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 .
Notice to Applicant
Claims 1-20 have been examined in this application. This communication is a final rejection in response to the “Amendments to the claims” and “Remarks” filed 4/27/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 9, 18, 19, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The limitation “configured to be at least partially water resistant” in claims 9, 18, and 20 fail to comply with the written description requirement because there is no disclosure of the system being water resistant, or what it would mean to be partially water resistant.
The limitation “a stationary winch assembly” fails to comply with the written description requirement because there is no disclosure of the winch assembly being stationary.
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 9, 18, 20 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.
The term “configured to be at least partially water resistant” in claims 9, 18, and 20 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “at least partially water resistant” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear how much of the system needs to be water resistant to be considered at least partially water resistant.
Regarding claim 19, the limitation “a stationary winch assembly” renders the claim indefinite because stationary by definition means not moving, and a winch that does not move would apply no force on the line and therefore would, by definition, not be a winch.
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.
Claims 1 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being obvious over EP 2586298 by Arakawa in view of US Patent Number 8,574,042 to Sloan.
Regarding claim 1, Arakawa discloses a mobile gantry system for an animal, comprising:
A frame assembly (frame 2) comprising a first support member and second support member defining a space for an animal therebetween (columns 4), the first support member and the second support member comprising substantially vertical members comprising an upper end and a lower end and a length extending therebetween (see Figure 1), wherein at least one of the first support member and the second support member comprises a channel (see channel for wire 10 in Figure 3);
A first basal member at the lower end of the first support member and a second basal member provided at the lower end of the second support member (base portions 4a);
A crossmember provided proximal to the upper end of each support member (beam portion 5);
A stationary handle coupled to at least a portion of the frame assembly (paragraph 35 discloses “a lateral movement correction bar 34 is fixed to each of the columns 4 of the gate-shaped frame 2 in the middle part of the height direction…The lateral movement correction bar has a pair of protruding plates 33 protruding from the inner face of the middle part so as to sandwich the column 4, and is engaged with a threaded hole of the column 4 to be fixed via the protruding plate 33”, correction bar 34 can be used as a handle);
A plurality of wheels coupled to the first and second basal members (wheels 6);
A winch assembly secured to the crossmember and comprising an actuator (21a, 21b, 22 comprises a winch assembly, and Figure 3 shows roller 21a of the winch assembly is secured to cross member 5) and a cable retractably extendable from the winch assembly (wire 10) operable to support at least a portion of a weight of an animal provided within the space (paragraph 41 discloses “When the moving pulley 22 is moved up and down, the wire 10 supporting the weight of the dog D moves up and down”);
The winch assembly further comprising a braking element to allow a user to slow or halt a speed of the cable (paragraph 52 discloses “By operating the operation handle 26, the harness 8 can be lifted up via the wire 10 and the moving pulley 22 that are moved up and down”, holding the handle in place or modulating the speed that the handle is turned therefore allows a user to slow or halt a speed of the cable).
Arakawa does not disclose the frame assembly is sized and operable to fit through a doorway and wherein a width between the first basal member and the second basal member is not more than 130 centimeters. However, Arakawa suggests the use of the machine 1 for an animal such as dogs, cats, or rabbits in standing or walking training for rehabilitation by veterinarians or therapists. It would thus have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the frame 2 or whatever size is necessary to allow hold the target types of animals while allowing veterinarians or therapists to maneuver and use the machine in their offices, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Arakawa does not disclose the frame assembly comprising an on-board power supply and a control system, the actuator being in communication with the on-board power supply, the power supply provided in communication with the winch assembly. However, these limitations are taught by Sloan. Sloan discloses a lift system for animals with an on board power supply and an actuator being in communication with the on-board power supply (column 4, lines 31-33 disclose “Illustrative examples of the driver 52 include a winch driven by an electric or gas-powered motor”), a control system (column 4, lines 35-38 disclose “Operation of the driver 52 can optionally be controlled via a wired or wireless remote control 54 that includes at least one of an up button, down button, and a stop button to control operation of the driver 52 as desired”). It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Arakawa using the teachings from Sloan in order to use a powered lift to provide lifting force to the pulley system.
