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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/29/2025 has been entered.
Status
This Office Action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed on 09/12/2025. The previous objections to the claims have been withdrawn. Furthermore, the previous 35 USC 112 rejections have also been withdrawn. Claims 1, 3-10, 15, 21-22, 25, 27-28, and 31-35 remain pending for consideration.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 3-5 and 31-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (KR100690680B1) in view of Kakimoto et al. (JPH0674624A, herein after referred to as Kakimoto).
Regarding claim 1, Yang teaches a method (the method disclosed in paragraph [6]) for controlling a refrigerator (Fig. 4 where freezer 105 of a refrigerator is illustrated), the refrigerator including an ice maker (ice mold 111 and blocking plate 131 Fig. 7) and a controller (control unit 181 Fig. 8) configured to control the ice maker (paragraph [6]), the ice maker including a tray (ice mold 111 Fig. 5) provided in a storage space of the refrigerator (freezer 105 Fig. 5) and configured to define an ice chamber (cavity 112a Fig. 7), a first heater (first heater 137 Fig. 7), and a second heater (second heater 117 Fig. 7) that is disposed closer to a circumferential surface of the ice chamber (outer perimeter of cavity 112a Fig. 6) than the first heater is (Fig. 6), the method comprising, turning on the first heater for ice separation (paragraph [6]); and turning on the second heater for the ice separation while the first heater is turned on (paragraph [6]).
Yang teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “the method comprising, turning on the second heater for ice making; turning off the second heater”.
However, Kakimoto teaches a method (the method disclosed in Figs. 6-8 corresponds to the method of Yang) comprising, turning on a second heater (paragraph [0018] where heater 20 Fig. 3 corresponds to the second heater of Yang) for ice making (disclosed “ice making process” in paragraph [0018]); turning off the second heater (paragraph [0019]) to release bubbles contained in the water during the ice making process therefore providing transparent ice (paragraph [0018]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the method of Yang to include “the method comprising, turning on the second heater for ice making; turning off the second heater” in view of the teachings of Kakimoto to release bubbles contained in the water during the ice making process therefore providing transparent ice.
Regarding claim 3, the combined teachings teach wherein turning on the second heater for the ice separation comprises turning on the second heater based on a temperature sensor (temperature sensor 115 Fig. 4 of Yang) detecting that a temperature of the ice chamber (paragraph [6] of Yang) has reached a first reference temperature (disclosed “set value” temperature in paragraph [6] of Yang used to determine ice completion) within a first reference period of time (disclosed “predetermined time” in paragraph [6] of Yang that elapses after water is supplied) after the first heater is turned on for the ice separation (referring to paragraph [6] of Yang, a person skilled in the art would recognize that second heater 117 can be turned on after first heater 137 since the timing between the two heaters can be adjusted).
Regarding claim 4, the combined teachings teach wherein turning on the second heater for the ice separation comprises turning on the second heater based on a temperature sensor (temperature sensor 115 Fig. 4 of Yang) detecting that a temperature of the ice chamber (paragraph [6] of Yang) has reached a first reference temperature (disclosed “set value” temperature in paragraph [6] of Yang used to determine ice completion) after the first heater is turned on for the ice separation (referring to paragraph [6] of Yang, a person skilled in the art would recognize that second heater 117 can be turned on after first heater 137 since the timing between the two heaters can be adjusted).
Regarding claim 5, the combined teachings teach wherein turning on the second heater for the ice separation comprises turning on the second heater based on a first reference time (disclosed “predetermined time” in paragraph [6] of Yang that elapses after water is supplied) having elapsed after the first heater is turned on for the ice separation (referring to paragraph [6] of Yang, a person skilled in the art would recognize that second heater 117 can be turned on after first heater 137 since the timing between the two heaters can be adjusted).
Regarding claim 32, the combined teachings teach further comprising turning on the second heater during at least a part of an ice making operation (disclosed “ice making process” in paragraph [0018] of Kakimoto).
Regarding claim 33, the combined teachings teach further comprising turning off the second heater before starting the ice separation (paragraph [0019] of Kakimoto).
Regarding claim 31, Yang teaches a refrigerator (Fig. 5 where freezer 105 of a refrigerator is illustrated) comprising an ice maker (ice mold 111 and blocking plate 131 Fig. 7) configured to make ice (ice 108 Fig. 7), wherein the ice maker comprises: a tray (ice mold 111 Fig. 5) that defines an ice chamber (cavity 112a Fig. 7) in which the ice is produced (Fig. 7), a first heater (first heater 137 Fig. 7) configured to provide heat to the ice chamber (paragraph [6]), and a second heater (second heater 117 Fig. 7) spaced apart from the first heater (Fig. 7) and configured to provide heat to the ice chamber (paragraph [6]), wherein the second heater is located closer to a circumferential surface of the ice chamber (outer perimeter of cavity 112a Fig. 6) than the first heater is (Fig. 6), and wherein, during an ice separation operation (paragraph [6]), the first heater is configured to be turned on first (referring to paragraph [6], a person skilled in the art would recognize that first heater 137 can be turned on first before second heater 117 since the timing between the two heaters can be adjusted), and the second heater is configured to be turned on while the first heater is turned on (paragraph [6]).
Yang teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “wherein the second heater is configured to be turned on during at least a portion of the ice making operation and to be turned off before initiation of an ice separation operation”.
However, Kakimoto teaches wherein a second heater (heater 20 Fig. 3 corresponds to the second heater of Yang) is configured to be turned on during at least a portion of an ice making operation (paragraph [0018] where the disclosed “ice making process” corresponds to the ice making operation of Yang) and to be turned off before initiation of an ice separation operation (disclosed “ice separation process” paragraphs [0019] and [0020]) to release bubbles contained in the water during the ice making process therefore providing transparent ice (paragraph [0018]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of Yang to include “wherein the second heater is configured to be turned on during at least a portion of the ice making operation and to be turned off before initiation of an ice separation operation” in view of the teachings of Kakimoto to release bubbles contained in the water during the ice making process therefore providing transparent ice.
Claims 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang and Kakimoto as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ji et al. (US20170089629A1, herein after referred to as Ji’629).
Regarding claim 6, Yang teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “further comprising: sequentially turning off the first heater and the second heater”.
However, Ji’629 teaches further comprising: sequentially turning off the first heater and the second heater (paragraph [0061] where it is understood that first heater 121 of Fig. 5 which corresponds to the first heater of Yang is turned off first before turning off second heater 122 of Fig. 5 which corresponds to the second heater of Yang) to provide better power management.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the method of the combined teachings to include “further comprising: sequentially turning off the first heater and the second heater” in view of the teachings of Ji’629 to provide better power management.
Regarding claim 7, the combined teachings teach further comprising: sequentially turning off the first heater and the second heater based on a time (paragraph [0061] of Ji’629 where it is understood that first heater 121 is turned off first and then second heater 122 is turned off after a certain period of time has elapsed) that has elapsed after the second heater is turned on reaching a set time (paragraph [0061] of Ji’629 where the certain period of time is understood to be a set time).
Regarding claim 8, the combined teachings teach further comprising: sequentially turning off the first heater and the second heater based on a temperature (paragraph [0070] of Ji’629 where it is understood that a temperature is associated with the signal generated by temperature sensor 130 Fig. 6 of Ji’629) detected by a temperature sensor (temperature sensor 130 Fig. 6 of Ji’629) reaching an OFF reference temperature (paragraph [0070] of Ji’629 where the signal generated by the temperature sensor is understood to be associated with an off reference temperature) within a set time (paragraph [0070] of Ji’629 where the signal generated by timer 132 is understood to be associated with a set time) after the second heater is turned on.
Regarding claim 9, the combined teachings teach further comprising: sequentially turning off the first heater and the second heater based on a temperature (paragraph [0069] of Ji’629 where it is understood that a temperature is associated with the signal generated by temperature sensor 130) detected by a temperature sensor (temperature sensor 130 Fig. 6 of Ji’629) reaching an OFF reference temperature (paragraph [0069] of Ji’629 where the signal generated by the temperature sensor is understood to be associated with an off reference temperature) after the second heater is turned on.
