DETAILED ACTION
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on 11/21/25. As directed by the response: none of the claims have been amended, cancelled, or added. Thus, claims 1-4 and 7-19 are presently pending in this application.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 2-4, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Diaz (WO 2016/146646).
With regard to claim 7, Diaz describes a method of heating at least one selected portion of an object (100)(cl. 1), the method including the following steps: projecting, with a device comprising a scanner (3)(FIG. 1B), an energy beam (2) onto a surface of the object (100) so as to produce a primary spot (21) on the surface, and repetitively scanning the beam in two dimensions in accordance with a scanning pattern so as to establish an effective spot on the surface (“scanner 3 including two mirrors or similar for two-dimensional scanning of the laser beam 2 in the horizontal (X-Y) plane.”, pg. 17, ln. 31-32), the effective spot having a two-dimensional energy distribution (“The present invention provides for enhanced flexibility and control of the heating process, due to the way in which the two-dimensional energy distribution of the effective laser spot can be adapted without any need for modifying or replacing the optics involved.”, pg. 16, ln. 23-25; pg. 18, ln. 8-18), displacing the effective spot in relation to the surface of the object to progressively heat the at least one selected portion of the object, wherein displacing the effective spot in relation to the surface of the object comprises displacing the effective spot following a track featuring at least one change of direction (cl. 1; pg. 18, ln. 24 to pg. 19, ln. 4; 100B in FIG. 1D); wherein the method includes maintaining the effective spot aligned with the track by modifying operation of the scanner in correspondence with the at least one change of direction (pg. 18, ln. 19-23). Furthermore, Diaz describes the step of modifying a geometric shape of the effective spot (21) and/or of the scanning pattern in correspondence with said at least one change of direction (see FIG. 1D in which effective spot 21 is turned as claimed as indicated by the arrow within track/segment 100B thereby modifying the scanning pattern in correspondence with at least one change of direction; Diaz at FIG. 1B illustrates an object 100 with a track 100A which is essentially duplicative of that of FIG. 2A of the instant patent application, and Diaz additionally illustrates a laser/effect spot 21 which as illustrated in FIG. 1B and as explicitly detailed within the written description therein: “Figures 1 B and 1 C schematically illustrate how the effective laser spot 21 can be adapted in width so as to carry out heat treatment of two tracks or segments 100A and 100B, respectively, of the workpiece 100, these two tracks or segments having different widths and extending at two substantially different angles with regard to the laser source (the scanner). Figure 1 D schematically illustrates how the effective laser spot can be displaced along a segment 100B of the workpiece having a width that varies along the track, whereby for example the width of the effective laser spot in the direction perpendicular to its displacement along the segment can be dynamically adapted during this displacement.”, pg. 18, ln. 34 to pg. 19, ln. 4; “In some embodiments of the invention, the system can include means 5 for dynamically adapting the size of the primary spot (for example, so as to modify the two- dimensional energy distribution and/or the size of the effective laser spot 21 ) and/or the focus of the laser beam along the optical axis. This makes it possible to control (such as to vary or maintain) the size of the primary laser spot while it is being displaced along the first scanning pattern, and/or while the effective laser spot 21 is being displaced in relation to the surface of the object.”, pg. 19, ln. 19-30.).
