DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-7, 9-10, 12-13, and 15 have been amended. Claims 8, 11, and 14 have been cancelled. Claims 21-26 have been added. Therefore, claims 1-7, 9-10, 12-13, 15, and 19-26 remain pending in the application.
Claim Objections
Claims 15 and 26 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 15, line 1, Examiner notes the status identifier indicates “(Previously presented)”, however claim 15 appears to be amended; see MPEP 714
In claim 26, line 2, “ a first pin end” should read “the first pin end”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 12 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the multi-piece fastener" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of examination, claim 12 will be read as “the lockbolt fastener”.
The term “imparting a sufficient force” in claim 26, line 4 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “imparting a sufficient force” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For the purpose of examination, claim 26, will be read as “imparting a force”.
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) 1-7, 9-10, 12-13, 21-23, and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schultz (US20030210969A1), hereinafter "Schultz", in view of Torresen (US2542376A), hereinafter "Torresen".
Regarding claim 1, Schultz teaches a lockbolt fastener (see Fig 2, Examiner notes fastener 20 and collar 46 as a lockbolt fastener) comprising:
a fastening collar (Fig 2, collar 46) comprising
a first collar end (see Fig 2, Examiner notes an end of collar 46 adjacent workpieces 28 as a first collar end),
a second collar end (see Fig 2, Examiner notes an end of collar 46 distal from workpieces 28 as a second collar end),
an inner collar surface (Fig 2, surface 64) extending (see Fig 2) from the first collar end (see Fig 2) to the second collar end (see Fig 2) and defining a collar cavity (see Fig 2, Examiner notes an interior cavity of collar 46 in which fastener 20 extends through as defining a collar cavity), and
an external collar surface (see Fig 2, Examiner notes an exterior surface of collar 46 as an external collar surface) comprising a first surface region (see Fig 2, Examiner notes a lower region of collar 46 adjacent workpieces 28 as comprising a first surface region) configured to receive a torque (capable of receiving a torque, i.e. this is a functional recitation; Examiner notes the lower region of collar 46 adjacent workpieces is capable of receiving a torque, e.g. pliers) and a second surface region (see Fig 2, Examiner notes an upper region of collar 46 distal workpieces 28 as a second surface region) adjacent (see Fig 2) to the first surface region (see Fig 2), wherein the second surface region (see Fig 2) comprises a substantially cylindrical shape (see Fig 2); and
a pin (Fig 2, fastener 20) configured to be at least partially received (see Fig 2) by the collar cavity (see Fig 2), the pin (20) comprising
a first pin end (see Fig 2, Examiner notes an end of fastener 20 distal from head 22 as a first pin end),
a second pin end (see Fig 2, Examiner notes an end of fastener 20 including head 22 as a second pin end) comprising a head portion (Fig 2, head 22), and
a shank (see Fig 2, Examiner notes a shank of fastener 20 as a shank) extending (see Fig 2) intermediate the first pin end (see Fig 2) and the second pin end (see Fig 2), wherein the shank (see Fig 2) comprises
a pull region (Fig 2, pin tail portion 48), and
a threaded portion (Fig 2, threaded shank portion 38) intermediate (see Fig 2) the pull region (48) and the second pin end (see Fig 2), and wherein the inner collar surface (64) is configured to be deformed (see Fig 2, Paragraphs 0034-0035) onto the threaded portion (38) and secured (see Fig 2, Paragraphs 0034-0035) to the shank (see Fig 2), and the fastening collar (46) is configured to be removed from the shank (see Fig 2) after deformation (see Fig 2, Paragraphs 0034-0035) by applying a torque (capable of being removed from the shank after deformation by applying a torque, i.e. this is a functional recitation; Examiner notes collar 46 is capable of being removed from the shank after deformation by applying an appropriate amount of torque using e.g. pliers) to the first surface region (see Fig 2) of the external collar surface (see Fig 2).
Schultz fails to teach a tapered threaded portion and wherein a diameter of the tapered threaded portion decreases in a direction towards the first pin end.
