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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 3/30/2026 has been entered.
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, 4, 5, 7, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebiko (JP2017-196978, with US 20210221181 as English equivalent) in view of Hashimoto (US 2006/0169377) and Burche (US 4353402).
Regarding claim 1, Ebiko discloses a pneumatic tire mounted and inflated on a rim ([0091]). While Ebiko does not expressly disclose a pair of sidewall portions and a pair of bead portions, pneumatic tires inherently have sidewall portions and bead portions to enable mounting on a rim and inflation with air. Ebiko discloses a tread portion having a pair of inner main grooves (3A), a pair of outer main grooves (3B), a center land portion (4A), intermediate land portions (4B), and shoulder land portions (4C). See Fig. 1 below. Each of the center land portion intermediate land portions, and shoulder land portions comprise a plurality of sipes disposed at intervals in the tire circumferential direction (see sipes 6, 8, 11 in Fig. 1). Ebiko states that the sipes may have a three-dimensional shape ([0061, 0077, 0087). Each of the intermediate land portions comprise a plurality of lug grooves comprising a bent portion and disposed at intervals (see lug grooves 7 having bending point 7c in Fig. 1, 2). One end of the lug grooves opens to the outer main groove (one end 7a) and an other end portion (7b) terminates within the land portion (see Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
380
415
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Ebiko discloses the sipes may be two-dimensional with zigzag shape along their length direction or may be a three-dimensional sipe bent more than the zigzag shape ([0077]). The zigzag shape along the extension of the sipe reads on the sipe having inclined surfaces that are mutually different in inclination direction with respect to the sipe length direction observed on a plane orthogonal to the sipe depth direction. While Ebiko expressly discloses the sipe may be three-dimensional that is bent more in the radial direction ([0077]), Ebiko does not provide explicit detail on this shape and whether it necessarily has inclined surfaces that are mutually different with respect to the depth direction. Examiner notes that three-dimensional sipes having zigzag shape in the length and in the depth directions are conventional. For example, Hashimoto discloses a three-dimensional sipe having zigzag shape along the length and depth directions that increases block stiffness during braking, driving, and cornering, thereby enhancing tire performance ([0009-0010], see Figs. 1-9). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the Ebiko's sipes a three-dimensional with different inclined surfaces in the length and depth directions since (1) Ebiko teaches that the sipe can be three-dimensional ([0077]) and (2) Hashimoto discloses a three-dimensional sipe having zigzag shape in the length and depth direction increases block stiffness during braking, driving, and cornering, thereby enhancing tire performance ([0009-0010], see Figs. 1-9).
Ebiko discloses the main grooves 3 as having a groove width of 5 to 20mm ([0046]) but does not disclose the ratios of inner and outer main groove width to the width of the center land portion and the width of the intermediate land portions.
In the same field of endeavor of tire treads, Burche discloses configuring a siped tread such that the groove width is wide enough to provide for free water passage to prevent hydroplaning but the ribs (land portions) must be wide enough to allow the tread elements to be adequately supported (i.e., rigidity) from angular abrasion during use (col 3, line 66-col 4, line 2). Burche states that the ratio of total rib width to total groove width is from 1.5/1 to 8/1 and is a function of the shape of the tire construction, tread design, and the depth of the slits (col 4, lines 2-5; this ratio equates to a total groove width that is 13 to 67% of rib width). Burche discloses as a general rule for ratio of rib width to groove width, passenger car tires have ratios of 1.5/1 to 4/1 to provide sufficient traction and to prevent tearing of the siped elements (i.e., groove/rib width ratio of 25% to 67%; col 4, lines 5-15). Thus, Burche expressly recognizes groove width and the ratio of groove width to land portion width as result effective variables for controlling drainage, traction, and durability properties of the tread. Further, Burche envisions these variables as being adapted based on the desired tread design (ratio is function of tread design, col 4, line 4). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the groove widths of the inner and outer main grooves of Ebiko as 28 to 33% of the width of the center land portion and intermediate land portions since (1) Burche discloses configuring passenger cars with groove to rib width ratios of 25% to 67% (col 4, lines 1-15) and (2) Burche discloses groove width and the ratio of groove to land portion widths as result effective variables and it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. One would have been motivated to optimize the drainage, traction, and durability properties of the tread based on the desired tread design (col 4, lines 3, line 66-col 4, line 15).
