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 without traverse of Species II which corresponds to claims 8-15 in the reply filed on 08/18/2026 is acknowledged. Thus, claims 1-7 and 16-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. A complete action on the merits of pending claims 8-15 appears below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS’s) submitted on 09/30/2024, 03/16/2026, and 08/19/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 12 and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 12 should be amended to the following to fix a minor grammatical error, “The medical device of claim 11, wherein the second link defines a third side opening in communication with the second guide channel and a fourth side opening in communication with the fourth guide channel, the lock ring is a first lock ring, the medical device further comprising:
a second lock ring disposed around the second link and covering the second side opening of the second link to maintain the second portion of the first tension member within the second guide channel and covering the fourth side opening to maintain the second portion of the second tension member within the fourth guide channel.”
Claim 13 depends from claim 1. Claim 1 was withdrawn as directed to a non-elected species. The dependency appears to be a typographical error and should instead be from claim 8 (or another appropriate preceding claim that provides antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter).
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.
Claim 12 is 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 12 depends upon claim 11 (which depends upon claim 10, which depends upon independent claim 8). Claim 12 states, “a second lock ring disposed around the second link and covering the second side opening of the second link…” The claim itself and the claims it depends upon, do not provide antecedent basis for “the second side opening of the second link.” Claim 11 introduces a “second side opening” only with respect to the first link. Thus, it is unclear what structure is being referenced by “the second side opening of the second link,” rendering the claim indefinite. For purposes of examination, the phrase “covering the second side opening of the second link” is treated as a clear drafting inconsistency arising from the claim’s dependency chain. In context, and consistent with the parallel language of claim 9 and the description of the lock ring embodiments (e.g., the second lock ring that covers the side openings of the second link), the limitation is understood to mean that the second lock ring covers the side openings of the second link that communicates with the second guide channel and the fourth guide channel (i.e., the openings just introduced in claim 12 as the “third side opening” and “fourth side opening”). The claim is read as follows, “The medical device of claim 11, wherein the second link defines a third side opening in communication with the second guide channel and a fourth side opening in communication with the fourth guide channel, the lock ring is a first lock ring, the medical device further comprising: a second lock ring disposed around the second link and covering the third side opening of the second link to maintain the second portion the first tension member within the second guide channel and covering the fourth side opening to maintain the second portion of the second tension member within the fourth guide channel.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 8-12 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 9 of U.S. Patent No. 11,452,572 B2, and over claims 1 and 17 of that same patent. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the present claims are obvious variants of the cited claims of the ‘572 patent.
Claim 1 of the ’572 patent recites a medical device comprising a first link, a second link, and a band (tension member). The first link has a proximal end portion coupled to a shaft and defines a first guide channel. The second link has a proximal end portion rotatably coupled to the distal end portion of the first link so that the second link is rotatable relative to the first link about a first axis, a distal end portion coupled to a tool member that is rotatable relative to the second link about a second axis non-parallel to the first axis, and a second guide channel. Portions of the band are disposed within the first and second guide channels and coupled to the tool member, and the second link is rotatable relative to the first link about the first axis when the band is moved.
Claim 9 of the ’572 patent (depending from claim 1) further recites that a side opening into the first guide channel is defined in the first link, and that the medical device comprises a lock ring disposed about a portion of the first link that covers a portion of the side opening. Claim 17 of the ’572 patent similarly adds the side opening and the lock ring covering a portion of the side opening.
Present claim 8 recites essentially the same combination of elements: a shaft, first link, second link, tension member, and lock ring; the first link defining a first guide channel and a side opening in communication therewith; the second link rotatably coupled about a first axis and defining a second guide channel; portions of the tension member in the guide channels and coupled to a tool member rotatable about a second axis; rotation of the second link in response to movement of the tension member; and the lock ring disposed around the first link and covering the side opening to maintain the tension member within the first guide channel.
The differences between present claim 8 and claims 1 + 9 (or claims 1 + 17) of the ’572 patent are minor. The functional language that the lock ring maintains the tension member within the channel is an inherent or obvious result of covering the side opening already recited in the ’572 claims. The remaining claim language is substantially the same in scope. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have readily recognized present claim 8 as an obvious variation of the combination already claimed in the ’572 patent.
Claims 9-12 further limit claim 8 by adding a second side opening and second lock ring on the second link, additional guide channels, and a second tension member with corresponding movement relationships. These limitations are obvious parallel expansions of the dual-guide-channel and dual-band structure already present or clearly suggested in the ’572 patent (see, e.g., claim 5 of the ’572 patent). They do not render the claims patentably distinct.