Furthermore, Diaz describes wherein the method includes modifying a geometric shape of the effective spot and/or of the scanning pattern in correspondence with said at least one change of direction (“the effective spot can be adapted in accordance to the tri-dimensional shape of the object, for example, to adapt the heating to the curvature, width, etc., of the object in the area being heated, and to the configuration of the portion of the object that is to be heated. The shape of the effective spot and/or the two-dimensional energy distribution can be adapted whenever needed, thereby adapting the process to the specific part of the object that is to be heated at any given moment.”, pg. 7, ln. 5-12), and wherein modifying the geometric shape of the effective spot and/or of the scanning pattern includes modifying the scanning pattern, wherein at least some portions of the scanning pattern are modified as a function of their distance to a center of the change of direction, modifying the geometric shape of the effective spot and/or of the scanning pattern includes modifying the scanning pattern so that all parts of
the scanning pattern are displaced at substantially the same angular velocity along a curved portion of the track in correspondence with the at least one change of direction (“the effective spot can be adapted in accordance to the tri-dimensional shape of the object, for example, to adapt the heating to the curvature, width, etc., of the object in the area being heated, and to the configuration of the portion of the object that is to be heated. The shape of the effective spot and/or the two-dimensional energy distribution can be adapted whenever needed, thereby adapting the process to the specific part of the object that is to be heated at any given moment.”, pg. 7, ln. 5-12; “Due to the flexibility with which the two-dimensional energy distribution within the effective laser spot as well as the shape and dimensions of the effective laser spot can be adapted, it is relatively easy to adapt the two-dimensional energy distribution also to complex surfaces, such as those of a sheet metal workpiece that has been shaped in a press so as to have a pre-determined three-dimensional configuration. For example, figure 1 E illustrates how the effective laser spot can be applied to provide for heat treatment of a track comprising two portions 100A and 100B of a pillar for a vehicle, in which said two portions are arranged at different angles in relation to the laser source and separated by a bend 100C. The shape of the effective laser spot and the two-dimensional energy distribution within the effective laser spot -that is, the energy distribution along and across the effective spot as projected onto the surface of the object- can be adapted to, for example, the width of the area to be heated, the three-dimensional shape of said area to be heated (so as to, for example, take the bend 100C into account), the orientation of different portions of said area in relation to the laser beam, etc.”, pg. 19, ln. 5-18), the scanning pattern is substantially symmetric with respect to a centerline parallel with the track when the scanning pattern is at a straight portion of the track, and wherein the scanning pattern is not symmetric with respect to any centerline in correspondence with the change of direction, or modifying the geometric shape of the effective spot and/or of the scanning pattern includes displacing characteristic points of the scanning pattern at the same linear velocity along a straight portion of the track, and displacing the characteristic points of the scanning pattern at the same angular velocity throughout a curved portion of the track in correspondence with said change of direction, at least one of the characteristic points being displaced at a different linear velocity than at least another one of the characteristic points at said curved portion of the track. It is submitted that the limitations which begin at line 12, pg. 3 and through the end of the claim due to the term “OR” at pg. 4, ln. 8, only one of the recitations (italicized above) included within this portion of the claim are being provided with patentable weight, as detailed above.
With regard to claim 2, Diaz describes the step of maintaining the effective spot aligned with the track is carried out without pivoting the device around any axis for the purpose of aligning the effective spot with the track (“the effective laser spot 21 according to the second scanning pattern can likewise be achieved by the scanner 3, and/or due to displacement of the scanner or associated equipment, for example, along tracks (not shown in FIG. 1A), such as tracks extending in parallel with the X axis and/or the Y axis.”, pg. 18, ln. 8 to pg. 19, ln. 30.
With regard to claim 3, Diaz describes the step of modifying operation of the scanner (3) is carried out so as to turn the effective spot (21) around an axis substantially aligned with the energy beam (2), without turning the device and without turning the object around any axis substantially aligned with the energy beam (see FIG. 1D in which effective spot 21 is turned as claimed as indicated by the arrow within track/segment 100B).
With regard to claim 4, Diaz describes the track extends in a plane, and wherein the step of modifying operation of the scanner is carried out so as to turn the effective spot (21) around an axis substantially perpendicular to the plane, without turning the device and without turning the object around any axis substantially perpendicular to the plane (see FIG. 1D in which effective spot 21 is turned as claimed as indicated by the arrow within track/segment 100B)..
With regard to claim 8, Diaz describes modifying the geometric shape of the effective spot and/or of the scanning pattern includes the following step: modifying the scanning pattern, wherein at least some portions of the scanning pattern are modified as a function of their distance to a center of the change of direction; and/or modifying the scanning pattern so that all parts of the scanning pattern are displaced at substantially the same angular velocity along a curved portion of the track in correspondence with the at least one change of direction (see FIG. 1D in which effective spot 21 is turned as claimed as indicated by the arrow within track/segment 100B); and/or displacing characteristic points of the scanning pattern at the same linear velocity along a straight portion of the track, and displacing the characteristic points of the scanning pattern at the same angular velocity throughout a curved portion of the track in correspondence with said change of direction, at least one of the characteristic points being displaced at a different linear velocity than at least another one of the characteristic points at said curved portion of the track.
With regard to claim 10, Diaz describes, for additive manufacturing, for joining at least two workpieces by welding them together, for laser cladding or for laser hardening (pg. 13, ln. 30 to pg. 14, ln. 8; pg. 18, ln. 19-23).
With regard to claim 11, Diaz describes the effective spot is displaced along the track by relative movement of the device in relation to the object, and/or wherein the scanner is additionally operated to displace the effective spot along the track (pg. 13, ln. 30 to pg. 14, ln. 8; pg. 18, ln. 19-23).
With regard to claim 13, Diaz describes the energy beam is a laser beam and wherein the device is a laser head for projecting the laser beam onto the object (pg. 17, ln. 28-36).
With regard to claim 17, Diaz describes modifying the geometric shape of the effective spot and/or of the scanning pattern includes the following step: modifying the scanning pattern, wherein at least some portions of the scanning pattern are modified as a function of their distance to a center of the change of direction (“the two-dimensional energy distribution can be varied as a function of the respective irradiation site on the object,”, pg. 7, ln. 11-12).
With regard to claim 18, Diaz describes modifying the geometric shape of the effective spot and/or of the scanning pattern includes the following step: modifying the scanning pattern so that all parts of the scanning pattern are displaced at substantially the same angular velocity along a curved portion of the track in correspondence with the at least one change of direction (“The energy distribution along this axis can be set by adjusting, for example, the distance between the lines a-c and the speed with which the laser beam travels along the lines. By adjusting the speed and/or scanning pattern, the energy distribution can be dynamically adapted without turning the laser beam on and off or without substantially modifying the power of the laser beam. For example, if the energy is to be distributed substantially equally throughout the effective laser spot, the laser beam can travel with a higher speed along the intermediate line b than along the first line a and the last line c. For example, the velocity of the primary laser spot along line b can be twice the speed of the primary laser spot along lines a and c.”, pg. 20, ln. 33 to pg. 21, ln. 4).
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.
Claims 9, 12, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Diaz (WO 2016/146646) in view of Bruck (US 20150174699).
With regard to claims 9 and 19, Diaz teaches the invention as claimed; however, Diaz does not teach the scanning pattern is substantially symmetric with respect to a centerline parallel with the track when the scanning pattern is at a straight portion of the track, and wherein the scanning pattern is not symmetric with respect to any centerline in correspondence with the change of direction. However, Bruck teaches the aforementioned limitation: scan lines S1-S8 as illustrated in FIG. 3, 4, and para. [0021]-[0022].
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device in the Diaz reference, to include the scanning pattern is substantially symmetric with respect to a centerline parallel with the track when the scanning pattern is at a straight portion of the track, and wherein the scanning pattern is not symmetric with respect to any centerline in correspondence with the change of direction, as suggested and taught by Bruck, for the purpose of providing a predetermined scanning pattern to achieve a desired scanning pattern (FIG. 3, 4, and para. [0021]-[0022]).
With regard to claim 12, Bruck teaches the two-dimensional energy distribution of the effective spot is dynamically adapted during displacement of the effective spot in relation to the at least one change of direction of the track so that it is different in a radially outer portion of the effective spot than in a radially inner portion of the effective spot (FIG. 3, 4, and para. [0021]-[0022]).
Response to Arguments
The Examiner’s comments presented in response to the Office Action response of 05/22/25 are submitted hereafter as some of the Examiner’s comments presented hereafter are relevant to the instant office action.
With regard to Applicant’s arguments at pgs. 8-11, arguments are presented regarding Diaz’s teachings regarding “how” the effective spot is “turned”; however, it is respectfully submitted that the teachings as detailed herein of Diaz illustrate and teach the claims as presently presented. With regard to the comment that Diaz does not disclose how the effective spot is aligned with the track at the curve (change of direction), the prior art citation clearly teaches and illustrates the foregoing limitation as detailed herein. As repeated herein, Diaz teaches at least with regard to “curves”: “When the effective spot is projected onto a non-planar portion or area, such as a curved portion or area such as a portion or area featuring bends, the term "two-dimensional energy distribution" refers to how the energy is distributed along and across the surface of the object, that is, to the energy distribution along and across the effective spot as projected onto the surface of the object….”; “Thus, the teachings of the present invention can be used to adequately control the heating when the effective spot moves over a curved surface, over a bent portion of the object, or when the effective spot moves from a first portion or region of the object to another portion or region placed at an angle with the first portion or region, etc. This can be very useful in order to, for example, assure a good quality of the heating, when the object being heated is an object that has previously been shaped (for example, hot-formed) in for example a press, so that the surface features a more or less complex shape with curves and/or bends, etc. This is often the case with, for example, sheet metal vehicle components….”
The Examiner’s comments presented in response to Applicant's arguments filed 11/22/24 have been reproduced below as they may be considered relevant to the instant office action. The office action response of 11/22/24 contends at pgs. 9-10 that: “it is respectfully submitted that Diaz does not teach the step of maintaining the effective spot aligned with the track by modifying operation of the scanner in correspondence with the at least one change of direction, as defined in the last lines of claim 1… That is, there seems to be a change in direction in the path along which the effective spot (in figure 1D, illustrated as a rectangle presumably created by repetitively scanning the laser beam along a set of parallel lines, which can be seen within the rectangle) moves….”.” It is initially respectfully submitted that the prior art in FIG. 1B illustrates an object 100 with a track 100A which is essentially duplicative of that of FIG. 2A of the instant patent application. Furthermore, the prior art citation additionally illustrates a laser/effect spot 21 which as illustrated in FIG. 1B and as explicitly detailed within the written description therein: “Figures 1 B and 1 C schematically illustrate how the effective laser spot 21 can be adapted in width so as to carry out heat treatment of two tracks or segments 100A and 100B, respectively, of the workpiece 100, these two tracks or segments having different widths and extending at two substantially different angles with regard to the laser source (the scanner). Figure 1 D schematically illustrates how the effective laser spot can be displaced along a segment 100B of the workpiece having a width that varies along the track, whereby for example the width of the effective laser spot in the direction perpendicular to its displacement along the segment can be dynamically adapted during this displacement.”, pg. 18, ln. 34 to pg. 19, ln. 4; “In some embodiments of the invention, the system can include means 5 for dynamically adapting the size of the primary spot (for example, so as to modify the two- dimensional energy distribution and/or the size of the effective laser spot 21 ) and/or the focus of the laser beam along the optical axis. This makes it possible to control (such as to vary or maintain) the size of the primary laser spot while it is being displaced along the first scanning pattern, and/or while the effective laser spot 21 is being displaced in relation to the surface of the object.”, pg. 19, ln. 19-30.
Additionally, the office action response at pg. 11 contends: “it is respectfully submitted that there is nothing in Diaz that suggests maintaining the effective spot aligned with the track by modifying operation of the scanner in correspondence with the at least one change of direction.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees with the aforementioned contention. Initially, Diaz teaches: “Figures 1 B and 1 C schematically illustrate how the effective laser spot 21 can be adapted in width so as to carry out heat treatment of two tracks or segments 100A and 100B, respectively, of the workpiece 100, these two tracks or segments having different widths and extending at two substantially different angles with regard to the laser source (the scanner). Figure 1 D schematically illustrates how the effective laser spot can be displaced along a segment 100B of the workpiece having a width that varies along the track, whereby for example the width of the effective laser spot in the direction perpendicular to its displacement along the segment can be dynamically adapted during this displacement.”, pg. 18, ln. 34 to pg. 19, ln. 4. Furthermore, Diaz additionally teaches: “Due to the flexibility with which the two-dimensional energy distribution within the effective laser spot as well as the shape and dimensions of the effective laser spot can be adapted, it is relatively easy to adapt the two-dimensional energy distribution also to complex surfaces, such as those of a sheet metal workpiece that has been shaped in a press so as to have a pre-determined three-dimensional configuration. For example, figure 1 E illustrates how the effective laser spot can be applied to provide for heat treatment of a track comprising two portions 100A and 100B of a pillar for a vehicle, in which said two portions are arranged at different angles in relation to the laser source and separated by a bend 100C. The shape of the effective laser spot and the two-dimensional energy distribution within the effective laser spot -that is, the energy distribution along and across the effective spot as projected onto the surface of the object- can be adapted to, for example, the width of the area to be heated, the three-dimensional shape of said area to be heated (so as to, for example, take the bend 100C into account), the orientation of different portions of said area in relation to the laser beam, etc.”, pg. 19, ln. 5-18.
The office action at pgs. 12-15 with regard to claims 2-4, the Applicant contends: “Diaz does not suggest any turning of the effective spot, so as to keep it aligned with the track in correspondence with the change of direction….” The Applicant’s contention is respectfully traversed as FIGS. 1B and 1D movement of the effective spot 21 within at least track 100A, and FIG. 1D explicitly illustrates the effective spot being turned as it enters/exits a bend portion: “Figure 1 D schematically illustrates how the effective laser spot can be displaced along a segment 100B of the workpiece having a width that varies along the track, whereby for example the width of the effective laser spot in the direction perpendicular to its displacement along the segment can be dynamically adapted during this displacement.”, pg. 19, ln. 1-4. With regard to the arguments presented over the scanner of Diaz, it should additionally be stressed that FIG. 2A of the instant patent application illustrates a scanner 2 which is essentially duplicative of the scanner 3 of Diaz. More specifically, FIG. 2A of the instant patent application illustrates scanner 2 as comprising two mirrors 21/22, and FIG. 1B of Diaz similarly illustrates a scanner 3 which comprises two mirrors. For the Applicant’s convenience both of the aforementioned figures are reproduced hereafter.
PNG
media_image1.png
606
490
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
691
655
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It is additionally respectfully submitted that with respect to the method step claimed, to the extent that the prior art apparatus meets the structural limitations of the apparatus as claimed, it will obviously perform the method steps as claimed. Furthermore, it has been held that where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977); MPEP 2112.01(I)".
At pg. 15 of Applicant’s office action response it is contended: “it is respectfully submitted that figure 1D of Diaz does not show HOW any alignment of the effective spot with the track is to be achieved. This contention is respectfully traversed as FIG. 1D of Diaz (which essentially mirrors that of FIG. 2A of the instant patent application) illustrates a scanner 3 in which laser equipment 1 produces a laser beam 2 and the scanner 3 includes two mirrors for two-dimensional scanning of the laser beam 2 in the horizontal (X-Y) plane.
At pgs. 15-17 of Applicant’s office action response with regard to claims 7, 8, 10, 11 and 13, it is respectfully submitted that the contentions presented are duplicative of prior contentions addressed herein.
At pgs. 18-20 of Applicant’s office action response with regard to the obviousness rejection over claims 9 and 12, the Examiner maintains their position over the secondary prior art citation Bruck as the citation is cited for its teachings related to a predetermined scanning pattern. For the Applicant’s convenience, FIGS. 3 and 4 of Bruck are reproduced hereafter to illustrate the teaching of the scanning pattern is substantially symmetric with respect to a centerline parallel with the track when the scanning pattern is at a straight portion of the track, and wherein the scanning pattern is not symmetric with respect to any centerline in correspondence with the change of direction.
PNG
media_image3.png
382
500
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Notwithstanding the foregoing, it is further submitted that such an adaptation regarding a specific scanning pattern would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention was made as optimization through routine experimentation since it has been held by the courts that a change in the shape or configuration, without any criticality in operation is nothing more than one of numerous configurations that one of ordinary skill in the art would find obvious. Furthermore, Bruck explicitly teaches: “FIG. 3 shows how the pattern of scan lines S1-S8 of FIG. 2 may be wrapped around the curved path 20, and repeated multiple times from the beginning 30 to the end 32 of the path. In other embodiments where the direction of the melt front progresses around a smaller angle, for example around only a 45 degree bend, then the sub-pattern S1-S8 need not be repeated, or may be repeated fewer times. This is simplified for clarity, since the beam circle diameters normally overlap at the scan lines as later shown. Each scan line S1-S8 in this example is aligned with a radius from the center 26 of scan progression path 20. In non-circular curved paths, the scan lines may be aligned with lines normal to the inner curved side 22 and/or the outer curved side 24. Perfect alignment of any or all of the scan lines along such radii or normals of the curve is not essential. Some of the scan lines may be aligned to within less than 20 degrees of such a radius or normal line, but especially less than 10 or 5 degrees thereof. Transverse alignment maintains a wet melt pool across the width of the curved path 20 as the scans progress. FIG. 4 shows the pattern of scan lines S1-S8 of FIG. 3 with an overlap in scan width (beam spot circle diameter; e.g. focus) at the radially outer ends of the scans. The overlap may be ⅔ in scan width or at least 1/10 in scan width. The overlap of adjacent scans increases toward the inner band B1 as the radial or normal lines of scan alignment converge. FIG. 5 shows repetition of the pattern of scan lines S1-S8 of FIG. 4 around the curved path 20, which maintains a consistent transverse melt front 55….”, para. [0021]-[0022].
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH W ISKRA whose telephone number is (313) 446-4866. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 09:00-17:00 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, IBRAHIME ABRAHAM can be reached on 571-270-5569. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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.
/JOSEPH W ISKRA/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761