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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities and Lines 12-18 should be amended as follows: “wherein the shaft portion is curved with a left-handed or a right-handed curvature and configured for a left ulna or a right ulna, respectively, wherein the curved head portion includes an opening oriented to direct a fastener towards a coronoid process at an angle perpendicular curved head portion, the two-axis positioning slot sized to allow a fastener to adjust the olecranon plate in both a proximal-distal direction and medial-lateral direction.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: In Line 2, the word --curved-- should be added before the words “head portion” in order to keep claim terminology consistent throughout. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: In Line 4, the word --respective-- should be added before the word “second”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: In Line 3, the word --curved-- should be added before the words “head portion” in order to keep claim terminology consistent throughout. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: In Line 1, the word “wasted” should be replaced with the spelling --waisted-- in order to keep claim terminology consistent throughout. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities and Lines 14-20 should be amended as follows: “wherein the shaft portion is curved with a left-handed or a right-handed curvature and configured for a left ulna or a right ulna, respectively, wherein the curved head portion includes an opening oriented to direct a fastener towards a coronoid process at an angle perpendicular curved head portion, the two-axis positioning slot sized to allow a fastener to adjust the olecranon plate in both a proximal-distal direction and medial-lateral direction.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: In Line 2, the word --curved-- should be added before the words “head portion” in order to keep claim terminology consistent throughout. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: In Line 4, the word --respective-- should be added before the word “second”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: In Line 3, the word --curved-- should be added before the words “head portion” in order to keep claim terminology consistent throughout. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 8 & 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 8 & 18 recite the limitation “the proximal end of the head portion” at Lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of examination, the limitations are being interpreted as “the shaft portion” and “a proximal end of the head portion”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 9, 11-14, & 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by O’Driscoll et al. (US PG Pub No. 2004/0116930).
Regarding Claim 1, O’Driscoll et al. discloses a bone plate (120/120R, Figs. 4-9, Paragraphs [0096-0104]) comprising: a curved head portion (distal portion 130, Figs. 4 & 9) capable of conforming (via bone-facing surface 124, Figs. 5 & 8) to an olecranon (Paragraph [0103]); a shaft portion (proximal portion 128, Figs. 4 & 9) extending from the curved head portion and capable of extending towards a distal end of an ulna (the distal portion 130 is fully and structurally capable of conforming to an olecranon and the proximal portion 128 is fully and structurally capable of extending towards a distal ulna when the plate 120/120R is placed on a patient’s ulna/elbow as recited in the functional language above); an upper surface (122, Figs. 5, 7 & 9) comprising the curved head portion and the shaft portion; a lower surface (124, Figs. 5 & 8) comprising the curved head portion and the shaft portion and capable of contacting the ulna (Paragraph [0103]); a first sidewall (right side wall 126, Figs. 7-8) extending between the upper surface and the lower surface along a first side (right side of 120/120R when viewing Fig. 7 which is the upper side wall 126 when viewing Figs. 4 & 9) of the plate; and a second sidewall (left side wall 126, Figs. 7-8) extending between the upper surface and the lower surface along a second side (left side of 120/120R when viewing Fig. 7 which is the lower side wall 126 when viewing Figs. 4 & 9) of the plate, wherein the shaft portion is curved with a left-handed (120, Paragraphs [0095, 0104]) or a right-handed curvature (120R, Paragraphs [0095, 0104]) and configured for a left ulna or a right ulna, respectively (“Plate 120R is configured for fixing bone discontinuities in the distal-lateral right humerus of a body. Thus plate 120R arcs to the left, rather than the right as described above for plate 120. Plates 120 and 120R, and all other left- and right-handed plates described herein, may be related to each other by substantial or complete mirror-image symmetry.”), wherein the curved head portion includes an opening (right-most circular aperture 170, Fig. 4) having an orientation to direct a fastener towards a coronoid process at a perpendicular angle to the olecranon plate (Figs. 5 & 8, See examiner annotated Fig. 4 below), a two-axis positioning slot (left-most slot 132, Fig. 4, which comprises a longitudinal axis 174 in the length direction and a transverse axis extending in the width direction, See examiner annotated Fig. 4 below) disposed on the shaft portion and distally of the opening of the head portion, the two-axis positioning slot sized to allow a fastener (fastener/bone screw, Paragraphs [0078-0082, 0096, 0101-102]) to adjust the olecranon plate in both a proximal-distal direction (direction depicted by arrow 174, Fig. 4) and medial-lateral direction (See examiner annotated Fig. 4 below)(With respect to the functional language above, the head portion opening is fully and structurally capable of accepting a fastener and directing the fastener towards a coronoid process perpendicularly to the plate, and the positioning slot is sized such that it is fully and structurally capable of allowing a fastener to adjust the plate in a proximal-distal direction and a medial-lateral direction via the positioning slot, based upon the size and structure of the fasteners used. (Paragraphs [0078-0080, 0101-0102]).
