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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 03/03/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-22 are pending in the application.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 15, the wrong status identifier is being used since claim 15 has not been amended. In Claim 15, “Currently Amended” should be changed to - - Original - - or Claim 15 should be Cancelled.
See MPEP - 714 Amendments, II. MANNER OF MAKING AMENDMENTS UNDER 37 CFR 1.121 - C. Amendments to the Claims:
(A) Status Identifiers: The current status of all of the claims in the application, including any previously canceled or withdrawn claims, must be given. Status is indicated in a parenthetical expression following the claim number by one of the following status identifiers: (original), (currently amended), (previously presented), (canceled), (withdrawn), (new), or (not entered). The status identifier (withdrawn– currently amended) is also acceptable for a withdrawn claim that is being currently amended. Also, See 714 Amendments, II. MANNER OF MAKING AMENDMENTS UNDER 37 CFR 1.121 – C. Amendments to the Claims: (E) Acceptable Alternative Status Identifiers
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 9-11, 15, 16-20, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shelton, IV (US 20110011915 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 22, Shelton, IV discloses a motorized surgical handle assembly apparatus (6), comprising: a non-movable handle (26); a movable handle (20/121) movably coupled to the non-movable handle; a drive assembly (65); a drivetrain (72/80) operably coupled to the movable handle and configured to move the drive assembly; a sensor (proportional sensor 110 [0059-0068, 0071, 0079-0084], variable resistance portion 133 of the retraction switch 131 and/or retraction switch 137/ variable resistor 137’) configured to obtain a measurement corresponding to at least one of a position or orientation of the movable handle (reduce the current based on proportion of depression force of handle/trigger 121); and
a controller (end-of-stroke switch 130/relay 134 circuit) operably coupled to the drivetrain and the sensor, wherein the controller is configured to:
determine, based at least in part on the measurement, that the movable handle (121) has, due to manual actuation of the movable handle in a distal direction, moved away from the non-movable handle by at least a threshold amount, and in response to determining that the movable handle has, due to manual actuation of the movable handle in a distal direction, moved away from the non-movable handle by at least the threshold amount (releases the retraction trigger 121 fully), operate the drivetrain to retract the drive assembly, wherein the movable handle (20/121) is usable, via manual actuation of the movable handle in a proximal direction, to advance the drive assembly such that jaws of a reloadable cartridge assembly coupled to the motorized surgical handle assembly apparatus are clamped ([0078-0081, 0092], figs. 1-15).
Shelton, IV “once the user releases the retraction trigger 121, the spring 125 will move the retraction trigger 121 to an unactuated position and the contact portion 135 of switch 131 will return to the normally closed position and thereby permit current to flow again to the motor 65 to complete the retraction process [0079]…automatically return or retract the cutting element when the firing trigger 432 stops being actuated, e.g., when the firing trigger 432 is released by the user” [0081].
Regarding claims 9, Shelton, IV discloses a motorized surgical handle assembly apparatus (6), the method comprising: receiving a measurement from a sensor (proportional sensor 110 [0059-0068, 0071, 0079-0084], variable resistance portion 133 of the retraction switch 131 and/or retraction switch 137/ variable resistor 137’) of the motorized surgical handle assembly apparatus,
wherein the measurement corresponds to at least one of a position or orientation of a movable handle of the motorized surgical handle assembly apparatus (slows retraction in proportion of handle/trigger 20/121 depress position); determining, based on the received measurement, that the movable handle has, via manual actuation of the movable handle in a distal direction, moved away from a non-movable handle of the motorized surgical handle assembly apparatus by at least a threshold amount (releases the retraction trigger 121 fully); and
operating, based at least in part on the determination that the movable handle has moved away from the non-movable handle by at least the threshold amount, a drivetrain (72/80) of the motorized surgical handle assembly apparatus to retract a drive assembly of the motorized surgical handle assembly apparatus ([0078-0081, 0092], figs. 1-15).
Shelton, IV “once the user releases the retraction trigger 121, the spring 125 will move the retraction trigger 121 to an unactuated position and the contact portion 135 of switch 131 will return to the normally closed position and thereby permit current to flow again to the motor 65 to complete the retraction process [0079]…automatically return or retract the cutting element when the firing trigger 432 stops being actuated, e.g., when the firing trigger 432 is released by the user” [0081].
Regarding claims 15, Shelton, IV discloses a motorized surgical handle assembly apparatus (6), comprising: a non-movable handle (26); a movable handle (20/121) movably coupled to the non-movable handle; a drive assembly (65); a drivetrain (72/80) operably coupled to the movable handle and coupleable to a reloadable cartridge assembly having jaws (12); a sensor (proportional sensor 110 [0059-0068, 0071, 0079-0084], variable resistance portion 133 of the retraction switch 131 and/or retraction switch 137/ variable resistor 137’) configured to obtain a measurement corresponding to at least one of a position or orientation of the movable handle (slows retraction in proportion of handle/trigger 20/121 depress position); and a controller (end-of-stroke switch 130/relay 134 circuit) operably coupled to the drivetrain and the sensor, wherein the controller is configured to operate the drivetrain to clamp or unclamp the jaws by an amount corresponding to the measurement ([0078-0081, 0092], figs. 1-15).
