DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. The amendment filed on 03/23/2026 has been received and fully considered.
3. Claims 1-17 are presented for examination.
Response to Arguments
4 Applicant's arguments filed 03/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The rejection under 35 USC 101 has been withdrawn along with the drawings’ objection. Regarding applicant’s assertions that: “… the applied references fail to teach or suggest "simulating the motion of the rotatable body in the simulation computer on the basis of: a torque of the simulated rotatable body corresponding to the measured actual torque of the real rotatable body when the actual speed exceeds the predetermined limit speed; and a determined value for the torque of the simulated rotatable body when the actual speed does not exceed the predetermined limit speed" as recited in exemplary independent claim 1”, the Examiner respectfully disagrees and notes that while Germann et al. “torque-controlled simulation” (see fig.3, col.2 ; col.7 lines 2-15, A torque-controlled electric load machine 20 is mounted in a known manner on the shaft 12 driven by the engine 10. The inertia of this machine preferably corresponds approximately to that of one wheel, so that the rotational motion of the wheel is dynamically modeled realistically by means of this machine and need not be simulated. The load machine 20 and its torque control are designed so that the machine torque delivered is brought as quickly as possible to the respective torque setpoint determined by the simulation computer.), relied upon for some aspect of the simulation, it is clear that Rampen et al. provides the different scenarios by which the simulation could be performed (see para 0145-0149) and the rejection makes clear what is relied upon for each limitation, and the combination of the cited references clearly render obvious the limitation, contrary to applicant’s assertions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
5.0 Claim(s) 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tian (USPG_PUB No. 2017/0074753), in view Germann et al. (US Patent No. 6,754,615), further in view of Rampen et al. (USPG_PUB No. 2019/0226959).
5.1 In considering claims 1 and 8, Doyle et al. teaches a method for simulating a motion of a rotatable body in a simulation computer using a brake test bench that comprises an engine, a real rotatable body representing the simulated rotatable body and a brake for braking the real rotatable body (see fig.3-5), the method comprising:
specifying a target speed using the simulation computer (see para [0036], real-time state data for the motor 526 (e.g., position, speed, etc.) provided to the motor via the controller); applying this target speed to the engine (see para [0036], In this example, motion system 524 comprises a motor 526, which responds to control signaling 520 provided by controller 518. Motor 526 is used to drive a load (not shown), such as a positioning axis, a rotational component of a machine, or other motor-driven load. Controller 518 also monitors feedback 522, which provides substantially real-time state data for the motor 526 (e.g., position, speed, etc.). In some scenarios, controller 518 may be a hardware controller, such as a programmable logic controller, motor drive, or other type of hardware controller); rotating the real rotatable body via the engine pressurized with the target speed (see par [0039], In the configuration depicted in FIG. 5, estimation system 302 sends torque command signal 410 to controller 518, which in turn instructs the motor 526 (via control signaling 520) to rotate in the indicated direction at the indicated torque. As the motor is rotating, velocity monitoring component 306 reads velocity feedback 404 from controller 518 (which itself measures the velocity of the motor 526 via feedback 522); specifying a braking value using the simulation computer (see para [0031] Interface component 312 can be configured to receive user input and to render output to the user in any suitable format (e.g., visual, audio, tactile, etc.). User input can be, for example, user-entered parameters used by the inertia and friction estimation system 302 when executing an estimation sequence (to be described in more detail below). Torque command generator 304 can be configured to output a torque control i.e. a brake torque produce by frictional force applied to the velocity monitoring component 306 to measure and record the velocity of the motor over time in response to the applied torque control command generated by the torque command generator 304); controlling the brake acting on the real rotatable body on the basis of the specified braking value (see [0033], suitable type of control signal), which instructs a motor driving the motion system to rotate in a specified direction at a given torque. inertia and friction estimation system 302 can control torque command signal 410 such that the torque value varies continuously over time between a maximum and minimum torque value and thus control the rotation and braking of the rotatable body. [0034] The motion system will accelerate or decelerate in accordance with the torque command signal 410 issued by inertia and friction estimation system 302, and velocity feedback 404 from the motion control system is provided to the estimation system 302. Velocity feedback 404 represents the velocity of the motion system over time in response to application of torque command signal 410. In an example testing sequence, inertia and friction estimation system 302 can control torque command signal 410 as a function of the velocity feedback 404 and one or more user-defined setpoints allow for braking system to be controlled); However, he does not expressly teach the step of measuring the actual torque and the actual speed of the real rotatable body; determining whether the actual speed exceeds a predetermined limit speed, and simulating the motion of the rotatable body in the simulation computer on the basis of a torque of the simulated rotatable body corresponding to the measured actual torque of the real rotatable body when the actual speed exceeds the predetermined limit speed, and a determined value for the torque of the simulated rotatable body the actual speed does not exceed the predetermined limit speed.
Germann et al. teaches the step of measuring the actual torque and the actual speed of the real rotatable body (see abstract, fig.3, “torque-controlled simulation”, also column 2 lines 62-67, the test beds are used to reproduce load collectives whose data in the form of angular wheel speed and torque or moment on the wheels of interest are recorded in a conventional way on vehicles equipped with devices for measuring torque and rotational speed on a representative test route. Then the test object can be tested, for example, with regard to its endurance on the test bed, which is operated as a load test bed, by running the load collectives which have been obtained under realistic conditions on the test route.); determining whether the actual speed exceeds a predetermined limit speed (see col.1 lines 44-51, Therefore, a spinning or blocked wheel is simulated as an alternative so that the torque setpoint is limited to a corresponding constant slip moment which is calculated from a preselected adhesion value representing the road surface, a tire normal force and a tire radius. The tire is simulated in a slip-free model except torque transmitting conditions where the limiter causes the rotational speed regulator to run to its limit to simulate a locking or spinning wheel to ensure predetermined speed limit is ascertained in the process).
Tian and Germann et al. are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor and that the model analyzes by Germann et al. is similar to that of Tian. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled in the art at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Germann et al. with that of Tian because Germann et al. teaches achieving accuracy that meets its respective requirement (see col.4 lines 12-23).
The combination of Tian and Germann et al. provides for simulation the motion of the rotatable body (see Germann et al. fig.3), but to specifically teach the condition of which it is simulated on the basis of if the actual speed exceeds the predetermined limit speed, or if the actual speed does not exceed the predetermined limit speed. Rampen et al. provides for simulating a rotatable body drives by motor includes simulating on the condition that if the actual speed exceeds the predetermined limit speed, or if the actual speed does not exceed the predetermined limit speed (see para [0145] It is useful to simulate the operation of the system prior to deployment to determine demand data which would lead to sustainable function without breaching any operating bounds such as: [0146] the speed of rotation (of the rotatable body) exceeding a maximum limit [0147] the speed of rotation (of the rotatable body) falling below a minimum limit).
Tian, Germann et al., and Rampen et al. are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor and that the model analyzes by Rampen et al is similar to that of Tian and Germann et al. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled in the art at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Rampen et al. with that of Tian and Germann et al. because Rampen et al teaches the improvement of effeciency (see para [0060]).
5.2 Regarding claim 2, the combination of Tian, Germann et al., and Rampen et al. teaches that wherein the value for the torque of the simulated rotatable body is determined on the basis of actual torques previously measured as a function of the actual speed (see Tian fig,3-5, 10-11, para [0039] Interface component 312 provides torque command generator 304 with the user-defined parameters 512. When testing is initiated, torque command generator 304 outputs a torque command signal 410 to the motion system 524. Torque command signal 410 is represented as u(t), since the torque command generator 304 will vary the torque command continuously over time. In the configuration depicted in FIG. 5, estimation system 302 sends torque command signal 410 to controller 518, which in turn instructs the motor 526 (via control signaling 520) to rotate in the indicated direction at the indicated torque. As the motor is rotating, velocity monitoring component 306 reads velocity feedback 404 from controller 518 (which itself measures the velocity of the motor 526 via feedback 522). [0040] An example testing sequence is now explained with reference to FIG. 6, which illustrates an example torque command u(t) and corresponding velocity feedback v(t) graphed over time. As shown on torque graph 602, the torque command signal u(t) is bounded by Umax and Umin. Velocity parameters Vmax and Vmin, shown on velocity graph 604, will determine phase transitions of the testing sequence. The values of Umax, Umin, Vmax, and Vmin can be defined by the user prior to testing (e.g., as user-defined parameters 512 of FIG. 5. Further Rampen para [0073]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled in the art at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Rampen et al. with that of Tian and Germann et al. because Rampen et al teaches the improvement of effeciency (see para [0060]).
5.3 As per claim 3, the combination of Tian, Germann et al., and Rampen et al. teaches that wherein the value for the torque of the simulated rotatable body is determined by extrapolation of previously measured actual torques as a function of the actual speed (See Tian fig. 11, para [0042] When the testing sequence begins at time t=0, the torque command generator 304 applies a positive ramp torque, causing the motion system to accelerate. As shown in FIG. 6, the torque command signal u(t)is increased continuously at a substantially constant rate beginning at time t=0. In one or more embodiments, the rate at which torque command signal is increased (that is, the slope of u(t)) can be configured as a user-defined parameter of the estimation system 302 (e.g., via interface component 312). During this first phase of the simulation testing sequence, the torque command signal u(t) continues to increase until either the velocity of the motion system v(t) reaches Vmax, or the torque command signal u(t) reaches Umax. In the illustrated example, the torque command signal reaches Umax just prior to the velocity of the motion system reaching Vmax. Accordingly, the torque command generator 304 holds the torque command signal at Umax while the velocity of the motion system continues to increase in response to the applied torque command signal. When the velocity v(t) reaches Vmax at time t=tc, the estimation system begins the second phase of the testing sequence. In some embodiments, if velocity v(t) does not reach Vmax within a defined timeout period after torque command signal has reached Umax (e.g., if Vmax was inadvertently set higher than the physical velocity limit of the motion system), the estimation system 302 can initiate a suitable timeout handling routine. This timeout handling routine may involve, for example, aborting the testing sequence and displaying an error message via interface component 312. Further [0043-0044]and Rampen para [0073]).). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled in the art at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Rampen et al. with that of Tian and Germann et al. because Rampen et al teaches the improvement of effeciency (see para [0060]).
5.4 As per claim 4, the combination of Tian, Germann et al., and Rampen et al. teaches that wherein the actual torques previously measured for the extrapolation as a function of the actual speed have only been measured after the actual speed has approximated the limit speed by a predetermined measure (see Rampen et al. para [0073] Regulation of the speed of the electric motor by the variable speed drive may take place within some or all of three regions of operation. It may be that above a threshold (‘speed max’) where the electric motor does not provide torque to avoid a further increase in speed of rotation. It may be that below a threshold (‘speed min’) the electric motor is commanded to provide maximum torque to avoid stalling. It may be that within an predetermined range (with the speed between ‘speed max’ and ‘speed min’) the variable speed drive acts in conjunction with the hydraulic pumping motoring cycle controller (frequently the dominating torque input). The variable speed drive controlling the electric motor typically seeks to maintain a target speed (albeit typically with loose regulation of speed around the target). Thus as the hydraulic machine starts to pump, the speed of the rotating body slows as the hydraulic machine extracts energy from the rotating body, and is allowed to slow according to the (loose) speed regulation. The hydraulic machine uses the kinetic energy arising from rotation of the rotating body, to pressurise/raise pressure in the cylinders. This regulation may allow the speed of rotation to vary to convert potential energy in the actuator to kinetic energy in the rotating body and vice versa thus reducing peak power consumption of this system (as energy stored in rotational kinetic energy during the motoring phase is later used to pump). The speed variation permits energy storage in the hydraulic system.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled in the art at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Rampen et al. with that of Tian and Germann et al. because Rampen et al teaches the improvement of effeciency (see para [0060]).
5.5 With regards to claim 5, the combination of Tian, Germann et al., and Rampen et al. teaches that wherein the extrapolation is carried out on the basis of a parameterizable friction model, the parameters of which are adapted to the actual torques previously measured as a function of the actual speed (see rampen et al. para 0171] For example, FIG. 11A illustrates the cycling shaft speed, the average of which decreases with time during operation of the apparatus as energy is lost to friction, heat etc. from one cycle of displacement to the next. If insufficient input of power is provided by the electric motor to make up for these unknown losses, this leads to a steady decline of the average speed and shaft speed will drop below speedmin. In this instance, a change in the moving average of the cycling shaft speed is indicative of average energy supplied to or used in the VSD/motor being different from average energy consumed supplied by the mechanical system. However, by applying a trim (a consistent, possibly varying, corrective input which provides an additional torque command in order to stabilize a rotation speed or maintain it at a target speed) on the electric motor drive (VSD) to raise/lower gain current to the correct level, this will give stable operation. Trim is usually described in reference to the electric motor torque, but may also be described in terms of electric motor power trim. Gain is a multiplier factor applied to the difference between the actual measured speed and the speed reference. Tian para [0068] In various embodiments, inertia and friction estimation system 302 can output the estimated inertia and friction coefficients in accordance with the requirements of a particular application in which the system operates. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 7, estimation system 302 may provide the estimates of J, B.sub.v, and B.sub.c to a motion controller 714, which can use the inertia and friction coefficient estimates to facilitate tuning one or more gain coefficients.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled in the art at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Rampen et al. with that of Tian and Germann et al. because Rampen et al teaches the improvement of effeciency (see para [0060]).
