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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/09/2025 has been entered.
Claim Status
Claims 1, 3, 16, 18, and 22 have been amended. Claims 2 and 17 were canceled. Claims 1, 3-14, 16, 18-20, and 22 remain pending and are ready for examination.
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(s) 1, 8, 13-14, 16, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US20170284369A1 -hereinafter Chen) in view of Berard (US 20160329713 A1 -hereinafter Berard) in view of Garcia et al. (US 20190003456 A1 -hereinafter Garcia).
Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches:
A method of controlling a renewable power plant comprising a plurality of renewable power generators electrically connected by a local power network (see [0014]; Chen: “the wind farm 1 includes a plurality of wind turbines 10-15, 20-25, 30-35, a substation 4, at least one cable 50, 51, 52 and a control system 6. Each of the cables 50, 51, 52 is electrically connectable to a utility grid via a first switch 7, for example a circuit breaker.” See [0016]: “Each of wind turbines 10-15, 20-25, 30-35 includes a generator 100-150, 200-250, 300-350”), the method comprising:
receiving a control signal requesting the renewable power plant to supply substantially zero active power to the main power network: (see [0001]; Chen: “a method and controller for coordinating control of the wind turbines of a wind farm during its disconnection to a utility grid.”)
categorizing at least one renewable power generator as power-supplying (see [0023]; Chen: “The active power supply available from the generator of the selected wind turbine can be regulated.”), and the remaining one or more renewable power generators as power-consuming; (see [0039]; Chen: “Where Pref is the power reference of the unselected wind turbine generator, Pref1 is the maximum wind power capacity of unselected wind turbine, Pref2 is the sum of values of action power consumption including the active power load of the auxiliary equipment and the maximum charging power capacity of the energy storage system of the unselected wind turbine.”)
operating the power-consuming renewable power generators in a paused state in which no active power is generated (see [0036]; Chen: “As for the unselected wind turbine of the plurality of wind turbines, maintaining openness of the electrical connection between the third winding of transformer unit of unselected wind turbines and the corresponding cable. For example, assume wind turbine 10 is unselected, and then its second switch 800 will be kept open to be isolated from the cable 50. See [0020]: “When the switches are opened, the control system 6 may set the wind turbine in a standby mode by stopping the rotation of the turbine by pitching the wind blades in the vane position. A wind turbine in the standby mode (hereafter referred to as a “deactivated” wind turbine) is disconnected from the main grid. Hence in order to ensure continuous standby operation of the wind turbine, for example wind turbine 10, the power input of its auxiliary equipment 102 may be electrically connected to the power output of its energy storage system 106 (for example uninterruptable power supply (UPS)). Typically the UPS comprises a system of batteries and super capacitors set installed in or near the wind turbine.”) and in which at least one auxiliary system of each power-consuming renewable power generator draws power from the local power network; and (see [0037]; Chen: “As for the unselected wind turbine of the plurality of wind turbines, electrically connecting a power output of its energy storage system to the power input of its auxiliary equipment. For example, assume wind turbine 10 is unselected, shown in FIG. 3, wind turbine 10 will close the switches 107 and 108 to realize the electrical connection of local energy storage system and local level auxiliary equipment, using the energy storage system to provide power supply for the auxiliary equipment.”)
operating the at least one power-supplying renewable power generator in an active state in which active power is supplied to the local power network; (see [0029]; Chen: “Therefore the central controller 6 will order wind turbine 10 to generate the wind power generator by referring its first power generation reference value which equals to the maximum active power supply available from the generator of wind turbine 10.”)
wherein the at least one power-supplying renewable power generator is controlled such that renewable power plant supplies substantially zero active power to the main power network, (see [0020]; Chen: “during a fault condition in the utility grid, the first switch 7 can be opened such that the wind turbines 10-15, 20-25, 30-35 are electrically disconnected to the utility grid… Following that, generally speaking, the wind turbine 10-15, 20-25, 30-35 can be activated to supply the auxiliary loads and the energy storage loads of the wind turbines 10-15, 20-25, 30-35, and the substation level auxiliary loads and substation level energy storage system in the wind farm 1 during islanding operation caused by utility grid failure.”) [That is, the selected generators of the wind turbines do not supply active power to grid due to disconnection.]
However, it does not explicitly teach:
operating, based on the control signal received, the renewable power plant in a mode, wherein operating the renewable power plant in the mode comprises:
wherein the at least one power-supplying renewable power generator is controlled based on a determination of active power supplied to the main power network by the renewable power plant, wherein the determination of active power supplied to the main power network is based on a measurement at a point of measurement between the local power network and the main power network,
and wherein the renewable power plant remains electrically connected to the main power network while operating in the mode.
Berard from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches:
operating, based on the control signal received, the renewable power plant in a mode, wherein operating the renewable power plant in the mode comprises: (see [0042]; Berard: “The microgrid 200 can operate in various modes, such as a grid-connected mode. In grid-connected mode, the microgrid 200 is connected to the grid 230 via the to switch 224 and the power interface device 212. The grid 230 provides active and reactive power to the microgrid 200 to offset imbalance between power production and demand on the microgrid 200.”)
and wherein the renewable power plant remains electrically connected to the main power network while operating in the mode. (see [0042]; Berard: “The microgrid 200 can operate in various modes, such as a grid-connected mode. In grid-connected mode, the microgrid 200 is connected to the grid 230 via the to switch 224 and the power interface device 212. The grid 230 provides active and reactive power to the microgrid 200 to offset imbalance between power production and demand on the microgrid 200.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Li to include Berard’s features of operating, based on the control signal received, the renewable power plant in a mode, wherein operating the renewable power plant in the mode comprises: and wherein the renewable power plant remains electrically connected to the main power network while operating a in the mode. Doing so would reduce production of the power sources and optimize energy cost. (Berard, [0062]-[0063])
However, it does not explicitly teach: wherein the at least one power-supplying renewable power generator is controlled based on a determination of active power supplied to the main power network by the renewable power plant, wherein the determination of active power supplied to the main power network is based on a measurement at a point of measurement between the local power network and the main power network,
Garcia from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the at least one power-supplying renewable power generator is controlled based on a determination of active power supplied to the main power network by the renewable power plant (see [0053]-[0054]; Garcia: “In an embodiment there is a wind power plant, WPP, with a plurality of WTGs, where a power plant controller, PCC, controls the WPP. The PPC is a control system of a WPP which has the responsibility to control Active Power (P) and Reactive Power (Q) at the Point of Interconnection (POI) with the electrical/Utility Grid (UG).” See [0062]-[0064]: “The PPC outputs the following power references: Active Power Reference to be sent to the Wind Turbines via the PPC Active Power Dispatcher (for the WTG normal power reference handle) Overboosting Active Power Reference to be sent to the Wind Turbines via the PPC Overboosting Dispatcher”. See [0012]-[0013]: “dispatching the power reference (Ptotalref) to each wind turbine generator of the plurality of wind turbine generators; and dispatching the overboost reference (PrefOB) to each wind turbine generator of the plurality of wind turbine generators.”), wherein the determination of active power supplied to the main power network is based on a measurement at a point of measurement between the local power network and the main power network, (see [0054]; Garcia: “The PPC is a control system of a WPP which has the responsibility to control Active Power (P) and Reactive Power (Q) at the Point of Interconnection (POI) with the electrical/Utility Grid (UG).” See [0059]-[0061]: “It receives as main inputs: measured frequency at a point of measurement feedback signals from each of the WTGs”) [That is, the Point of Interconnection/ point of measurement reads on ‘a point of measurement’ and the electrical/Utility Grid reads on ‘the main power network’]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of Li and Berard to include Garcia’s features of the at least one power-supplying renewable power generator is controlled based on a determination of active power supplied to the main power network by the renewable power plant, and the determination of active power supplied to the main power network is based on a measurement at a point of measurement between the local power network and the main power network. Doing so would increase power production from a wind turbine generator for a period of time and minimize the impact of load/generation changes in the power system. (Garcia, [0006] and [0131])
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Chen, Berard, and Garcia teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, Chen further teaches comprising, prior to the categorizing:
identifying renewable power generators operating in an active state; and (see [0021]; Chen: “In step 201, at least one wind turbine of the plurality of wind turbines 10-15, 20-25, 30-35 are selected according to the criteria:”)
selecting at least one renewable power generator from the identified renewable power generators in an active state to be categorized as power-supplying. (see [0023]; Chen: “he first power generation reference value represents the maximum active power supply by the generator of the selected wind turbine;”)
Regarding Claim 13, the combination of Chen, Berard, and Garcia teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, Chen further teaches wherein one or more of the renewable power generators comprises a wind turbine generator or a solar power unit. (see [0001]; Chen: “coordinating control of the wind turbines of a wind farm.”)
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of Chen, Berard, and Garcia teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above, Chen further teaches wherein the method is performed in response to receiving both the control signal requesting the renewable power plant to supply substantially zero active power to the main power network (see [0020]; Chen: “during a fault condition in the utility grid, the first switch 7 can be opened such that the wind turbines 10-15, 20-25, 30-35 are electrically disconnected to the utility grid.”) and a further control signal indicating that a trigger criteria has been met. (see [0021]; Chen: “In step 201, at least one wind turbine of the plurality of wind turbines 10-15, 20-25, 30-35 are selected according to the criteria:”)
Regarding Claim 16, the limitations in this claim is taught by the combination of Chen, Berard, and Garcia as discussed connection with claim 1.
Regarding Claim 22, the limitations in this claim is taught by the combination of Chen, Berard, and Garcia as discussed connection with claim 1.
Claim(s) 3-7 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Berard in view of Garcia in view of Scholte-Wassink et al. (US20090160187A1 -hereinafter Scholte-Wassink).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Chen, Berard, and Garcia teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above; however, it does not explicitly teach: comprising determining a set point based on the determination of active power supplied to the main power network by the renewable power plant for providing to the at least one power-supplying renewable power generator and wherein the at least one power-supplying renewable power generator is controlled based on the determined set point.
Scholte-Wassink further teaches comprising determining a set point based on the determination of active power supplied to the main power network by the renewable power plant for providing to the at least one power-supplying renewable power generator (see [0022]; Scholte-Wassink: “the central controller 500 may receive global set points for the total active and reactive power to be fed into or received from the external grid 300 from a control centre (not shown) of the external grid or the SCADA computer via an Ethernet LAN 550.”) and wherein the at least one power-supplying renewable power generator is controlled based on the determined set point. (see [0024]; Scholte-Wassink: “a subsequent step 2200 of adjusting the actual power production of the wind turbines such that the actual power production and actual power consumption of the wind farm 10 is balanced.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of the combination of Chen and Berard to include Scholte-Wassink’s features of determining a set point based on the determination of active power supplied to the main power network by the renewable power plant for providing to the at least one power-supplying renewable power generator and wherein the at least one power-supplying renewable power generator is controlled based on the determined set point. Doing so would island the wind farm in a controlled way and avoid the emergency shut down. (Scholte-Wassink, [0030])
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Chen, Berard, and Garcia teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above; however, it does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one power-supplying renewable power generator is controlled based on a predetermined set point.
Scholte-Wassink from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the at least one power-supplying renewable power generator is controlled based on a predetermined set point. (see [0022]; Scholte-Wassink: “After calculating individual set points for the wind turbines 100-102 in the processing and storage unit 520 such that the global set points of power flow are met, the corresponding set points are distributed to the individual wind turbines 100-102 via the Ethernet 550.”)
The same motivation to combine Chen, Berard, Garcia, and Scholte-Wassink a set forth for Claim 3 equally applies to Claim 4.
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Chen, Berard, Garcia, and Scholte-Wassink teaches all the limitations of claim 3 above, Scholte-Wassink further teaches wherein operating the at least one power-supplying renewable power generator in the active state in which active power is supplied to the local power network comprises ramping the active power output of the at least one power-supplying renewable power generator to comply with the set point. (see [0031]; Scholte-Wassink: “Note, that in the event of an outage of the external grid 300 the total power output of the wind farm 10 has to be reduced to the amount balancing the actual total power consumption of the wind farm 10 within a few ten ms. This can required steep down ramping rates of the wind turbines. In the context of this application, the terms of ramping up and down a wind turbine refer to increasing and decreasing the power output of the wind turbine, respectively”)
The same motivation to combine Chen, Berard, Garcia, and Scholte-Wassink a set forth for Claim 3 equally applies to Claim 5.
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Chen, Berard, and Garcia teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above; however, it does not explicitly teach wherein operating the power-consuming renewable power generators in the paused state comprises ramping the active power output of the power-consuming renewable power generators to zero.
Scholte-Wassink from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein operating the power-consuming renewable power generators in the paused state comprises ramping the active power output of the power-consuming renewable power generators to zero. (see [0033]; Scholte-Wassink: “those wind turbines are issued to produce no power, i.e. they are controlled to ramp down to zero power production in a step 1500 as shown in FIG. 9.”)
The same motivation to combine Chen, Berard, Garcia, and Scholte-Wassink a set forth for Claim 2 equally applies to Claim 6.
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Chen, Berard, Garcia, and Scholte-Wassink teaches all the limitations of claim 5 above, Scholte-Wassink further teaches wherein the active power is ramped at a ramp rate set prior to receipt of the control signal. (see [0031]; Scholte-Wassink: “Note, that in the event of an outage of the external grid 300 the total power output of the wind farm 10 has to be reduced to the amount balancing the actual total power consumption of the wind farm 10 within a few ten ms. This can required steep down ramping rates of the wind turbines. In the context of this application, the terms of ramping up and down a wind turbine refer to increasing and decreasing the power output of the wind turbine, respectively”)
The same motivation to combine Chen, Berard, Garcia, and Scholte-Wassink a set forth for Claim 2 equally applies to Claim 7.
Regarding Claim 18, the limitations in this claim is taught by the combination of Chen, Berard, Garcia, and Scholte-Wassink as discussed connection with claim 3.
Regarding Claim 19, the limitations in this claim is taught by the combination of Chen, Berard, Garcia, and Scholte-Wassink as discussed connection with claim 4.
Regarding Claim 20, the combination of Chen, Berard, Garcia, and Scholte-Wassink teaches all the limitations of claim 19 above, Berard further teaches and wherein operating the power-consuming renewable power generators in the paused state comprises ramping the active power output of the power-consuming renewable power generators to zero. (see [0054]; Berard: “In zone two 414, a zone of operation where the received frequency 304 is greater than flimp 408 and less than fmax 312, the renewable energy source can be configured to ramp down production of power, for example, decreasing output power linearly from the maximum output power 406 to zero.”)
The same motivation to combine Chen and Berard a set forth for Claim 1 equally applies to Claim 20.
Scholte-Wassink further teaches wherein operating the at least one power-supplying renewable power generator in the active state in which active power is supplied to the local power network comprises ramping the active power output of the at least one power-supplying renewable power generator to comply with the set point. (see [0031]; Scholte-Wassink: “Note, that in the event of an outage of the external grid 300 the total power output of the wind farm 10 has to be reduced to the amount balancing the actual total power consumption of the wind farm 10 within a few ten ms. This can required steep down ramping rates of the wind turbines. In the context of this application, the terms of ramping up and down a wind turbine refer to increasing and decreasing the power output of the wind turbine, respectively”)
The same motivation to combine Chen, Berard, Garcia, and Scholte-Wassink a set forth for Claim 3 equally applies to Claim 20.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Berard in view of Garcia in view of Abeyasekera et al. (WO2018078028A1-hereinafter Abeyasekera).
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Chen, Berard, and Garcia teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above; however, it does not explicitly teach wherein, if no renewable power generators are identified as operating in an active state, the further comprises, prior to the categorizing: identifying renewable power generators operating in a paused state; and selecting at least one renewable power generator from the identified renewable power generators in a paused state to be cateqorized as power-supplying.
Abeyasekera from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein, if no renewable power generators are identified as operating in an active state, the further comprises, prior to the categorizing: identifying renewable power generators operating in a paused state (see page 17, lines 10-12; Abeyasekera: “In one embodiment, instead of shutting down only a portion of the wind turbines in the park, the controller shuts down all of the wind turbines in the park.”); and selecting at least one renewable power generator from the identified renewable power generators in a paused state to be cateqorized as power-supplying. (see page 17, last paragraph; Abeyasekera: “If all of the wind turbines were shut down in response to the HVDC link being nonfunctional, in one embodiment, a first wind turbine is started by an internal auxiliary power supply such as an uninterruptible power supply (UPS) (e.g., a battery based UPS) disposed in the first wind turbine or at a same location as the first wind turbine (e.g., same off-shore platform). The first wind turbine may also be started using an separate generator (e.g., a diesel generator) or other means. Once started, the first wind turbine can provide power to its own auxiliary systems (e.g., yawing motors, pumps, or heating elements).”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of the combination of Chen, Berard, and Garcia to include Abeyasekera’s features of if no renewable power generators are identified as operating in an active state, the further comprises, prior to the categorizing: identifying renewable power generators operating in a paused state; and selecting at least one renewable power generator from the identified renewable power generators in a paused state to be cateqorized as power-supplying. Doing so would improve transmission efficiency, reduces cost and improves reliability. (Abeyasekera, page 1, lines 16 and page 16, line 1)
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Berard in view of Garcia in view of Kjær et al. (US20170234299A1 -hereinafter Kjær).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Chen, Berard, and Garcia teaches all the limitations of claim 8 above; however, it does not explicitly teach wherein the selection of one or more of the identified renewable power generators is a random selection.
Kjær from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the selection of one or more of the identified renewable power generators is a random selection. (see [0079]-[0080]; Kjær: “Maintain an off-line static priority-list of wind turbine generators (all in the wind power plant). The list could be one of a) Randomly ordered.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of the combination of Chen, Berard, and Garcia to include Kjær’s features of the selection of one or more of the identified renewable power generators is a random selection. Doing so would minimize active power losses in a wind power plant including a plurality of wind turbine generators, while still providing the required reactive power support to the electrical grid. (Kjær, [0008])
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Berard in view of Garcia in view of Wakata et al. (US 20110140428 A1 -hereinafter Wakata).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Chen, Berard, and Garcia teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above; however, it does not explicitly teach wherein the selection of one or more of the identified renewable power generators is based on a fatigue level of the renewable power generators.
Wakata from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein the selection of one or more of the identified renewable power generators is based on a fatigue level of the renewable power generators. (see [0020]; Wakata: “Since the degradation level (fatigue) of a wind turbine generator can be assessed from the level of the rotational torque exerted on the main shaft, a wind turbine generator group with a high level of degradation can easily be determined by estimating the degradation level on the basis of the output of the wind turbine generator, thereby extending the life of the wind power plant.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of the combination of Chen, Berard, and Garcia to include Wakata’s features of the selection of one or more of the identified renewable power generators is based on a fatigue level of the renewable power generators. Doing so would reduce the influence on a utility grid by reducing the rapid change in active power, and extending the life of a wind power plant while controlling the active power output in response to a request of the utility grid, as well as a wind power plant equipped with the same. (Wakata, [0006])
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Berard in view of Garcia in view of Noto et al. (US 20160115942 A1 -hereinafter Noto).
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of Chen, Berard, and Garcia teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above; however, it does not explicitly teach wherein, in the event of a loss of communication between a power plant controller and the power-supplying renewable power generators and/or power-consuming renewable power generators, the renewable power generator continues to operate in the mode dictated by its power-consuming or power-supplying categorization.
Noto from the same or similar field of endeavor teaches wherein, in the event of a loss of communication between a power plant controller and the power-supplying renewable power generators and/or power-consuming renewable power generators, the renewable power generator continues to operate in the mode dictated by its power-consuming or power-supplying categorization. (see [0020]; Noto: “the client device 150 may be utilized by an operator to communicate with one or more of the turbine controllers 26 when network connectivity between the SCADA system 104 and the wind farm 102 has been lost, thereby allowing the operator to continue to monitor and control the wind turbines 10 located within the wind farm 102.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teaching of the combination of Chen, Berard, and Garcia to include Noto’s features of in the event of a loss of communication between a power plant controller and the power-supplying renewable power generators and/or power-consuming renewable power generators, the renewable power generator continues to operate in the mode dictated by its power-consuming or power-supplying categorization. Doing so would ensure that the wind farm may continue to be maintained despite a loss of connection with the remote SCADA system. (Noto, [0005])
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim rejection(s) of the independent claim(s) have been fully considered and are persuasive because of the amendments. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Anichkov (US20130234523A1) discloses control for the necessary increase or decrease in active power output may be facilitated by a POI control module.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VI N TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1108. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-5:00.
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, ROBERT FENNEMA can be reached at (571) 272-2748. 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.
/V.N.T./Examiner, Art Unit 2117
/ROBERT E FENNEMA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2117