Ebiko's plurality of lug grooves comprising the bent portion comprise a first groove portion extending from the one end portion to a bend point (see groove portion extending from 7a to 7c, Fig. 2) and a second groove portion extending from the bend point to the other end portion (see groove portion extending from 7c to 7b, Fig. 2).
As to the intersection angle formed by the first groove portion in the intermediate land portion and one of the plurality of sipes having the three dimensional shape formed in the intermediate land portions, Ebiko discloses the first groove portion has an inclination angle θ of 20° to 35° ([0102-0105]). Ebiko discloses that one end of the sipes has an inclination angle α of 45° to 70° and the other end of the sipe has an angle β of α±10° ([0109-0113])--which equates to a range of 35° to 80° given the 45° to 70° range of α. As can be seen in Fig. 2, one of the plurality of sipes having the three dimensional shape formed in the intermediate land portion has an angle β. The angle between θ and β ranges from 65° to 125° (intersection angle = 180 - (θ + β)). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the intersection angle β1 as 45° to 70° as claimed since Ebiko discloses the first portion having inclination angle of 20° to 35° ([0102-0105]), one of the sipe ends having inclination α of 45° to 70° and the other end of the sipe having inclination angle β of α±10° ([0109-0113]), said ranges yielding an intersection angle range for the β-angled sipe of 65° to 125°, which overlaps the claimed range. One would have been motivated to adjust the groove and sipe inclinations to provide water drainage performance and steering stability ([0102-0113]).
Regarding claim 4, Ebiko's bent portion have acute angles (Fig. 2) and the sipes communicate with the lug grooves having the bent portion.
Regarding claim 5, Ebiko discloses a plurality of lug grooves (see lug grooves 5) and a plurality of sipes (see sipes 6) formed in the center land portion (4A), these sipes and lug grooves connecting with each other and opening to either inner main groove of the pair of inner main grooves (see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 7, Ebiko discloses the shoulder land portions comprise a plurality of lug grooves extending in the tire width direction (see lug grooves 9) and not in communication with the outer main grooves. The shoulder land portions further comprise a plurality of longitudinal grooves (see grooves 10) that connect the shoulder lug grooves (see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 13, as can be seen in Fig. 2, one of the plurality of sipes having the three dimensional shape formed in the intermediate land portion has an angle β. As discussed in claim 1, the angle between θ and β ranges from 65° to 125° (intersection angle = 180 - (θ + β)). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the intersection angle β1 as 45° to 65° as claimed since Ebiko discloses the first portion having inclination angle of 20° to 35° ([0102-0105]), one of the sipe ends having inclination α of 45° to 70° and the other end of the sipe having inclination angle β of α±10° ([0109-0113]), said ranges yielding an intersection angle range for the β-angled sipe of 65° to 125°, which overlaps the claimed range. One would have been motivated to adjust the groove and sipe inclinations to provide water drainage performance and steering stability ([0102-0113]).
Claims 2, 3, 8, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebiko (JP2017-196978, with US 20210221181 as English equivalent) in view of Hashimoto (US 2006/0169377) and Burche (US 4353402) as applied to the claims above, and further in view of Sugitani (JPH06-183214, with English machine translation).
Regarding claims 2, 3, and 8, Ebiko does not disclose the width W1 of the inner main grooves as smaller than the width of the outer main groove W2; however, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the groove widths as claimed since Sugitani, similarly directed towards a tire tread, teaches configuring the groove width (b) of the inner grooves as 0.60 to 0.90 times the width (c) of the outer grooves to improve noise performance without deteriorating the steering stability on dry and wet road surfaces ([0006]), said range overlapping the range in claims 3 and 8.
Regarding claim 9, Ebiko's bent portion have acute angles (Fig. 2) and the sipes communicate with the lug grooves having the bent portion.
Regarding claim 10, Ebiko discloses a plurality of lug grooves (see lug grooves 5) and a plurality of sipes (see sipes 6) formed in the center land portion (4A), these sipes and lug grooves connecting with each other and opening to either inner main groove of the pair of inner main grooves (see Fig. 1).
Claims 6, 11, 12, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebiko (JP2017-196978, with US 20210221181 as English equivalent) in view of Hashimoto (US 2006/0169377), Burche (US 4353402), and Sugitani (JPH06-183214, with English machine translation) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nukushina (US 20160207359).