5.6 As per claims 6 and 9, the combination of Tian, Germann et al., and Rampen et al. teaches the step of measuring the actual brake pressure of the brake acting on the real rotatable body Rampen et al. para [0156] Thus, in an example embodiment, the variation in measured pressure in the HP manifold with total volume of hydraulic fluid displaced into the HP manifold since a reference point (e.g. minimum of rotatable shaft speed, or since the rotatable shaft speed reached a certain value) is measured and stored. It can be used to calculate a map of the relationship between displaced hydraulic fluid and HP manifold pressure. This map could be determined theoretically, where the map is based on theoretical pressure change for a given displacement, or empirically for example during operation (potentially using as few as two cycles of motoring and pumping, or many such cycles). [0014] a motor drivingly coupled to the rotatable body and configured to exert a torque on the rotatable body (to thereby increase the rotational kinetic energy of the rotatable body), and determining the torque value of the simulated rotatable body, taking into account the measured actual torque and the measured actual brake pressure (see [0073] Regulation of the speed of the electric motor by the variable speed drive may take place within some or all of three regions of operation. It may be that above a threshold (‘speed max’) where the electric motor does not provide torque to avoid a further increase in speed of rotation. It may be that below a threshold (‘speed min’) the electric motor is commanded to provide maximum torque to avoid stalling. It may be that within a predetermined range (with the speed between ‘speed max’ and ‘speed min’) the variable speed drive acts in conjunction with the hydraulic pumping motoring cycle controller (frequently the dominating torque input). The variable speed drive controlling the electric motor typically seeks to maintain a target speed (albeit typically with loose regulation of speed around the target). Thus, as the hydraulic machine starts to pump, the speed of the rotating body slows as the hydraulic machine extracts energy from the rotating body, and is allowed to slow according to the (loose) speed regulation. The hydraulic machine uses the kinetic energy arising from rotation of the rotating body, to pressurise/raise pressure in the cylinders. This regulation may allow the speed of rotation to vary to convert potential energy in the actuator to kinetic energy in the rotating body and vice versa thus reducing peak power consumption of this system (as energy stored in rotational kinetic energy during the motoring phase is later used to pump). The speed variation permits energy storage in the hydraulic system.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled in the art at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Rampen et al. with that of Tian and Germann et al. because Rampen et al teaches the improvement of effeciency (see para [0060]).
5.7 Regarding claims 7 and 10, the combination of Tian, Germann et al., and Rampen et al. teaches that wherein the determination of the value for the torque of the simulated rotatable body is carried out taking into account the measured actual torque and the measured actual brake pressure using a Kalman filter (Rampen et al. para [0164] This can be achieved by simulating using predetermined demand data (i.e. a specification of the variation of displacement, pressure or position of an actuator with time, typically for each of a plurality of hydraulic power units in connection with the same object at the same time) and iteratively amending the demand data to avoid operation breaching set bounds or to otherwise condition (e.g. optimize) performance (e.g. to minimize power output or maximize the effectiveness or relevance of a test procedure). [0165] trimming/applying a filter to a demanded value of displacement, position or pressure, which filter may vary with time to include the Kalman Filtering). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled in the art at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Rampen et al. with that of Tian and Germann et al. because Rampen et al teaches the improvement of efficiency (see para [0060]).
5.8 As per claim 11, the combination of Tian, Germann et al., and Rampen et al. teaches that wherein the actual torque is a torque acting on the rotatable body by the brake (see Rampen et al. para 0014] a motor drivingly coupled to the rotatable body and configured to exert a torque on the rotatable body (to thereby increase the rotational kinetic energy of the rotatable body), Tian para [0031], component 306 can measure and record the velocity of the motor over time in response to the applied torque control command generated by the torque command generator 304. [0041] In the example illustrated in FIG. 6, when testing begins at time t=0, the applied torque signal u(t) and the motor velocity v(t) are both initially zero when the testing begins at time t=0. [0042] When the testing sequence begins at time t=0, the torque command generator 304 applies a positive ramp torque, causing the motion system to accelerate. ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled in the art at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Rampen et al. with that of Tian and Germann et al. because Rampen et al teaches the improvement of efficiency (see para [0060]).
5.9 Regarding claim 12, the combination of Tian, Germann et al., and Rampen et al. teaches that wherein the determined value for the torque is an estimated torque value based on a past measured value (see Tian para [0066], the estimation system can be configured to determine the deviation of the actual (measured or estimated) torque of the motion system from the issued torque command signal, and take this deviation into consideration when estimating J, B.sub.v, and B.sub.c.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled in the art at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Rampen et al. with that of Tian and Germann et al. because Rampen et al teaches the improvement of efficiency (see para [0060]).
5.10 As per claim 13, the combination of Tian, Germann et al., and Rampen et al. teaches that wherein the determined value for the torque is an estimated torque value based on a plurality of past measured values at a speed above the predetermined limit speed (see Tian para The user-defined setpoints can include torque limits 406 defining the upper and lower bounds of the torque command signal 410, and velocity limits 408 defining checkpoint velocity valves used to control the torque command signal 410 and generate the estimates. [0066], the estimation system can be configured to determine the deviation of the actual (measured or estimated) torque of the motion system from the issued torque command signal, and take this deviation into consideration when estimating J, B.sub.v, and B.sub.c. Rampen et al. [0073] Regulation of the speed of the electric motor by the variable speed drive may take place within some or all of three regions of operation. It may be that above a threshold (‘speed max’) where the electric motor does not provide torque to avoid a further increase in speed of rotation. It may be that below a threshold (‘speed min’) the electric motor is commanded to provide maximum torque to avoid stalling. It may be that within an predetermined range (with the speed between ‘speed max’ and ‘speed min’) the variable speed drive acts in conjunction with the hydraulic pumping motoring cycle controller (frequently the dominating torque input).). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled in the art at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Rampen et al. with that of Tian and Germann et al. because Rampen et al teaches the improvement of efficiency (see para [0060]).
5.11 Regarding claim 14, the combination of Tian, Germann et al., and Rampen et al. teaches that wherein the simulated rotatable body and the rotatable body are a simulated or real engine vehicle wheel arrangement with a wheel, a brake disc and a wheel axle (see Rampen et al. para [0113] With reference to FIG. 2, an individual hydraulic power unit comprises a rotatable shaft 20, coupled to an electric motor 22, an electronically commutated hydraulic machine 30 which is capable of functioning as a pump or as a motor while rotating in the same direction and a flywheel 26.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled in the art at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Rampen et al. with that of Tian and Germann et al. because Rampen et al teaches the improvement of efficiency (see para [0060]).
5.12 As per claim 15, the combination of Tian, Germann et al., and Rampen et al. teaches that wherein the braking value is a brake pressure, a brake force, or a braking torque (see para [0114], The electric motor applies a torque to the rotatable shaft (and therefore the rotatable body) in use in a single direction of rotation. The hydraulic machine has high pressure fluid line 122 which is in fluid communication with the respective hydraulic actuator. A pressure relief valve 128 provides a connection to low pressure in the event of a pressure excess in the high pressure fluid line.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled in the art at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Rampen et al. with that of Tian and Germann et al. because Rampen et al teaches the improvement of efficiency (see para [0060]).
5.13 Regarding 16, the combination of Tian, Germann et al., and Rampen et al. teaches that wherein the predetermined limit speed is a value greater than zero (see Rampen et al. para [0075], This makes efficient use of the (typically electric) motor, for example avoiding time required to start or restart a motor from zero or very low speed, and minimising acceleration and deceleration of the motor which are typically regions of lower motor efficiency (especially for electric motors). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled in the art at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Rampen et al. with that of Tian and Germann et al. because Rampen et al teaches the improvement of efficiency (see para [0060]).
5.14 With regards to claim 17, the combination of Tian, Germann et al., and Rampen et al. teaches the step of: storing a series of consecutive measured values in a ring buffer to provide an extrapolated series of measurements (see Rampen et al. para [0075], This makes efficient use of the (typically electric) motor, for example avoiding time required to start or restart a motor from zero or very low speed i.e. more than zero, and minimising acceleration and deceleration of the motor which are typically regions of lower motor efficiency (especially for electric motors). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of skilled in the art at the time of filing of the applicant’s invention to combine the method of Rampen et al. with that of Tian and Germann et al. because Rampen et al teaches the improvement of efficiency (see para [0060]).
Conclusion
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
6.1 Breton (USPG_PUB No. 2019/0195734) teaches a test method for a vehicle powertrain includes, during a first test of a first vehicle or a portion of a first vehicle on a dynamometer.
7. Claims 1-17 are rejected and 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.
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDRE PIERRE-LOUIS whose telephone number is (571)272-8636. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM-5:00 PM.
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, EMERSON C PUENTE can be reached at 571-272-3652. 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.
/ANDRE PIERRE LOUIS/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2187 December 14, 2025
Prosecution Insights