Shelton, IV “once the user releases the retraction trigger 121, the spring 125 will move the retraction trigger 121 to an unactuated position and the contact portion 135 of switch 131 will return to the normally closed position and thereby permit current to flow again to the motor 65 to complete the retraction process [0079]…automatically return or retract the cutting element when the firing trigger 432 stops being actuated, e.g., when the firing trigger 432 is released by the user” [0081].
Regarding claims 2-3, 10-11, and 16-20, Shelton, IV discloses in response to determining that the movable handle has moved away from the non-movable handle by at least the threshold amount, the controller is configured to operate the drivetrain to retract the drive assembly such that the movable handle is moved away from the non-movable handle amount wherein, in response to determining that the movable handle has moved away from the non-movable handle by at least the threshold amount, the controller is configured to operate the drivetrain to retract the drive assembly such that jaws of a reloadable cartridge assembly coupled to the motorized surgical handle assembly apparatus are unclamped the controller is configured to operate the drivetrain such that an angle between the jaws changes at a first rate corresponding to a second rate at which the position or orientation of the movable handle changes (slow retraction and release the retraction trigger 121 fully to retract fully and “generally proportional to the amount of movement of the firing trigger 20” [0059, 0078-0081, 0092], figs. 1-15).
Regarding claims 5, Shelton, IV discloses a friction cam (123/129) movably coupled to the non-movable handle; and a spring (125) configured to bias the friction cam toward the movable handle (20/121) such that movement of the movable handle moves the friction cam by a corresponding amount ([0078-0081], figs. 10-13).
Claim(s) 1, 9, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Trees et al. (US 20150209059 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Trees et al. discloses a motorized surgical handle assembly apparatus (404/432), comprising: a non-movable handle (motor 402/gear box 412 form a non-movable handle); a movable handle (404/432) movably coupled to the non-movable handle (motor 402/gear box 412); a drive assembly (rack 408/closure tube 418); a drivetrain (402/412) operably coupled to the movable handle and configured to move the drive assembly; a sensor (410/428/444/446/448/430) configured to obtain a measurement corresponding to at least one of a position or orientation of the movable handle ([0099-0103], figs. 10-15); and
a controller ([0099]) operably coupled to the drivetrain and the sensor, wherein the controller is configured to:
determine, based at least in part on the measurement, that the movable handle has, due to manual actuation of the movable handle in a distal direction, moved away from the non-movable handle by at least a threshold amount, and in response to determining that the movable handle has, due to manual actuation of the movable handle in a distal direction, moved away from the non-movable handle by at least the threshold amount (releases the retraction trigger 432 fully), operate the drivetrain to retract the drive assembly, wherein the movable handle (404/432) is usable, via manual actuation of the movable handle in a proximal direction, to advance the drive assembly such that jaws of a reloadable cartridge assembly coupled to the motorized surgical handle assembly apparatus are clamped ([0099-0103], figs. 10-15).
Trees et al. states: “If the fourth sensor 446 becomes deactivated during distal movement of the cutting element, thereby indicating that the firing trigger 432 has been released by the user, the controller can be configured to cause the motor 402 to reverse movement of the cutting element… automatically return or retract the cutting element when the firing trigger 432 stops being actuated, e.g., when the firing trigger 432 is released by the user” [0103].
Regarding claims 9, Trees et al. discloses a motorized surgical handle assembly apparatus (404/432), the method comprising: receiving a measurement from a sensor (410/428/444/446/448/430) of the motorized surgical handle assembly apparatus,
wherein the measurement corresponds to at least one of a position or orientation of a movable handle of the motorized surgical handle assembly apparatus (move until contact sensor 446) determining, based on the received measurement, that the movable handle has, via manual actuation of the movable handle in a distal direction ([0099-0103], figs. 10-15), moved away from a non-movable handle of the motorized surgical handle assembly apparatus by at least a threshold amount (releases the retraction trigger 432 fully); and
operating, based at least in part on the determination that the movable handle has moved away from the non-movable handle by at least the threshold amount, a drivetrain (72/80) of the motorized surgical handle assembly apparatus to retract a drive assembly of the motorized surgical handle assembly apparatus ([0099-0103], figs. 10-15).
Trees et al. states: “If the fourth sensor 446 becomes deactivated during distal movement of the cutting element, thereby indicating that the firing trigger 432 has been released by the user, the controller can be configured to cause the motor 402 to reverse movement of the cutting element… automatically return or retract the cutting element when the firing trigger 432 stops being actuated, e.g., when the firing trigger 432 is released by the user” [0103].
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.
Claim(s) 8 and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Shelton, IV (US 20110011915 A1) in view of Hudson et al. (US 20220133318 A1).
Regarding claims 8 and 12-13 Shelton, IV fails to discloses the friction cam includes a magnet, wherein the sensor comprises a Hall effect sensor, and wherein the measurement indicates a position or an angle of rotation of the magnet of the friction cam.
Hudson et al. teaches a movable handle (44) with a friction cam (crown gear 142/motor gear 114) that includes a magnet, wherein the sensor comprises a Hall effect sensor, and wherein the measurement indicates a position or an angle of rotation of the magnet of the friction cam (utilizes hall and potentiometer to measure trigger movement, [0102, 0129-0135, 0198, 0215]).
Given the teachings of Shelton, IV to have a moveable handle/trigger with a proportional sensor and cam and to retract when the moveable handle is moved distal/away from a stationary handle, it 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 to modify the friction cam includes a magnet, wherein the sensor comprises a Hall effect sensor, and wherein the measurement indicates a position or an angle of rotation of the magnet of the friction cam to have the handle move a selected number of degrees to have precise adjustment of speed/torque for more precise operation of the tool, safety purposes and/or for feedback purposes as taught by Hudson et al.
Claim(s) 7 and 10-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Shelton, IV (US 20110011915 A1) in view of Smith et al. (US 20100258611 A1).
Regarding claims 7 and 14 Shelton, IV fails to disclose the sensor comprises a binary switch that is actuatable via movement of the friction cam, and wherein the measurement indicates that the friction cam has moved by an amount corresponding to movement of the movable handle by at least the threshold amount, wherein receiving the measurement from the sensor includes receiving the measurement from a binary switch, and wherein the measurement comprises an indication that a friction cam movably coupled to the non-movable handle has moved by an amount corresponding to movement of the movable handle by at least the threshold amount.
Smith et al. teaches a stapler (1) having a sensor comprises a binary switch that is actuatable via movement of the friction cam, and wherein the measurement indicates that the friction cam has moved by an amount corresponding to movement of the movable handle by at least the threshold amount, wherein receiving the measurement from the sensor includes receiving the measurement from a binary switch, and wherein the measurement comprises an indication that a friction cam movably coupled to the non-movable handle has moved by an amount corresponding to movement of the movable handle by at least the threshold amount [0114].
Given the teachings of Shelton, IV to have a moveable handle/trigger with a proportional sensor and cam and to retract when the moveable handle is moved distal/away from a stationary handle, it 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 to modify the sensor comprises a binary switch that is actuatable via movement of the friction cam, and wherein the measurement indicates that the friction cam has moved by an amount corresponding to movement of the movable handle by at least the threshold amount, wherein receiving the measurement from the sensor includes receiving the measurement from a binary switch, and wherein the measurement comprises an indication that a friction cam movably coupled to the non-movable handle has moved by an amount corresponding to movement of the movable handle by at least the threshold amount to have the handle move a selected number of degrees to have precise adjustment of speed/torque for more precise operation of the tool, safety purposes and/or for feedback purposes as taught by Smith et al.
Claim(s) 16 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Shelton, IV (US 20110011915 A1) in view of Shelton, IV et al. (US 20180168649 A1).
Regarding claims 16 and 20, If argued, that Shelton, IV fails to disclose the controller is configured to operate the drivetrain such that an angle between the jaws changes at a first rate corresponding to a second rate at which the position or orientation of the movable handle changes, wherein the controller is configured to operate the drivetrain such that an angle between the jaws changes non-linearly with the position or orientation of the movable handle.
Shelton, IV et al. teaches having a controller is configured to operate the drivetrain such that an angle between the jaws changes at a first rate corresponding to a second rate at which the position or orientation of the movable handle changes, wherein the controller is configured to operate the drivetrain such that an angle between the jaws changes non-linearly with the position or orientation of the movable handle [0396].
Given the teachings of Shelton, IV to have a moveable handle/trigger with a proportional sensor controlled/slow retraction and release of a retraction trigger to control retraction speed and moveable handle/trigger movement is “generally proportional” to retraction movement, it 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 to modify the controller to be configured to operate the drivetrain such that an angle between the jaws changes at a first rate corresponding to a second rate at which the position or orientation of the movable handle changes, wherein the controller is configured to operate the drivetrain such that an angle between the jaws changes non-linearly with the position or orientation of the movable handle to have the handle move a selected number of degrees to have easier adjustment of speed/torque with ergonomically a moving handle (easier larger movement not proportion to movement of retraction) for more precise operation of the tool, safety purposes and/or for feedback purposes as taught by Shelton, IV et al.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Shelton, IV (US 20110011915 A1) in view of JINNO (US 20090110533 A1) and further in view of Johnson et al. (US 6010054 A).
