DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the amendments to the claims filed on 11 September 2026. Claims 1 – 9 and 20 – 22 are pending and currently being examined.
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 .
Specification
The previously made objections to the specification are hereby withdrawn in view of applicant’s arguments and cancellation of Claim 23.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “thermal element” in claim 7, “first routing feature” in claim 9 and “second routing feature” in claim 9.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 6, 8 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tuccelli (PG Pub US 20200172568 A1) in view of Gabriel (French Patent FR 866461 A) and further in view of Cartledge (US Patent 6,554,791 B1).
In Re Claim 1, Tuccelli discloses a method of isolating discrete fluid portions (MPEP 2112.02 – I states that “Under the principles of inherency, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device. When the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will inherently perform the claimed process. In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 231 USPQ 136 (Fed. Cir. 1986)”; paragraph [0052] discloses an apparatus that anticipates the claimed method) in a peristaltic consumable (paragraph [0052]; Figure 6; note that label 5 is not in Figure 6 but Figure 5 shows label “tubing wrapped around a central mandrel”, the label 5 corresponds to “central mandrel”; the “tubing” is label 10 but the label is not shown in Figure 6; the “tubing”/10 plus the “mandrel”/5 is being designated the claimed peristaltic consumable), comprising: inserting a consumable (5, 10) into a roller assembly (15; paragraph [0052]; Figure 5; note that label 15 is not in the figure but it shows label “roller compressing the tubing”) comprising one or more rollers (15; at least two rollers are visible), wherein the consumable (5, 10) is a consumable cartridge (paragraphs [0021],[0022] and Figures 6 and 7 demonstrate that the mandrel 5 in combination with the wrapped tubing 10 is “placed” in the pump apparatus, which means it can also be removed from the pump apparatus, therefore the mandrel 10 in combination with the wrapped tubing 10 reads on the claimed consumable cartridge) comprising a cylindrical core (5) having a length of tubing (10) helically wrapped (paragraph [0052]: “peristaltic helix”) around the cylindrical core (5) (as best seen in Figure 6), the length of tubing having been wrapped around the cylindrical core to pre-load the consumable cartridge (5, 10) prior to the inserting (Figure 6 clearly demonstrates a modular unit, it is under preload due to the wrapping action of the tubing around the mandrel prior to being “placed” in the pump apparatus as shown in Figure 7) and prior to the loading of the fluid into the tubing (fluid only enters the tubing when the cartridge is assembled in the pump apparatus); loading fluid in an inlet (the “one end” in paragraph [0051]: “Sample introduced as a pulse at one end of a flow channel”) of the tubing (10); moving the one or more rollers from a disengaged position to an engaged position (Figure 7 shows the pump apparatus without the rollers when the cartridge is placed in the apparatus; the roller must be moved into engagement with the tube after the placement is made in order for the pump to function; as shown in Figure 5, the rollers surround the cartridge, so the only way to place the cartridge is to remove/move/disengage the rollers prior to placement of the cartridge and then move the rollers back into the engagement position with the tube) to compress the tubing (10) with the one or more rollers (15) to isolate one or more fluid portions (paragraph [0032]: “an individually defined volume”) within the tubing (“paragraph [0049]: “the different or discrete zones or packets of fluid are achieved by applying compressive forces to the exterior of the fluid flow channel”; paragraph [0032]: “an individually defined volume separated from adjoining volumes by an intervening barrier”), preventing fluid communication between adjacent fluid portions (paragraph [0048]: “maintain the separation between packets”); causing relative peristaltic movement between the tubing (10) and the one or more rollers (15) and move each of the one or more fluid portions across the tubing (paragraph [0049]: “essentially mimicking a peristaltic pump”); and outputting at least a part of the fluid from an outlet of the tubing (paragraph [0050]: “channel outlet”; paragraph [0051]: “exit the flow channel”).
Although Tuccelli discloses rotating the one or more rollers by an implied motor to induce relative rotation between the one or more rollers and the consumable, Tuccelli does not explicitly disclose individually rotating the one or more rollers.
However, Gabriel discloses a peristaltic consumable (Figure 2 – “K12” is one of the labels in this figure that points to the consumable; Translation Page 2, Line 1: “drum”) insertable into a pump apparatus (Figure 1), one or more rollers (“J4”; Figure 1) driven by rotational power supplied by a motor (“A2” is driven by a motor) to induce relative rotation between the one or more rollers (“J4”) and the consumable (“K12”), the rollers (“J4”) being individually rotated about their respective roller axis by gears (“F1”,“H1”,”J5”; Machine Translation Page 2, Lines 26 – 33).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to rotate the one or more rollers of Tuccelli individually via a gear transmission between the motor and the one or more rollers as taught by Gabriel for the purpose of mitigating the risk of wear or rolling of the tube (Machine Translation Page 2, Line 31 of Gabriel).
As discussed above, the examiner contends that Tuccelli discloses preloading the cartridge with the tube wrap prior to insertion and then moving the rollers to engagement. Alternatively, if this is not clear to applicant:
However, Cartledge discloses a consumable cartridge (400; Figures 18A,18B,19; Column 12, Lines 48 – 65) that is preloaded with tubing (415) prior to insertion into the pump apparatus (Figure 1). The cartridge (14) is replaced with a new one by first disengaging the roller (312) from the old cartridge, then removing/replacing the cartridge, then re-engaging the roller (312) with the new cartridge in that order (Column 21, Lines 17 – 23; Column 11, Lines 14 – 16).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to remove/replace the consumable cartridge of Tuccelli by first disengaging the one or more rollers from the old cartridge, then removing/replacing the cartridge, then re-engaging the one or more rollers with the new cartridge in that order as taught by Cartledge for the purpose of protecting the roller mechanism and facilitating cartridge removal (Column 21, Lines 21 – 23 of Cartledge).
In Re Claim 2, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 1, and Tuccelli discloses that the relative peristaltic movement is achieved by (b) moving the one or more rollers around the cylindrical core (paragraph [0052]: “One or more rollers 15 rotate around the mandrel 5”).
In Re Claim 5, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 1, and Tuccelli discloses determining a time (paragraph [0051]: “known time”; paragraph [0056]: “target a particular residence time”) for incubation of the fluid (paragraph [0013]: “The flow channel may function as an incubation chamber”) and mechanically encapsulating the fluid in the tubing (10) with the one or more rollers (15) for the determined time (“residence time”) for incubation (by selecting the appropriate flow rate and tubing length - paragraph [0056]), wherein an amount of time from when a portion of the fluid is loaded into the inlet to when the portion of the fluid is output from the outlet corresponds to the determined time for incubation (paragraph [0051]: “Sample introduced as a pulse at one end of a flow channel will exit the flow channel in a sharp, well-defined peak at a known time”).
In Re Claim 6, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 1, and Tuccelli discloses that the tubing (10) is flexible (the tubing must be flexible for the apparatus to function as disclosed).
In Re Claim 8, the combined references above disclose all the limitations of Claim 1, and Tuccelli discloses that the fluid is loaded in the inlet using a pump (paragraph [0075]: “main feed pump”).
In Re Claim 20, Tuccelli discloses a method of isolating discrete fluid portions (MPEP 2112.02 – I states that “Under the principles of inherency, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device. When the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will inherently perform the claimed process. In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 231 USPQ 136 (Fed. Cir. 1986)”; paragraph [0052] discloses an apparatus that anticipates the claimed method) in a peristaltic consumable (paragraph [0052]; Figure 6; note that label 5 is not in Figure 6 but Figure 5 shows label “tubing wrapped around a central mandrel”, the label 5 corresponds to “central mandrel”; the “tubing” is label 10 but the label is not shown in Figure 6; the “tubing”/10 plus the “mandrel”/5 is being designated the claimed peristaltic consumable), comprising: providing a consumable cartridge (5, 10) comprising a support body (5) having a length of flexible tubing (10) arranged around the support body (5); the length of flexible tubing having been arranged around the support body to pre-load the consumable cartridge (Figure 6 clearly demonstrates a modular unit, it is under preload due to the wrapping action of the tubing around the mandrel prior to being “placed” in the pump apparatus as shown in Figure 7); inserting the pre-loaded consumable cartridge into a roller assembly comprising one or more rollers (Figure 7; paragraph [0022]); loading fluid into an inlet (the “one end” in paragraph [0051]: “Sample introduced as a pulse at one end of a flow channel”) of the tubing (10); moving the one or more rollers from a disengaged position to an engaged position (Figure 7 shows the pump apparatus without the rollers when the cartridge is placed in the apparatus; the roller must be moved into engagement with the tube after the placement is made in order for the pump to function; as shown in Figure 5, the rollers surround the cartridge, so the only way to place the cartridge is to remove/move/disengage the rollers prior to placement of the cartridge and then move the rollers back into the engagement position with the tube) to compress the tubing (10) with one or more rollers (15; paragraph [0052]; Figure 5; note that label 15 is not in the figure but it shows label “roller compressing the tubing”) to isolate discrete fluid portions (paragraph [0049]: “the different or discrete zones or packets of fluid are achieved by applying compressive forces to the exterior of the fluid flow channel”; paragraph [0032]: “an individually defined volume separated from adjoining volumes by an intervening barrier”), thereby preventing fluid communication between adjacent portions (paragraph [0048]: “maintain the separation between packets”); inducing relative peristaltic movement between the tubing (10) and the one or more rollers (15) and advance each isolated portion along the tubing (paragraph [0049]: “essentially mimicking a peristaltic pump”); and delivering at least a part of the fluid from an outlet of the tubing (paragraph [0050]: “channel outlet”; paragraph [0051]: “exit the flow channel”), wherein the support body (5) is a cylindrical geometry (as shown in Figure 6).
Although Tuccelli discloses rotating the one or more rollers by an implied motor to induce relative rotation between the one or more rollers and the consumable, Tuccelli does not explicitly disclose individually rotating the one or more rollers.
However, Gabriel discloses a peristaltic consumable (Figure 2 – “K12” is one of the labels in this figure that points to the consumable; Translation Page 2, Line 1: “drum”) insertable into a pump apparatus (Figure 1), one or more rollers (“J4”; Figure 1) driven by rotational power supplied by a motor (“A2” is driven by a motor) to induce relative rotation between the one or more rollers (“J4”) and the consumable (“K12”), the rollers (“J4”) being individually rotated about their respective roller axis by gears (“F1”,“H1”,”J5”; Machine Translation Page 2, Lines 26 – 33).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to rotate the one or more rollers of Tuccelli individually via a gear transmission between the motor and the one or more rollers as taught by Gabriel for the purpose of mitigating the risk of wear or rolling of the tube (Machine Translation Page 2, Line 31 of Gabriel).
As discussed above, the examiner contends that Tuccelli discloses preloading the cartridge with the tube wrap prior to insertion and then moving the rollers to engagement. Alternatively, if this is not clear to applicant:
However, Cartledge discloses a consumable cartridge (400; Figures 18A,18B,19; Column 12, Lines 48 – 65) that is preloaded with tubing (415) prior to insertion into the pump apparatus (Figure 1). The cartridge (14) is replaced with a new one by first disengaging the roller (312) from the old cartridge, then removing/replacing the cartridge, then re-engaging the roller (312) with the new cartridge in that order (Column 21, Lines 17 – 23; Column 11, Lines 14 – 16).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to remove/replace the consumable cartridge of Tuccelli by first disengaging the one or more rollers from the old cartridge, then removing/replacing the cartridge, then re-engaging the one or more rollers with the new cartridge in that order as taught by Cartledge for the purpose of protecting the roller mechanism and facilitating cartridge removal (Column 21, Lines 21 – 23 of Cartledge).
Claim(s) 3, 4, 7 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tuccelli (PG Pub US 20200172568 A1) in view of Gabriel (French Patent FR 866461 A) and in view of Cartledge (US Patent 6,554,791 B1) and further in view of Mittelstein (PG Pub US 20020146338 A1).
PNG
media_image1.png
481
590
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 12 of Mittelstein
In Re Claims 3 and 4, Tuccelli, Gabriel and Cartledge discloses all the limitations of Claim 1, but they do not disclose that the wrapped portions are spaced apart and do not contact one another in the compressed state.
However, Mittelstein discloses a consumable (Figure 11) to be used in a fluid isolating pump (see title), comprises a cylindrical core (530) having a length of tubing (510) helically wrapped around the cylindrical core (530), wherein wrapped portions of the tubing around the cylindrical core (530) are spaced apart from each other (there is clearly a ridge in between), wherein when the wrapped portions of the tubing are compressed with one or more rollers (various embodiments show the roller: 320; Figure 6, 522; Figure 13), the wrapped portions in a compressed state do not contact one another (see annotated figure above) (paragraphs [0052],[0053]; Figures 11, 12).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to substitute the consumable (Figure 6) of Tuccelli / Gabriel / Cartledge with the consumable (Figure 11) of Mittelstein because the configuration provides an effective means to maintain or change the temperature of fluid being pumped (paragraph [0011] of Mittelstein).
In Re Claim 7, Tuccelli, Gabriel and Cartledge disclose all the limitations of Claim 1, but they do not disclose a thermal element.
However, Mittelstein discloses a consumable (Figure 11) to be used in a fluid isolating pump (see title), comprises a cylindrical core (530) having a length of tubing (510) helically wrapped around the cylindrical core (530), wherein the temperature of fluid inside the tubing (510) is controlled (“maintain or change temperature of fluid” - paragraph [0011]) using a thermal element (“heating or cooling elements”)(paragraphs [0011],[0013]; Figures 11, 12).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to substitute the consumable (Figure 6) of Tuccelli / Gabriel / Cartledge with the consumable (Figure 11) of Mittelstein (having the heating or cooling elements in the central core) because the configuration provides an effective means to maintain or change the temperature of fluid being pumped (paragraph [0011] of Mittelstein).
In Re Claim 9, Tuccelli, Gabriel and Cartledge disclose all the limitations of Claim 1, but they do not disclose an end cap.
PNG
media_image2.png
386
525
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 11 of Mittelstein
However, Mittelstein discloses a consumable (Figure 11) to be used in a fluid isolating pump (see title), comprises a cylindrical core (530) having a length of tubing (510) helically wrapped around the cylindrical core (530), the consumable further includes an endcap (the annotated larger diameter portion of 530 in the above figure is being designated as an endcap) coupled to an end of the cylindrical core (530), and wherein the endcap is formed with a first routing feature (where 542 is installed in the end cap; this is similar to port 342 in Figure 8) and a second routing feature (where 552 is installed in the end cap), wherein the inlet (this includes a portion of the tube 510 and connector 542) of the tubing (510) is routed through the first routing feature and the outlet (this includes a portion of the tube 510 and connector 552) of the tubing (510) is routed through the second routing feature (paragraphs [0011], [0013], [0041], [0052], [0053]; Figures 11, 12).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to modify the consumable of Tuccelli / Gabriel / Cartledge to incorporate a cap as taught by Mittelstein because the cap provides convenient fittings for connecting to the fluid source and destination.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tuccelli (PG Pub US 20200172568 A1) in view of Gabriel (French Patent FR 866461 A) and in view of Cartledge (US Patent 6,554,791 B1) and further in view of Corso (PG Pub US 20130266929 A1).
In Re Claim 21, Tuccelli, Gabriel and Cartledge disclose all the limitations of Claim 20, and paragraph [0076] discloses a rotational speed that achieves a target flow rate (to maintain a desired residence time as stated in paragraph [0056]), but they do not disclose adjusting speed based on a sensor feedback.
However, Corso discloses adjusting a speed of the one or more rollers in response to feedback from a sensor (paragraph [0029]) that detects a position of at least one fluid portion within the tubing (the claimed “position” is the exit of the tubing, a portion of the fluid is detected/measured when it exits the tubing, paragraph [0029]: “the fluid flow exiting the tubing being pinched by the rollers is measured”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to incorporate a feedback sensor as taught by Corso at the exit of the tubing of Tuccelli / Gabriel / Cartledge for the purpose of ensuring that the desired flow rate is established and maintained (paragraphs [0007] and [0018] of Corso).
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tuccelli (PG Pub US 20200172568 A1) in view of Gabriel (French Patent FR 866461 A) and in view of Cartledge (US Patent 6,554,791 B1) and in view of Corso (PG Pub US 20130266929 A1) and further in view of Karlin (PG Pub US 20210093983 A1).
In Re Claim 22, Tuccelli, Gabriel, Cartledge and Corso disclose all the limitations of Claim 21, and although paragraph [0005] of Tuccelli discloses exposure to radiation as part of known techniques, the combined references do not disclose gamma-radiation compatible materials.
However, paragraph [0044] of Karlin discloses tubing (21) and support body (“pump head”) from gamma-radiation compatible materials (“suitable for being gamma irradiated”), and are configured for single use (“materials suitable for being disposable”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to make the tubing and support body of Tuccelli / Gabriel / Cartledge / Corso from gamma-radiation compatible materials configured for single use as taught by Karlin because it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use (See MPEP 2144.07 In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960)).
Response to Arguments
Applicant has argued on Page 12 of Applicant’s Response that “thermal element” does not allegedly warrant an interpretation under 35 USC 112 (f). Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive because although the phrase limits the interpretation to a class of structures, it does not limit the phrase to a specific structure. There can be many distinct structures in the class.
Applicant has argued on Page 12 of Applicant’s Response that “routing feature” does not allegedly warrant an interpretation under 35 USC 112 (f). Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive because a recitation of the location of a structure does not specify the structure itself, so there are still insufficient structural description in the claim.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DNYANESH G KASTURE whose telephone number is (571)270-3928. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu, 7:30 AM to 6:00 PM.
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, Essama Omgba can be reached at 469-295-9278. 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.
/D.G.K/Examiner, Art Unit 3746
/NATHAN C ZOLLINGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Prosecution Insights