www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`
`15/836,192
`
`12/08/2017
`
`TOInOhil‘O MAEYAMA
`
`20326.0078USD1
`
`3162
`
`53148
`
`759°
`
`08/29/20”
`
`HAMRE, SCHUMANN, MUELLER & LARSON RC.
`45 South Seventh Street
`Suite 2700
`
`MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-1683
`
`MERLIN'JESSICAM
`
`ART UNIT
`2871
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`08/29/2019
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time 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):
`PTOMail@hsml.eom
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`0/7709 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`15/836,192
`Examiner
`JESSICA M MERLIN
`
`Applicant(s)
`MAEYAMA, Tomohiro
`Art Unit
`AIA (FITF) Status
`2871
`Yes
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 the correspondence address -
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing
`date of this communication.
`|f NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from 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, even if timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on June 5, 2019.
`[:1 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a). This action is FINAL.
`
`2b) C] This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)[:] 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 Expat/7e Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`5)
`Claim(s)
`
`19 and 21—34 is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s) 22 and 30 is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`E] Claim(s) _ is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(s) 19,21,23—29 and 31—34 is/are rejected.
`
`C] Claim(s) _
`
`is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[:1 Claim(s)
`9
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init events/pph/index.'sp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`10):] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11). The drawing(s) filed on December 8, 2017 is/are: a). accepted or b)l:] 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)C] Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)I:] All
`
`b)|:] Some**
`
`c)C] None of the:
`
`1.|:] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`21:] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3D Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in 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) D Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date_
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) C] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) CI Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20190826
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/836,192
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice ofPre-AIA 0r AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the
`
`first inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`2.
`
`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.
`
`Response to Amendment
`
`3.
`
`Receipt is acknowledged of applicant’s amendment filed June 5, 2019. Claims 1—18 and
`
`20 have been cancelled without prejudice. Claims 19 and 21—34 are pending and an action on the
`
`merits is as follows. Claims 22 and 30 were previously withdrawn.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 US C § 103
`
`4.
`
`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.
`
`5.
`
`Claims 19, 21, and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Fujita (US 2008/0013030 A1) in View of Wang et al. (US 2011/0290414 A1) and further in
`
`View of In0 (US 2008/0143949 A1).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/836,192
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 3
`
`In regard to claim 19, Fujita discloses a display device, comprising (see 6. g. Figures 1 -
`
`I 6):
`
`a thin film transistor (TFT) substrate 10b, 1b having first and second major surfaces;
`
`a color filter substrate 10a, la opposed to the first major surface of the TFT substrate,
`
`wherein the TFT substrate 10b, 1b includes an overlap portion which overlaps the color filter
`
`substrate 10a, la 21 and a non—overlap portion which does not overlap the color filter substrate, a
`
`color filter surface of the color filter substrate 10a, la that is opposite a surface facing the first
`
`major surface is disposed a first distance from the first major surface;
`
`a plurality of source drivers 2 disposed on the non—overlap portion of the TFT substrate
`
`10b, 1b, source driver surface of at least one of the plurality of source drivers 2 that is opposite a
`
`surface facing the first major surface is disposed a second distance from the first major surface,
`
`the second distance is less than the first distance, and
`
`a first height adjusting body 7a-n disposed on the non—overlap portion of the TFT
`
`substrate 10b, 1b, a first height adjusting body surface of the first height adjusting body 7a-n that
`
`is opposite a surface facing the first major surface is disposed a third distance from the first
`
`major surface, the third distance is greater than the second distance, wherein the first height
`
`adjusting body 7a-n is disposed between two source drivers from the plurality of source drivers
`
`2.
`
`Fujita fails to disclose
`
`a polarizer disposed on the color filter surface,
`
`a height of the first height adjusting body is greater than a height of the at least one of the
`
`plurality of source drivers, and
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/836,192
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 4
`
`the height of the first height adjusting body is equal to a distance between the polarizer
`
`and the first major surface.
`
`However, Wang et al. discloses (see e.g. Figure 1M):
`
`a height of the first height adjusting body 196 is greater than a height of the at least one
`
`of the plurality of source drivers 182.
`
`Given the teachings of Wang et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in
`
`the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display device of
`
`Fujita with a height of the first height adjusting body is greater than a height of the at least one of
`
`the plurality of source drivers.
`
`Doing so would provide further protection to the driving chips of the display device.
`
`Fujita, in view of Wang et al., fails to disclose
`
`a polarizer disposed on the color filter surface,
`
`the height of the first height adjusting body is equal to a distance between the polarizer
`
`and the first major surface.