Regarding claim 21, Shelton, IV fails to disclose the movable handle has a looped structure configured to receive a user's hand such that the movable handle is manually actuatable in the distal direction and manually actuatable in a proximal direction with the user's hand while the user's hand is positioned in the looped structure.
JINNO a movable handle (32) has a looped structure configured to receive a user's hand such that the movable handle is manually actuatable in the distal direction and manually actuatable in a proximal direction with the user's hand while the user's hand is positioned in the looped structure ([0034-0045], figs. 1 and 5-11).
Johnson et al. also teaches a movable handle (22) has a looped structure configured to receive a user's hand such that the movable handle is manually actuatable in the distal direction and manually actuatable in a proximal direction with the user's hand while the user's hand is positioned in the looped structure (col. 7, lines 40-67, figs. 1-3).
Given the teachings of Shelton, IV to have a moveable handle/trigger with a proportional sensor controlled/slow retraction and release of a retraction trigger to control retraction speed, it 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 to modify the movable handle to have a looped structure configured to receive a user's hand such that the movable handle is manually actuatable in the distal direction and manually actuatable in a proximal direction with the user's hand while the user's hand is positioned in the looped structure to have easier adjustment of a moving handle (easier grasping) for more precise operation of the tool, ergonomic purposes, safety purposes and/or for feedback purposes as taught by JINNO and Johnson et al.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Trees et al. (US 20150209059 A1) in view of JINNO (US 20090110533 A1) and further in view of Johnson et al. (US 6010054 A).
Regarding claim 21, Trees et al. fails to disclose the movable handle has a looped structure configured to receive a user's hand such that the movable handle is manually actuatable in the distal direction and manually actuatable in a proximal direction with the user's hand while the user's hand is positioned in the looped structure.
JINNO a movable handle (32) has a looped structure configured to receive a user's hand such that the movable handle is manually actuatable in the distal direction and manually actuatable in a proximal direction with the user's hand while the user's hand is positioned in the looped structure ([0034-0045], figs. 1 and 5-11).
Johnson et al. also teaches a movable handle (22) has a looped structure configured to receive a user's hand such that the movable handle is manually actuatable in the distal direction and manually actuatable in a proximal direction with the user's hand while the user's hand is positioned in the looped structure (col. 7, lines 40-67, figs. 1-3).
Given the teachings of Trees et al. to have a moveable handle/trigger with a sensor to control release of a retraction trigger, it 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 to modify the movable handle to have a looped structure configured to receive a user's hand such that the movable handle is manually actuatable in the distal direction and manually actuatable in a proximal direction with the user's hand while the user's hand is positioned in the looped structure to have easier adjustment of a moving handle (easier grasping) for more precise operation of the tool, ergonomic purposes, safety purposes and/or for feedback purposes as taught by JINNO and Johnson et al.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 6 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Reasons for Allowable Subject Matter
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art of record fails to teach or render obvious a motorized surgical handle device comprising all the structural and functional limitations and further comprising, amongst other limitations/features, a controller is configured to determine a measurement of movement of a handle, that the movable handle has moved away from a non-movable handle/housing by at least a threshold amount, and in response to determining that the movable handle has moved away from the non-movable handle by at least the threshold amount operate the motor/drivetrain to retract a drive assembly and the sensor comprises a rotational potentiometer coupled to the movable handle such that the rotational potentiometer is coaxial with an axis of rotation of the movable handle. Though Shelton, IV (US 20110011915 A1) teaches motorized surgical handle device with a sensor for determining movement of the handle away from a non-moveable handle/housing to activate retraction, it would not be obvious to modify the sensor to be around the same axis of the trigger wherein the sensor is rotational potentiometer coupled to the movable handle such that the rotational potentiometer is coaxial with an axis of rotation of the movable handle and one of ordinary skill would recognize that retract the drive assembly with having adding a coaxial potentiometer would require substantial modification the, drive member, clamping member, handles and sensor(s) to function with a coaxial pentameter with the moveable handle. Having the efficiency and speed of the retract function with a rotational potentiometer coupled to a movable handle such that the rotational potentiometer is coaxial with an axis of rotation of the movable handle provides a direct measurement and improved accuracy as well as compact design for a trigger sensor system.
While various features of the claimed subject matter are found individually in the prior art, a skilled artisan would have to include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure to combine or modify the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed subject matter, and thus obviousness would not be proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). There is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine or modify the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention, and thus obviousness would not be proper. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-22 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on all references and objections applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: See references cited, form 892.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT LONG whose telephone number is (571)270-3864. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9am-5pm, 8-9pm (EST).
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, SHELLEY SELF can be reached at (571) 272-4524. 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.
/ROBERT F LONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731
Prosecution Insights