DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-15 (filed 09/27/2024) have been considered in this action. Claims 1-15 are newly filed.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: CONTROL SYSTEM FOR ULTRASONIC HAND PIECE THAT GENERATES A CONTROL SIGNAL BASED ON A CALCULATED THERMAL INDEX.
Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1, 4-12 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bassinger et al. (US 20110137232, hereinafter Bassinger) in view of Gliner (US 20220133535, hereinafter Gliner).
In regards to Claim 1, Bassinger teaches “A control system for an ultrasonic hand piece, the control system comprising: an irrigation pressure sensor configured to measure a pressure of an irrigation fluid” ([0025] FIG. 1 is a diagram of the components in the fluid path of a phacoemulsification system. FIG. 1 depicts the fluid path through the eye 1145 during cataract surgery. The components include an irrigation fluid source 1105, an irrigation pressure sensor 1130... a hand piece 1150; [0027] A hand piece 1150 is placed in the eye 1145 during a phacoemulsification procedure. The hand piece 1150 has a hollow needle (as seen in FIG. 2) that is ultrasonically vibrated in the eye to break up the diseased lens. [0030] FIG. 4 is a block diagram of one embodiment of a control system according to the principles of the present invention. In FIG. 4, CPU 116 is coupled to power source 120 and irrigation pressure sensor 1130. In this manner, CPU 116 receives pressure information from irrigation pressure sensor 1130. CPU 116 also interfaces with power source 120 and controls its operation--thereby controlling the power sent to the hand piece) “an ultrasonic power source configured to provide power to an ultrasonic transducer” ([0029] FIG. 3 is a diagram of a partial system according to the principles of the present invention. In FIG. 3, irrigation fluid source provides irrigation fluid to hand piece 1150. An irrigation pressure sensor measures the pressure of the irrigation fluid. A power source 120 provides power to hand piece 1150. As previously described, power source 120 provides ultrasonic power to hand piece 1150 that vibrates the phacoemulsification needle. [0007] Power is applied to the hand piece to vibrate the cutting needle. In general, the amplitude of needle movement (or vibration) is proportional to the power applied. In conventional phacoemulsification systems, the needle vibrates back and forth producing a longitudinal needle stroke. In improved systems, the needle may be caused to vibrate in a twisting or torsional motion. Regardless of the type of vibration, the magnitude of vibration (or amplitude of needle stroke) varies with applied power) “and a controller, coupled to the irrigation pressure sensor and the ultrasonic power source, configured to:” ([0010] In one embodiment consistent with the principles of the present invention, the present invention is a control system for managing power supplied to a phacoemulsification hand piece. The control system includes an irrigation pressure sensor, a power source that provides power to the hand piece, and a controller that controls the power source. [0030] FIG. 4 is a block diagram of one embodiment of a control system according to the principles of the present invention. In FIG. 4, CPU 116 is coupled to power source 120 and irrigation pressure sensor 1130. In this manner, CPU 116 receives pressure information from irrigation pressure sensor 1130. CPU 116 also interfaces with power source 120 and controls its operation--thereby controlling the power sent to the hand piece. As previously described, CPU 116 can be any suitable controller) “determine an irrigation flow rate from a measured irrigation pressure provided by the irrigation pressure sensor” ([0034] determine an irrigation flow rate from a measured irrigation pressure provided by the irrigation pressure sensor) “receive a selection of an ultrasonic power modality,” ([0007] Power is applied to the hand piece to vibrate the cutting needle. In general, the amplitude of needle movement (or vibration) is proportional to the power applied. In conventional phacoemulsification systems, the needle vibrates back and forth producing a longitudinal needle stroke. In improved systems, the needle may be caused to vibrate in a twisting or torsional motion. Regardless of the type of vibration, the magnitude of vibration (or amplitude of needle stroke) varies with applied power; wherein twisting or torsional movements are modalities) “generate a control signal based on the selected ultrasonic power modality” (Fig. 6-10 shows different power modality signals for controlling the ultrasonic vibrations [0010] In one embodiment consistent with the principles of the present invention, the present invention is a control system for managing power supplied to a phacoemulsification hand piece. [0029] . As previously described, power source 120 provides ultrasonic power to hand piece 1150 that vibrates the phacoemulsification needle.)