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 .
Status of the Claims
In the communication filed on 03/30/2026 claims 1 and 3-12 are pending. Independent claim 1 has been amended by incorporating limitations cancelled from claim 9. Claim 5 has been amended to place the claim in proper dependent form. Claim 2 is cancelled.
Response to Arguments/Amendments
Applicant's arguments and amendments filed 03/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues in page 6 of the Remarks dated 03/30/2026 that Choi fails to disclose “a mobile charger configured to supply electric power to charge another vehicle, wherein the mobile charger comprises a charging gun configured to be connected to a charging port at another electric vehicle.” Applicant states that examiner’s citations on page 6 of the Office Action dated 12/29/2025 fail to teach the amended limitations. However, the examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. In this case, the examiner cites Mera on page 18 of the Office Action dated 12/29/2025 for the amended limitations.
The applicant argues in pages 7-8 of the Remarks dated 03/30/2026 that Choi fails to disclose “a junction box for divergence, configured to distribute the electric power generated by the fuel cell to one of the electric power generated by the fuel cell to one of the bidirectional power converter and the mobile charger directly connected to the junction box”. The applicant argues that the relays B1, B2, 52, 53, and 54 of Choi fail to disclose the junction box of the present invention. In response to applicant's argument that “the relay of choi is positioned so that it can only distribute power generated from the fuel cell to the first and second batteries”, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
The remaining arguments are moot as the applicant’s arguments for the remaining claims were based on dependency of the independent claims.
The claim objection and the 112(d) rejection are withdrawn due to the amendments made by the applicant.
This Office Action is made Final due to the amendments.
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.
Claims 1, 3-5, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (Korean Patent KR-20160086241-A), in view of Yoon et al. (USPGPN 20180326865), and further in view of Mera (USPGPN 20120013303).
With respect to claim 1, Choi teaches a mobile electric vehicle charging system comprising: a fuel cell configured to generate electric power required to drive a vehicle (Fig. 1; a mobile hybrid power system 10 comprising a fuel cell 10 to generate electric power required to drive a vehicle (see ¶[65-66]).
Choi teaches a main battery configured to store the electric power generated by the fuel cell (Figs. 1-3; a first battery 60 configured to store the electric power generated by the fuel cell 10).
Choi teaches a power converter configured to control electric power input to the main battery (Figs. 1-5; a converter configured to control electric power input to the battery 60 (see ¶[43-44])).
Choi teaches a mobile charger configured to supply the electric power to charge another vehicle (Figs. 1-2, 4, and 6; a charger 30 configured to supply the electric power to charge another load 2. One of ordinary skill understands a load may be another vehicle for the power supplying vehicle).
Choi teaches a junction box for divergence, configured to distribute the electric power generated by the fuel cell to one of the bidirectional power converter and the mobile charger directly connected to the junction box (Figs. 1-6; the relays depicted by B1, B2, 52, 53, and 54 are understood by one of ordinary skill to be equivalent to a junction box for divergence. These relays are configured to distribute the electric power generated by the fuel cell 10 to one of the converter 51 and the charger 30 which are directly connected to these switches).
Choi teaches a fuel cell control unit configured to control distribution of the electric power by the junction box for the divergence (Fig. 1; a control unit 55 configured to control distribution of the electric power by the relays).
However, Choi fails to explicitly teach a bidirectional power converter configured to control electric power input to and output from the main battery; wherein the fuel cell control unit is configured to determine whether to distribute the electric power generated by the fuel cell only to the mobile charger based on whether an electric vehicle charging mode entry condition is satisfied; and a charging gun configured to be connected to a charging port provided at another electric vehicle.
Yoon teaches a bidirectional power converter configured to control electric power input to and output from the main battery (Figs. 1-2; a bidirectional DC-DC converter configured to control electric power input to and output from the main battery).