PNG
media_image1.png
418
1111
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, O’Driscoll et al. discloses wherein the plate is left-handed (120, Fig. 4, Paragraph [0104]) and the first sidewall of the shaft portion (right side of 120 when viewing Fig. 7 which is the upper side wall 126 when viewing Fig. 4) is convex (Fig. 4) and the second sidewall of the shaft portion (left side of 120 when viewing Fig. 7 which is the lower side wall 126 when viewing Fig. 4) is concave (Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 3, O’Driscoll et al. discloses wherein the plate is right-handed (120R, Fig. 9, Paragraph [0104]) and the first sidewall of the shaft portion (right side of 120R when viewing Fig. 7 which is the upper side wall when viewing Fig. 9) is concave (Fig. 9) and the second sidewall of the shaft portion (right side of 120R when viewing Fig. 7 which is the lower side wall when viewing Fig. 9) is convex (Fig. 9).
Regarding Claim 4, O’Driscoll et al. discloses a first opening in the curved head portion (second-from-right circular aperture 134 when viewing Figs. 4 & 9, See examiner annotated Fig. 4 above) configured to receive a first fastener (fastener/bone screw, Paragraphs [0078-0082, 0096, 0101-102]), wherein the first opening is capable of receiving the first fastener such that the first fastener extends toward a distal end of the ulna (“the openings may include tapered counterbores that bias a fastener toward (or away from) a bone discontinuity, for example, to provide compression.”, Paragraph [0079]).
Regarding Claim 9, O’Driscoll et al. discloses wherein the first sidewall and the second sidewall define waisted edge scallops (160, Figs. 4, 6 & 9, Paragraph [0100]).
Regarding Claim 11, O’Driscoll et al. discloses a system capable of treating a fracture in a proximal ulna bone, the system comprising: a bone plate (120/120R, Figs. 4-9, Paragraphs [0096-0104]) comprising: a curved head portion (distal portion 130, Figs. 4 & 9) capable of conforming (via bone-facing surface 124, Figs. 5 & 8) to an olecranon (Paragraph [0103]); a shaft portion (proximal portion 128, Figs. 4 & 9) extending from the curved head portion and capable of extending towards a distal end of an ulna (the distal portion 130 is fully and structurally capable of conforming to an olecranon and the proximal portion 128 is fully and structurally capable of extending towards a distal ulna when the plate 120/120R is placed on a patient’s ulna/elbow as recited in the functional language above); an upper surface (122, Figs. 5, 7 & 9) comprising the curved head portion and the shaft portion; a lower surface (124, Figs. 5 & 8) comprising the curved head portion and the shaft portion and capable of contacting the ulna (Paragraph [0103]); a first sidewall (right side wall 126, Figs. 7-8) extending between the upper surface and the lower surface along a first side (right side of 120/120R when viewing Fig. 7 which is the upper side wall 126 when viewing Figs. 4 & 9) of the plate; and a second sidewall (left side wall 126, Figs. 7-8) extending between the upper surface and the lower surface along a second side (left side of 120/120R when viewing Fig. 7 which is the lower side wall 126 when viewing Figs. 4 & 9) of the plate, wherein the shaft portion is curved with a left-handed (120, Paragraphs [0095, 0104]) or a right-handed curvature (120R, Paragraphs [0095, 0104]) and configured for a left ulna or a right ulna, respectively (“Plate 120R is configured for fixing bone discontinuities in the distal-lateral right humerus of a body. Thus plate 120R arcs to the left, rather than the right as described above for plate 120. Plates 120 and 120R, and all other left- and right-handed plates described herein, may be related to each other by substantial or complete mirror-image symmetry.”); wherein the curved head portion includes an opening (right-most circular aperture 170, Fig. 4) having an orientation to direct a fastener towards a coronoid process at a perpendicular angle to the olecranon plate (Figs. 5 & 8, See examiner annotated Fig. 4 above), a two-axis positioning slot (left-most slot 132, Fig. 4, which comprises a longitudinal axis 174 in the length direction and a transverse axis