`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMIVHSSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria1 Virginia 22313-1450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`
`
`
`
`15/473,390
`
`03/29/2017
`
`Tomas Schwarz
`
`066964— 8046.US00
`
`4295
`
`PERKINS COIE LLP - LOS General
`POST OFFICE BOX 1247
`SEATTLE, WA 98111-1247
`
`MATTHEWS, CHRISTINE HOPKINS
`
`ART UNIT
`
`3735
`
`PAPER NUIVIBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`09/27/2017
`
`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):
`
`patentprocurement @perkinscoie.c0m
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Application No.
`
`Applicant(s)
`
`
`
`Applicant-Initiated Interwew Summary
`
`15/473,390
`SCHWARZ ET AL.
`
`Examiner
`Art Unit
`NA (First Inventor
`Page
`to File) Status
`Yes
`
`CHRISTINE H.
`MATTHEWS
`
`3735
`
`1 of 1
`
`All participants (applicant, applicant’s representative, PTO personnel):
`
`1.
`
`CHRISTINE H. MATTHEWS (Primary Examiner);
`Telephonic
`
`2.
`
`Kenneth Ohriner (Attorney of Record); Telephonic
`
`Date of Interview: 21 September 2017
`
`Claim(s) discussed: 41, 47 and new claims
`
`Identification of prior art discussed: Sokolowski and Marchitto
`
`Amendment Proposed: Applicant proposed new claims in order to overcome the current rejections under 35 USC 102.
`
`Issues Discussed:
`
`Proposed Amendments:
`Applicant proposed new claims along with discussion of incorporation of currently pending claims 41 and 47. The examiner noted that as
`written, neither claim appeared to be substantial in light of the presently applied references, however further limiting a structure that is applying
`the thermal treatment or the RF waves could be helpful. Applicant also noted that claim 80 was allowed in related cases, however no such
`determination could be presently made.
`
`Attachment(s): Proposed Amendments
`/CHR|ST|NE H MATTHEWS/
`
`Applicant recordation instructions: The formal written reply to the last Office action must include the substance of the interview. (See MPEP
`section 713.04). If a reply to the last Office action has already been filed, applicant is given a non-extendable time limit of the longer of one month or
`thirty days from this interview date, or the mailing date of this interview summary form, whichever is later, to file a statement of the substance of the
`interview.
`
`Examiner recordation instructions: Examiners must summarize the substance of any interview of record. A complete and proper recordation of the
`substance of an interview should include the items listed in MPEP 713.04 for complete and proper recordation including the identification of the
`general thrust of each argument or issue discussed, a general indication of any other pertinent matters discussed regarding patentability and the
`general results or outcome of the interview, to include an indication as to whether or not agreement was reached on the issues raised.
`
`Applicant is reminded that a complete written statement as to the substance of the interview must be made of record in the
`application file. It is the applicant’s responsibility to provide the written statement, unless the interview was initiated by the
`Examiner and the Examiner has indicated that a written summary will be provided. See MPEP 713.04
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3735
`
`Please further see:
`
`MPEP 713.04
`Title 37 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 1.133 Interviews, paragraph (b)
`37 CFR § 1.2 Business to be transacted in writing
`
`
`
`
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`PTOL-413/413b (Rev. 01/01/2015)
`
`Interview Summary
`
`Paper No. 20170921
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`