“calculate a thermal index value based on the irrigation flow rate and the selected ultrasonic power modality” ([0034] In this manner, the calculated thermal value (T) is a function of: the power (P) applied to the hand piece, the fluid flow (F) through the eye, and the friction (Fr) between the needle and the sleeve. The fluid flow through the eye is calculated from the irrigation pressure (since the cross section area of the irrigation path is known, the flow through the irrigation line is calculated based on the irrigation fluid pressure as read from the irrigation pressure sensor). Therefore, T=F (P, F, Fr). This calculated thermal value provides a good estimate of the actual temperature experienced at the incision site (where burning is most likely to occur). [0047] The controller 38 may receive user-based commands via the user interface 40, which may include setting a vibration mode and/or frequency of the piezoelectric actuator 22, adjusting the vibration mode and/or frequency of the piezoelectric actuator 22, setting or adjusting a stroke amplitude of the needle 16, and/or setting or adjusting an irrigation and/or aspiration rate of the pumping sub-system 26) “and in response to the thermal index value reaching a threshold value, adjust the control signal based on the thermal index value” ([0041] In this manner, when the calculated thermal value exceeds the threshold thermal value, the power supplied to the hand piece is decreased in proportion to an amount that is in excess of the threshold thermal value. When the calculated thermal value falls below the threshold thermal value, normal operation resumes).
Bassinger fails to teach “wherein the ultrasonic power modality is one of a two-dimensional power modality and a three-dimensional power modality”. It should be understood that based upon the BRI, limitations that have already been taught by Bassinger will be additionally shown to be taught through Gliner to improve understanding and readability.
Gliner teaches “receive a selection of an ultrasonic power modality” ([0047] The controller 38 may receive user-based commands via the user interface 40, which may include setting a vibration mode and/or frequency of the piezoelectric actuator 22, adjusting the vibration mode and/or frequency of the piezoelectric actuator 22, setting or adjusting a stroke amplitude of the needle 16, and/or setting or adjusting an irrigation and/or aspiration rate of the pumping sub-system 26) “generate a control signal based on the selected ultrasonic power modality” ([0048] The controller 38 is configured to perform respective adjustments of a frequency of the drive signal (generated by the signal generator 30) so as to maximize the stroke length and maintain mechanical resonance of the needle 16 responsively to the provided respective indications of the stroke length (block 108 of FIG. 2). It should be noted that the term “mechanical resonance of the needle”, in all grammatical forms thereof, is defined as approximately vibrating at the mechanical resonance, due to noise, thermal effects and bandwidth limitations, for example. The controller 38 may adjust the frequency of the drive signal to maximize the stroke length using any suitable method, for example, based on an optimization algorithm, for example, but not limited to, including a gradient descent algorithm;) “provide the control signal to the ultrasonic power source” ([0007] Power is applied to the hand piece to vibrate the cutting needle. In general, the amplitude of needle movement (or vibration) is proportional to the power applied. In conventional phacoemulsification systems, the needle vibrates back and forth producing a longitudinal needle stroke. In improved systems, the needle may be caused to vibrate in a twisting or torsional motion. Regardless of the type of vibration, the magnitude of vibration (or amplitude of needle stroke) varies with applied power. [0055] The needle 16 is ultrasonically vibrated by applying electric power to the piezoelectric crystals 50, which in turn, cause the horn 14 to ultrasonically vibrate, which in turn, ultrasonically vibrates the needle 16. The electric power is defined by a number of parameters, such as signal frequency and amplitude, and if the power is applied in pulses, then the parameters can further include pulse width, shape, size, duty cycle, amplitude, and so on. These parameters are controlled by the controller 38 (FIG. 1)) “wherein the ultrasonic power modality is one of a