extending in the width direction, See examiner annotated Fig. 4 above) disposed on the shaft portion and distally of the opening of the head portion, the two-axis positioning slot sized to allow a fastener (fastener/bone screw, Paragraphs [0078-0082, 0096, 0101-102]) to adjust the olecranon plate in both a proximal-distal direction (direction depicted by arrow 174, Fig. 4) and medial-lateral direction (See examiner annotated Fig. 4 above)(With respect to the functional language above, the head portion opening is fully and structurally capable of accepting a fastener and directing the fastener towards a coronoid process perpendicularly to the plate, and the positioning slot is sized such that it is fully and structurally capable of allowing a fastener to adjust the plate in a proximal-distal direction and a medial-lateral direction via the positioning slot, based upon the size and structure of the fasteners used. (Paragraphs [0078-0080, 0101-0102]); and a plurality of fasteners (fasteners/bone screws) capable of fastening the plate to the ulna (“For example, if used with fasteners, the openings may be sized to receive and effectively hold fasteners of different size, such as number 2.7, 3.5, and/or 4.0 bone screws, in order of increasing size. Generally, the smaller the opening, the smaller the screw, so that smaller openings allow relatively larger numbers of screws to be used with a given plate. Generally, also, the larger the plate, the larger the number of openings, so that larger plates allow relatively larger numbers of screws to be used.”, Paragraph [0080]).
Regarding Claim 12, O’Driscoll et al. discloses wherein the plate is left-handed (120, Fig. 4, Paragraph [0104]) and the first sidewall of the shaft portion (right side of 120 when viewing Fig. 7 which is the upper side wall 126 when viewing Fig. 4) is convex (Fig. 4) and the second sidewall of the shaft portion (left side of 120 when viewing Fig. 7 which is the lower side wall 126 when viewing Fig. 4) is concave (Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 13, O’Driscoll et al. discloses wherein the plate is right-handed (120R, Fig. 9, Paragraph [0104]) and the first sidewall of the shaft portion (right side of 120R when viewing Fig. 7 which is the upper side wall when viewing Fig. 9) is concave (Fig. 9) and the second sidewall of the shaft portion (right side of 120R when viewing Fig. 7 which is the lower side wall when viewing Fig. 9) is convex (Fig. 9).
Regarding Claim 14, O’Driscoll et al. discloses a first opening in the curved head portion (second-from-right circular aperture 134 when viewing Figs. 4 & 9, See examiner annotated Fig. 4 above) configured to receive a first fastener (fastener/bone screw, Paragraphs [0078-0082, 0096, 0101-102]) of the plurality of fasteners, wherein the first opening is capable of receiving the first fastener such that the first fastener extends toward a distal end of the ulna (“the openings may include tapered counterbores that bias a fastener toward (or away from) a bone discontinuity, for example, to provide compression.”, Paragraph [0079]).
Regarding Claim 19, O’Driscoll et al. discloses wherein the first sidewall and the second sidewall of the plate define waisted edge scallops (160, Figs. 4, 6 & 9, Paragraph [0100]).
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.
Claim(s) 5-6 & 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Driscoll et al. (US PG Pub No. 2004/0116930).
Regarding Claims 5-6 & 15-16, O’Driscoll et al. discloses the claimed invention as stated above in Claims 1 & 11, respectively, and further discloses a second opening (left-most circular aperture 134 when viewing Figs. 4 & 9, See examiner annotated Fig. 4 above) positioned distally of the first opening (distal end is at 142, proximal end is at 144, Fig. 4), the second opening is configured to receive a second fastener (fastener/bone screw, Paragraphs [0078-0082, 0096, 0101-102]) such that the second fastener extends towards one of a coronoid process of the ulna or an anterior cortex of the ulna (“the openings may include tapered counterbores that bias a fastener toward (or away from) a bone discontinuity, for example, to provide compression.”, Paragraph [0079]).