Yoon teaches wherein the fuel cell control unit is configured to determine whether to distribute the electric power generated by the fuel cell only to the mobile charger based on whether an electric vehicle charging mode entry condition is satisfied (Fig. 3; in step S320 the control unit determines to distribute the electric power generated by the fuel cell 100 only to the external power consumption device 50 via the external power supply inverter 900 (i.e., the mobile charger) based on whether an external power consumption device 50 has been connected in step S100 (i.e., a mode entry condition)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Yoon’s mobile power generation and distribution method to Choi’s mobile hybrid power system in order to determine proper power flow in the mobile hybrid power system when an external load or electric vehicle is connected and in need of power supply. The advantage to this being that such an adaptation would improve both energy efficiency and durability in performing external power generation (see Yoon ¶[02]).
However, Choi fails to explicitly teach a charging gun configured to be connected to a charging port provided at another electric vehicle.
Mera teaches a charging gun configured to be connected to a charging port provided at another electric vehicle (Fig. 1, output connector 152 can be connected to input connector 151 of the other vehicle through charging cable 184).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Choi and Yoon by adding the features disclosed by Mera. The benefit being the cost of managing the charging operations of multiple vehicles is reduced, the vehicles themselves manage the charging operations without external control, and vehicle-to-vehicle charging of multiple vehicles may be done in parallel at a high-speed and (in ¶’s [52, 57, and 64] of Mera).
With respect to claim 3, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1. However, Choi fails to explicitly teach wherein the electric vehicle charging mode entry condition includes confirmation that the vehicle enters a charging preparation state and a charging gun of the mobile charger is connected to another electric vehicle.
Mera teaches wherein the electric vehicle charging mode entry condition includes confirmation that the vehicle enters a charging preparation state (Fig. 5, steps 508 and 510 prepare the vehicle for charging the other vehicle) and a charging gun of the mobile charger is connected to another electric vehicle (Fig. 1, output connector 152 can be connected to input connector 151 of the other vehicle through charging cable 184).
Therefore, it would have obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Choi by adding the features disclosed by Mera. The benefit being the cost of managing the charging operations of multiple vehicles is reduced, the vehicles themselves manage the charging operations without external control, and vehicle-to-vehicle charging of multiple vehicles may be done in parallel at a high-speed (in ¶’s [52, 57, and 64] of Mera).
With respect to claim 4, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 3. However, Choi fails to explicitly teach wherein the vehicle charging preparation state includes stoppage of driving of the vehicle when the vehicle is turned on, an idle state, and a state in a case that a transmission in the vehicle is stage P.
Mera teaches wherein the vehicle charging preparation state includes stoppage of driving of the vehicle when the vehicle is turned on, an idle state, and a state in a case that a transmission in the vehicle is stage P (It is understood by one of ordinary skill in the art in order for the process flow illustrated in Fig. 5 to occur the vehicles must be on and in an idle-state and its transmission/drive unit set to parked, see ¶’s [33, 65-72]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Choi by adding the features disclosed by Mera. The benefit being the cost of managing the charging operations of multiple vehicles is reduced, the vehicles themselves manage the charging operations without external control, and vehicle-to-vehicle charging of multiple vehicles may be done in parallel at a high-speed and (in ¶’s [52, 57, and 64] of Mera).
With respect to claim 5, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1. However, Choi fails to explicitly teach wherein the fuel cell control unit is configured to compare a required charging power amount of another electric vehicle with an available charging power amount of the fuel cell to determine an executable charging power amount.
Yoon teaches wherein the fuel cell control unit is configured to compare a required charging power amount of another electric vehicle with an available charging power amount of the fuel cell to determine an executable charging power amount (Fig. 3, teaches in step S300 the available SOC is compared to the external device’s target SOC to determine how to supply power to the external device comparing it to a reference value of the fuel cell, see ¶’s [13, 48]. One of ordinary skill understands another electric vehicle is an external device).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Yoon’s mobile power generation and distribution method to Choi’s mobile hybrid power system in order to determine proper power flow in the mobile hybrid power system when an external load or electric vehicle is connected and in need of power supply. The advantage to this being that such an adaptation would improve both energy efficiency and durability in performing external power generation (see Yoon ¶[02]).
With respect to claim 7, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 5. However, Choi fails to explicitly teach wherein when the required charging power amount is less than the available charging power amount, the fuel cell control unit is configured to control the junction box for the divergence based on the required charging power amount and the available charging power amount so that electric power generated by the fuel cell is distributed to the mobile charger and the bidirectional power converter.