However, Torresen teaches it is known to provide a tapered threaded portion (Figs 1 and 6, threaded end 22), wherein a diameter (see Figs 1 and 6, Examiner notes a major diameter of threaded end 22 as a diameter) of the tapered threaded portion (22) decreases (see Figs 1 and 6) in a direction (see Figs 1 and 6, Examiner notes a direction parallel to a longitudinal axis of rivet 16 as a direction) towards (see Figs 1 and 6) the first pin end (see Fig 1, Examiner notes an end of rivet 16 distal head 20 as a first pin end), and wherein the inner collar surface (see Fig 1, Examiner notes an inner surface of a bore of collar 24 as an inner collar surface) is configured to be deformed (see Fig 2, Col 3, lines 51-72) onto the tapered threaded portion (22) and secured (see Fig 2, Col 3, lines 51-72) to the shank (see Fig 1), and the fastening collar (Fig 1, collar 24) is configured to be removed from the shank (see Fig 1) after deformation (see Fig 2, Col 3, lines 51-72) by applying a torque (capable of being removed from the shank after deformation by applying a torque, i.e. this is a functional recitation; Examiner notes collar 24 is capable of being removed from the shank after deformation by applying an appropriate amount of torque using e.g. pliers) to the first surface region (Fig 2, flange 36) of the external collar surface (see Fig 1, Examiner notes an exterior surface of collar 24 as an external collar surface).
Therefore, as evidenced by Torresen, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine an adequately sized and shaped tapered threaded portion and wherein a diameter of the tapered threaded portion decreases in a direction towards the first pin end as taught by Torresen to Schultz. The rationale for supporting this conclusion of obviousness is to facilitate a tighter joint and accomplishing a reduction in weight (Torresen, Col 4, lines 41-49).
Regarding claim 2, modified Schultz teaches the lockbolt fastener (see Fig 2) of claim 1 but fails to teach wherein the head portion is configured to receive a torque.
However, Schultz in Paragraph 0029, indicates Fig 1 depicts head 22 having a flush configuration but may include other head configurations which are well known in the art.
Therefore, as evidenced by Schultz, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the head portion of modified Schultz with an adequately sized and shaped head portion configured to receive a torque. Additionally, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the head portion to be configured to receive a torque as an obvious change in shape. MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(B). The rationale for supporting this conclusion of obviousness is to provide common head configurations configured to receive a torque according to application and requirements.
Regarding claim 3, modified Schultz teaches the lockbolt fastener (see Fig 2) of claim 2 and further teaches wherein the head portion (22) comprises at least one of a substantially flat side (see Fig 2, Paragraph 0029), a rib, a spline, an indent, a knurl, a lobe, a bore, a recessed socket, and a tab.
Regarding claim 4, modified Schultz teaches the lockbolt fastener (see Fig 2) of claim 1 and further teaches wherein a dimension (Torresen, see Figs 1 and 6, Examiner notes a dimension of the major diameter of threaded end 22 as a dimension) of the tapered threaded portion (Torresen, 22) decreases (Torresen, see Figs 1 and 6) along a helical lock groove thread portion (Torresen, see Figs 1 and 6, Examiner notes threaded end 22 as along a helical lock groove thread portion) in an axial direction (Fig 2, axis 23) towards the first pin end (see Fig 2).
Regarding claim 5, modified Schultz teaches the lockbolt fastener (see Fig 2) of claim 4 and further teaches wherein the dimension (Torresen, see Figs 1 and 6) is a thread crest (Torresen, see Figs 1 and 6, Examiner notes thread crests of threaded end 22 as a thread crest) of the tapered threaded portion (Torresen, 22).
Regarding claim 6, modified Schultz teaches the lockbolt fastener (see Fig 2) of claim 4 and further teaches wherein the dimension (Torresen, see Figs 1 and 6) decreases (Torresen, see Figs 1 and 6) along at least 50% (Torresen, see Figs 1 and 6) of a length (Torresen, see Figs 1 and 6) of the tapered threaded portion (Torresen, 22) in the axial direction (23) towards (see Fig 2) the first pin end (see Fig 2).
