs from the combination as applied to claim 2 in specifically reciting, wherein an outer joining layer is arranged to join the liner barrier layer and the outer liner layer, and wherein an inner joining layer is arranged to join the liner barrier layer and the inner liner layer.
Eickhoff (US 20210245914) teaches capsules for coffee (see paragraph 31 and 32), and which capsule can comprise a base substrate layer (see figure 19, item 210; paragraph 35) and having a multilayer liner (Figure 8 and 19, item 220), and which multilayer liner can comprise an outer joining layer (240) and an inner joining layer (260) (figure 8, item 240 and 260; see paragraph 37: “…second layer 240 and fourth layer 260 may be tie layers suitable for bonding, coupling, or attaching first layer 230 and/or fifth layer 270 to third layer 250.”). The outer joining layer joins the liner barrier layer (250) with an outer liner layer (230) at a side of the body layer (210) and the inner joining layer joins the liner barrier layer (250) and the inner liner layer (270). Eickhoff teaches that this configuration is useful for extending the shelf-life of the contents (see paragraph 3).
Andreae (US 20170008694) teaches a beverage producing capsule that comprises an outer cellulose layer (figure 6, item 29; paragraph 65) followed by an outer liner layer (figure 6, item 25; paragraph 65), then a liner barrier layer (figure 6, item 27; paragraph 64) and then an inner liner layer (figure 6, item 26; paragraph 64). Andreae further teaches that the above layers of the laminate are welded to one another or glued to one another using adhesive (see paragraph 23) and therefore is suggesting an outer joining layer joining the liner barrier layer 27 to the outer liner layer 25; and an inner joining layer joining the liner barrier layer 27 to the inner liner layer 26. Andreae teaches that this configuration is useful for providing barrier properties to a capsule while also making the capsule more environmentally friendly (see paragraph 4).
Thibado (US 20170144813) discloses materials for beverage producing pods (see paragraph 4) which can comprise one or more outer layers 210 (see paragraph 27), an outer joining layer (figure 2, item 230) that is arranged to join a liner barrier layer (figure 2, item 220; paragraph 28) and the outer liner layer (figure 2, item 210). Thibado further teaches an inner joining layer (figure 2, item 230) arranged to join the liner barrier layer 220 and an inner liner layer 210. Thibado teaches that this configuration can provide a long shelf life of packaged food while also providing compostable materials (paragraph 2).
Since Dogan is not limiting regarding the specific structure of the cup-shaped capsule body, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the combination and to use a liner that comprises an outer joining layer that is arranged to join the liner barrier layer to an outer liner layer and an inner joining layer that is arranged to join the liner barrier layer to an inner liner layer, for the purpose of providing the requisite barrier properties and compostability, for example, to the capsule.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination, as applied to claim 5 above, and in further view of Cabilli (US 20190225412).
It is initially noted that in light of the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112b, claim 6 is unclear as to the particular required structure.
Nonetheless, claim 6 differs from the combination, as applied to claim 5 above, in specifically reciting that wherein the water distribution wall and/or the bottom wall is/are connected to the body such that the inner liner layer and the at least one protection layer are sealed to each other along said circumference so that the liner barrier layer and the wall barrier layer are united along said circumference.
Cabilli teaches providing a bottom wall (figure 2, item 142) to a beverage producing capsule (figure 2, item 10) and which bottom wall comprises a wall barrier layer (see figure 3, item 1423; paragraph 76). Cabilli further teaches that in addition to the wall barrier layer, there can be a main layer 1420 (see paragraph 62). Since Cabilli also teaches that there can be at least one layer 1422 and at least one layer 1420 both positioned around the wall barrier layer 1423 (see paragraphs 62-63), the reference is teaching and suggesting a main layer and a protection layer covering opposing faces of the wall barrier layer. Cabilli further teaches that the layers that surround the barrier layer are also useful for protecting the barrier layer from corrosion and/or abrasion (see paragraph 98) and that the bottom wall is sealed to the body (see paragraph 45)
To therefore modify the bottom wall of Dogan to include a main layer and a protection layer on opposing faces of the wall barrier layer would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art for the purpose of protecting the wall barrier layer.
Since Talon already teaches and suggests that the liner barrier layer and the wall barrier layer are united along the circumference, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have also connected the bottom wall to the body by sealing an inner liner layer to a protection layer to guarantee the barrier protection as already taught by Talon, while also protecting the barrier layer of the bottom wall.
Claims 5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination, as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Brivois (US 20230415974).
Regarding claim 5, at paragraph 67, Talon teaches that the barrier properties can be achieved using a combination of materials including barrier thermoplastic films having single or multiple layers, or aluminum or paper or a combination thereof. Therefore, the combination is teaching that the bottom wall can comprise a “main layer” or a protection layer.
Claims 5 and 8 differs from the combination, as applied to claim 1, in specifically reciting, wherein the water distribution wall and/or the bottom wall has/have, respectively, a multi-layered structure comprising, in addition to the wall barrier layer: a main layer, and/or at least one protection layer covering a face of the wall barrier layer and another protection layer covering an opposite face of the wall barrier layer (claim 5); and wherein a wall joining layer is arranged to join the wall barrier layer and one of the protection layers, and/or wherein a main joining layer is arranged to join the wall barrier layer and the main layer arranged to join the wall barrier layer and one of the protection layers (claim 8).
Brivois teaches a puncturable bottom wall layer (see figure 1 and 2, item 12; paragraph 18) of a beverage capsule and which bottom wall layer comprises a barrier layer having a gas barrier function (figure 2, item 12b, paragraph 31 and 38). Brivois teaches that there is a wall joining layer (figure 2, item 15) arranged to join the wall barrier layer (12b) and the one of the protection layers 12a and 12c. Brivois therefore teaches a protection layer on opposing faces of the wall barrier layer 12b (see paragraph 29 and 31)
To modify the combination and to use wall joining layers as taught by Brivois would therefore have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to secure the wall barrier layer to the capsule as well as for protecting the wall barrier layer.
Conclusion
Appleford (US 20240051735) discloses beverage producing capsules (see paragraph 2 and 63; figure 1) and where the body of the capsule comprises a substrate layer (figure 3, item 50; paragraph 155), then an outer liner layer (Figure 3, item 52), then a liner barrier layer (figure 3, item 54) and then an inner liner layer (figure 3, item 56) all of which are useful to provide increased barrier to transmission of fluids through e packaging material (see paragraph 156).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VIREN THAKUR whose telephone number is (571)272-6694. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 10:30-7:00pm.
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, Erik Kashnikow can be reached at 571-270-3475. 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.
/VIREN A THAKUR/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1792
Prosecution Insights