Yoon teaches wherein when the required charging power amount is less than the available charging power amount, the fuel cell control unit is configured to control the junction box for the divergence based on the required charging power amount and the available charging power amount so that electric power generated by the fuel cell is distributed to the mobile charger and the bidirectional power converter (Fig. 3, if at S300 the external power is < than the reference value then at S310 the power from the fuel cell is delivered to the external power supply and to the high voltage battery, see ¶’s [18, 48]. Furthermore, it is understood the power delivered to the battery is through the bidirectional power converter as shown in Figs. 1-2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Yoon’s mobile power generation and distribution method to Choi’s mobile hybrid power system in order to determine proper power flow in the mobile hybrid power system when an external load or electric vehicle is connected and in need of power supply. The advantage to this being that such an adaptation would improve both energy efficiency and durability in performing external power generation (see Yoon ¶[02]).
Claims 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (Korean Patent KR-20160086241-A), in view of Yoon et al. (USPGPN 20180326865) and Mera (USPGPN 20120013303), and further in view of Ham et al. (USPGPN 20160362010).
With respect to claim 6, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 5. However, Choi fails to explicitly teach wherein, when the required charging power amount is equal to or greater than the available charging power amount, the fuel cell control unit is configured to control the junction box for the divergence so that the electric power generated by the fuel cell is supplied only to the mobile charger.
Yoon teaches when the required charging power amount is equal to or greater than the available charging power amount, the fuel cell control unit is configured to control the junction box for the divergence so that electric power generated by the fuel cell is supplied only to the mobile charger (Fig. 3, if at S300 the external power is ≥ than the reference value then at S320 the power from the fuel cell is delivered only to the external power supply, see ¶’s [15, 48]).
However, Yoon teaches in Fig. 1 the DC-DC converter 300 is in series before the high voltage battery 500 and the DC external power supply port 920 requiring it to operate to supply power to both components.
Ham teaches in Fig. 1 the bidirectional power converter 130 is in parallel with the connection port 160. The bidirectional power converter 130 is dedicated to power flow operations of the main battery 120.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Choi and Yoon by adding the features disclosed by Ham to have a rearrangement of parts (refer to the MPEP section below). The advantage of this modification is the bidirectional power converter would be dedicated to power flow management of the main battery (see ¶ [29] of Ham). This configuration in Ham ensures the converter meets the power requirements of the main battery without needing frequent replacements or additional costly components due to wear from extended use powering both the battery and the output port in Yoon. Thus by modifying Yoon so that the bidirectional converter is after the junction box's connection with the external port (see annotated Fig. 1 from Yoon below), it serves to reduce wear and costs from more frequent replacement of the converter.
MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C)
C. Rearrangement of Parts
In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice).
PNG
media_image1.png
341
527
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 8, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Further, Choi teaches the fuel cell control unit is configured to control the junction box for divergence (Fig. 1; the control unit 55 is configured to control the relays for divergence).
However, Choi fails to explicitly teach wherein, when the electric vehicle charging mode entry condition is not satisfied, the electric power generated by the fuel cell is not supplied to the mobile charger.
Ham teaches wherein when the electric vehicle charging mode entry condition is not satisfied the fuel cell control unit is configured to control electric power generated by the fuel cell is not supplied to the mobile charger (Fig. 3, when step S103 is not satisfied the vehicle enters driving mode in S115, see ¶ [45]. It is understood by one of ordinary skill in S115 the power generated by the fuel cell 110 is not supplied to the portable power generator 200).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Choi by adding the features disclosed by Ham. The benefit being a safety feature is included in order to avoid an accident during external power delivery by ensuring the fuel cell vehicle is in a power generation mode (in ¶’s [05, 53] of Ham).
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (Korean Patent KR-20160086241-A, in view of Yoon et al. (USPGPN 20180326865) and Mera (USPGPN 20120013303), and further in view of Sakurai (USPGPN 20050269981).
With respect to claim 9, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1.