Sloan does not explicitly disclose the power supply being a battery. However, Sloan discloses that driver 52 can be an electric motor. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Arakawa and Sloan to use a battery as a well-known way to power an electric motor.
Regarding claim 2 (dependent on claim 1), Arakawa discloses at least one of a cable, wire, cord, link, line, and the battery is provided in the channel (see wire 10 in the channel in Figure 3).
Regarding claim 3 (dependent on claim 1), Arakawa does not disclose the plurality of wheels further comprises at least one wheel vibration dampener. However, the examiner takes official notice that the use of wheel vibration dampeners for wheels is notoriously well-known, and that it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Arakawa to use wheel vibration dampeners in order to make wheel movements quieter and smoother. Since the applicant has not traversed the examiner’s official notice, the notice is taken to be admitted prior art (see MPEP 2144.03(C), second paragraph).
Regarding claim 4 (dependent on claim 1), Arakawa and Sloan do not disclose a panel coupled to the first member, the second support member, and the crossmember. However, Sloan discloses gussets 42 that extend between uprights 40 and cross member 34 to reinforce the frame. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to make the different portions of the gusset of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient, including larger gussets that couple to both uprights and the cross member for better reinforcement. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47.
Regarding claim 5 (dependent on claim 1), Arakawa discloses the crossmember further comprises a removably fastenable vibration dampener proximal to the winch assembly. Figures 1 and 3 shows shock absorber 24 being mounted on the cross member proximal to the winch assembly.
Arakawa does not disclose the vibration dampener being removably fastenable. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the shock absorber removable in order to make it easier to perform maintenance or to replace, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
Regarding claim 6 (dependent on claim 1), Sloan further teaches the actuator further comprises a removably securable actuator switch that is in direct, wired communication or indirect, wireless communication with the winch assembly and is capable of altering the location of and support provided by the retractably extendable cable. Column 4, lines 35-38 disclose “Operation of the driver 52 can optionally be controlled via a wired or wireless remote control 54 that includes at least one of an up button, down button, and a stop button to control operation of the driver 52 as desired”.
Regarding claim 7 (dependent on claim 1), Sloan does not disclose explicitly disclose the battery comprising a rechargeable battery having a battery port and a battery bracket. However, column 4, lines 31-33 disclose “Illustrative examples of the driver 52 include a winch driven by an electric or gas-powered motor”. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to use a battery to power an electric motor, and it would furthermore be obvious to use well-known types of batteries such as a rechargeable battery having a battery port and to use a battery bracket to hold the battery.
Regarding claim 8 (dependent on claim 1), Sloan discloses the control system further comprises a user interface coupled with at least one control unit including at least one of a transmitter or receiver. Column 4, lines 35-38 disclose “Operation of the driver 52 can optionally be controlled via a wired or wireless remote control 54”.
Regarding claim 9 (dependent on claim 1), Arakawa, as best understood, discloses the system is configured to be at least partially water resistant and comprises at least one of a shielding and a coating, such that the system can be utilized in water therapy or for aquatic animals. The closed portions of the columns 4, base portions 4a, and beam portion 5 comprise a feature that makes those portions of the frame waterproof and the walls of columns 4, base portions 4a, and beam portion 5 comprise a shielding.
Regarding claim 10 (dependent on claim 1), Arakawa does not disclose the control system further comprises at least one sensor capable of completing at least one of the recognition, determination, and reporting of various operational, physical, or environmental parameters proximal to the system. However, the examiner takes official notice that the use of sensors to measure parameters such as weight on a pulley, charge of a battery, etc. are notoriously well-known in the art, and that it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Arakawa to use such sensors in order to better monitor the different components of the machine during use in order to provide the user with more data or to detect errors or faults before they happen. Since the applicant has not traversed the examiner’s official notice, the notice is taken to be admitted prior art (see MPEP 2144.03(C), second paragraph).