Regarding claims 6 and 11, Ebiko's plurality of lug grooves comprising the bent portion comprise a first groove portion extending from the one end portion to a bend point (see groove portion extending from 7a to 7c, Fig. 2) and a second groove portion extending from the bend point to the other end portion (sfee groove portion extending from 7c to 7b, Fig. 2).
Ebiko does not expressly disclose the length a of the first groove portion relative to the length b of the second groove portion. In the same field of endeavor of tire treads with bent lug grooves, Nukushina discloses configuring the distance L1 from the inner edge of the land portion to the apex (bent portion) as 5 to 40% ([0012])--thus, the length 'a' of the first portion would be 60 to 95% of the land width (a=100%-L1). Nukushina further teaches the distance L2 from the inner edge of the land portion to the closed end portion of the groove is 30 to 70% of the land portion width ([0012]). The length 'b' of the second portion would be the L2-L1, which given the ranges for L1 and L2 yield a length of 0% to 65% of the land portion width and length b/a ratio of >0% to 68% ((L2-L1)/(1-L1);length cannot be negative and upper limit = (70-5)/(100-5)).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the lengths as claimed since (1) Ebiko clearly illustrates the length of the second portion as a small portion of the length of the first portion (see Fig. 2); and (2) Nukushina, similarly directed towards a tread having bent lug grooves, teaches configuring the bent portion and closed portion of the bent groove at distances from the inner edge of the land portion, said distances yielding a range of distances that include the claimed range relationship (as detailed above). One would have been motivated to configure the lengths to suppress uneven wear (Nukushina [0012]).
Regarding claim 12, Ebiko discloses the shoulder land portions comprise a plurality of lug grooves extending in the tire width direction (see lug grooves 9) and not in communication with the outer main grooves. The shoulder land portions further comprise a plurality of longitudinal grooves (see grooves 10) that connect the shoulder lug grooves (see Fig. 1).
Regarding claims 14 and 15 , Ebiko does not disclose a first/second portion bend angle of 25 to 90 degrees. In the same field of endeavor of tire treads, Nukushina discloses a tread having lug grooves with bent portions wherein the angle between the first and second portions of the bent lug groove is 5 to 60 degrees ([0035]). Nukushina discloses that bend angle provides uneven wear resistance and rigidity ([0035]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the bend angel as 25 to 90 degrees or 30 to 90 degrees since Nukushina teaches bend angles of 5 to 60 degrees provide uneven wear resistance and rigidity ([0035]).
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebiko (JP2017-196978, with US 20210221181 as English equivalent) in view of Hashimoto (US 2006/0169377) and Burche (US 4353402) as applied to the claims above, and further in view of Suzuki (US 20170190222).
Regarding claims 14 and 15 , Ebiko does not disclose a first/second portion bend angle of 25 to 90 degrees. In the same field of endeavor of tire treads, Suzuki discloses a tread having lug grooves with bent portions wherein the angle between the first and second portions of the bent lug groove is 0 to 90 degrees ([0092]). Suzuki discloses that bend angles less than 90 degrees provide sufficient edge effects such that snow performance can be improved ([0076]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the bend angel as 25 to 90 degrees or 30 to 90 degrees since Suzuki teaches bend angles of 0 to 90 degrees provide sufficient edge effect such that snow performance can be improved ([0076]).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebiko (JP2017-196978, with US 20210221181 as English equivalent) in view of Hashimoto (US 2006/0169377) and Burche (US 4353402) as applied to the claims above, and further in view of Nemoto (US 20150136288).
Regarding claim 16, Ebiko does not disclose the width W1 of the inner main grooves as smaller than the width of the outer main groove W2; however, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the groove widths as claimed since Nemoto, similarly directed towards a tire tread, teaches configuring the groove width relationship between outer circumferential grooves and inner circumferential grooves as 1.05 to 1.15 (outer width/inner width is inverse of claimed inner/outer ratio, and 1.05-1.15 equates to 0.87 to 0.95) to increase the proportion of rib-like land portions on the inner side in the tire width direction without reducing wet performance and to improve steering stability performance ([0015-0016]), said 0.87 to 0.95 range overlapping the claimed range.
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebiko (JP2017-196978, with US 20210221181 as English equivalent) in view of Hashimoto (US 2006/0169377), Burche (US 4353402), and one of Suzuki (US 20170190222) or Nukushina (US 20160207359).