However, Choi fails to explicitly teach wherein the mobile charger includes: a first relay configured to interrupt or allow supply of current from the junction box for the divergence; a power converter configured to convert current supplied from the fuel cell into current necessary to charge another electric vehicle; and a second relay configured to interrupt surge of current converted by the power converter.
Yoon teaches a first relay configured to interrupt or allow supply of current from the junction box for the divergence (Fig. 1, relay 910 makes or breaks the connection to the external power supply from the junction box).
Yoon teaches a power converter configured to convert current supplied from the fuel cell into current necessary to charge another device (Fig. 2, external power supply inverter 900 converts fuel cell 100 power for supply to the external power consumption device 50).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Yoon’s mobile charger and circuitry to Choi’s mobile hybrid power system in order to deliver the proper power flow in the mobile hybrid power system when an external load or electric vehicle is connected and in need of power supply. The advantage to this being that such an adaptation would improve both energy efficiency and durability in performing external power generation (see Yoon ¶[02]).
However, Choi fails to explicitly teach a second relay configured to interrupt surge of current converted by the power converter; and configured to charge another electric vehicle.
Mera teaches configured to charge another electric vehicle (Fig. 1, vehicle 100 contains charging circuitry to charge another vehicle through inter-vehicle charging, see ¶ [43] and Figs. 2, 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Choi and Yoon by adding the features disclosed by Mera. The benefit being the cost of managing the charging operations of multiple vehicles is reduced, the vehicles themselves manage the charging operations without external control, and vehicle-to-vehicle charging of multiple vehicles may be done in parallel at a high-speed and (in ¶’s [52, 57, and 64] of Mera).
However, Choi fails to explicitly teach a second relay configured to interrupt surge of current converted by the power converter.
Sakurai teaches a second relay configured to interrupt surge of current converted by the power converter (Fig. 2, relay Ry3 protects invertor 36 from excessive surge currents, see ¶ [34]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Choi, Yoon, and Mera by adding the features disclosed by Sakurai. The benefit being a control apparatus of an electrical vehicle is provided in which a relay is switches to a disconnecting state without causing any failure of the electric vehicle (in ¶ [09] of Sakurai).
With respect to claim 10, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 9.
However, Choi fails to explicitly teach wherein a control unit of the mobile charger is configured to transmit information related to whether the charging gun is connected to the charging port of another electric vehicle and information related to a required charging power amount of another electric vehicle to the fuel cell control unit configured to control the fuel cell.
Yoon teaches information related to a required charging power amount of another device to a fuel cell control unit configured to control the fuel cell (Fig. 3, S200 teaches the required power needed by the external device and additional steps are used determine control of the fuel cell 100).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Yoon’s mobile charger and circuitry to Choi’s mobile hybrid power system in order to deliver the proper power flow in the mobile hybrid power system when an external load or electric vehicle is connected and in need of power supply. The advantage to this being that such an adaptation would improve both energy efficiency and durability in performing external power generation (see Yoon ¶[02]).
However, Choi fails to explicitly teach wherein a control unit of the mobile charger is configured to transmit information related to whether the charging gun is connected to the charging port of another electric vehicle.
Mera teaches wherein a control unit of the mobile charger is configured to transmit information related to whether the charging gun is connected to the charging port of another electric vehicle (Fig. 2, the charge information obtaining section 230 obtains information from another electric vehicle through wired communication, see ¶ [53]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Choi and Yoon by adding the features disclosed by Mera. The benefit being the cost of managing the charging operations of multiple vehicles is reduced, the vehicles themselves manage the charging operations without external control, and vehicle-to-vehicle charging of multiple vehicles may be done in parallel at a high-speed and (in ¶’s [52, 57, and 64] of Mera).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (Korean Patent KR-20160086241-A, in view of Yoon et al. (USPGPN 20180326865), Mera (USPGPN 20120013303) and Sakurai (USPGPN 20050269981), and further in view of Ham et al. (USPGPN 20160362010).
With respect to claim 11, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 9.