Claims 11 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being obvious over EP 2586298 by Arakawa in view of US Patent Number 8,574,042 to Sloan and US Patent Number 7,234,686 to Stone.
Regarding claim 11, Arakawa discloses a mobile gantry system for an animal, comprising:
A frame assembly comprising a first support member and second support member defining a space for an animal therebetween (columns 4), the first support member and the second support member comprising substantially vertical members comprising an upper end and a lower end and a length extending therebetween (see Figure 1), wherein at least one of the first support member and the second support member comprises a channel (see channel for wire 10 in Figure 3);
At least one basal member provided proximal to the lower end of each support member (base portions 4a);
A crossmember provided proximal to the upper end of each support member (beam portion 5);
A handle coupled to at least a portion of the frame assembly (correction bar 34 can be used as a handle);
A plurality of lockable wheels coupled to the basal member (wheels 6 can be locked in place by wedge stops), wherein each wheel is movable in either a mono-axial or poly-axial direction (see wheels in Figure 1);
A winch assembly comprising an actuator (21a, 21b, 22) and a cable retractably extendable from the winch assembly (wire 10) operable to support at least a portion of a weight of an animal provided within the space (paragraph 41 discloses “When the moving pulley 22 is moved up and down, the wire 10 supporting the weight of the dog D moves up and down”);
A quick release clip removably securable to the cable (see clip between wire 10 and intermediate wire 19 in Figures 1 and 3); and
A lifting member (support bar 9) disposed distal to the crossmember and removably couplable to at least one of the cable and the quick release clip (Figures 1 and 3 show support bar 9 being removably coupled to the clip by intermediate wire 19).
Arakawa does not disclose the frame assembly is sized and operable to fit through a doorway and wherein a width between the first basal member and the second basal member is not more than 130 centimeters. However, Arakawa suggests the use of the machine 1 for an animal such as dogs, cats, or rabbits in standing or walking training for rehabilitation by veterinarians or therapists. It would thus have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the frame 2 or whatever size is necessary to allow hold the target types of animals while allowing veterinarians or therapists to maneuver and use the machine in their offices, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Arakawa does not disclose the actuator being in communication with an on-board power supply, a panel securable to at least one of the frame assembly and the cross member. However, these limitations are taught by Sloan. Sloan discloses a lift system for animals with an on board power supply and an actuator being in communication with the on-board power supply (column 4, lines 31-33 disclose “Illustrative examples of the driver 52 include a winch driven by an electric or gas-powered motor”), and panel 42 securable to at least one side of the frame assembly 40 and cross member 34. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Arakawa using the teachings from Sloan in order to use a powered lift to provide lifting force to the pulley system.
Arakawa and Sloan do not disclose the panel being removable securable. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make gussets 42 removable for maintenance or replacement, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
Arakawa does not disclose a cleat mount and a cleat operable to receive the cable from the winch bracket wherein the cleat is operable as a safety device to slow or halt the cable’s motion. However, this limitation is taught by Stone. Stone discloses a frame and pulley system to elevate an article off the floor with a cleat 170 that receives line 16 from a winch in order to prevent slippage of the line through the cleats in the reverse direction. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Arakawa using the teachings from Stone in order to prevent the line 10 from slipping through the pulleys and dropping the animal.
Regarding claim 12 (dependent on claim 11), Arakawa discloses at least one of a cable, wire, cord, link, line, and the battery is provided within the channel (see channel for wire 10 in Figure 3).
Regarding claim 13 (dependent on claim 11), Arakawa discloses the actuator is a manual mechanical device such that the winch is capable of lifting, supporting, or unweighting at least a portion of an animal once physically worked upon by a user. Paragraphs 40-42 describes the manual operation of handle 26 to raise and lower wire 10.
Regarding claim 14 (dependent on claim 11), Sloan further teaches a control system, wherein the actuator is an electric mechanical device such that the winch is capable of lifting, supporting, or unweighting at least a portion of an animal upon a user's application of power and control. Column 4, lines 31-33 disclose “Illustrative examples of the driver 52 include a winch driven by an electric or gas-powered motor” and lines 35-38 disclose “Operation of the driver 52 can optionally be controlled via a wired or wireless remote control 54 that includes at least one of an up button, down button, and a stop button to control operation of the driver 52 as desired”.
Regarding claim 15 (dependent on claim 11), Sloan does not disclose explicitly disclose the on-board power supply further comprises a battery assembly comprising a rechargeable battery having a battery port and a battery bracket. However, column 4, lines 31-33 disclose “Illustrative examples of the driver 52 include a winch driven by an electric or gas-powered motor”. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to use a battery to power an electric motor, and it would furthermore be obvious to use well-known types of batteries such as a rechargeable battery having a battery port and to use a battery bracket to hold the battery.
Regarding claim 16 (dependent on claim 11), Arakawa and Sloan do not disclose the panel further comprises at least one retainment element, such as a magnetic portion, a shelf, a folder, or a cubby configured to receive and maintain a stationary position of an item relative to the frame assembly. However, the examiner takes official notice that attaching retainment elements to veterinary devices is well-known in the art to place or store items, and that it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Arakawa and Sloan to add retainment elements in order to keep relevant documents for the animal nearby. Since the applicant has not traversed the examiner’s official notice, the notice is taken to be admitted prior art (see MPEP 2144.03(C), second paragraph).
Regarding claim 17 (dependent on claim 11), Arakawa does not disclose the plurality of lockable wheels further comprises at least one wheel vibration dampener. However, the examiner takes official notice that the use of wheel vibration dampeners for wheels is notoriously well-known, and that it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Arakawa to use wheel vibration dampeners in order to make wheel movements quieter and smoother. Since the applicant has not traversed the examiner’s official notice, the notice is taken to be admitted prior art (see MPEP 2144.03(C), second paragraph).
Regarding claims 18 (dependent on claim 11) and 20 (dependent on claim 19), Arakawa, as best understood, discloses the system is configured to be at least partially water resistant and comprises at least one of a shielding or coating, such that the system can be utilized in water therapy or for aquatic animals. The closed portions of the columns 4, base portions 4a, and beam portion 5 comprise a feature that makes those portions of the frame waterproof and the walls of columns 4, base portions 4a, and beam portion 5 comprise a shielding.
Regarding claim 19, Arakawa discloses a mobile gantry system for an animal, comprising:
A frame assembly comprising at least a first and second support member defining a space for an animal therebetween (columns 4), wherein each support member is substantially vertical, comprises an upper end and a lower end and a length extending therebetween (see Figure 1), wherein at least one support member comprises a channel (see channel for wire 10 in Figure 3);
At least one basal member provided proximal to the lower end of each support member (base portions 4a);
A crossmember provided proximal to the upper end of each support member (beam portion 5);
A handle coupled to at least a portion of the frame assembly (correction bar 34 can be used as a handle), wherein the handle is stationary relative to the frame assembly (paragraph 35 discloses “a lateral movement correction bar 34 is fixed to each of the columns 4 of the gate-shaped frame 2 in the middle part of the height direction…The lateral movement correction bar has a pair of protruding plates 33 protruding from the inner face of the middle part so as to sandwich the column 4, and is engaged with a threaded hole of the column 4 to be fixed via the protruding plate 33”);
A plurality of lockable wheels coupled to the basal member (wheels 6 can be locked in place by wedge stops), wherein each wheel is movable in either a mono-axial or poly-axial direction (see wheels in Figure 1);
A stationary winch assembly comprising an actuator (21a, 21b, 22 mounted to frame 2) and a cable retractably extendable from the winch assembly (wire 10) operable to support or unweight at least a portion of a weight of an animal provided within the space (paragraph 41 discloses “When the moving pulley 22 is moved up and down, the wire 10 supporting the weight of the dog D moves up and down”);
A quick release clip removably securable to the cable (see clip between wire 10 and intermediate wire 19 in Figures 1 and 3); and
A lifting member (support bar 9) disposed distal to the crossmember and removably couplable to at least one of the cable and the quick release clip (Figures 1 and 3 show support bar 9 being removably coupled to the clip by intermediate wire 19).
Arakawa does not disclose an envelope of the frame member comprises a width of not more than 130 centimeters, wherein the at least one basal member of each support member are spaced and dimensioned to fit within a standard single doorway. However, Arakawa suggests the use of the machine 1 for an animal such as dogs, cats, or rabbits in standing or walking training for rehabilitation by veterinarians or therapists. It would thus have been an obvious matter of design choice to make the frame 2 or whatever size is necessary to allow hold the target types of animals while allowing veterinarians or therapists to maneuver and use the machine in their offices, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Arakawa does not disclose an on-board power supply, a control system, the in actuator being in communication with the on-board power supply, a panel securable to at least one side of the frame assembly. However, these limitations are taught by Sloan. Sloan discloses a lift system for animals with an on board power supply and an actuator being in communication with the on-board power supply (column 4, lines 31-33 disclose “Illustrative examples of the driver 52 include a winch driven by an electric or gas-powered motor”), a control system comprising at least one of a user interface coupled with at least one of a control unit and a control panel (column 4, lines 35-38 disclose “Operation of the driver 52 can optionally be controlled via a wired or wireless remote control 54 that includes at least one of an up button, down button, and a stop button to control operation of the driver 52 as desired”), and panel 42 securable to at least one side of the frame assembly. Furthermore, panel 42 can be configured to retain medical devices, documents, or other items by various methods such as with tape. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Arakawa using the teachings from Sloan in order to use a powered lift to provide lifting force to the pulley system.
Arakawa and Sloan do not disclose the panel being removably securable. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make gussets 42 removable for maintenance or replacement, since it has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179.
Sloan does not disclose explicitly disclose the on-board power supply further comprises a battery assembly provided within the channel and having at least a rechargeable battery, a battery port and a battery bracket. However, column 4, lines 31-33 disclose “Illustrative examples of the driver 52 include a winch driven by an electric or gas-powered motor”. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to use a battery to power an electric motor, and it would furthermore be obvious to use well-known types of batteries such as a rechargeable battery having a battery port and to use a battery bracket to hold the battery.
Arakawa does not disclose a cleat mount and a cleat operable to receive the cable from the winch bracket wherein the cleat is operable as a safety device to slow or halt the cable’s motion. However, this limitation is taught by Stone. Stone discloses a frame and pulley system to elevate an article off the floor with a cleat 170 that receives line 16 from a winch in order to prevent slippage of the line through the cleats in the reverse direction. It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Arakawa using the teachings from Stone in order to prevent the line 10 from slipping through the pulleys and dropping the animal.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments directed to newly amended claim limitations are moot in view of the current grounds of rejection.
Regarding the argument that correction bar 34 is not stationary because it can be attached to column 4 at different heights, paragraph 35 discloses “a lateral movement correction bar 34 is fixed to each of the columns 4 of the gate-shaped frame 2 in the middle part of the height direction…The lateral movement correction bar has a pair of protruding plates 33 protruding from the inner face of the middle part so as to sandwich the column 4, and is engaged with a threaded hole of the column 4 to be fixed via the protruding plate 33”. Thus when correction bar 34 is attached to column 4, it is stationary because it is fixed via protruding plates 33 and the threaded hole in column 4. Adjusting the height of correction bar 34 requires removing the correction bar 34 and attaching it to different positions on column 4, but the bar is still stationary when it is attached to column 4.
Regarding the argument that Arakawa does not disclose the winch assembly secured to or disposed along the crossmember, Figure 3 of Arakawa clearly shows that roller 21a is secured to the middle of cross member 5, and roller 21b is secured to the right end of cross member 5. The fact that other parts of the winch assembly moves does not change the fact that the winch assembly is secured to cross member 5 at rollers 21a and 21b.
Conclusion
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 MICHAEL H WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-6554. The examiner can normally be reached 10-6:30.
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, Josh Michener can be reached at 571-272-1467. 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.
MICHAEL H. WANG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3642
/MICHAEL H WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3642
