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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims filed 11/20/2024 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are pending and under consideration.
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 1-20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-17 of U.S. Patent No. 12171965 (‘965).
As to claims 1-20, claims 1-17 of ‘965 teach or suggest the claim as follows (with claim dependencies shown in paratheses, e.g., 3/2/1 as claim 3 incorporating claims 1 and 2).
Clm
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
‘965
1
1
7/1
9/1
7/1
9/1
2/1
3/1
4/1
5/1
Clm
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
‘965
10
10
1
10+7/1
10+9/1
10+7/1
11/10
12/10
14/10
15
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.
Claims 1, 4, 6-10 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meyering et al (US 20170035950 A1) in view of Magram (US 5683357 A).
Regarding claim 1, Meyering substantially teaches applicant’s claimed invention, and specifically discloses a device with every structural limitation of applicant’s claimed invention (except for the limitations shown in italics and grayed-out) including:
a sampling system (figure 1, system 100), comprising:
a filtering device (figures 1 and 2c and [0024], the system 100 comprising a filter 226) configured to filter cerebrospinal fluid, the filtering device having an inlet region (figure 1 and [0026], intake 104) configured to receive unfiltered cerebrospinal fluid from a patient and an outlet region (figure 1 and [0026], outlet 108) configured to direct filtered cerebrospinal fluid to the patient;
a cerebrospinal fluid sampling port (figure 1 [0032-0033] port 124 in fluid communication with outlet 108 and in fluid communication with intake 104 through the filter 226) in fluid communication with the inlet region and the outlet region of the filtering device;
wherein the cerebrospinal fluid sampling port has a first end region configured to receive a sample cerebrospinal fluid, a stopcock, a syringe port, and a second end region; and
wherein the stopcock is configured to shift between a first position where the sample cerebrospinal fluid is directed from the first end region to the second end region and a second position where the sample cerebrospinal fluid is directed from the first end region to the syringe port.
Meyering does not teach wherein the cerebrospinal fluid sampling port has a first end region configured to receive a sample cerebrospinal fluid, a stopcock, a syringe port, and a second end region; and
wherein the stopcock is configured to shift between a first position where the sample cerebrospinal fluid is directed from the first end region to the second end region and a second position where the sample cerebrospinal fluid is directed from the first end region to the syringe port.
In the same field of endeavor, namely an external cerebrospinal fluid drain apparatus, Magram teaches wherein the cerebrospinal fluid sampling port (figure 1, three-way valve 16) has a first end region (figure 1, port 15) configured to receive a sample cerebrospinal fluid, a stopcock (figure 1, handle 18), a syringe port (figure 1, side tab 14), and a second end region (figure 1, port 17); and
wherein the stopcock is configured to shift between a first position (col 4 lines 45-60, manipulating handle permit passage of fluid between port 15 and port 18 ) where the sample cerebrospinal fluid is directed from the first end region to the second end region and a second position (col 4 lines 45-60, manipulating handle allows withdrawal of fluid through side tab 14) where the sample cerebrospinal fluid is directed from the first end region to the syringe port.
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Meyering to incorporate the teachings of Magram and provides the sampling port as claimed for the purpose of selectively controlling fluid flow through the sampling port, thereby preventing undesired fluid flow through the sampling port out and directing fluid from the filtering device to patient when sampling is not needed as taught by Magram (col 4 lines 45-50)
Regarding claim 4, Meyering, as modified by Magram, teaches the sampling system of claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein the sample cerebrospinal fluid is the filtered cerebrospinal fluid (Meyering; figure 1 [0032-0033] port 124 is configured to collect filtered fluid from outlet 108).
Regarding claim 6, Meyering, as modified by Magram, teaches the sampling system of claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein the cerebrospinal fluid sampling port is configured to receive the filtered cerebrospinal fluid from the outlet region of the filtering device (Meyering; figure 1 [0032-0033] port 124 is configured to collect filtered fluid from outlet 108).
Regarding claim 7, Meyering, as modified by Magram, teaches the sampling system of claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein when the stopcock is in the first position, the sample cerebrospinal fluid is substantially blocked from the syringe port (Magram; col 4 lines 45-60, manipulating handle permits passage of fluid between port 15 and port 17 and blocks fluid to the side tap 14).
Regarding claim 8, Meyering, as modified by Magram, teaches the sampling system of claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein when the stopcock is in the second position, the sample cerebrospinal fluid is substantially blocked from the second end region (Magram; col 4 lines 45-60, manipulating handle permits passage of fluid between port 15 and side tap 14 and blocks fluid to port 17).
Regarding claim 9, Meyering, as modified by Magram, teaches the sampling system of claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein the filtering device includes one or more tangential flow filters (Meyering; [0041]).
Regarding claim 10, Meyering, as modified by Magram, teaches the sampling system of claim 1.
The combination further teaches further comprising a syringe releasably coupled to the syringe port (Magram; col 4 lines 45-60)
Regarding claim 19, Meyering, as modified by Magram, teaches the sampling system of claim 1.
The combination further teaches further comprising a syringe releasably coupled to the syringe port (Magram; col 4 lines 45-60)
Claims 2, 3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meyering et al (US 20170035950 A1) in view of Magram (US 5683357 A), and in further in an alternate embodiment of Meyering et al (US 20170035950 A1; [0032-0033]).
Regarding claim 2, Meyering, as modified by Magram, teaches the sampling system of claim 1.
The combination further teaches the sampling system further comprising a waste outlet (figure 1, retentate outlet 106).
The combination does not expressly teach a waste sampling port in fluid communication with the filtering device and the waste outlet, wherein the waste sampling port is disposed along tubing of the filtering device, and wherein the waste sampling port is configured to receive waste material that is filtered from the unfiltered cerebrospinal fluid by the filtering device;
However, Meyering teaches a tubing (figure 1 and [0032-0033], 114) can be connected to various components of the system 100 including between retentate outlet 106 and vessel 110, and the tubing may have a port to access the fluid traveling within the tubing for the purpose of collecting fluid for testing or other purpose, for example, testing for particular characteristics or parameters.
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Meyering, as modified by Magram, to incorporate the teachings of the alternate embodiment of Meyering and provides the waste sapling port as claimed for the purpose of sampling and testing waste fluid to determine particular characteristics or parameters thereof as taught by Meyering ([0033]).
Regarding claim 3, Meyering, as modified by Magram, teaches the sampling system of claim 1.
The combination does not teach wherein the sample cerebrospinal fluid is the unfiltered cerebrospinal fluid.
However, Meyering teaches a sampling port could be added to various component of the system including tubing between the intake and patient (figure 1 [0032-0033]) for the purpose of collecting fluid for testing or other purpose, for example testing for particular characteristics or parameters.
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Meyering, as modified by Magram, to incorporate the teachings of the alternate embodiment of Meyering and provides sampling system as claimed for the purpose of sampling and testing unfiltered fluid to determine particular characteristics or parameters thereof as taught by Meyering ([0033]).
Regarding claim 5, Meyering, as modified by Magram, teaches the sampling system of claim 1.
The combination does not teach wherein the cerebrospinal fluid sampling port is configured to receive the unfiltered cerebrospinal fluid from the inlet region of the filtering device.
However, Meyering teaches a sampling port could be added to various component of the system including tubing between the intake and patient (figure 1 [0032-0033]) for the purpose of collecting fluid for testing or other purpose, for example testing for particular characteristics or parameters.
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Meyering, as modified by Magram, to incorporate the teachings of the alternate embodiment of Meyering and provides sampling port as claimed for the purpose of sampling and testing unfiltered fluid to determine particular characteristics or parameters thereof as taught by Meyering ([0033]).
Claims 11, 14 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meyering et al (US 20170035950 A1) in view of Chen et al (US 20190009014 A1) and Magram (US 5683357 A).
Regarding claim 11, Meyering teaches a sampling system, comprising:
a controller assembly (figures 1, filtration system 102);
a filter cassette (figure 1 and 2c [0024], filter 206 disposed within and coupled to the filtration system 102) removably coupled to the controller assembly, the filter cassette having an inlet region (figures 1 and 2a and [0026] intake 104 configured to be coupled to tubing 114 and receive unfiltered cerebrospinal fluid from patient 112) configured to be coupled to a catheter and configured to receive unfiltered cerebrospinal fluid, one or more filters (figures 1 and 2c, filter 206), and an outlet region (figures 1 and 2a, outlet 108 configured to be coupled to outlet of tubing 114 and direct filtered fluid) configured to be coupled to an outlet of the catheter and to direct filtered cerebrospinal fluid to the catheter;
a cerebrospinal fluid sampling port (figure 1 and [0032-0033] port 124 in fluid communication with outlet 108 and in fluid communication with intake 104 through the filter 226) in fluid communication with the inlet region and the outlet region of the filter cassette;
wherein the cerebrospinal fluid sampling port has a first end region configured to receive a sample cerebrospinal fluid, a stopcock, a syringe port, and a second end region; and
wherein the stopcock is configured to shift between a first position where the sample cerebrospinal fluid is directed from the first end region to the second end region and a second position where the sample cerebrospinal fluid is directed from the first end region to the syringe port.
Meyering does not teach the filtering cassette removably coupled to the controller assembly.
In the same field of endeavor, namely an apparatus for performing cerebral micro-dialysis, Chen teaches the filtering cassette removably coupled to the controller assembly ([0080] filter cartridge 38 with filter element 40 can be removed from housing 10 and replaced).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Meyering to incorporate the teachings of Chen and provides the filter cassette as claimed for the purpose of allowing the filter to be readily replaced when needed as taught by Chen ([0080]).
The combination is still silent as to wherein the cerebrospinal fluid sampling port has a first end region configured to receive a sample cerebrospinal fluid, a stopcock, a syringe port, and a second end region; and
wherein the stopcock is configured to shift between a first position where the sample cerebrospinal fluid is directed from the first end region to the second end region and a second position where the sample cerebrospinal fluid is directed from the first end region to the syringe port.
In the same field of endeavor, namely an external cerebrospinal fluid drain apparatus, Magram teaches wherein the cerebrospinal fluid sampling port (figure 1, three-way valve 16) has a first end region configured to receive a sample cerebrospinal fluid (figure 1, port 15), a stopcock (figure 1, handle 18), a syringe port (figure 1, side tab 14), and a second end region (figure 1, port 17); and
wherein the stopcock is configured to shift between a first position (col 4 lines 45-60, manipulating handle permit passage of fluid between port 15 and port 18 ) where the sample cerebrospinal fluid is directed from the first end region to the second end region and a second position (col 4 lines 45-60, manipulating handle allows withdrawal of fluid through side tab 14) where the sample cerebrospinal fluid is directed from the first end region to the syringe port.
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Meyering, as modified by Chen, to incorporate the teachings of Magram and provides the sampling port as claimed for the purpose of selectively controlling fluid flow through the sampling port, thereby preventing undesired fluid flow through the sampling port out and directing fluid from the filtering device to patient when sampling is not needed as taught by Magram (col 4 lines 45-50).
Regarding claim 14, Meyering, as modified by Chen and Magram, teaches the sampling of claim 11.
The combination further teaches wherein the sample cerebrospinal fluid is the filtered cerebrospinal fluid (Meyering; figure 1 [0032-0033] port 124 is configured to collect filtered fluid from outlet 108).
Regarding claim 16, Meyering, as modified by Chen and Magram, teaches the sampling of claim 11.
The combination further teaches wherein the cerebrospinal fluid sampling port is configured to receive the filtered cerebrospinal fluid from the outlet region of the filter cassette (Meyering; figure 1 [0032-0033] port 124 is configured to collect filtered fluid from outlet 108).
Regarding claim 17, Meyering, as modified by Chen and Magram, teaches the sampling system of claim 11.
The combination further teaches wherein when the stopcock is in the first position, the sample cerebrospinal fluid is substantially blocked from the syringe port (Magram; col 4 lines 45-60, manipulating handle permit passage of fluid between port 15 and port 18 and blocks fluid through the side tap 14).
Regarding claim 18, Meyering, as modified by Chen and Magram, teaches the sampling system of claim 11.
The combination further teaches wherein when the stopcock is in the second position, the sample cerebrospinal fluid is substantially blocked from the second end region (Magram; col 4 lines 45-60, manipulating handle permit passage of fluid between port 15 and 14 and blocks fluid through port 17).
Claims 12, 13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meyering et al (US 20170035950 A1) in view of Chen et al (US 20190009014 A1) and Magram (US 5683357 A), and in further in an alternate embodiment of Meyering et al (US 20170035950 A1; [0032-0033]).
Regarding claim 12, Meyering, as modified by Chen and Magram, teaches the sampling system of claim 11.
The combination further teaches the sampling system further comprising a waste outlet (figure 1, retentate outlet 106).
The combination does not expressly teach a waste sampling port in fluid communication with the filter cassette and the waste outlet, wherein the waste sampling port is disposed along tubing of the filter cassette, and wherein the waste sampling port is configured to receive waste material that is filtered from the unfiltered cerebrospinal fluid by the filter cassette;
However, Meyering teaches a tubing can be connected to various components of the system 100 including between retentate outlet and vessel ([0032-0033]), and the tubing may have a port to access the fluid traveling within the tubing for the purpose of collecting fluid for testing or other purpose, for example testing for particular characteristics or parameters.
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Meyering, as modified by Chen and Magram, to incorporate the teachings of the alternate embodiment of Meyering and provides the waste sampling port as claimed the purpose of sampling and testing waste fluid to determine particular characteristics or parameters thereof ([0033]).
Regarding claim 13, Meyering, as modified by Chen and Magram, teaches the sampling system of claim 11.
The combination does not teach wherein the sample cerebrospinal fluid is the unfiltered cerebrospinal fluid.
However, Meyering teaches a sampling port could be added to various component of the system including tubing between the intake and patient (figure 1 [0032-0033]) for the purpose of collecting fluid for testing or other purpose, for example testing for particular characteristics or parameters.
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Meyering, as modified by Chen and Magram, to incorporate the teachings of the alternate embodiment of Meyering and provides sampling system as claimed the purpose of sampling and testing unfiltered fluid to determine particular characteristics or parameters thereof ([0033]).
Regarding claim 15, Meyering, as modified by Chen and Magram, teaches the sampling system of claim 11.
The combination does not teach wherein the cerebrospinal fluid sampling port is configured to receive the unfiltered cerebrospinal fluid from the inlet region of the filtering device.
However, Meyering teaches a sampling port could be added to various component of the system including tubing between the intake and patient (figure 1 [0032-0033]) for the purpose of collecting fluid for testing or other purpose, for example testing for particular characteristics or parameters.
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Meyering, as modified by Chen and Magram, to incorporate the teachings of the alternate embodiment of Meyering and provides sampling system as claimed the purpose of sampling and testing unfiltered fluid to determine particular characteristics or parameters thereof ([0033]).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meyering et al (US 20170035950 A1) in view of Chen et al (US 20190009014 A1), Magram (US 5683357 A), and in an alternate embodiment of Meyering et al (US 20170035950 A1; [0032-0033]).
Regarding claim 20, Meyering teaches a method for collecting a sample from a cerebrospinal fluid system, the method comprising:
withdrawing unfiltered cerebrospinal fluid from a patient with the cerebrospinal fluid system (figure 1 and [0033] withdrawing fluid traveling within the tubing 114);
wherein the cerebrospinal fluid system includes:
a filter cassette (figures 1 and 2c and [0024] filter 226) configured to filter the unfiltered cerebrospinal fluid, the filter cassette having an inlet region (figure 1 and [0026], intake 104) configured to be coupled to a catheter (figures 1 and 2a [0026], intake 104 configured to be coupled to tubing 114 and receive unfiltered cerebrospinal fluid from patient 112) and configured to receive the unfiltered cerebrospinal fluid, one or more filters (figures 1 and 2c and [0024] filter 226), and an outlet region (figures 2 and 2a, outlet 108 configured to be coupled to outlet of tubing 114 and direct filtered fluid out) configured to be coupled to an outlet of the catheter and to direct filtered cerebrospinal fluid to the catheter,
wherein the filter cassette is configured to be removably housed within an opening in a controller assembly;
a cerebrospinal fluid sampling port (figure 1 and [0032-0033] port 124 is in fluid communication with intake 108 through filter 226) in fluid communication with the inlet region and the outlet region, wherein the cerebrospinal fluid sampling port has a first end region configured to receive a sample cerebrospinal fluid, a stopcock, a syringe port, and a second end region, and
wherein the stopcock is configured to shift between a first position where the sample cerebrospinal fluid is directed from the first end region to the second end region and a second position where sample cerebrospinal fluid is directed from the first end region to the syringe port; and
shifting the stopcock from the first position to the second position.
Meyering does not teach wherein the filtering cassette is configured to be removably housed within an opening in a controller assembly.
In the same field of endeavor, namely an apparatus for performing cerebral micro-dialysis, Chen teaches wherein the filtering cassette is configured to be removably housed within an opening in a controller assembly ([0080] filter cartridge 38 with filter element 40 can be removed from opening within housing 10).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Meyering to incorporate the teachings of Chen and provides the filter cassette as claimed for the purpose of allowing the filter to be readily replaced when needed as taught by Chen ([0080]).
The combination is still silent as to wherein the cerebrospinal fluid sampling port has a first end region configured to receive a sample cerebrospinal fluid, a stopcock, a syringe port, and a second end region, and
wherein the stopcock is configured to shift between a first position where the sample cerebrospinal fluid is directed from the first end region to the second end region and a second position where sample cerebrospinal fluid is directed from the first end region to the syringe port; and
shifting the stopcock from the first position to the second position.
In the same field of endeavor, namely an external cerebrospinal fluid drain apparatus, Magram teaches wherein the cerebrospinal fluid sampling port (figure 1, three-way valve 16) has a first end region (figure 1, port 15) configured to receive a sample cerebrospinal fluid, a stopcock (figure 1, handle 18), a syringe port (figure 1, side tab 14), and a second end region (figure 1, port 17), and
wherein the stopcock is configured to shift between a first position (col 4 lines 45-60, manipulating handle permit passage of fluid between port 15 and port 18) where the sample cerebrospinal fluid is directed from the first end region to the second end region and a second position where sample cerebrospinal fluid is directed from the first end region to the syringe port (col 4 lines 45-60, manipulating handle allows withdrawal of fluid through side tab 14); and
shifting the stopcock from the first position to the second position (col 4 lines 45-60, manipulating handle from the first position to the second position).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Meyering, as modified by Chen, to incorporate the teachings of Magram and provides the sampling port as claimed for the purpose of selectively controlling fluid flow through the sampling port, thereby preventing undesired fluid flow through the sampling port out and directing fluid from the filtering device to patient when sampling is not needed as taught by Magram (col 4 lines 45-50).
The combination is still silent as to withdrawing unfiltered cerebrospinal fluid from a patient.
However, Meyering teaches a sampling port could be added to various component of the system including tubing between the inlet and patient (figure 1 [0032-0033]) for the purpose of collecting fluid for testing or other purpose, for example testing particular characteristics or parameters of the fluid.
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Meyering, as modified by Chen and Magram, to incorporate the teachings of the alternate embodiment of Meyering and provides sampling system as claimed the purpose of sampling and testing unfiltered fluid to determine particular characteristics or parameters thereof ([0033]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Meythaler et al (US 20040024358 A1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SETH HAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2545. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0900-1700.
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, Sarah Al-Hashimi can be reached at (571) 272-7159. 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.
/SETH HAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3781
Prosecution Insights