However, Choi fails to explicitly teach wherein, when a charging release mode entry condition is satisfied, a control unit of the mobile charger is configured to transmit a signal informing that a charging release mode has been satisfied to the fuel cell control unit configured to control the fuel cell and is configured to control the first relay to interrupt supply of the electric power to another electric vehicle.
Mera teaches interrupt supply of electric power to another electric vehicle (Fig. 5, in step 512 power supply to the other electric vehicle is terminated once the fed power reaches the requested power amount, see ¶ [70]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to have modified Choi by adding the features disclosed by Mera. The benefit being the cost of managing the charging operations of multiple vehicles is reduced, the vehicles themselves manage the charging operations without external control, and vehicle-to-vehicle charging of multiple vehicles may be done in parallel at a high-speed and (in ¶’s [52, 57, and 64] of Mera).
However, Choi fails to explicitly teach wherein when a charging release mode entry condition is satisfied a control unit of the mobile charger is configured to transmit a signal informing that a charging release mode has been satisfied to a fuel cell control unit configured to control the fuel cell and is configured to control the first relay to interrupt supply of electric power to another device.
Ham teaches wherein when a charging release mode entry condition is satisfied a control unit of the mobile charger is configured to transmit a signal informing that a charging release mode has been satisfied to a fuel cell control unit configured to control the fuel cell and is configured to control the first relay to interrupt supply of electric power to another device (Fig. 6, in steps S141-S143 a stopping command is received by the fuel cell controller and the relay is commanded to turn off supply to the power generator device, see ¶’s [51-52]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Choi and Mera by adding the features disclosed by Ham. The benefit being a safety feature is included in order to avoid an accident during external power delivery by ensuring the fuel cell vehicle is in a power generation mode (in ¶’s [05, 53] of Ham).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (Korean Patent KR-20160086241-A, in view of Yoon et al. (USPGPN 20180326865) and Mera (USPGPN 20120013303), and further in view of Ko (WIPO Patent WO-2018101702-A1).
With respect to claim 12, Choi teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1. However, Choi fails to explicitly teach wherein a diode is disposed between the mobile charger and the junction box for the divergence, and wherein the diode is configured to interrupt flow of reverse current from the mobile charger to the fuel cell.
Yoon teaches wherein the diode is configured to interrupt flow of reverse current from the mobile charger to the fuel cell (Figs. 1-2, diode shown is known by one of ordinary skill in the art to interrupt flow of reverse current towards the fuel cell).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have adapted Yoon’s mobile charger and circuitry to Choi’s mobile hybrid power system in order to deliver the proper power flow in the mobile hybrid power system when an external load or electric vehicle is connected and in need of power supply. The advantage to this being that such an adaptation would improve both energy efficiency and durability in performing external power generation (see Yoon ¶[02]).
However, Choi fails to explicitly teach wherein a diode is disposed between the mobile charger and the junction box for the divergence.
Ko teaches wherein a diode is disposed between the mobile charger and the junction box for the divergence (Figs. 7-8, diode 360 is between switch 340 used to change current paths and boosting/step-up unit 330 used for matching voltages for charging the second electric vehicle, see ¶’s [86-89]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Choi and Yoon by adding the features disclosed by Ko. The benefit being the diode is used for blocking reverse current caused by a connection error in the switch caused inadvertently by user/communication error thus preventing charging failure or damage to the charging system (in ¶ [92] of Ko).
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Austin (USPGPN 20210135296) teaches a vehicle battery charger and a vehicle battery charging system are described and illustrated, and can include a controller enabling a user to enter a time of day at which the vehicle battery charger or system begins and/or ends charging of the vehicle battery. The vehicle battery charger can be separate from the vehicle, can be at least partially integrated into the vehicle, can include a transmitter and/or a receiver capable of communication with a controller that is remote from the vehicle and vehicle charger, and can be controlled by a user or another party (e.g., a power utility) to control battery charging based upon a time of day, cost of power, or other factors.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Frank A Silva whose telephone number is (703)756-1698. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 09:30 am -06:30 pm ET.
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, Drew Dunn can be reached at 571-272-2312. 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.
/FRANK ALEXIS SILVA/ Examiner, Art Unit 2859
/DREW A DUNN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights