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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 11/26/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are pending in the application.
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 person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(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 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Langer (7213724).
Regarding claim 14, Langer (Figures 1-6) teaches a method for playing a game or engaging in agility training comprising: disposing a plurality of balls (Fig. 2, Part No. 22) in a ball housing (14) (Col. 2, Lines 6-11); adjusting a vertical position of an angled shelf (Fig. 2-3, Part No. 16) relative to the ball housing (Col. 3, Lines 4-9 and Lines 31-42); dispensing the plurality of balls (22) from the ball housing (Col. 2, Lines 6-11); reflecting at least one ball dispensed from the housing in a direction away from the ball housing (Col. 2, Lines 6-11) by the angled shelf (16) (Col. 3, Lines 4-9 and Lines 31-42); and engaging with the at least one reflected ball by a user (Col. 2, Lines 6-14).
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.
Claim 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Langer in view of Parlato (4542904).
Regarding claim 15, Langer (Figures 1-6) teaches reflecting the at least one ball (22) in a direction away from the ball housing comprises dropping the at least one ball from the ball housing and launching the at least one ball by the angled shelf (Fig. 2, Part No. 16) disposed beneath the ball housing (14) (Col. 2, Lines 6-14).
Langer does not teach bouncing the at least one ball off of the angled shelf.
Parlato (Figures 1-4) teaches bouncing the at least one ball (Fig. 2, Part No. 46, 50, 54) off of the angled shelf (40) (Col. 2, Lines 43-60).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Langer with bouncing the at least one ball off of the angled shelf as taught by Parlato as a means of allowing a ball to fall under force onto a shelf before coming to rest (Parlato: Col. 2, Lines 43-60).
Claims 16 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Langer in view of Quercetti (4662846).
Regarding claim 16, Langer (Figures 1-6) teaches dispensing the plurality of balls (22) from the ball housing (14) comprises dispensing the plurality of balls from a chamber defined within the ball housing according to a predetermined sequence (Col. 2, Lines 6-14).
Langer does not teach dispensing the plurality of balls from a plurality of chambers defined within the ball housing.
Quercetti (Figures 1-8) teaches dispensing the plurality of balls (Fig. 1, Part No. E) from a plurality of chambers (39) defined within the ball housing (Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Langer with dispensing the plurality of balls from a plurality of chambers defined within the ball housing as taught by Quercetti as a means of providing a ball housing with columns that are opened and closed by means of a control box to release and retain balls in each column of the ball housing (Quercetti: Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
Regarding claim 17, Langer (Figures 1-6) teaches dispensing the plurality of balls (22) from the ball housing comprises releasing the at least one ball (22) from the ball housing.
Langer does not teach releasing the balls by actuating a mechanical switch disposed within the ball housing.
Quercetti (Figures 1-8) teaches releasing the balls by actuating a mechanical switch (Fig. 1, Part No. 56) disposed within the ball housing (Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Langer with releasing the balls by actuating a mechanical switch disposed within the ball housing as taught by Quercetti as a means of providing a ball housing with tabs that are opened and closed by means of a control box to release and retain balls in a column of the ball housing (Quercetti: Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
Regarding claim 18, Langer (Figures 1-6) teaches dispensing the plurality of balls (22) from the ball housing (14) comprises controlling the operation of a mechanical switch (33) through a control box (62) (Col. 3, Lines 66-67; Col. 4, Lines 1-8) communicated to the ball housing.
Langer does not teach dispensing the plurality of balls from the ball housing comprises controlling the operation of a plurality of mechanical switches through a control box communicated to the ball housing.
Quercetti (Figures 1-8) teaches dispensing the plurality of balls from the ball housing comprises controlling the operation of a plurality of mechanical switches (Fig. 1, Part No. 56) through a control box (55) communicated to the ball housing (Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Langer with controlling the operation of a plurality of mechanical switches through a control box communicated to the ball housing as taught by Quercetti as a means of providing a ball housing with tabs that are opened and closed by means of a control box to release and retain balls in a column of the ball housing (Quercetti: Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
Regarding claim 19, Langer (Figures 1-6) teaches disposing the plurality of balls (22) in the ball housing (14) comprises distributing the plurality of balls in a chamber defined within the ball housing, the chamber comprising at least one surface (33) which comprises an angle relative to a horizontal axis of the ball housing.
Langer does not teach distributing the plurality of balls between a plurality of chambers defined within the ball housing, each of the plurality of chambers comprising at least one surface which comprises an angle relative to a horizontal axis of the ball housing.