Accordingly, claims 8-12 of the present application are not patentably distinct from claims 1 and 9 (and claims 1 and 17) of U.S. Patent No. 11,452,572 B2.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 8-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burbank (US 2010/0011901 A1), in view of Vargas (US 2006/0025652 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Burbank discloses, a wrist mechanism for an instrument used in minimally invasive medical procedures. Burbank teaches, a medical device (Figures 2A-2B, wrist mechanism (200)), comprising:
a shaft (Figures 2A-2B, main tube (110)), a first link (Figures 2A-2B, proximal clevis (220)), a second link (Figures 2A-2B, distal clevis (230)), and a tension member (Figures 2A-2B, cable (253 & 254)) (Paragraphs [0027]-[0029]);
the first link (proximal clevis (220)) comprising a proximal end portion (Figures 2A-2B, right end of proximal clevis (220)) and a distal end portion (Figures 2A-2B, left end of proximal clevis (220)), the proximal end portion of the first link (right end of proximal clevis (220)) being coupled to the shaft (main tube (110); As seen in Figures 2A-2B and disclosed in Paragraph [0030], the proximal clevis (220) is indeed attached to the main tube (110), specifically at the right (proximal) end of proximal clevis (220)), the first link (proximal clevis (220)) defining a first guide channel (Figure 2B, guide channels (222); Paragraph [0030]) and a side opening in communication with the first guide channel (See annotated Figure 2A below, (opening); Where the (opening) shown in Figure 2A is leading into guide channels (222) defined in the proximal clevis (220));
the second link (distal clevis (230)) comprising a proximal end portion (Figures 2A-2B, right end of distal clevis (230)) and a distal end portion (Figures 2A-2B, left end of distal clevis (230)), the proximal end portion of the second link (right end of distal clevis (230)) being rotatably coupled to the distal end portion of the first link (Figures 2A-2B; Paragraph [0030]; Where the right end of distal clevis (230) couples to the left of proximal clevis (220) via pin (225)), the second link (distal clevis (230)) being rotatable relative to the first link (proximal clevis (220)) about a first axis (Figure 4B, pitch axis (425); Paragraphs [0030] and [0041]), the distal end portion of the second link (left end of distal clevis (230)) coupled to a tool member (Figures 2A-2B, effector (240); Paragraph [0029]; Further, Paragraph [0033], where the effector (240) couples to the left end of distal clevis (230) through pin (235)), the tool member (effector (240)) being rotatable relative to the second link (distal clevis (230)) about a second axis (Figure 4B, yaw axis (435); Paragraphs [0033] and [0042]), the second link (distal clevis (230)) defining a second guide channel (Figure 2B, guide channels (232); Paragraphs [0030]-[0032]);
a first portion of the tension member being within the first guide channel (portions of cable (253 & 254) retained/guided within guide channels (222) according to Paragraphs [0030] and [0033]; Figure 2B), a second portion of the tension member being within the second guide channel (portions of cable (253 & 254) retained/guided within guide channels (232) according to Paragraphs [0030]-[0034]; Figure 2B), and a third portion of the tension member being coupled to the tool member (portions of cable (253 & 254) coupled to jaws (242 & 244) of effector (240) according to Paragraphs [0029], [0032]-[0033], and [0036]; Figure 4A); and
the second link (distal clevis (230)) being rotatable relative to the first link (proximal clevis (220)) about the first axis (pitch axis (425)) in response to the tension member (cable (253 & 254)) being moved (Paragraph [0041]).
Burbank fails to teach, a lock ring; and the lock ring being disposed around the first link and covering the side opening of the first link to maintain the first portion of the tension member within the first guide channel.
Vargas discloses an articulating medical device. Vargas teaches, a device (Figure 7-8, cannula system (700); Paragraph [0043]) comprising a shaft (unmarked) with a lock ring (Figures 7-8, sheath (705); Paragraph [0043]; Where sheath (705) has a ring-shaped cross-sectional shape and locks over the shaft, sealing at the distal end (710) and proximal end (715) covering a portion of the shaft, such that as explicitly stated in paragraph [0043], “The addition of the sheath 705 provides a smooth continuous surface that may be used to cover discontinuities.” Further as seen in Figures 7-8, the sheath (705) is clearly bending/articulating with the articulating portions it is covering).
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify the medical device of Burbank to incorporate a lock ring, as taught by Vargas, such that the lock ring is disposed around the first link and covering the side opening of the first link to maintain the first portion of the tension member within the first guide channel, as both references and the claimed invention are directed to articulating medical devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make this modification, as such a modification would have been predictable, namely, to cover discontinuities and prevent undesired lubrication of structures such as the internal tension members of Burbank (Paragraph [0043] of Vargas).