Regarding claims 7, 21, and 22, modified Schultz teaches the lockbolt fastener (see Fig 2) of claim 4 and further teaches wherein the tapered threaded portion (Torresen, 22) decreases (Torresen, see Figs 1 and 6) in diameter (Torresen, see Figs 1 and 6) towards the first pin end (see Fig 2) but fails to teach at an angle in a range of [claim 7: 0.005 degrees to 15 degrees; claim 21: 0.5 degrees to 15 degrees; claim 22: 5 degrees to 15 degrees].
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have modified an angle of the tapered threaded portion as disclosed by modified Schultz to decrease in diameter towards the first pin end at an angle in a range of [claim 7: 0.005 degrees to 15 degrees; claim 21: 0.5 degrees to 15 degrees; claim 22: 5 degrees to 15 degrees], since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(A). The rationale for supporting this conclusion of obviousness is to optimize the binding engagement between the collar and fastener based on application and requirements.
Regarding claim 9, modified Schultz teaches the lockbolt fastener (see Fig 2) of claim 1 and further teaches wherein the shank (see Fig 2) of the pin (20) comprises a first shank region (Fig 2, shank portion 30), wherein the tapered threaded portion (Torresen, 22) is intermediate (see Fig 2) the first shank region (30) and the pull region (48), and wherein the first shank region (30) comprises a substantially cylindrical shape (see Fig 2, Paragraph 0030).
Regarding claim 10, modified Schultz teaches the lockbolt fastener (see Fig 2) of claim 1 and further teaches wherein the first surface region (see Fig 2) of the external collar surface (see Fig 2) comprises at least one of a substantially flat side, a rib, a spline, an indent, a knurl, a lobe, a bore (see Fig 2, Examiner notes a bore extending through the lower region of collar 46 adjacent workpieces 28 as comprising a bore), and a tab.
Regarding claim 12, as best understood, modified Schultz teaches the lockbolt fastener (see Fig 2) of claim 1 and further teaches wherein the multi-piece fastener (see Fig 2) is configured to be installed (see Fig 2, Paragraphs 0034-0035) in a bore (Fig 2, holes 32) in a structure (Fig 2, workpieces 28) and wherein the structure (28) is configured as at least one of an aerospace part or component (see Fig 2, Paragraph 0017), an automotive part or component, a transportation part or component, and a building and construction part or component.
Regarding claim 13, modified Schultz teaches the lockbolt fastener (see Fig 2) of claim 1 but fails to teach wherein a diameter of the shank is in a range of 0.06 inches to 4 inches.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have modified a diameter of the shank as disclosed by modified Schultz to be in a range of 0.06 inches to 4 inches, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(A). The rationale for supporting this conclusion of obviousness is to provide an assembly of appropriate size based on application and requirements.
Regarding claim 23, modified Schultz teaches the lockbolt fastener (see Fig 2) of claim 1 and further teaches wherein the pull region (48) comprises an annular shoulder, a groove (Fig 2, grooves 52), or a combination thereof.
Regarding claim 26, as best understood, modified Schultz teaches a method (see Fig 2, Paragraphs 0034-0035) for fastening (see Fig 2), the method (see Fig 2) comprising:
inserting (see Fig 2, Paragraphs 0034-0035) a first pin end (see Fig 2) of the lockbolt fastener (see Fig 2) of claim 1 (see claim 1) into a bore (Fig 2, holes 32) in a structure (Fig 2, workpieces 28),
applying (see Fig 2, Paragraphs 0034-0035) an axial force (see Fig 2, Paragraphs 0034-0035) to the pull region (48) of the pin (20);
imparting (see Fig 2, Paragraphs 0034-0035) a sufficient force (see Fig 2, Paragraphs 0034-0035) to the second surface region (see Fig 2) to swage (see Fig 2, Paragraphs 0034-0035) the inner collar surface (64) onto the tapered threaded portion (Torresen, 22) thereby securing (see Fig 2, Paragraphs 0034-0035) the pin (20) to the fastening collar (46) and forming threads (see Fig 2, Paragraphs 0034-0035) on the inner collar surface (64).
Claim(s) 15, 19-20, and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schultz, in view of Torresen and Sherry et al. (US5579986A), hereinafter "Sherry".