Quercetti (Figures 1-8) teaches distributing the plurality of balls (Fig. 1, Part No. E) between a plurality of chambers (39) defined within the ball housing, each of the plurality of chambers (39) comprising at least one surface (56) which comprises an angle relative to a horizontal axis of the ball housing (Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Langer with each of the plurality of chambers comprising at least one surface which comprises an angle relative to a horizontal axis of the ball housing as taught by Quercetti as a means of providing a ball housing with tabs that are opened and closed by means of a control box to release and retain balls in a column of the ball housing (Quercetti: Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
Claims 1-2, 4-7, 9-11, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Langer (7213724) in view of Quercetti (4662846).
Regarding claim 1, Langer (Figures 1-6) teaches an apparatus for providing a game or agility training, the apparatus comprising: a ball housing (14) (Col. 2, Lines 6-11); a plurality of balls (22) disposed within the ball housing (14); an adjustable shelf (Fig. 2, Part No. 16) coupled to the ball housing; and a control (Fig. 2, Part No. 62) coupled to the ball housing, wherein the control comprises means for regulating how the plurality of balls are dispensed from the ball housing (Col. 3, Lines 15-21), and wherein a position of the shelf (16) is vertically adjustable relative to the ball housing (Col. 3, Lines 4-9 and Lines 31-42).
Langer does not teach a control box.
Quercetti (Figures 1-8) teaches a control box (55) coupled to the ball housing, the control box comprises means for regulating how the plurality of balls are dispensed from the ball housing (Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified Langer with the control box comprising means for controlling each of the plurality of mechanical switches as taught by Quercetti as a means of providing a ball housing with tabs that are opened and closed by means of a control box to release and retain balls in a column of the ball housing (Quercetti: Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
Regarding claim 2, the modified Langer (Figures 1-6) teaches the ball housing comprises: at least one chamber defined within the ball housing; an aperture defined in a surface of the ball housing and communicated to a distal end of the at least one chamber (See fig. 2).
The modified Langer does not teach a mechanical switch adjacently disposed to the aperture, the mechanical switch comprising a closed configuration which closes the aperture and an open configuration which opens the aperture, wherein the control box comprises means for alternating the mechanical switch between the closed configuration and the open configuration.
Quercetti (Figures 1-8) teaches a mechanical switch (Fig. 1, Part No. 56) adjacently disposed to the aperture, the mechanical switch comprising a closed configuration which closes the aperture and an open configuration which opens the aperture, wherein the control box comprises means for alternating the mechanical switch between the closed configuration and the open configuration (Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified Langer with a mechanical switch adjacently disposed to the aperture as taught by Quercetti as a means of providing a ball housing with tabs that are opened and closed by means of a control box to release and retain balls in a column of the ball housing (Quercetti: Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
Regarding claim 4, the modified Langer (Figures 1-6) teaches a plurality of balls (22) disposed within the ball housing (14); and an adjustable shelf (Fig. 2, Part No. 16) coupled to the ball housing.
The modified Langer does not teach the control box comprises means for communicating with the mechanical switch.
Quercetti (Figures 1-8) teaches the control box (55) comprises means for communicating with the mechanical switch (Fig. 1, Part No. 56) (Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified Langer with the control box comprises means for communicating with the mechanical switch as taught by Quercetti as a means of providing a ball housing with tabs that are opened and closed by means of a control box to release and retain balls in a column of the ball housing (Quercetti: Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
Regarding claim 5, the modified Langer (Figures 1-6) teaches a plurality of balls (22) disposed within the ball housing (14); and an adjustable shelf (Fig. 2, Part No. 16) coupled to the ball housing.
The modified Langer does not teach the means for alternating the mechanical switch between the closed configuration and the open configuration comprises means for alternating the mechanical switch between the closed configuration and the open configuration according to predetermined sequence.
Quercetti (Figures 1-8) teaches the means (55) for alternating the mechanical switch between the closed configuration and the open configuration comprises means for alternating the mechanical switch between the closed configuration and the open configuration according to predetermined sequence (Fig. 1, Part No. 56) (Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
It is noted that claims are interpreted using a broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI). Under BRI, the prior art of Quercetti is fully capable of performing the limitations of claim 5 as a user can effect opening and closing of the “mechanical switch” according to a sequence using the control box of Quercetti.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified Langer with means for alternating the mechanical switch between the closed configuration and the open configuration as taught by Quercetti as a means of providing a ball housing with tabs that are opened and closed by means of a control box to release and retain balls in a column of the ball housing (Quercetti: Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
Regarding claim 6, the modified Langer (Figures 1-6) teaches a plurality of balls (22) disposed within the ball housing (14); and an adjustable shelf (Fig. 2, Part No. 16) coupled to the ball housing.
The modified Langer does not teach the means for alternating the mechanical switch between the closed configuration and the open configuration comprises means for alternating the mechanical switch between the closed configuration and the open configuration according to random sequence.
Quercetti (Figures 1-8) teaches the means (55) for alternating the mechanical switch between the closed configuration and the open configuration comprises means for alternating the mechanical switch between the closed configuration and the open configuration according to random sequence (Fig. 1, Part No. 56) (Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
It is noted that claims are interpreted using a broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI). Under BRI, the prior art of Quercetti is fully capable of performing the limitations of claim 6 as a user can effect opening and closing of the “mechanical switch” according to a random sequence using the control box of Quercetti.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified Langer with means for alternating the mechanical switch between the closed configuration and the open configuration as taught by Quercetti as a means of providing a ball housing with tabs that are opened and closed by means of a control box to release and retain balls in a column of the ball housing (Quercetti: Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
Regarding claim 7, the modified Langer (Figures 1-6) teaches a plurality of balls (22) disposed within the ball housing (14); and an adjustable shelf (Fig. 2, Part No. 16) coupled to the ball housing.
The modified Langer does not teach the ball housing comprises at least one transparent surface.
Quercetti (Figures 1-8) teaches the ball housing comprises at least one transparent surface (28) (Col. 3, Lines 16-20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified Langer with the ball housing comprises at least one transparent surface as taught by Quercetti as a means of providing a ball housing a transparent cover to allow a user to see inside the ball housing (Quercetti: Col. 3, Lines 16-20).
Regarding claim 9, Langer (Figures 1-6) teaches a system for providing a game or agility training, the system comprising: a ball housing (Fig. 1-2, Part No. 14); an extendable shelf (16) coupled to the ball housing; a chamber defined within the ball housing (See fig. 1-2); a plurality of balls (22) disposed within the chamber (See fig, 2); and wherein a position of the extendable shelf (16) is vertically adjustable relative to the ball housing (14) (Col. 3, Lines 4-9 and Lines 31-42).
Langer does not teach a plurality of chambers defined within the ball housing; a plurality of mechanical switches disposed within the ball housing, wherein the extendable shelf is disposed beneath each of the plurality of mechanical switches.
Quercetti (Figures 1-8) teaches a plurality of chambers (Fig. 1, Part No. 39) (Col. 3, Lines 48-59) defined within the ball housing; a plurality of mechanical switches (Fig. 1, Part No. 56) disposed within the ball housing (Col. 6, Lines 12-21), wherein the shelf (Fig. 1 and 7, Part No. 36) is disposed beneath each of the plurality of mechanical switches (Fig. 1, Part No. 56) (Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Langer with a plurality of mechanical switches disposed within the ball housing as taught by Quercetti as a means of providing a ball housing with tabs that are opened and closed to release and retain balls in a column of the ball housing (Quercetti: Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
Regarding claim 10, the modified Langer (Figures 1-6) teaches the extendable shelf (16) comprises means for rotating the extendable shelf relative to a vertical plane defined by the ball housing (Col. 3, Lines 4-9) (See fig. 2).
Regarding claim 11, the modified Langer (Figures 1-6) teaches a ball housing (Fig. 1-2, Part No. 14), and an extendable shelf (16) coupled to the ball housing (Col. 3, Lines 4-9 and Lines 31-42).
The modified Langer does not teach a control box communicated to each of the plurality of mechanical switches, the control box comprising means for controlling each of the plurality of mechanical switches.
Quercetti (Figures 1-8) teaches a control box (55) communicated to each of the plurality of mechanical switches (56), the control box comprising means for controlling each of the plurality of mechanical switches (Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified Langer with the control box comprising means for controlling each of the plurality of mechanical switches as taught by Quercetti as a means of providing a ball housing with tabs that are opened and closed by means of a control box to release and retain balls in a column of the ball housing (Quercetti: Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
Regarding claim 13, the modified Langer (Figures 1-6) teaches the chamber comprises an aperture (See fig. 1-2) disposed at its distal end and at least one surface (33) disposed adjacent to the aperture (See fig. 1-2) (Col. 3, Lines 4-9 and Lines 31-42).
The modified Langer does not teach each of the plurality of chambers comprises an aperture disposed at its distal end and at least one surface disposed adjacent to the aperture.
Quercetti (Figures 1-8) teaches each of the plurality of chambers (Fig. 1, Part No. 39) (Col. 3, Lines 48-59) comprises an aperture disposed at its distal end and at least one surface (40) disposed adjacent to the aperture (Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified Langer with each of the plurality of chambers comprises an aperture disposed at its distal end as taught by Quercetti as a means of providing a ball housing with openings that are opened and closed to release and retain balls in a column of the ball housing (Quercetti: Col. 6, Lines 12-21).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Langer in view of Quercetti, further in view of Henkel (20110269579).