O’Driscoll et al. does not disclose a plurality of second openings, or a third opening positioned distally of the plurality of second openings, wherein the third opening is configured to receive a third fastener such that the third fastener extends towards an olecranon process of the ulna. O’Driscoll et al. does disclose in Paragraphs [0078-0081 & 0101-0102] that “The openings also may have any suitable positions or densities within each anchor portion of the plate. The openings may be positioned along a middle axis of the plate, with the center of each opening centered across the width at each position. Alternatively, one or more of the openings may be disposed off-center, that is, disposed asymmetrically or laterally relative to the local width of the bone plate. For example, some or all openings may be staggered in position, such as alternatively disposed at lateral positions on opposing sides of the middle axis. Alternatively, or in addition, two or more of the openings may be aligned side-by-side (transversely), as described below in Section IX for the olecranon plates. Openings that precede and/or follow the laterally disposed openings or side-by-side openings may be positioned along the middle axis of the bone plates, increasing the density of screws that may be used. Spacing between openings (center-to-center or side-to-side) may be constant or varied. For example, some or all of the openings of the end-anchor portion may be clustered together at a higher density to increase the number of screws that can be used to fix (stabilize) the associated segment(s) of bone(s) via the plate. The openings may be positioned at different positions on a cured plate so that the screws interact with the bone and/or each other in a three-dimensional pattern, in some cases interdigitating or locking together so that the screws are fixed to more than just bone. In these situations, it may be preferable to use tapered screws that can pass one another or deflect or bend off one another rather than hit up against one another and stop. The openings also may be positioned so that screws will project along a long axis of the bone, rather than a transverse axis, increasing the length of screw and the number of threads that contact the bone, and thus increasing purchase.”
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to replace the three circular apertures in the head portion of O’Driscoll et al. with 3 sets of side-by-side, transversely aligned apertures as taught by O’Driscoll et al. in order to allow an increased density of screws to be used for stabilizing the adjacent bone segments via the plate.
Claim(s) 8 & 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Driscoll et al. (US PG Pub No. 2004/0116930) in view of Sixto JR, et al. (US PG Pub No. 2009/0118770).
Regarding Claims 8 & 18 as best understood, O’Driscoll et al. discloses the claimed invention as stated above in Claims 1 & 11, respectively, and further discloses a profile thickness of the plate along the shaft portion (thickness along 120/120R measured between 122 & 124, Fig. 5) which tapers along a proximal end of the head portion (proximal end is at 144, Fig. 1) and is capable of enabling closing of the fascia (“The thickness of lateral condyle plate 120 may vary along the length and/or across the width of plate 120.”, Paragraph [0099]).
O’Driscoll et al. does not disclose wherein the profile thickness of the plate is 2 mm along the shaft and tapers to less than 2.75 mm along the proximal end of the head portion. O’Driscoll does disclose in Paragraph [0099] that “Thinning may occur as a gradual taper from proximal to distal portions 128, 130 or at one or more fairly discrete positions along the length of the plate. A thinner distal portion may, for example, locally decrease the profile of the bone plate to minimize irritation. Alternatively, or in addition, proximal portion 128 may thin proximally near proximal end 142, to produce a tapered region 156 (see FIG. 5). Tapered region 156 may be produced, for example, by angled chamfers on outer surface 122 and/or inner surface 124, among others. Tapered region 156 may be useful, for example, to facilitate sliding proximal end 142 of plate 120 under soft tissue during positioning of the plate on bone. Alternatively, or in addition, thinning may occur transversely, along axes corresponding to width. For example, as shown in FIGS. 7 and 8, plate 120 thins or tapers towards center positions 157 from sides 126. In some embodiments, plate 120 may taper from center positions 157 toward sides 126. Transverse thinning, either thinning toward the sides and/or toward the center may occur in proximal and/or distal portions of the plate.”
Sixto, JR. et al. discloses an elongate bone plate for use on an arm bone (200, Figs. 9-11, Paragraph [0118]), wherein the plate comprises a curved head portion (231, Fig. 9) and a shaft portion (portion between bottom of 231 and end at 202, Figs. 9-10) extending from the curved head portion, an upper surface (208), a lower surface (210), a plurality of openings in the head portion (screw holes 230-234, Fig. 9) and a plurality of openings in the shaft portion (220-226, 236, Fig. 9), each configured to accept a fastener (Paragraph [0120]), and wherein a profile thickness of the plate (thickness measured between upper and lower surfaces (208 & 210, Fig. 10) along the shaft portion is 2 mm (Paragraph [0124]) and wherein “It is an important feature of the lateral plate that it is, overall, progressively stiffer from the distal end to the proximal end, corresponding to the loads experienced at respective portions of the plate.”
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the thickness of the shaft portion of the plate of O’Driscoll et al. to be 2 mm, tapering to less than 2 mm from the shaft portion to the proximal end of the head portion, as taught by Sixto, JR et al. in order to provide a low profile plate that has both sufficient structural strength and the ability to bend as needed to match a bone contour.
Claim(s) 10 & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over O’Driscoll et al. (US PG Pub No. 2004/0116930) in view of Patterson et al. (US Patent No. 7,137,987).
Regarding Claims 10 & 20, O’Driscoll et al. discloses the claimed invention as stated above in Claims 9 & 19, respectively, and further discloses wherein one of the waisted edge scallops of the first sidewall defines a first indentation (160 closest to 144 along right side wall 126, Fig. 4. Each scallop 160 defines an indentation along the right sidewall 126 as seen in Fig. 4, 6 & 9, Paragraph [0100]) and one of the waisted edge scallops of the second sidewall defines a second indentation (160 closest to 144 along left side wall 126, Fig. 4. Each scallop 160 defines an indentation along the left sidewall 126 as seen in Fig. 4, 6 & 9, Paragraph [0100]), wherein the first indentation and the second indentation are arranged between two adjacent fastener openings (134, Figs. 4 & 9) and are aligned with each other across the longitudinal axis of the plate such that they face each other (Figs 4 & 9).
O’Driscoll et al. does not disclose wherein the first indentation and the second indentation are aligned with a k-wire hole. O’Driscoll et al. does not disclose any k-wire holes along the plate.
Patterson et al. discloses an elongate bone plate (100< Figs. 1a-4) for use on an arm bone (Abstract), wherein a shaft portion of the plate comprises a plurality of bone screw openings (120, 121, Figs. 1a & 4), and wherein two adjacent bone screw openings (120 & 120) at the narrow end of the plate have a k-wire hole positioned centrally therebetween (Figs. 1a & 4), such that “200 is positioned and temporarily secured to the bone using K-wires” prior to insertion of bone screws into one of the bone screw openings (Col. 7).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the plate of O’Driscoll to add a k-wire hole centrally between adjacent bone screw openings in the head portion as taught by Patterson et al. such that the k-wire holes are aligned with the first and second indentations in order to provide the plate with a means for allowing the plate to be temporarily secured to the surgical site prior to final placement and insertion of the fasteners.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments, filed 06/19/26, have overcome the objections to claims 4, 5, 10, 14, 15, 19 & 20.
Applicant’s amendments, filed 06/19/26, have overcome the 112(b) rejection for Claims 8 & 18.
In regards to the Applicant’s argument, filed 06/19/26, with respect to the contention that the plate in Fig. 4 of O’Driscoll et al. is for a humerus bone rather than an ulna bone, thus the O’Driscoll plate cannot have a curved head portion configured to conform to an olecranon: It is noted that a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. As stated in the office action above, the curved head portion of the plate of O’Driscoll et al. is fully and structurally capable of conforming to an olecranon as stated in the functional language and thus the argument as presented by the Applicant has been fully considered but is not persuasive.
In regards to the Applicant’s argument, filed 06/19/26, with respect to the contention that there are no openings in O’Driscoll that are shaped to guide a fastener toward a coronoid process perpendicularly to the plate since the plate is configured to be disposed over the humerus bone and not an ulna bone: It is noted that a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. As stated in the office action above, the openings through the curved head portion of the plate of O’Driscoll et al. are fully and structurally capable of directing a fastener perpendicularly towards a coronoid process as stated in the functional language. Furthermore, as seen in Fig. 8, the right-most circular aperture is depicted in cross-section which shows a conically shaped lower section which is capable of accepting a polyaxial screw for insertion at a multitude of angles (Paragraph [0079]). Thus the argument as presented by the Applicant has been fully considered but is not persuasive.
In regards to the Applicant’s argument, filed 06/19/26, with respect to the contention that there can be no opening distally of the two-axis positioning slot which can guide a fastener toward the coronoid process: As seen in the office action above, the two-axis positioning slot is depicted in the examiner annotated Fig. 4 as being the left-most slot 132. The claim recites that the two-axis positioning slot is disposed on the shaft portion “distally of the opening of the head portion” and not vice versa as stated in the argument. Thus, O’Driscoll et al. discloses the claimed invention as stated above and the argument has been fully considered but is not persuasive.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA WEISS whose telephone number is (571) 270-5597. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 8:00 am to 4:00 pm EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, please contact the examiner’s supervisor, KEVIN T. TRUONG, at 571-272-4705. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JESSICA WEISS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3775
Prosecution Insights