Regarding claim 10, the combined teachings teach further comprising: displacing the tray (step S17 in paragraph [0021] of Kakimoto where ice tray 8 Fig. 9C of Kakimoto corresponds to the tray of Yang) to an ice separation position (the position illustrated in Fig. 9C of Kakimoto) based on the first heater (dish heater 33 Fig. 4 of Kakimoto corresponds to the first heater of Yang) and the second heater being turned off (paragraphs [0020] to [0021] of Kakimoto).
Claims 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang and Kakimoto as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Takagi (JP2010266173A).
Regarding claim 27, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “wherein the second heater is configured to operate for ice making to thereby cause bubbles to move downward and be collected at a lower side of the ice chamber during the ice making”.
However, Takagi teaches wherein the second heater (electric heater 92 Fig. 5 corresponds to the second heater of Yang) is configured to operate for ice making (paragraph [0006]) to thereby cause bubbles (paragraph [0006]) to move downward and be collected at a lower side (bottom of ice tray 91 Fig. 5) of the ice chamber (the water cavities of ice tray 91 Fig. 5 corresponds to the ice chamber of Yang) during the ice making (paragraph [0006]) to produce extremely transparent ice (paragraph [0006]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the method of the combined teachings to include “wherein the second heater is configured to operate for ice making to thereby cause bubbles to move downward and be collected at a lower side of the ice chamber during the ice making” in view of the teachings of Takagi to produce extremely transparent ice.
Regarding claim 28, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “wherein the second heater is in contact with a lower portion of the tray”.
However, Takagi teaches wherein the second heater (electric heater 92 Fig. 5 corresponds to the second heater of Yang) is in contact with a lower portion (bottom of ice tray 91 Fig. 5) of the tray (ice tray 91 Fig. 5 corresponds to the tray of Yang) as a designer choice to present a different arrangement between the tray and the heater.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the method of the combined teachings to include “wherein the second heater is in contact with a lower portion of the tray” in view of the teachings of Takagi as a designer choice to present a different arrangement between the tray and the heater.
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang and Kakimoto as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Son et al. (US 20130014535 A1, herein after referred to as Son’35).
Regarding claim 34, the combined teachings teach wherein the first heater is spaced apart from the second heater in a first direction (Fig. 6 of Yang where the vertical direction corresponds to the first direction).
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “wherein the first heater is disposed closer than the second heater to a plane passing through a center of the ice chamber and perpendicular to the first direction”.
However, Son’35 teaches wherein a first heater (lower heater 152 Fig. 9 corresponds to the first heater of Yang) is disposed closer than a second heater (upper heater 151 Fig. 9 corresponds to the second heater of Yang) to a plane (see below annotated Fig. 9 of Son’35) passing through a center of the ice chamber (see below annotated Fig. 9 of Son’35) and perpendicular to a first direction (see below annotated Fig. 9 of Son’35) as a designer option to present a different arrangement between the heaters.
PNG
media_image1.png
482
1082
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the method of the combined teachings to include “wherein the first heater is disposed closer than the second heater to a plane passing through a center of the ice chamber and perpendicular to the first direction” in view of the teachings of Son’35 as a designer option to present a different arrangement between the heaters.
Claims 15, 22, and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang, in view of Kakimoto, and in further view of Larson et al. (US 20200064043 A1, herein after referred to as Larson).
Regarding claim 15, Yang teaches a refrigerator (Fig. 5 where freezer 105 of a refrigerator is illustrated) comprising: a cabinet (Fig. 5 where wall 106 of a refrigerator cabinet is illustrated) that defines a storage space (freezer 105 Fig. 5); and an ice maker (ice mold 111 and blocking plate 131 Fig. 7) provided inside the storage space (Fig. 5) and configured to make ice (ice 108 Fig. 7), wherein the ice maker includes: a tray (ice mold 111 Fig. 5) provided in the storage space (Fig. 5) and configured to define an ice chamber (cavity 112a Fig. 7) in which the ice is produced (Fig. 7), a first heater (first heater 137 Fig. 7), and a second heater (second heater 117 Fig. 7) that is disposed closer to a circumferential surface of the ice chamber (outer perimeter of cavity 112a Fig. 6) than the first heater is (Fig. 6), and wherein, during an ice separation (paragraph [6]), the first heater is configured to be turned on first (referring to paragraph [6], a person skilled in the art would recognize that first heater 137 can be turned on first before second heater 117 since the timing between the two heaters can be adjusted), and the second heater is configured to be turned on while the first heater is turned on (paragraph [6]).
Yang teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “wherein the first heater is configured to: turn on based on satisfaction of a first ON condition for the ice separation, and turn off based on satisfaction of a first OFF condition, wherein the second heater is configured to: turn on based on satisfaction of a third ON condition for ice making, and turn off based on satisfaction of a third OFF condition”.
However, Kakimoto teaches a first heater (dish heater 33 Fig. 4 corresponds to the first heater of Yang) is configured to: turn on based on satisfaction of a first ON condition (paragraph [0022] where the first on condition is understood to be the completion of step S11) for an ice separation (paragraph [0020] and [0021] where steps S12-S20 correspond to the ice separation of Yang), and turn off based on satisfaction of a first OFF condition (paragraph [0020] where a detected temperature equal to or higher than zero degree Celsius corresponds to the first off condition), wherein the second heater (heater 20 Fig. 3 corresponds to the second heater of Yang) is configured to: turn on based on satisfaction of a third ON condition (corresponds to the completion of step S5 in paragraph [0018]) for ice making (disclosed “ice making process” in paragraph [0018]), and turn off based on satisfaction of a third OFF condition (corresponds to the completion of steps S7-S8 in paragraph [0019]) to release bubbles contained in the water during the ice making process therefore providing transparent ice (paragraph [0018]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of Yang to include “wherein the first heater is configured to: turn on based on satisfaction of a first ON condition for the ice separation, and turn off based on satisfaction of a first OFF condition, wherein the second heater is configured to: turn on based on satisfaction of a third ON condition for ice making, and turn off based on satisfaction of a third OFF condition” in view of the teachings of Kakimoto to release bubbles contained in the water during the ice making process therefore providing transparent ice.
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “wherein the second heater is configured to: turn on based on satisfaction of a second ON condition for the ice separation, turn off based on satisfaction of a second OFF condition”.
However, Larson teaches wherein a second heater (heater elements 40 Fig. 8 correspond to the second heater of Yang) is configured to: turn on based on satisfaction of a second ON condition (paragraph [0094] where the cubes having been determined to be fully frozen corresponds to the second on condition) for an ice separation (paragraph [0094] and Fig. 15 where the disclosed “ejection of the ice cubes corresponds to the ice separation of Yang), turn off based on satisfaction of a second OFF condition (disclosed “predetermined time” in paragraph [0088]) to control the second heater during the ice separation processes.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “wherein the second heater is configured to: turn on based on satisfaction of a second ON condition for the ice separation, turn off based on satisfaction of a second OFF condition” in view of the teachings of Larson to control the second heater during the ice separation process.
Regarding claim 22, the combined teachings teach wherein the first ON (paragraph [6] of Yang where the temperature detected by temperature sensor 115 corresponds to the first on condition of Kakimoto) condition comprises (i) a temperature of the ice chamber (paragraph [6] of Yang) reaching a predetermined temperature (disclosed “set value” temperature in paragraph [6] of Yang used to determine ice completion).
Regarding claim 35, the combined teachings teach wherein the first ON condition comprises a predetermined time elapsing (corresponds to the time it takes for steps S10 and S11 to be accomplished as described in paragraph [0020] of Kakimoto) after the third OFF condition has been satisfied (paragraph [0020] of Kakimoto).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang, Kakimoto, and Larson as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Song et al. (US20200340726A1, herein after referred to as Song).
Regarding claim 21, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “wherein the second ON condition comprises (i) a temperature of the ice chamber reaching a first reference temperature within a first reference time, (ii) the temperature of the ice chamber reaching the first reference temperature, or (iii) a time for which the first heater is in a turn-on state exceeding the first reference time”.
However, Song teaches wherein a second ON condition (see below annotated Fig. 24 of Son) comprises a temperature of an ice chamber (disclosed “temperature of ice making water” in paragraph [0155]) reaching a first reference temperature (see below annotated Fig. of Song) to provide a method where the heater is controlled through voltage impulses.
PNG
media_image2.png
521
874
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “wherein the second ON condition comprises (i) a temperature of the ice chamber reaching a first reference temperature within a first reference time, (ii) the temperature of the ice chamber reaching the first reference temperature, or (iii) a time for which the first heater is in a turn-on state exceeding the first reference time” in view of the teachings of Song to provide a method where the heater is controlled through voltage impulses.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang, Kakimoto, and Larson as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Son’35.
Regarding claim 25, the combined teachings teach wherein the first heater is spaced apart from the second heater in a first direction (Fig. 6 of Yang where the vertical direction corresponds to the first direction).
The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “wherein the first heater is disposed closer to a plane passing through a center of the ice chamber than the second heater is, the plane being perpendicular to the first direction”.
However, Son’35 teaches wherein a first heater (lower heater 152 Fig. 9 corresponds to the first heater of Yang) is disposed closer to a plane (see below annotated Fig. 9 of Son’35) passing through a center of the ice chamber (see below annotated Fig. 9 of Son’35) than a second heater (upper heater 151 Fig. 9 corresponds to the second heater of Yang) is, the plane being perpendicular to the first direction (see below annotated Fig. 9 of Son’35) as a designer option to present a different arrangement between the heaters.
PNG
media_image3.png
482
1082
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “wherein the first heater is disposed closer to a plane passing through a center of the ice chamber than the second heater is, the plane being perpendicular to the first direction” in view of the teachings of Son’35 as a designer option to present a different arrangement between the heaters.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 12/29/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant's argument on pages 10-11 that the Examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it is noted that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the Applicant' s disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392; 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
The Examiner has met all requirements establishing a prima facie case: all factual findings required by Graham were supplied in the previous and present Actions; the references are related art, and Applicant has supplied no evidence that there is no reasonable expectation of success; all claim limitations were met in the previous and present Actions, and Applicant has merely made the allegation that the limitations are not met, and thus has not provided any evidence or argument directed to how the identified elements in the first action fail to meet the claimed limitations or to how the identified elements are otherwise distinguishable from the claimed limitations. Neither has Applicant supplied any evidence or argument addressing any failure of Examiner's application of the TSM test, pursuant to current governing law (see KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (U.S. 2007)).
Further, motivation was provided in all present and previous combinations of references. Although a specific motivation may not have been explicitly stated within one of the references, the motivation was not improper, and provided in accordance with the Teaching-Suggestion-Motivation Test (TSM). As such, Examiner's use of these facts as a motivation statement is in compliance with the requirements of the TSM test, since the Teaching-Suggestion-Motivation (TSM) test should be flexibly applied and the teaching, suggestion, or motivation need not be written within the reference. See KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (US 2007); Ortho-McNeil Pharm., Inc. v. Mylan Lab., Inc., 520 F.3d 1358, 86 U.S.P.Q.2d 1196 (Fed. Cir. 2008); Ex Parte Kubin, 83 USPQ2d 1410 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 2007).
Furthermore, Applicant is reminded that the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference rather, the test is what the combined teachings of those references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art.
In the case at hand, the teachings of Kakimoto would have suggested to a person skilled in the art to modify the method of Yang to include turning on a second heater (paragraph [0018] where heater 20 Fig. 3 corresponds to the second heater) for ice making (disclosed “ice making process” in paragraph [0018]) and turning off the second heater (paragraph [0019]) to provide transparent ice by releasing bubbles contained in the water during the ice making with the heat provide from the second heater.
Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive and the rejections are maintained.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMBA NMN GAYE whose telephone number is (571)272-8809. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 4:30AM to 2:30PM.
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, Jerry -Daryl Fletcher can be reached at 571-270-5054. 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.
/SAMBA NMN GAYE/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JERRY-DARYL FLETCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763