Regarding claim 3, the modified Langer (Figures 1-6) teaches a plurality of balls (22) disposed within the ball housing (14); and an adjustable shelf (Fig. 2, Part No. 16) coupled to the ball housing.
The modified Langer does not teach the shelf is coupled to the ball bousing by a plurality of telescoping rods, strings, or cords directly beneath a bottom surface of the ball housing.
Henkel (Figures 1-5) teaches the shelf (Fig. 1, Part No. 32) (Para. 0020) is coupled to the ball bousing (60) (Para. 0019) by a plurality of telescoping rods (Fig. 1, Part No. 22, 24, 26, 28) (Para. 0019, 0025) directly beneath a bottom surface of the ball housing (60).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified Langer with the shelf is coupled to the ball bousing by a plurality of telescoping rods directly beneath a bottom surface of the ball housing as taught by Henkel as a means of simple substitution of one known element (a shelf attached to a ball housing as taught by Langer) for another (a shelf attached to a ball housing by telescopic members as taught by Henkel) to obtain predictable results (a shelf attached to a ball housing that aids with sports training) (Henkel: Para. 0025).
Claims 8 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Langer in view of Quercetti, further in view of Krickovic (20110227288).
Regarding claim 8, the modified Langer (Figures 1-6) teaches a plurality of balls (22) disposed within the ball housing (14); and an adjustable shelf (Fig. 2, Part No. 16) coupled to the ball housing.
The modified Langer does not teach the at least one chamber comprises a zigzag configuration defined throughout a height of the ball housing.
Krickovic (Figures 1-7) teaches the at least one chamber (Fig. 1, Part No. 22a) comprises a zigzag configuration defined throughout a height of the ball housing (Para. 0028).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified Langer with the at least one chamber comprises a zigzag configuration defined throughout a height of the ball housing as taught by Krickovic as a means of maximizing holding capacity of a ball holding chamber in a housing (Krickovic: Para. 0028).
Regarding claim 12, the modified Langer (Figures 1-6) teaches a ball housing (Fig. 1-2, Part No. 14), and an extendable shelf (16) coupled to the ball housing (Col. 3, Lines 4-9 and Lines 31-42).
The modified Langer does not teach at least one of the plurality of chambers comprises a zigzag configuration defined within the ball housing.
Krickovic (Figures 1-7) teaches at least one of the plurality of chambers (Fig. 1, Part No. 22a) comprises a zigzag configuration defined within the ball housing (Para. 0028).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified Langer with at least one of the plurality of chambers comprises a zigzag configuration as taught by Krickovic as a means of maximizing holding capacity of a ball holding chamber in a housing (Krickovic: Para. 0028).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Langer in view of Krickovic (20110227288).
Regarding claim 20, Langer (Figures 1-6) teaches disposing a plurality of balls (Fig. 2, Part No. 22) in a ball housing (14) (Col. 2, Lines 6-11).
Langer does not teach disposing the plurality of balls in the ball housing comprises stacking the plurality of balls in a zigzag configuration within at least one chamber defined within the ball housing.
Krickovic (Figures 1-7) teaches disposing the plurality of balls in the ball housing (Fig. 1, Part No. 22a) comprises stacking the plurality of balls in a zigzag configuration within at least one chamber defined within the ball housing (Para. 0028).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Langer with stacking the plurality of balls in a zigzag configuration within at least one chamber as taught by Krickovic as a means of maximizing holding capacity of a ball holding chamber in a housing (Krickovic: Para. 0028).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments (directed to claim 14) filed 11/26/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the prior art of Langer does not teach the recitation in claim 14 of “adjusting a vertical position of an angled shelf relative to the ball housing”, this is not found persuasive because Langer (See fig. 2)adjusting a vertical position of an angled shelf (Fig. 2-3, Part No. 16) relative to the ball housing (Col. 3, Lines 4-9 and Lines 31-42). Applicant argues that the angled shelf of Langer is static, this is not found persuasive because the vertical position of the shelf of Langer is adjusted as claimed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-13 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. It is noted that (in view of applicant’s amendment to claims 1 and 9), the prior art of Langer is now being used as the primary reference in the rejection of claims 1-13. Applicant argues that the prior art of Quercetti (which is used as a secondary reference under 35 USC 103) does not teach expelling balls from a housing, this persuasive because the primary reference of Langer teaches expelling balls from a housing. One cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). In addition, test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981).
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 CHRISTOPHER GLENN whose telephone number is (571)272-1277. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m..
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, EUGENE KIM can be reached at (571) 272-4463. 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.
/C.G./Examiner, Art Unit 3711
/JOSEPH B BALDORI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711