Regarding claims 17 and 18, Ebiko discloses a pneumatic tire mounted and inflated on a rim ([0091]). While Ebiko does not expressly disclose a pair of sidewall portions and a pair of bead portions, pneumatic tires inherently have sidewall portions and bead portions to enable mounting on a rim and inflation with air. Ebiko discloses a tread portion having a pair of inner main grooves (3A), a pair of outer main grooves (3B), a center land portion (4A), intermediate land portions (4B), and shoulder land portions (4C). See Fig. 1 below. Each of the center land portion intermediate land portions, and shoulder land portions comprise a plurality of sipes disposed at intervals in the tire circumferential direction (see sipes 6, 8, 11 in Fig. 1). Ebiko states that the sipes may have a three-dimensional shape ([0061, 0077, 0087). Each of the intermediate land portions comprise a plurality of lug grooves comprising a bent portion and disposed at intervals (see lug grooves 7 having bending point 7c in Fig. 1, 2). One end of the lug grooves opens to the outer main groove (one end 7a) and an other end portion (7b) terminates within the land portion (see Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
380
415
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Ebiko discloses the sipes may be two-dimensional with zigzag shape along their length direction or may be a three-dimensional sipe bent more than the zigzag shape ([0077]). The zigzag shape along the extension of the sipe reads on the sipe having inclined surfaces that are mutually different in inclination direction with respect to the sipe length direction observed on a plane orthogonal to the sipe depth direction. While Ebiko expressly discloses the sipe may be three-dimensional that is bent more in the radial direction ([0077]), Ebiko does not provide explicit detail on this shape and whether it necessarily has inclined surfaces that are mutually different with respect to the depth direction. Examiner notes that three-dimensional sipes having zigzag shape in the length and in the depth directions are conventional. For example, Hashimoto discloses a three-dimensional sipe having zigzag shape along the length and depth directions that increases block stiffness during braking, driving, and cornering, thereby enhancing tire performance ([0009-0010], see Figs. 1-9). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the Ebiko's sipes a three-dimensional with different inclined surfaces in the length and depth directions since (1) Ebiko teaches that the sipe can be three-dimensional ([0077]) and (2) Hashimoto discloses a three-dimensional sipe having zigzag shape in the length and depth direction increases block stiffness during braking, driving, and cornering, thereby enhancing tire performance ([0009-0010], see Figs. 1-9).
Ebiko discloses the main grooves 3 as having a groove width of 5 to 20mm ([0046]) but does not disclose the ratios of inner and outer main groove width to the width of the center land portion and the width of the intermediate land portions.
In the same field of endeavor of tire treads, Burche discloses configuring a siped tread such that the groove width is wide enough to provide for free water passage to prevent hydroplaning but the ribs (land portions) must be wide enough to allow the tread elements to be adequately supported (i.e., rigidity) from angular abrasion during use (col 3, line 66-col 4, line 2). Burche states that the ratio of total rib width to total groove width is from 1.5/1 to 8/1 and is a function of the shape of the tire construction, tread design, and the depth of the slits (col 4, lines 2-5; this ratio equates to a total groove width that is 13 to 67% of rib width). Burche discloses as a general rule for ratio of rib width to groove width, passenger car tires have ratios of 1.5/1 to 4/1 to provide sufficient traction and to prevent tearing of the siped elements (i.e., groove/rib width ratio of 25% to 67%; col 4, lines 5-15). Thus, Burche expressly recognizes groove width and the ratio of groove width to land portion width as result effective variables for controlling drainage, traction, and durability properties of the tread. Further, Burche envisions these variables as being adapted based on the desired tread design (ratio is function of tread design, col 4, line 4). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the groove widths of the inner and outer main grooves of Ebiko as 28 to 33% of the width of the center land portion and intermediate land portions since (1) Burche discloses configuring passenger cars with groove to rib width ratios of 25% to 67% (col 4, lines 1-15) and (2) Burche discloses groove width and the ratio of groove to land portion widths as result effective variables and it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. One would have been motivated to optimize the drainage, traction, and durability properties of the tread based on the desired tread design (col 4, lines 3, line 66-col 4, line 15).
Ebiko's plurality of lug grooves comprising the bent portion comprise a first groove portion extending from the one end portion to a bend point (see groove portion extending from 7a to 7c, Fig. 2) and a second groove portion extending from the bend point to the other end portion (see groove portion extending from 7c to 7b, Fig. 2).
Ebiko does not disclose a first/second portion bend angle of 25 to 90 degrees. In the same field of endeavor of tire treads, Suzuki discloses a tread having lug grooves with bent portions wherein the angle between the first and second portions of the bent lug groove is 0 to 90 degrees ([0092]). Suzuki discloses that bend angles less than 90 degrees provide sufficient edge effects such that snow performance can be improved ([0076]). Alternatively, Nukushina discloses a tread having lug grooves with bent portions wherein the angle between the first and second portions of the bent lug groove is 5 to 60 degrees ([0035]). Nukushina discloses that bend angle provides uneven wear resistance and rigidity ([0035]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the bend angel as 25 to 90 degrees or 30 to 90 degrees in view of (1) Suzuki teaches bend angles of 0 to 90 degrees provide sufficient edge effect such that snow performance can be improved ([0076]) or (2) Nukushina teaches bend angles of 5 to 60 degrees provide uneven wear resistance and rigidity ([0035]).
Regarding claim 19, as to the intersection angle formed by the first groove portion in the intermediate land portion and one of the plurality of sipes having the three dimensional shape formed in the intermediate land portions, Ebiko discloses the first groove portion has an inclination angle θ of 20° to 35° ([0102-0105]). Ebiko discloses that one end of the sipes has an inclination angle α of 45° to 70° and the other end of the sipe has an angle β of α±10° ([0109-0113])--which equates to a range of 35° to 80° given the 45° to 70° range of α. As can be seen in Fig. 2, one of the plurality of sipes having the three dimensional shape formed in the intermediate land portion has an angle β. The angle between θ and β ranges from 65° to 125° (intersection angle = 180 - (θ + β)). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the intersection angle β1 as 45° to 65° as claimed since Ebiko discloses the first portion having inclination angle of 20° to 35° ([0102-0105]), one of the sipe ends having inclination α of 45° to 70° and the other end of the sipe having inclination angle β of α±10° ([0109-0113]), said ranges yielding an intersection angle range for the β-angled sipe of 65° to 125°, which overlaps the claimed range. One would have been motivated to adjust the groove and sipe inclinations to provide water drainage performance and steering stability ([0102-0113]).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebiko (JP2017-196978, with US 20210221181 as English equivalent) in view of Hashimoto (US 2006/0169377), Burche (US 4353402), and one of Suzuki (US 20170190222) or Nukushina (US 20160207359) as applied to the claims above, and further in view of Nemoto (US 20150136288).
Regarding claim 20, Ebiko does not disclose the width W1 of the inner main grooves as smaller than the width of the outer main groove W2; however, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to have configured the groove widths as claimed since Nemoto, similarly directed towards a tire tread, teaches configuring the groove width relationship between outer circumferential grooves and inner circumferential grooves as 1.05 to 1.15 (outer width/inner width is inverse of claimed inner/outer ratio, and 1.05-1.15 equates to 0.87 to 0.95) to increase the proportion of rib-like land portions on the inner side in the tire width direction without reducing wet performance and to improve steering stability performance ([0015-0016]), said 0.87 to 0.95 range overlapping the claimed range.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the angles θ and α disclosed by Ebiko yield an intersection angle corresponding to claimed β1 that is in the range of 75 to 115 degrees. The amended claim recites an angle range of 45 to 70 degrees which excludes the disclosure of Ebiko by a significant margin.
Examiner disagrees. The claim recites an intersection angle β1 formed by the first groove portion and one of the plurality of sipes. Ebiko discloses one of the 3D sipes as having angle β (see Fig. 2) and that angle β has a range of α±10° ([0102-0105]). This range yields a larger intersection angle difference than θ and α. As discussed above, the intersection angle with the β-angled sipe ranges from 65° to 125°, which overlaps the claimed range. One would have been motivated to adjust the groove and sipe inclinations to provide water drainage performance and steering stability ([0102-0113]).
PNG
media_image2.png
360
254
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 6 and 11, Applicant argues that Nukushina does not disclose the narrowed a and b relationship range.
Examiner disagrees. The prior Office action cited a working example whereas Nukushina's disclosure recites broader range of values that include the claimed ranges.
Regarding applicant's arguments concerning the new claims, new grounds of rejection have been made.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT C DYE whose telephone number is (571)270-7059. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm EST.
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, Anna Momper can be reached at (571) 270-5788. 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.
/ROBERT C DYE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights