www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and TrademarkOffice
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`16/618,682
`
`12/02/2019
`
`T. Blane SANDERS
`
`P001672USO1PCT
`
`9078
`
`60402
`
`7590
`
`06/29/2023
`
`KINETIC CONCEPTS, INC.
`c/o Harness Dickey & Pierce
`5445 Corporate Drive
`Suite 300
`
`Troy, MI 48098
`
`EXAMINER
`
`TRAN, NHU
`
`3781
`
`06/29/2023
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`Thetime period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`
`dgodzisz@hdp.com
`troymailroom @hdp.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`Office Action Summary
`
`Application No.
`16/618,682
`Examiner
`NHU Q TRAN
`
`Applicant(s)
`SANDERSetal.
`Art Unit
`AIA (FITF) Status
`3781
`Yes
`
`-- The MAILING DATEof this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing
`date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s) filed on 04/28/2023.
`C} A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`2a)[¥) This action is FINAL.
`2b) (J This action is non-final.
`3)02 An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4)\0) Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-26 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) 13-26 is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`[) Claim(s)__ is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-12 is/are rejected.
`(1 Claim(s)__is/are objectedto.
`C] Claim(s)
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`“If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http:/Awww.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`Application Papers
`10)C) The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)M The drawing(s) filed on 12/02/2019 is/are: a)¥) accepted or b)() objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12)0) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`c)() None ofthe:
`b)( Some**
`a)C) All
`1.2 Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.1.) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.2.) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been receivedin this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`* See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1) ([] Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`2) (J Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3)
`
`(LJ Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) (J Other:
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20230620
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/618,682
`Art Unit: 3781
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
`
`Note: This office action is in response to communication filed on 04/28/2023.
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA or AIA Status
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined
`
`under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Status of Claims
`
`Claim(s) 1-26 is/are pending in the application.
`
`Claim(s) 1-12 is/are examined on the merits.
`
`Responseto Arguments
`
`Applicant’s arguments/remarksfiled on 04/28/2023 have been considered, but
`
`they are not persuasive.
`
`Applicant argues that the system of Locke (US PGPUB 20130072850)is notin
`
`the same field of endeavor as the claimed system; however, Applicant’s argumentis not
`
`found persuasive. Locke discloses a system comprising a porous foam, a plurality of
`
`struts, and a moisture barrier. The system of Locke comprises mostof the elements
`
`required by claim 1. Furthermore, the system of claim 1 does not exclude reduced
`
`pressure source during operation. Claim 1 only recites the limitation “the porous foam is
`
`configured to provide a contact force at least between the plurality of struts and the
`
`tissue site to create the tissue deformation without the application of a reduced
`
`pressure” which discusses aboutproviding a contact force at least between the plurality
`
`of struts and the tissue site. Since the porous foam of Locke and the claimed porous
`
`foam are patentably indistinct in terms of structure, the taught porous foam is
`
`considered/expected to be capable of providing a contact force at least between the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/618,682
`Art Unit: 3781
`
`Page 3
`
`plurality of struts and the tissue site to create the tissue deformation without the
`
`application of a reduced pressure (See MPEP § 2112.01 (I)). In addition, the porous
`
`foam has a body massand is capable of creating the tissue deformation without the
`
`application of a reduced pressure.
`
`Applicant argues that Locke’s struts 1219 are structurally distinguishable from the
`
`struts recited in claim 1 because of the NTSAMD formedor coated on the struts 1219;
`
`however, Applicant’s argument is not found persuasive. The coated NTSAMD on the
`
`struts 1219 is optional (the struts 1219 may be formed from or coated with at least one
`
`NTSAMD material: 0074). Even if the NTSAMD is coated on the struts 1219, the
`
`NTSAMD will becomea part of the struts 1219; and therefore, the struts 1219 still
`
`directly contact the tissue site. In addition, when the struts 1219 are formed from the
`
`NTSAMD material, the struts 1219 directly contact the tissuesite.
`
`With respect to the double patenting claim rejections, the double patenting claim
`
`rejections are withdrawnin view of the abandonment of Application No. 16/618641.
`
`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 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
`
`obviousnessrejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/618,682
`Art Unit: 3781
`
`Page 4
`
`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 effectivefiling date of the claimed invention to a person having
`
`ordinaryskill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains.
`
`Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention
`
`was made.
`
`The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness
`
`under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized asfollows:
`
`1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
`
`2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
`
`3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
`
`4. Considering objective evidence presentin the application indicating
`
`obviousness or nonobviousness.
`
`Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Locke (US PGPUB 20130072850) in view of Olson (US PGPUB 20100069863).
`
`Regarding claim 1, Locke discloses a system (a system 1200: 40072 and Figs.
`
`12-13) for stimulating tissue growth at a tissue site (0072), comprising:
`
`a porous foam (a dressing filler 1206 comprising an open-cell, reticulated foam
`
`1217: 40073 and Fig. 12) comprising an exterior-facing surface (a surface thatis
`
`contacted to a cover/drape 1210 : 40072 and Fig. 12), a tissue contact surface (a
`
`surface that is contacted to a tissue site 1201: J0072 and Fig. 12), and a plurality of
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/618,682
`Art Unit: 3781
`
`Page 5
`
`struts (a plurality of struts 1219: ¥0073 and Fig. 13) positioned at the tissue contact
`
`surface (some of the struts 1219 contactthe tissue site 1201: 40075 and Figs. 12-13),
`
`the plurality of struts of the porous foam configured to directly contact the tissue site and
`
`to create tissue deformation at the tissue site (some of the struts 1219 contactthe tissue
`
`site 1201 and these struts 1219 provide a point load to the tissue site 1201: (0075;
`
`therefore, the struts 1219 are capable of creating tissue deformation at the tissue site),
`
`a moisture barrier (a cover or drape 1210: 40072 and Fig. 12) configured to cover
`
`the exterior-facing surface of the porous foam (40072 and Fig. 12);
`
`wherein the porous foam (1206+1217) is configured to provide a contact force at
`
`least between the plurality of struts and the tissue site to create the tissue deformation
`
`without the application of a reduced pressure (some of the struts 1219 contact the
`
`tissue site 1201 and these struts 1219 provide a point load to the tissue site 1201:
`
`40075; therefore, the porous foam is capable of providing a contactforce at least
`
`between the plurality of struts and the tissue site to create the tissue deformation
`
`without the application of a reduced pressure; and since the taught porous foam and the
`
`claimed porous foam are patentably indistinct in terms of structure, the taught porous
`
`foam is considered/expected to be capable of providing a contact force at least between
`
`the plurality of struts and the tissue site to create the tissue deformation without the
`
`application of a reduced pressure; See MPEP § 2112.01 (I)); and ...
`
`Locke discloses the moisture barrier (the cover or drape 1210: 40072 and Fig.
`
`12), but does not disclose the material of the moisture barrier or disclose that the
`
`moisture barrier is configured to trap moisture at the tissue site.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/618,682
`Art Unit: 3781
`
`Page 6
`
`In the same field of endeavor, wound dressings, Olson discloses a reduced
`
`pressure treatment system 100 comprising a dressing 102 and a dressing material 106
`
`(40014-0015 and Figs. 1-2). Olson further discloses a sealing member 106 that is made
`
`from polyurethane, EVAfilm or silicones for the benefits of providing a fluid seal over the
`
`dressing to maintain reduced pressure at a desired reduced pressure and providing an
`
`impermeable or semi-permeable elastomeric seal (Y0022 and 0062).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
`
`filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the moisture barrier of Locke by
`
`selecting/using polyurethane, EVAfilm, or silicones as a material, similar to that
`
`disclosed by Olson, in order to provide a fluid seal over the dressing to maintain
`
`reduced pressure at a desired reduced pressure and provide an impermeable or semi-
`
`permeable elastomeric seal, as suggested in 40022 and 0062 of Olson andasit has
`
`been held that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended
`
`use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (See MPEP § 2144.07). Since
`
`the moisture barrier of Locke in view of Olson is made of polyurethane or silicone which
`
`is the same material as the moisture barrier in §0028 of the instant application; the
`
`moisture barrier of Locke in view of Olson is capable of trapping moisture at the tissue
`
`site.
`
`Locke does notdisclose the porous foam being formed of a hydrophobic material
`
`configured to prevent fluid absorption within the porous foam such that the porous foam
`
`is entirely non-absorbent.
`
`Olson further discloses a technique of providing/disposing hydrophobic porous
`
`layers/materials (214+220: 0033, 0040 and Fig. 2) above the tissue site 207 (0078) for
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/618,682
`Art Unit: 3781
`
`Page 7
`
`the benefits of keeping liquids away from the tissue site, reducing or preventing the lateral
`
`spread of the liquid along the interface between the tissue-interface layer and the surface
`
`of the tissue site, and thereby further preventing or reducing maceration of the tissue at
`
`or nearthe tissue site (¢0078).
`
`Examiner further notes that there are only two types of porous foam: hydrophobic
`
`and hydrophilic porous foams.
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
`
`filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the porous foam of Lockein view of
`
`Olson by making the porous foam hydrophobic,similar to that disclosed by Olson, in
`
`order to keep liquids away from the tissue site, reduce or prevent the lateral spread of
`
`the liquid along the interface between the tissue-interface layer and the surface of the
`
`tissue site, and thereby further prevent or reduce maceration of the tissue at or near the
`
`tissue site, as suggested in 40078 of Olson and asit has been held that the use of
`
`knowntechnique to yield predictable result is prima facie obvious (See MPEP § 21438(I)
`
`(C & G)). Therefore, the porous foam of Locke in view of Olson is capable of preventing
`
`fluid absorption within the porous foam such that the porous foam is entirely non-
`
`absorbent.
`
`Regarding claims 2-3, Locke in view of Olson disclosesall the limitations as
`
`discussed abovefor claim 1.
`
`Lockein view of Olson further discloses wherein the porous foam is configured
`
`to remain at the tissue site for at least 3 days or wherein the porous foam is configured
`
`to remain at the tissue site between 3 days to 7 days (since the taught porous foam and
`
`the claimed porous foam are patentably indistinct in terms of structure, the taught
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/618,682
`Art Unit: 3781
`
`Page 8
`
`porous foam is considered/expected to be capable of remaining at the tissue site for at
`
`least 3 days or remaining at the tissue site between 3 days to 7 days; See MPEP §§
`
`2112.01 (I), 2114 (1)-(II) and 2115).
`
`Regarding claim 4, Locke in view of Olson disclosesall the limitations as
`
`discussed abovefor claim 1.
`
`Locke further discloses wherein the plurality of struts are exposedat the tissue
`
`contact surface (some of the struts 1219 contact the tissue site 1201: 40075 and Figs.
`
`12-13).
`
`Regarding claim 5, Locke in view of Olson disclosesall the limitations as
`
`discussed abovefor claim 1.
`
`Locke further comprisesa plurality of voids (the open-cell, reticulated foam
`
`(1206+1217) inherently comprises a plurality of voids arranged between struts 1219:
`
`Figs. 12-13), and wherein the plurality of voids and the plurality of struts are exposed at
`
`the tissue contact surface and configured to engage the tissue site (some of the struts
`
`1219 contact the tissue site 1201: 40075 and Figs. 12-13; therefore, the plurality of
`
`voids and the plurality of struts are exposed at the tissue contact surface and configured
`
`to engage the tissue site).
`
`Regarding claim 6, Locke in view of Olson disclosesall the limitations as
`
`discussed abovefor claim 1.
`
`Locke further discloses the porous foam comprisesa reticulated polyurethane
`
`foam (the dressing filler 1206 comprises a reticulated polyurethane foam 1217: 40073
`
`and Fig. 12).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/618,682
`Art Unit: 3781
`
`Page 9
`
`Regarding claim 7, Locke in view of Olson disclosesall the limitations as
`
`discussed abovefor claim 1.
`
`Locke further discloses wherein the porous foam (1206+1217) comprises a
`
`thickness (Fig. 12) that is substantially flush with a surface of an epidermis around the
`
`tissue site (the thickness of (1206+1217)is flush/even with a surface of an epidermis
`
`1213 around the tissue site 1201: 40072 and Fig. 12).
`
`Regarding claim 8, Locke in view of Olson disclosesall the limitations as
`
`discussed abovefor claim 1.
`
`Locke discloses the moisture barrier (the cover or drape 1210: 40072 and Fig.
`
`12) and is configured to be positioned in a sealed space between the moisture barrier
`
`and the tissue site (0072 and Fig. 12), but does not disclose the material of the
`
`moisture barrier or disclose the moisture barrier comprising a film layer.
`
`Olson further discloses a sealing member 106 that is made from polyurethane,
`
`EVAfilm or silicones for the benefits of providing a fluid seal over the dressing to maintain
`
`reduced pressure at a desired reduced pressure and providing an impermeable or semi-
`
`permeable elastomeric seal ((0022 and 0062).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
`
`filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the moisture barrier of Locke in
`
`view of Olson by selecting/using polyurethane, EVAfilm, or silicones as a material,
`
`similar to that disclosed by Olson, in order to provide a fluid seal over the dressing to
`
`maintain reduced pressure at a desired reduced pressure and provide an impermeable
`
`or semi-permeable elastomeric seal, as suggested in (0022 and 0062 of Olson and asit
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/618,682
`Art Unit: 3781
`
`Page 10
`
`has been held that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its
`
`intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (See MPEP § 2144.07).
`
`Regarding claim 9, Locke in view of Olson disclosesall the limitations as
`
`discussed abovefor claim 8.
`
`Locke further discloses wherein the moisture barrier (1210) comprises an
`
`adhesive (an adhesive 1215: 40072 and Fig. 12).
`
`Regarding claim 10, Locke in view of Olson disclosesall the limitations as
`
`discussed abovefor claim 1.
`
`Locke discloses the moisture barrier (the cover or drape 1210: 40072 and Fig.
`
`12) comprises an adhesive (an adhesive 1215: 40072 and Fig. 12), but does not
`
`disclose the material of the moisture barrier or disclose the moisture barrier comprising
`
`an adhesivefilm.
`
`Olson further discloses a sealing member 106 that is made from polyurethane,
`
`EVAfilm or silicones for the benefits of providing a fluid seal over the dressing to
`
`maintain reduced pressure at a desired reduced pressure and providing an
`
`impermeable or semi-permeable elastomeric seal (Y0022 and 0062).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
`
`filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the moisture barrier of Locke in
`
`view of Olson by selecting/using polyurethane, EVAfilm, or silicones as a material,
`
`similar to that disclosed by Olson, in order to provide a fluid seal over the dressing to
`
`maintain reduced pressure at a desired reduced pressure and provide an impermeable
`
`or semi-permeable elastomeric seal, as suggested in (0022 and 0062 of Olson and asit
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/618,682
`Art Unit: 3781
`
`Page 11
`
`has been held that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its
`
`intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (See MPEP § 2144.07).
`
`Thus, the moisture barrier of Locke in view of Olson comprises an adhesivefilm.
`
`Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Lockein view of Olson, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of
`
`Luckemeyer (US PGPUB 20160015872 — of record).
`
`Regarding claim 11, Locke in view of Olson disclosesall the limitations as
`
`discussed abovefor claim 1.
`
`Locke/Olson does not disclose wherein the moisture barrier comprises a coating.
`
`In the same field of endeavor, negative pressure therapy system, Luckemeyer
`
`discloses a dressing 102 comprising a cover 108 andatissue interface 110 (0025 and
`
`Fig. 1). Luckemeyer further discloses that the cover 108 is coated with an acrylic adhesive
`
`for the benefits of improving seal and reducing leaks (40050).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
`
`filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the moisture barrier of Locke in
`
`view of Olson by incorporating a coating, similar to that disclosed by Luckemeyer,in
`
`order to improve seal and reduce leaks, as suggested in §0050 of Luckemeyer.
`
`Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Lockein view of Olson, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of
`
`Hartwell (US PGPUB 20160166744).
`
`Regarding claim 12, Locke in view of Olson disclosesall the limitations as
`
`discussed abovefor claim 1.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/618,682
`Art Unit: 3781
`
`Page 12
`
`Locke/Olson doesnot disclose the porous foam comprises a porosity between
`
`about 20 pores per inch to about 80 pores per inch.
`
`In an analogous art for being directed to solve the same problem, providing wound
`
`packing material for use in negative pressure wound therapy, Hartwell discloses a wound
`
`packing material including a reticulated polyurethane foam suitable for use in negative
`
`pressure wound therapy (Abstract and 40018). Hartwell further discloses/suggests the
`
`foam used in negative pressure wound therapy has porosities in the range 30-60 ppi
`
`((0018: the taught porosity overlaps with the claimed range porosity) for the benefits of
`
`allowing transmission of the negative pressure to the wound bed and providing sufficient
`
`mechanical strength to prevent the negative pressure from substantially collapsing the
`
`structure of the foam (40018).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
`
`filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the porous foam of Lockein view of
`
`Olson by providing/making the porosities between 30-60 ppi, similar to that disclosed by
`
`Hartwell, in order to allow transmission of the negative pressure to the wound bed and
`
`provide sufficient mechanical strength to prevent the negative pressure from
`
`substantially collapsing the structure of the foam, as suggested in 40018 of Hartwell and
`
`as it has been held that scaling up or down of an element which merely requires a
`
`changein size is generally considered as being within the ordinary skill in the art (See
`
`MPEP § 2144.04(IV) (A). In re Rinehart, 531 F.2d 1048, 189 USPQ 143 (CCPA 1976)).
`
`In addition, it has been held that a prima facie case of obviousness exists when the
`
`claimed ranges overlap with ranges disclosed by the prior art. See MPEP § 2144.05(I).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/618,682
`Art Unit: 3781
`
`Page 13
`
`Conclusion
`
`THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time
`
`policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
`
`A shortenedstatutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE
`
`
`
`MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the eventafirst reply is filed within
`
`TWO MONTHS ofthe mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not
`
`mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortenedstatutory period, then the
`
`shortenedstatutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any
`
`extension fee 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 ofthis final action.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to NHU Q TRAN whosetelephone number is (571)272-
`
`2032. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 8:00-5:00 (PST).
`
`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:/Awww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's
`
`supervisor, SARAH AL-HASHIMI can be reached on (571) 272-7159. The fax phone
`
`number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571 -
`
`273-8300.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/618,682
`Art Unit: 3781
`
`Page 14
`
`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 https://ppair-
`
`my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on accessto 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.
`
`/NHU Q. TRAN/
`Examiner, Art Unit 3781
`
`/SARAH AL HASHIMI/
`Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3781
`
`