`
`However, Ino discloses (see e. g. Figure 3 and paragraph [0064]):
`
`a polarizer 14 disposed on the color filter surface 12,
`
`the height of the first height adjusting body 30 is equal to a distance between the polarizer
`
`14 and the first major surface (i. e. of 11).
`
`Given the teachings of Ino, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art
`
`before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display device of Fujita, in
`
`view of Wang et al., with a polarizer disposed on the color filter surface, the height of the first
`
`height adjusting body is equal to a distance between the polarizer and the first major surface.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/836,192
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 5
`
`Doing so would prevent the chip from being displaced horizontally or vertically (see 6. g.
`
`paragraph [0066] 0fIn0).
`
`In regard to claim 21, Fujita discloses the limitations as applied to claim 19 above, and
`
`(see e.g. Figure 8-10):
`
`a second height adjusting body 7a-n, the second height adjusting body 7a-n being
`
`disposed on the non—overlap portion of the TFT substrate 10b, 1b, wherein
`
`a second height adjusting body surface of the second height adjusting body 7a-n that is
`
`opposite a surface facing the first major surface is disposed the third distance from the first major
`
`surface.
`
`In regard to claim 34, Fujita discloses the limitations as applied to claim 19 above, and
`
`a liquid crystal layer disposed between the TFT substrate and the color filter substrate
`
`(see e.g. paragraph [0001]).
`
`6.
`
`Claims 23 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Fujita (US 2008/0013030 A1) in View of Wang et al. (US 2011/0290414 A1) in View of In0
`
`(US 2008/0143949 A1) and further in View of Takabayashi (US 2009/0067112 A1).
`
`In regard to claim 23, Fujita, in view of Wang et al. and Ino, discloses the limitations as
`
`applied to claim 19 above, but
`
`fails to disclose
`
`a metal frame connected to the TFT substrate; and
`
`an electromagnetic interference shielding tape connected to the color filter surface,
`
`connected to the height adjusting body surface, and connected to the metal frame.
`
`However, Takabayashi discloses
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/836,192
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 6
`
`a metal frame 2 connected to the TFT substrate 11 (Le. at least via other display
`
`components); and
`
`an electromagnetic interference shielding tape 19 connected to the color filter surface 12,
`
`connected to the height adjusting body surface 18, and connected to the metal frame 2.
`
`Given the teachings of Takabayashi, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill
`
`in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display device of
`
`Fujita, in view of Wang et al. and Ino, with a metal frame connected to the TFT substrate; and an
`
`electromagnetic interference shielding tape connected to the color filter surface, connected to the
`
`height adjusting body surface, and connected to the metal frame.
`
`Doing so would prevent unwanted electromagnetic interference to the display device, as
`
`is known in the art.
`
`In regard to claim 32, Fujita, in view of Wang et al. and Ino, discloses the limitations as
`
`applied to claim 19 above, but fails to disclose
`
`wherein the height adjusting body is electrically non—conductive.
`
`However, Takabayashi discloses
`
`wherein the height adjusting body 18 is electrically non—conductive (see e. g. paragraph
`
`[0] I 7]).
`
`Given the teachings of Takabayashi, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill
`
`in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display device of
`
`Fujita, in view of Wang et al. and Ino, with wherein the height adjusting body is electrically non—
`
`conductive.
`
`Doing so would prevent unwanted electrical shorts among display components.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/836,192
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 7
`
`7.
`
`Claims 24 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Fujita (US 2008/0013030 A1) in View of Wang et al. (US 2011/0290414 A1) in View of Ino
`
`(US 2008/0143949 A1) in View of Takabayashi (US 2009/0067112 A1) and further in View of
`
`Ono (6,525,786 B1).
`
`In regard to claim 24, Fujita, in view of Wang et al. and Ino, discloses the limitations as
`
`applied to claim 23 above, but fails to disclose
`
`the color filter substrate includes an overlap portion which overlaps the polarizer and a
`
`non—overlap portion which does not overlap the polarizer, and
`
`the electromagnetic interference shielding tape is connected to the color filter surface in
`
`the non—overlap portion which does not overlap the polarizer.
`
`However, Takabayashi discloses
`
`the color filter substrate 12 includes an overlap portion which overlaps the polarizer 13
`
`and a non—overlap portion which does not overlap the polarizer 13.
`
`Given the teachings of Takabayashi, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill
`
`in the art to modify the display device of Fujita, in view of Wang et al. and Ino, with the color
`
`filter substrate includes an overlap portion which overlaps the polarizer and a non—overlap
`
`portion which does not overlap the polarizer.
`
`Doing so would provide a means for allowing the device to act as an optical switch.
`
`Fujita, in view of Wang et al., Ino, and Takabayashi, fails to disclose
`
`wherein the electromagnetic interference shielding tape is connected to the color filter
`
`surface in the non—overlap portion which does not overlap the polarizer.
`
`However, Ono discloses (see 6. g. Figure 5):
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/836,192
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 8
`
`wherein the electromagnetic interference shielding tape 8 is connected to the color filter
`
`surface in the non—overlap portion which does not overlap the polarizer.
`
`Given the teachings of Ono, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art
`
`before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display device of Fujita, in
`
`view of Wang et al., Ino, and Takabayashi, with wherein the electromagnetic interference
`
`shielding tape is connected to the color filter surface in the non—overlap portion which does not
`
`overlap the polarizer.
`
`Doing so would provide the shielding tape directly applied to the color filter substrate,
`
`which provides shielding from electromagnetic shock.
`
`In regard to claim 25, Fujita, in view of Wang et al., Ino, and Takabayashi, discloses the
`
`limitations as applied to claim 23 above, but fails to disclose
`
`a transparent conductive layer formed on the color filter surface, the electromagnetic
`
`interference shielding tape being directly connected to the transparent conductive layer.
`
`However, Ono discloses (see 6. g. Figure 5):
`
`a transparent conductive layer 4 formed on the substrate 2, the electromagnetic
`
`interference shielding tape 8 being directly connected to the transparent conductive layer 4.
`
`Given the teachings of Ono, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art
`
`before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display device of Fujita, in
`
`view of Wang et al., Ino, and Takabayashi, with a transparent conductive layer formed on the
`
`color filter surface, the electromagnetic interference shielding tape being directly connected to
`
`the transparent conductive layer.
`
`Doing so would provide the shielding tape directly applied to the color filter substrate,
`
`which provides shielding from electromagnetic shock.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/836,192
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 9
`
`8.
`
`Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita (US
`
`2008/0013030 A1) in View of Wang et al. (US 2011/0290414 A1) in View of In0 (US
`
`2008/0143949 A1) and further in View of Hashido (US 2014/0176840 A1).
`
`In regard to claim 26, Fujita, in view of Wang et al. and Ino, discloses the limitations as
`
`applied to claim 19 above, but fails to disclose
`
`a flexible circuit film and a circuit substrate, the flexible circuit film being connected to
`
`the circuit substrate, and the source driver being connected to the flexible circuit film.
`
`However, Hashido discloses (see 6. g. Figure 3):
`
`a flexible circuit film 3 and a circuit substrate 5, the flexible circuit film 3 being
`
`connected to the circuit substrate 5, and the source driver 23d being connected to the flexible
`
`circuit film 3.
`
`Given the teachings of Hashido, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in
`
`the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display device of
`
`Fujita, in view of Wang et al. and Ino, with a flexible circuit film and a circuit substrate, the
`
`flexible circuit film being connected to the circuit substrate, and the source driver being
`
`connected to the flexible circuit film.
`
`Doing so would provide a means for applying signals to the display pixel regions.
`
`9.
`
`Claims 27 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Fujita (US 2008/0013030 A1) in View of Wang et al. (US 2011/0290414 A1) in View of In0
`
`(US 2008/0143949 A1) in View of Hashido (US 2014/0176840 A1) and further in View of Ono
`
`(6,525,786 B1).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/836,192
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 10
`
`In regard to claim 27, Fujita, in view of Wang et a1., Ino, and Hashido, discloses the
`
`limitations as applied to claim 26 above, but fails to disclose
`
`an electromagnetic interference shielding tape that covers at least a portion of the flexible
`
`circuit film and the circuit substrate.
`
`However, Ono discloses (see 6. g. Figure 5):
`
`an electromagnetic interference shielding tape 19 that covers at least a portion of the
`
`flexible circuit film 6 and the circuit substrate 7.
`
`Given the teachings of Ono, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art
`
`before the effective filing date to modify the display device of Fujita, in view of Wang et a1., Ino,
`
`and Hashido, with an electromagnetic interference shielding tape that covers at least a portion of
`
`the flexible circuit film and the circuit substrate.
`
`Doing so would provide a shielding layer to the electrical components on the display
`
`device.
`
`In regard to claim 28, Fujita, in view of Wang et a1., Ino, and Hashido, discloses the
`
`limitations as applied to claim 27, but fails to disclose
`
`the circuit substrate includes a ground terminal, wherein the electromagnetic interference
`
`shielding tape is connected to the ground terminal.
`
`However, Ono discloses (see 6. g. Figure 5):
`
`the circuit substrate 7 includes a ground terminal, wherein the electromagnetic
`
`interference shielding tape 19 is connected to the ground terminal (see 6. g. abstract).
`
`Given the teachings of Ono, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art
`
`before the effective filing date to modify the display device of Fujita, in view of Wang et a1., Ino,
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/836,192
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 11
`
`and Hashido, with the circuit substrate includes a ground terminal, wherein the electromagnetic
`
`interference shielding tape is connected to the ground terminal.
`
`Doing so would provide a means for providing a ground terminal to the EMI shielding
`
`tape.
`
`10.
`
`Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita (US
`
`2008/0013030 A1) in View of Wang et al. (US 2011/0290414 A1) in View of In0 (US
`
`2008/0143949 A1) in View of Hashido (US 2014/0176840 A1) in View of Ono (6,525,786 B1) )
`
`and further in View of Auger (US 5,573,857).
`
`In regard to claim 29, Fujita, in view of Wang et al., Ino, Hashido and Ono, discloses
`
`the limitations as applied to claim 27 above, but fails to disclose
`
`wherein the electromagnetic interference shielding tape includes a metal film interposed
`
`between insulating films, and a portion of the electromagnetic interference shielding tape which
`
`is not covered by the insulating films is connected to the ground terminal.
`
`However, Auger discloses
`
`wherein the electromagnetic interference shielding tape includes a metal film interposed
`
`between insulating films (see 6. g. abstract).
`
`Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize connecting the EMI shielding
`
`tape via an opening in the insulating film, in order to provide a ground connection.
`
`Given the teachings of Auger, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the
`
`art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display device of Fujita,
`
`in view of Wang et al., Ino, Hashido and Ono, with wherein the electromagnetic interference
`
`shielding tape includes a metal film interposed between insulating films, and a portion of the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/836,192
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 12
`
`electromagnetic interference shielding tape which is not covered by the insulating films is
`
`connected to the ground terminal.
`
`Doing so would provide a means for preventing unwanted crosstalk and electromagnetic
`
`interference using known materials.
`
`11.
`
`Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita (US
`
`2008/0013030 A1) in View of Wang et al. (US 2011/0290414 A1) in View of In0 (US
`
`2008/0143949 A1) in View of Okuda (US 2006/0119760 A1).
`
`In regard to claim 31, Fujita, in view of Wang et al. and Ino, discloses the limitations as
`
`applied to claim 19 above, but fails to disclose
`
`wherein the height adjusting body is compressible.
`
`However, Okuda discloses wherein the height adjusting body 20 is compressible (see 6. g.
`
`paragraph [0063]).
`
`Given the teachings of Okuda, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the
`
`art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display device of Fujita,
`
`in view of Wang et al. and Ino, with wherein the height adjusting body is compressible.
`
`Doing so would provide a material that may absorb shock that is applied to the display
`
`device.
`
`12.
`
`Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujita (US
`
`2008/0013030 A1) in View of Wang et al. (US 2011/0290414 A1) in View of Ino (US
`
`2008/0143949 A1) in View of in View of Bae et al. (US 7,251,140 B2).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/836,192
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 13
`
`In regard to claim 33, Fujita, in view of Wang et al. and Ino, discloses the limitations as
`
`applied to claim 19 above, but fails to disclose
`
`wherein the height adjusting body is thermally conductive.
`
`However, Bae et al. discloses
`
`wherein the height adjusting body 36 is thermally conductive (see 6. g. Column 3, lines
`
`5 7-59).
`
`Given the teachings of Bae et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in
`
`the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display device of
`
`Fujita, in view of Wang et al. and Ino, with wherein the height adjusting body is thermally
`
`conductive.
`
`Doing so would provide a means for providing thermal conduction away from electronic
`
`components.
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`13.
`
`Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 19, 21, 23—29, and 31—34 have been
`
`considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used
`
`in the current rejection.
`
`14.
`
`In regard to independent claim 19, applicant’s arguments, on pages 7—8 of the Remarks,
`
`that the previously applied prior art fails to disclose all of the limitations of claim 19, as newly
`
`amended, have been fully considered and are appreciated. However, the newly cited rejection,
`
`necessitated by amendment, discloses all of the limitations of claim 19, as cited above.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/836,192
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 14
`
`Conclusion
`
`15.
`
`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 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 date of this
`
`final action.
`
`16.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to JESSICA M MERLIN whose telephone number is (571)270—
`
`3207. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday—Thursday 7:00AM—5z00PM.
`
`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, Ed Glick can be reached on (571) 272—2490. The fax phone number for the
`
`organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571—273—8300.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/836,192
`Art Unit: 2871
`
`Page 15
`
`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 M. Merlin
`
`August 26, 2019
`
`/JESSICA M MERLIN/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871
`
`