Regarding claim 15, Schultz teaches a method (see Fig 2, Paragraphs 0034-0035) for fastening (see Fig 2), the method (see Fig 2) comprising:
inserting (see Fig 2, Paragraphs 0034-0035) a first pin end (see Fig 2, Examiner notes an end of fastener 20 distal from head 22 as a first pin end) of a multi-piece fastener (see Fig 2, Examiner notes fastener 20 and collar 46 as a multi-piece fastener) into a bore (Fig 2, holes 32) in a structure (Fig 2, workpieces 28), the multi-piece fastener (see Fig 2) comprising
a fastening collar (Fig 2, collar 46) comprising
a first collar end (see Fig 2, Examiner notes an end of collar 46 adjacent workpieces 28 as a first collar end),
a second collar end (see Fig 2, Examiner notes an end of collar 46 distal from workpieces 28 as a second collar end),
an inner collar surface (Fig 2, surface 64) extending (see Fig 2) from the first collar end (see Fig 2) to the second collar end (see Fig 2) and defining a collar cavity (see Fig 2, Examiner notes an interior cavity of collar 46 in which fastener 20 extends through as defining a collar cavity), and
an external collar surface (see Fig 2, Examiner notes an exterior surface of collar 46 as an external collar surface) comprising a first surface region (see Fig 2, Examiner notes a lower region of collar 46 adjacent workpieces 28 as comprising a first surface region) and a second surface region (see Fig 2, Examiner notes an upper region of collar 46 distal workpieces 28 as a second surface region) adjacent (see Fig 2) to the first surface region (see Fig 2), wherein the second surface region (see Fig 2) comprises a substantially cylindrical shape (see Fig 2), and
a pin (Fig 2, fastener 20) configured to be at least partially received (see Fig 2) by the collar cavity (see Fig 2), the pin (20) comprising
the first pin end (see Fig 2),
a second pin end (see Fig 2, Examiner notes an end of fastener 20 including head 22 as a second pin end) comprising a head portion (Fig 2, head 22), and
a shank (see Fig 2, Examiner notes a shank of fastener 20 as a shank) extending (see Fig 2) extending (see Fig 2) intermediate the first pin end (see Fig 2) and the second pin end (see Fig 2), wherein the shank (see Fig 2) comprises a pull region (Fig 2, pin tail portion 48), and a threaded portion (Fig 2, threaded shank portion 38) intermediate (see Fig 2) the pull region (48) and the second pin end (see Fig 2);
deforming (see Fig 2, Paragraphs 0034-0035) the inner collar surface (64) onto the threaded portion (38) thereby securing (see Fig 2, Paragraphs 0034-0035) the pin (20) to the fastening collar (46).
Schultz fails to teach a tapered threaded portion, wherein a diameter of the tapered threaded portion decreases in a direction towards the first pin end, and subsequent to deforming the inner collar surface, removing the fastening collar from the pin by applying a torque to the external collar surface.
However, Torresen teaches it is known to provide a tapered threaded portion (Figs 1 and 6, threaded end 22) and wherein a diameter (see Figs 1 and 6, Examiner notes a major diameter of threaded end 22 as a diameter) of the tapered threaded portion (22) decreases (see Figs 1 and 6) in a direction (see Figs 1 and 6, Examiner notes a direction parallel to a longitudinal axis of rivet 16 as a direction) towards (see Figs 1 and 6) the first pin end (see Fig 1, Examiner notes an end of rivet 16 distal head 20 as a first pin end).
Therefore, as evidenced by Torresen, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine an adequately sized and shaped tapered threaded portion and wherein a diameter of the tapered threaded portion decreases in a direction towards the first pin end as taught by Torresen to Schultz. The rationale for supporting this conclusion of obviousness is to facilitate a tighter joint and accomplishing a reduction in weight (Col 4, lines 41-49).
Schultz, in view of Torresen fails to teach subsequent to deforming the inner collar surface, removing the fastening collar from the pin by applying a torque to the external collar surface.
However, Sherry teaches it is known to provide subsequent to deforming (see Figs 4-5, Col 3, lines 44-48) the inner collar surface (see Fig 3, Examiner notes an interior surface of bore 20 as the inner collar surface), removing (see Fig 6, Col 3, lines 63-70) the fastening collar (Fig 6, collar 12) from the pin (Figs 3 and 6, pin 11) by applying a torque (see Fig 6, Col 3, lines 63-70) to the external collar surface (Fig 6, portion 22).
Therefore, as evidenced by Sherry, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine subsequent to deforming the inner collar surface, removing the fastening collar from the pin by applying a torque to the external collar surface as taught by Sherry to modified Schultz. The rationale for supporting this conclusion of obviousness is to facilitate replaceably removing the collar from the threaded pin shank by unscrewing the collar with use of a spanner (Sherry, Col 3, lines 63-70).
Regarding claim 19, modified Schultz teaches the method (see Fig 2) of claim 15 and further teaches wherein a dimension (Torresen, see Figs 1 and 6, Examiner notes a dimension of the major diameter of threaded end 22 as a dimension) decreases (Torresen, see Figs 1 and 6) along at least 50% (Torresen, see Figs 1 and 6) of a length (Torresen, see Figs 1 and 6) of the tapered threaded portion (Torresen, 22) in an axial direction (Fig 2, axis 23) towards the first pin end (see Fig 2).
Regarding claim 20, modified Schultz teaches the method (see Fig 2) of claim 15 and further teaches wherein the tapered threaded portion (Torresen, 22) decreases (Torresen, see Figs 1 and 6) in diameter (Torresen, see Figs 1 and 6) towards the first pin end (see Fig 2) but fails to teach at an angle in a range of 0.005 degrees to 15 degrees.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have modified an angle of the tapered threaded portion as disclosed by modified Schultz to decrease in diameter towards the first pin end at an angle in a range of 0.005 degrees to 15 degrees, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2144.04 (IV)(A). The rationale for supporting this conclusion of obviousness is to optimize the binding engagement between the collar and fastener based on application and requirements.
Regarding claim 24, modified Schultz teaches the lockbolt fastener (see Fig 2) of claim 1 but fails to teach wherein the first surface region comprises a square nut portion, a hex nut portion, a knurled nut portion, or a splined nut portion.
However, Sherry teaches it is known to provide wherein the first surface region (see Fig 6, Examiner notes a region of collar 12 having portion 22 as the first surface region) comprises a square nut portion, a hex nut portion (Fig 6, portion 22; Col 3, lines 63-70, Sherry indicates hexagon), a knurled nut portion, or a splined nut portion.
Therefore, as evidenced by Sherry, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine an adequately sized and shaped hex nut portion as taught by Sherry to modified Schultz. The rationale for supporting this conclusion of obviousness is to facilitate replaceably removing the collar from the threaded pin shank by unscrewing the collar with use of a spanner (Sherry, Col 3, lines 63-70).
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schultz, in view of Torresen and Fulbright et al. (US5315755A), hereinafter "Fulbright".
Regarding claim 25, modified Schultz teaches the lockbolt fastener (see Fig 2) of claim 1 but fails to teach wherein the shank does not include a breakneck groove.
However, Fulbright teaches it is known to provide wherein the shank (Fig 1, shank 18) does not include a breakneck groove (see Fig 1, Col 6, lines 38-63, Fulbright indicates shank 18 is constructed without a breakneck groove).
Therefore, as evidenced by Fulbright, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine wherein the shank does not include a breakneck groove as taught by Fulbright to modified Schultz. The rationale for supporting this conclusion of obviousness is to provide a fastener having the advantage of being lighter and of a lower cost (Fulbright, Col 1, lines 57-68).
Allowable Subject Matter
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
The Examiner respectfully notes claims 1 and 15 would be allowable if amended to recite the tapered threaded portion includes a continuous thread. For example, claim 1, beginning line 19, “...deformed onto the tapered threaded portion and secured to the shank, and wherein the tapered threaded portion includes a continuous thread such that the fastening collar...” and claim 15, beginning line 18, “...direction towards the first pin end, wherein the tapered threaded portion includes a continuous thread;...”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOCK WONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1349. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:30am - 5:00pm (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, Kristina Fulton can be reached at (571)272-7376. 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.
/J.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3675 /KRISTINA R FULTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675