PNG
media_image1.png
293
572
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Burbank teaches, wherein the second link (distal clevis (230)) defines a second side opening in communication with the second guide channel (See annotated Figures 2A and 4A below, (second opening); Where the (second opening) shown in Figures 2A and 4A is leading into guide channels (232) defined in the distal clevis (230)).
Burbank fails to teach, the lock ring is a first lock ring, the medical device further comprising: a second lock ring disposed around the second link and covering the second side opening of the second link to maintain the second portion of the tension member within the second guide channel.
Vargas teaches, the device (cannula system (700)) comprising the shaft (unmarked) with the lock ring (Figures 7-8, sheath (705); Paragraph [0043]; Where sheath (705) has a ring-shaped cross-sectional shape and locks over the shaft, sealing at the distal end (710) and proximal end (715) covering a portion of the shaft, such that as explicitly stated in paragraph [0043], “The addition of the sheath 705 provides a smooth continuous surface that may be used to cover discontinuities.” Further as seen in Figures 7-8, the sheath (705) is clearly bending/articulating with the articulating portions it is covering. Furthermore, the sheath (705) which is a single continuous structure, satisfies, the limitations of “a first lock ring” and “a second lock ring”, specifically the portions of sheath (705) covering the articulating portion in Figures 7-8 serve as distinct portions of the sheath, given that they perform the function of “covering discontinuities”. Under the Broadest Reasonable Interpretation (BRI), reciting a "first lock ring" and a "second lock ring" does not automatically mean they must be two physically separate, discrete parts.);
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify the medical device of Burbank to incorporate a lock ring, as taught by Vargas, such that the lock ring is disposed around the first link and covering the side opening of the first link to maintain the first portion of the tension member within the first guide channel and disposed around the second link and covering the second side opening of the second link to maintain the second portion of the tension member within the second guide channel, where each portion of the lock ring taught by Vargas and incorporated into Burbank performing that function constitutes a first lock ring and a second lock ring, respectively, as both references and the claimed invention are directed to articulating medical devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make this modification, as such a modification would have been predictable, namely, to cover discontinuities and prevent undesired lubrication of structures such as the internal tension members of Burbank (Paragraph [0043] of Vargas).
PNG
media_image2.png
669
1095
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Burbank further teaches, wherein the first link (proximal clevis (220)) defines a third guide channel (Figure 2B, bottom/lower guide channels (222)), the second link (distal clevis (230)) defines a fourth guide channel (Figure 2B, bottom/lower guide channels (232); corresponding to cable (251 & 252)), the tension member is a first tension member (cable (253 & 254)), and the medical device (wrist mechanism (200)) further comprises:
a second tension member (Figures 2A-2B, cable (251 & 252); Paragraph [0029]) comprising a first portion (portions of cable (251 & 252) retained/guided within lower guide channels (222) according to Paragraphs [0030] and [0033]; Figure 2B), a second portion (portions of cable (251 & 252) retained/guided within lower guide channels (232) according to Paragraphs [0030]-[0034]; Figure 2B), and a third portion (portions of cable (251 & 252) coupled to jaws (242 & 244) of effector (240) according to Paragraphs [0029], [0032]-[0033], and [0036]; Figure 4A), the first portion of the second tension member disposed within the third guide channel (as stated previously), the second portion of the second tension member being within the fourth guide channel (as stated previously), and the third portion of the second tension member is coupled to the tool member (as stated previously),
the second link (distal clevis (230)) being rotatable relative to the first link (proximal clevis (220)) about the first axis (pitch axis (425)) in response to the first tension member (cable (253 & 254)) and the second tension member (cable (251 & 252)) being moved in a proximal direction (Paragraph [0036]), and
the tool member (effector (240)) being rotatable relative to the second link (distal clevis (230)) about the second axis (yaw axis (435)) in response to the first tension member (cable (253 & 254)) being moved in the proximal direction and the second tension member (cable (251 & 252)) being moved in a distal direction (Paragraph [0036]; The device is capable of actuating/moving in this manner).
Regarding claim 11, Burbank teaches, wherein the side opening of the first link (proximal clevis (220)) is a first side opening ((opening) in annotated Figure 2A above leading into guide channels (222); the clevis which is U-shaped in structure inherently provides corresponding side openings/recesses between the prongs on each side), the first link (proximal clevis (220)) defines a second side opening (the U-shaped structure of the clevis (220) is providing a corresponding side opening/recess on the opposite/adjacent side of the (opening) in annotated Figure 2A) in communication with the third guide channel (bottom/lower guide channels (222); the opening on the opposite/adjacent side of the (opening) in annotated Figure 2A is leading into the lower/bottom guide channels (222) that receive the second tension member (cable (251 & 252)); see Figures 2A-2B and Paragraph [0030]).
Burbank fails to teach, the lock ring covers the second side opening to maintain the first portion of the second tension member within the third guide channel.
Vargas teaches, the lock ring (sheath (705); Paragraph [0043]; ring-shaped cross-section that locks over and covers portions of the articulating structure, providing a smooth continuous surface that covers discontinuities). Under the BRI applied in the rejection of claim 9, portions of the continuous sheath (705) that perform the covering function constitute the lock ring covering the relevant openings.
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify the medical device of Burbank to incorporate the lock ring, as taught by Vargas, such that the lock ring covers the second side opening of the first link to maintain the first portion of the second tension member within the third guide channel, as both references and the claimed invention are directed to articulating medical devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make this modification, as such a modification would have been predictable, namely, to cover discontinuities and prevent undesired lubrication of structures such as the internal tension members of Burbank (Paragraph [0043] of Vargas).
Regarding claim 12, as best understood in view of the 112(b) rejection above, Burbank teaches, wherein the second link (distal clevis (230)) defines a third side opening in communication with the second guide channel ((second opening) in annotated Figures 2A and 4A above leading into guide channels (232); the U-shaped structure of distal clevis (230) provides side openings/recesses between the prongs leading into the guide channels (232) that receive the first tension member (cable (253 & 254))) and a fourth side opening in communication with the fourth guide channel (corresponding side opening/recess on the opposite or adjacent side of clevis (230) leading into the lower guide channels (232) that receive the second tension member (cable (251 & 252)); see Figures 2A-2B and 4A; see also Paragraphs [0030]-[0032]).
Burbank fails to teach, the lock ring is a first lock ring, the medical device further comprising: a second lock ring disposed around the second link and covering the third side opening of the second link to maintain the second portion of the first tension member within the second guide channel and covering the fourth side opening to maintain the second portion of the second tension member within the fourth guide channel.
Vargas teaches, the lock ring (sheath (705); Paragraph [0043]; ring-shaped cross-section that locks over and covers portions of the articulating structure, providing a smooth continuous surface that covers discontinuities). Under the BRI applied in the rejection of claim 9, the continuous sheath (705) satisfies the limitations of both “a first lock ring” and “a second lock ring,” specifically the portions covering the respective articulating sections that perform the function of covering discontinuities.
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify the medical device of Burbank to incorporate the lock ring, as taught by Vargas, such that the lock ring is a first lock ring and a second lock ring, disposed around the second link covering the third side opening to maintain the second portion of the first tension member within the second guide channel and covering the fourth side opening to maintain the second portion of the second tension member within the fourth guide channel, as both references and the claimed invention are directed to articulating medical devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make this modification, as such a modification would have been predictable, namely, to cover discontinuities and prevent undesired lubrication of structures such as the internal tension members of Burbank (Paragraph [0043] of Vargas).
Regarding claim 13, Burbank further teaches, wherein the first link (proximal clevis (220)) defines a central bore (Figure 7B, conduits (722); Paragraph [0062]) configured to receive a component of the medical device therethrough (As disclosed in Paragraphs [0062]-[0066] and shown in Figures 7A-7B, a space near the central axis of proximal clevis (220) for conduits (722) that receive electrical wires or other conductors. It is also noted that guide channels (222) are positioned near the outer edge to provide room near the center axis for such components).
Regarding claim 14, Burbank further teaches, wherein the first guide channel (guide channels (222)) is curved along a longitudinal centerline of the first link (proximal clevis (220)) and has a curved inner guide surface (Paragraphs [0030]-[0031] and [0034]; surfaces of guide channels (222) and (232) are curved, including approximately circular arcs and multi-directional curvature), the tension member (cable (253 & 254)) contacts the curved inner guide surface to maintain a select bend geometry and tension on the tension member (cable (253 & 254)) during actuation of the tool member (effector (240)) (Paragraphs [0031] and [0034]; cables rest against and slide on the curved guide surfaces that maintain constant moment arm, equal pull-in/play-out lengths, desired bend geometry, and tension throughout the range of motion).
Regarding claim 15, Burbank further teaches, wherein the first guide channel (guide channels (222)) is offset from the first axis of rotation (pitch axis (425)) such that a force applied on the second link (distal clevis (230)) from the tension member (cable (253 & 254)) produces a torque about the first axis of rotation (pitch axis (425)) (Paragraphs [0031] and [0041]; guide channels define a radius/moment arm about pin (25)/pitch axis (425) at which the cables acts; application of tension produces torque about the pitch axis).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OSAMA NEMER whose telephone number is (571)272-6365. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-5:00.
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, Jackie Ho can be reached at (571)272-4696. 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.
/O.N./Examiner, Art Unit 3771 /TAN-UYEN T HO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Prosecution Insights