two-dimensional power modality and a three-dimensional power modality” ([0049] In some embodiments the piezoelectric actuator 22 may include a single resonance mode, for example, a longitudinal resonance mode (indicated using arrow 42), or a transverse resonance mode (indicated using arrow 44), or a torsional resonance mode (indicated using arrow 46). In some embodiments, the piezoelectric actuator 22 may include two (or more) different resonance modes having two (or more) respective resonant frequencies. The resonance modes may include any suitable resonance modes, for example, any two or more of the following: the longitudinal resonance mode (indicated using arrow 42), or the transverse resonance mode (indicated using arrow 44), or the torsional resonance mode (indicated using arrow 46); wherein the single resonance mode is 2D, while the combination of 2 resonance modes is 3D; [0055] The needle 16 is ultrasonically vibrated by applying electric power to the piezoelectric crystals 50, which in turn, cause the horn 14 to ultrasonically vibrate, which in turn, ultrasonically vibrates the needle 16. The electric power is defined by a number of parameters, such as signal frequency and amplitude, and if the power is applied in pulses, then the parameters can further include pulse width, shape, size, duty cycle, amplitude, and so on).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the priority date of the instant invention to have taken the control system of Bassinger which controls the power using a signal to an ultrasonic hand tool using an algorithm which determines a thermal index/value on the basis of the power supplied according to a different mode of power operation and the flow of irrigational fluid so that when the thermal index/value exceeds a threshold, the power supplied is changed by lowering it to prevent a burn to an eye, with the use of different power operational modes that include two dimensional and three dimensional power modalities as taught by Gliner, because Bassinger states that the thermal index is a function of power applied, while Gliner teaches that the power applied is dependent upon the modality of 2D or 3D resonance applied which when combined would teach that the thermal value is based on a function of a power that is a 2D or 3D modality thus affording a reasonable motivation for combination. Furthermore Gilner states in [0030-0033] that temperature is a concern as burns should be avoided, thus PHOSITA would understand that when using the modalities of Gliner, an algorithm such as Bassinger’s which considers the power and mode of power being applied in limiting that power to prevent eye damage through burning could be utilized in which the power, flow rate and friction is considered to prevent burning, thus affording further motivation to combine. Furthermore, both Bassinger and Gliner are in the related field of controllable Phacoemulsification systems, thus making their combination more suggestable. By combining these elements, it can be considered taking the known use of selectable modalities of power that are 2D or 3D, and using it to improve the controller which controls a power provided based on a thermal index/value calculated based on a provided power function and flow of irrigation fluid so that the controller considers the power modality of 2D or 3D when limiting the power based on the thermal value/index.
In regards to Claim 12, the control system of claim 1 substantially covers identical subject matter as the method performed by claim 12. Accordingly, claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 using similar reasoning as applied to claim 1.
In regards to Claim 4, the combination of Bassinger and Gliner teaches the control system as incorporated by claim 1 above. Gliner further teaches “The control system of claim 1, wherein the two-dimensional power modality is one of a longitudinal power modality and a torsional power modality” ([0049] In some embodiments the piezoelectric actuator 22 may include a single resonance mode, for example, a longitudinal resonance mode (indicated using arrow 42), or a transverse resonance mode (indicated using arrow 44), or a torsional resonance mode (indicated using arrow 46). In some embodiments, the piezoelectric actuator 22 may include two (or more) different resonance modes having two (or more) respective resonant frequencies. The resonance modes may include any suitable resonance modes, for example, any two or more of the following: the longitudinal resonance mode (indicated using arrow 42), or the transverse resonance mode (indicated using arrow 44), or the torsional resonance mode (indicated using arrow 46); wherein the single resonance mode is 2D, while the combination of 2 resonance modes is 3D).
In regards to Claim 5, the combination of Bassinger and Gliner teaches the control system as incorporated by claim 4 above. Gliner further teaches “The control system of claim 4, wherein the three-dimensional power modality is a combination of the longitudinal power modality and the torsional power modality” ([0049] In some embodiments the piezoelectric actuator 22 may include a single resonance mode, for example, a longitudinal resonance mode (indicated using arrow 42), or a transverse resonance mode (indicated using arrow 44), or a torsional resonance mode (indicated using arrow 46). In some embodiments, the piezoelectric actuator 22 may include two (or more) different resonance modes having two (or more) respective resonant frequencies. The resonance modes may include any suitable resonance modes, for example, any two or more of the following: the longitudinal resonance mode (indicated using arrow 42), or the transverse resonance mode (indicated using arrow 44), or the torsional resonance mode (indicated using arrow 46); wherein the combination of 2 resonance modes is 3D and includes torsional and longitudinal movements).
In regards to Claim 14, the control system of claim 5 substantially covers identical subject matter as the method performed by claim 14. Accordingly, claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 using similar reasoning as applied to claim 5.
In regards to Claim 6, the combination of Bassinger and Gliner teaches the control system as incorporated by claim 5 above. Gliner further teaches “The control system of claim 5, wherein said calculate the thermal index value includes non-linearly increasing the thermal index value when the selected ultrasonic power modality is the three-dimensional power modality” ([0031] The resonant frequency of the piezoelectric actuator is non-linear and inadequate control can lead to the phacoemulsification probe providing an inadequate needle stroke length and becoming too hot for the eye. For example, the phacoemulsification probe could reach a temperature of 42 degrees Celsius, above which the proteins in the eye could coagulate, which is very dangerous for the eye; wherein because the resonance is the modality, it would increase non-linearly the thermal index because this is in relationship with the power provided, which is the non-linearity between thermal/temperature and modality as suggested). Bassinger further teaches ([0044] As shown in FIG. 7, the thermal watch algorithm operates to decrease the power of any given pulse non-linearly. In this manner, the thermal watch algorithm operates on an individual pulse (or a series of pulses as the case may be).).
In regards to Claim 15, the control system of claim 6 substantially covers identical subject matter as the method performed by claim 15. Accordingly, claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 using similar reasoning as applied to claim 6.
In regards to Claim 7, the combination of Bassinger and Gliner teaches the control system as incorporated by claim 1 above. Bassinger further teaches “The control system of claim 1, wherein: the control signal includes a power level” ([0036] As seen in FIG. 4, the CPU 116 reads the irrigation pressure from the irrigation pressure sensor 1130. Since CPU 116 controls the power source 120, CPU 116 also has the value for the power level applied to the hand piece) “and said adjust the control signal includes adjust the power level in proportion to the thermal index value” ([0036] As seen in FIG. 4, the CPU 116 reads the irrigation pressure from the irrigation pressure sensor 1130. Since CPU 116 controls the power source 120, CPU 116 also has the value for the power level applied to the hand piece. CPU 116 uses these two values (in conjunction with the coefficient of friction) to calculate a temperature that estimates the actual temperature at the incision site. In this manner, CPU 116 continuously or periodically calculates T=f(P, F, Fr). The calculated thermal value is compared continuously or periodically to a threshold thermal value. When the calculated thermal value exceeds the threshold thermal value, the power to the hand piece is decreased).
In regards to Claim 8, the combination of Bassinger and Gliner teaches the control system as incorporated by claim 7 above. Bassinger further teaches “The control system of claim 7, wherein said adjust the power level in proportion to the thermal index value includes tracking an inverse of a segment of the thermal index value that reaches the threshold value” ([0037] In one embodiment of the present invention, the calculated thermal value is used as an input to control the amount of power provided to the hand piece. In this manner, the actual power applied to the hand piece tracks the inverse of the calculated thermal value when the calculated thermal value exceeds the threshold thermal value. This is more clearly seen with reference to FIGS. 6-10 below).
In regards to Claim 9, the combination of Bassinger and Gliner teaches the control system as incorporated by claim 7 above. Gliner further teaches “The control system of claim 7, wherein: the controller is further configured to adjust the power level based on the ultrasonic power modality” ([0028] When the piezoelectric actuator is not operating at its resonant frequency, the stroke length is less than the maximum and the electrical energy used to power the piezoelectric actuator is converted to heat thereby heating the phacoemulsification probe....if the resonant frequency of the piezoelectric actuator changes due to the needle impacting a cataract, and the piezoelectric actuator is still powered with the same frequency signal, the piezoelectric actuator will start to heat and the stoke length will decrease. The additional heat will lead to further changes in the resonant frequency, which in turn leads to further heat and reduced stroke length, and so on. [0055] The needle 16 is ultrasonically vibrated by applying electric power to the piezoelectric crystals 50, which in turn, cause the horn 14 to ultrasonically vibrate, which in turn, ultrasonically vibrates the needle 16. The electric power is defined by a number of parameters, such as signal frequency and amplitude, and if the power is applied in pulses, then the parameters can further include pulse width, shape, size, duty cycle, amplitude, and so on; wherein signal frequency and amplitude are the constituent elements of modality).
In regards to Claim 10, the combination of Bassinger and Gliner teaches the control system as incorporated by claim 9 above. Bassinger further teaches “The control system of claim 9, wherein the controller is further configured to: when the thermal index value reaches the threshold value, override a manual power control of the ultrasonic power source and when the thermal index value is less than the threshold value, resume the manual power control of the ultrasonic power source” ([0042] This implementation of the thermal watch algorithm can be set to run automatically during cataract surgery. During surgery, the doctor controls the application of power to the hand piece (generally via a foot pedal). When the calculated thermal value exceeds the threshold thermal value, the thermal watch algorithm overrides the doctor's control of power. When the calculated thermal value falls below the threshold thermal value, the doctor's control of power is resumed).
In regards to Claim 11, the combination of Bassinger and Gliner teaches the control system as incorporated by claim 1 above. Bassinger further teaches “The control system of claim 1, wherein the threshold value is based on a sensitivity level representing a friction between an irrigation sleeve and a phacoemulsification tip of the ultrasonic hand piece” ([0008] The inventors have found that this heating is dependent on three basic factors: the amount of power applied to the hand piece (which in turn determines the magnitude of needle vibration or amplitude of needle stroke); the amount of fluid flow through the eye (since the fluid carries heat away); and the amount of friction between the needle and the surrounding sleeve at the incision (as can be appreciated, the tighter the fit between the sleeve and the needle, the more friction, and the more heat produced as the needle vibrates). [0033] Emprical studies have found the response function G(t) to be exponential as shown below. G(t)=G.sub.0e.sup.-.alpha.t The coefficients `G.sub.0` and `.alpha.` can be determined to best fit the coefficient of friction (between the sleeve and the needle) and experimental data on .DELTA.T under various flow and power conditions.[0036] As seen in FIG. 4, the CPU 116 reads the irrigation pressure from the irrigation pressure sensor 1130. Since CPU 116 controls the power source 120, CPU 116 also has the value for the power level applied to the hand piece. CPU 116 uses these two values (in conjunction with the coefficient of friction) to calculate a temperature that estimates the actual temperature at the incision site. In this manner, CPU 116 continuously or periodically calculates T=f(P, F, Fr). The calculated thermal value is compared continuously or periodically to a threshold thermal value. When the calculated thermal value exceeds the threshold thermal value, the power to the hand piece is decreased).
Claim(s) 2-3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bassinger and Gliner as applied to claims 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Kadziauskas et al (US 8308676, hereinafter Kadziauskas).
In regards to Claim 2, the combination of Bassinger and Gliner teaches the control system as incorporated by claim 1 above.
The combination of Bassinger and Gliner fail to teach “The control system of claim 1, further comprising: a temperature sensor configured to measure a temperature of the irrigation fluid, wherein said calculate the thermal index value is further based on the measured temperature”.
Kadziauskas teaches “The control system of claim 1, further comprising: a temperature sensor configured to measure a temperature of the irrigation fluid” ([col 3 line 55] Any suitable temperature sensors 50, 52 connected to the computer 22 by lines 54, 56 and flow sensors 60, 62 interconnected to the computer by lines 64, 66, respectively, provide a means for monitoring power removed from the eye 16 by aspirated fluid. The temperature sensors 50, 52 and flow sensors 60, 62 may be of any suitable type. Since the flow rates and temperature of the aspiration and irrigation fluids are known, as well as the power provided to the handpiece, an energy balance can be calculated by the computer) “wherein said calculate the thermal index value is further based on the measured temperature” ([col 4 line 11] the computer may modulate the phaco power level or duty cycle based upon the level of a "heat factor" determined by the energy balance).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the priority date of the instant invention to have taken the ultrasonic control system of Bassinger and Gliner and improve it the use of the temperature sensor that senses an irrigation fluid temperature which is then used for modifying a heat factor that corresponds to a thermal index/value, because it would gain the obvious benefit of having better information about the state of the ultrasonic system, and especially about temperatures of the eye for preventing burns as taught by Kadziauskas [col 2]. All of Bassinger, Gliner and Kadziauskas teaches that thermal management in an ultrasonic phacoemulsification system is of utmost importance to prevent burning of the eye, and thus by using the temperature sensor of Kadziauskas PHOSITA would understand that its measurements can be used as a check that the irrigation fluid is of an appropriate temperature to provide cooling to the tip (i.e. if the fluid itself is hot, it cant be relied upon to cool the tip) and thus provides motivation for incorporating such information into the thermal value calculation of Bassinger. In fact, because the “heat factor” as taught by Kadziauskas is similar to the thermal value of Bassinger, it makes those features more obvious to combine. By combining these elements, it can be considered taking the known use of temperature sensor for modifying a heat factor value, and applying those teachings to the control system of Bassinger and Gliner in a known way that achieves predictable results.
In regards to Claim 13, the control system of claim 2 substantially covers identical subject matter as the method performed by claim 13. Accordingly, claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 using similar reasoning as applied to claim 2.
In regards to Claim 3, the combination of Bassinger, Gliner and Kadziauskas teaches the control system as incorporated by claim 2 above. Kadziauskas further teaches “The control system of claim 2, wherein the controller is further configured to: adjust the thermal index value based on the temperature of the irrigation fluid over time” ([col 3 line 55] Any suitable temperature sensors 50, 52 connected to the computer 22 by lines 54, 56 and flow sensors 60, 62 interconnected to the computer by lines 64, 66, respectively, provide a means for monitoring power removed from the eye 16 by aspirated fluid. The temperature sensors 50, 52 and flow sensors 60, 62 may be of any suitable type. Since the flow rates and temperature of the aspiration and irrigation fluids are known, as well as the power provided to the handpiece, an energy balance can be calculated by the computer. [col 4 line 11] the computer may modulate the phaco power level or duty cycle based upon the level of a "heat factor" determined by the energy balance). Bassinger further teaches “and calculate a variation of the thermal index value above a continuous change in the temperature of the irrigation fluid” ([0048] Several variations of the algorithm may also be implemented. In one variation, the power is decreased in proportion to a scalar factor of the temperature increase. In another variation, the power is decreased in proportion to a function of the temperature increase. In another variation, a minimum power level can be set. In this case, power will never fall below the minimum power level thus resulting in a continuous (albeit lower) application of power to the hand piece. In yet another variation, the rate at which power is decreased can be changed. In this case, the power decrease can be made to be as smooth as desired. A smooth decrease in power results in more effective cutting (as power is applied continuously and not turned off) and better surgeon feel).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Clayton (US 20240374423) – teaches how different modes of operation that correspond with resonance points are controlled for an ultrasonic handheld
Mackool et al. (US 20100324581) – teaches that a thermal watch algorithm is utilized to regulate power to an ultrasonic handheld
Raney (US 20100069825) – teaches a multi-modal ultrasonic handheld with algorithms for transitioning between modes
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN M SKRZYCKI whose telephone number is (571)272-0933. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30-3:30.
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, Ken Lo can be reached at 571-272-9774. 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.
/JONATHAN MICHAEL SKRZYCKI/Examiner, Art Unit 2116
Prosecution Insights