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 09/30/2025 claims 1, 4-6, and 12-16 are pending. Claims 1 and 4-6 are amended. Claims 2-3 and 7-11 are cancelled. Claims 12-16 are new. Claims 1 and 12 are independent.
Response to Arguments/Amendments
Applicant's arguments and amendments filed 09/30/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to independent claim 1, the applicant amended the claim by adding portions of cancelled claims 3 and 7. Further, the applicant has added the new limitations “when” and “shared bridge arm”. The amendments made by the applicant have changed the scope of the claim.
In response to applicant's argument in pages 13-16 of the Remarks that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., the highlighted wire in annotated Fig. 3 below connecting the front-end DC conversion path 22A to the neutral node N) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Furthermore, the applicant argues that Figs. 6-7 of Kim fail to disclose the claimed features. However, the rejections rely on Fig. 4 of Kim, not Figs. 6-7, as identified in the Office Action dated 07/02/2025. Fig. 4 illustrates the claimed features as cited in the rejections. Applicant’s arguments therefore do not address the actual basis of the rejection.
PNG
media_image1.png
440
670
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The remaining arguments are moot as the applicant’s arguments for the remaining claims were based on dependency of the independent claims.
The drawing, disclosure, and claim objections are withdrawn due to the amendments.
The provisional non-statutory double patent rejections have been withdrawn due to the accepted Terminal Disclaimer.
This Office Action is Final due to the amendments.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 09/30/2025 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of 17/981,605 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities: add --y-- to “batter” so that it reads “battery” in line 20 of claim 1 and line 17 of claim 12. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (Korean Patent KR-20120114852-A), in view of Hosaka et al. (Japanese Patent JP-2017135785-A), and further in view of Wang et al. (USPGPN 20220329096).
With respect to independent claims 1 and 12, Kim teaches a power integration system with motor drive and battery charging and discharging functions (Fig. 4 illustrates a configuration of an inverter and the charging circuit integrated module for a motor drive unit 3 and for battery charging and discharging).
Kim teaches a motor (Fig. 4; motor 300).
Kim teaches a power integration circuit, comprising: an inverter, comprising multi-phase bridge arms, each of said bridge arms comprising an upper switch and a lower switch, and each of said bridge arms correspondingly coupled to each phase winding of the motor (In Fig. 4 the inverter and charging circuit integration module comprising an inverter comprising multi-phase arms 110-130, each arm 110-130 comprising an upper switch (111, 121, 131) and a lower switch (115, 125, 135), and each arm 110-130 correspondingly coupled to each phase winding of the motor 300).
Kim teaches a charger, comprising a front-end DC conversion path (In Fig. 4 the inverter and charging circuit integration module includes a charging path through control unit 160 and inductor L2 coupled to the upper switch 131 and lower switch 135 of arm 130 of the inverter, see ¶ [46]).
Kim teaches a charging unit (In Fig. 4 the inverter and charging circuit integration module becomes a charging configuration (see ¶ [47])).
Kim teaches wherein the front-end DC conversion path comprises a front-end bridge arm and a first energy-storing inductor coupled to the front-end bridge arm (In Fig. 4 the charging path comprises a control unit 160 coupled to the upper switch (111, 121, 131) and a lower switch (115, 125, 135), and an inductor L2 coupled to the control unit 160).
Kim teaches the charging unit comprises a second energy-storing inductor (Fig. 4; a second inductor L1).
Kim teaches a sub path coupled to the second energy-storing inductor (In Fig. 4 a sub path is illustrated as the path that couples control unit 140 to inductor L1).
Kim teaches a battery, coupled to the power integration circuit (In Fig. 4 a battery 200 coupled to the inverter and charging circuit integration module).
Kim teaches the front-end bridge arm and the second energy-storing inductor of the charger are coupled to at least two shared bridge arm of said bridge arms of the inverter to convert the DC power to charge the battery (Fig. 4; the battery 200 is charged by converted DC power flowing through at least two shared bridge arms comprising upper switches (111, 121, 131) and lower switches (115, 125, 135) coupled to the inductor L1, the control unit 160, and the inductor L2).
Kim teaches the battery provides power required to drive the motor through the inverter (Fig. 4; the battery 200 provides power required to drive the motor 300 through the inverter and charging circuit).
However, Kim fails to explicitly teach a plurality of second energy-storing inductors; when the power integration circuit receives a DC power provided by a DC power apparatus; and when a voltage of the battery is greater than a reference voltage value, the charging unit of the charger operates in a boost mode to charge the battery; when the voltage of the battery is less than the reference voltage value, the charging unit of the charger operates in a buck mode to charge the battery.
It is well known by one of ordinary skill in the art that a single inductor as represented by L1 in Kim may comprise a plurality of inductors. Therefore, representing Kim as a single inductor in Fig. 4 would simplify having to add the actual amount of inductors connected since in practice inductors typically come in set values and a designer usually combines these in series and/or parallel combinations to reach the desired inductance amount. The advantage to showing one inductor in the figure proves in a simpler and cleaner design schematic.
However, Kim fails to explicitly teach when the power integration circuit receives a DC power provided by a DC power apparatus; and when a voltage of the battery is greater than a reference voltage value, the charging unit of the charger operates in a boost mode to charge the battery; when the voltage of the battery is less than the reference voltage value, the charging unit of the charger operates in a buck mode to charge the battery.
Hosaka teaches receives a DC power provided by a DC power apparatus (In Fig. 5 the battery-equipped motor drive control device 101c receives DC power provided by a solar power generation panel 107 through cable 108 into charging terminal 1032, see ¶ [31, 34]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Kim’s integrated module of an inverter and a charging circuit by adding Hosaka’s DC power input. The advantage to this modification being the number of circuit elements required for charging can be reduced leading to a cost reduction (in ¶ [42] of Hosaka).
Kim discloses the claimed invention except for when the power integration circuit receives DC power. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the device to perform actions when DC power was received, since it has been held that choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).)
However, Kim fails to explicitly teach when a voltage of the battery is greater than a reference voltage value, the charging unit of the charger operates in a boost mode to charge the battery; when the voltage of the battery is less than the reference voltage value, the charging unit of the charger operates in a buck mode to charge the battery.
Wang teaches wherein when a voltage of the battery is greater than a reference voltage value, the charging unit operates in a boost mode to charge the battery, and when the voltage of the battery is less than the reference voltage value, the charging unit operates in a buck mode to charge the battery (In ¶ [41-42] the voltage of the battery is compared with a reference voltage and based on the comparison (greater than or less than) the buck mode of operation or the boost mode of operation is selected).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Kim’s integrated module and Hosaka’s DC power I/O with Wang’s buck and boost mode selection process. The advantage of this modification being the voltage output changes with the required voltage of the battery in real time so as to reduce the energy consumption and improve energy efficiency (in ¶ [06] of Wang).
With respect to claim 13, Kim teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 12. Further, Kim teaches wherein the battery provides power required by a power-receiving apparatus through the charger, and according to the power required by the power-receiving apparatus, the charging unit makes the battery operate in a boost mode or a buck mode to discharge to the power-receiving apparatus (¶ [31-35; 40]; the charger boosts the voltage above the grid peak, and if the battery sits below that level, it must buck the voltage down before charging or discharging to a motor 300 which is understood to be a power-receiving apparatus).
Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (Korean Patent KR-20120114852-A), in view of Hosaka et al. (Japanese Patent JP-2017135785-A) and Wang et al. (USPGPN 20220329096), and further in view of Kim Tae-won et al. (Korean Patent KR-20120125886-A) and Sakurai et al. (Taiwanese Patent TW-201119907-A).
With respect to dependent claims 4 and 14, Kim teaches the invention as discussed above in claims 1 and 12, respectively. Further, Kim teaches a common-connected node of the control unit to a first end of the first energy-storing inductor and a second end of the first energy-storing inductor coupled to the battery (In Fig. 4 a common-connected node of control unit 150 is connected to a first end of inductor L2 and a second end of inductor L2 is coupled to the battery 200).
Kim teaches wherein when the charging unit of the charger operates in the boost mode or in the buck mode (¶ [31-35]; the charger boosts the voltage above the grid peak, and if the battery sits below that level, it must buck the voltage down before charging).
However, Kim fails to explicitly teach wherein the front-end bridge arm comprises a first switch and a second switch, a common-connected node of the first switch and the second switch coupled to a first end of the first energy-storing inductor, wherein the sub path comprises a third switch, a first end of the third switch coupled to an end, which is not commonly coupled to the upper switch, of the lower switch, and a second end of the third switch coupled to the DC power apparatus; and the first switch is turned on, the second switch is turned off, and a switch of the shared bridge arm that operates with the front-end bridge arm is turned on so that the DC power charges the battery.
Hosaka teaches wherein the sub path comprises a third switch (In Figs. 5-6 an I/F circuit 1031 comprises a switching element 10312. In ¶ [40] switching element 10312 may be a relay, a FET, an IGBT, or the like).
Hosaka teaches a second end of the third switch coupled to the DC power apparatus (In Figs. 5-6 the second end of switching element 10312 is coupled to the solar power generation panel 107 through cable 108 into charging terminal 1032).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Kim’s integrated module of an inverter and a charging circuit by adding Hosaka’s DC power input and output capabilities. The advantage to this modification being the number of circuit elements required for charging can be reduced leading to cost reduction (in ¶ [42] of Hosaka).
However, Kim fails to explicitly teach wherein the front-end bridge arm comprises a first switch and a second switch, a common-connected node of the first switch and the second switch coupled to a first end of the first energy-storing inductor, and a first end of the third switch coupled to an end, which is not commonly coupled to the upper switch, of the lower switch; and the first switch is turned on, the second switch is turned off, and a switch of the shared bridge arm that operates with the front-end bridge arm is turned on so that the DC power charges the battery.
Kim Tae-won teaches wherein the front-end bridge arm comprises a first switch and a second switch (In Fig. 3 circuit 40 comprises a first switch and a second switch).
Kim Tae-won teaches a common-connected node of the first switch and the second switch coupled to a first end of the first energy-storing inductor (In Fig. 3 a common-connected node of the first switch and the second switch of circuit 40 are coupled to a first end of the inductor towards battery 10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Kim’s integrated module and Hosaka’s DC power I/O with Kim Tae-won’s boosting circuit 40. The advantage of this modification being the boosted voltage can be applied to rotate the motor in an efficient and safe manner (in ¶ [50] of Kim Tae-won).
However, Kim fails to explicitly teach a first end of the third switch coupled to an end, which is not commonly coupled to the upper switch, of the lower switch; and the first switch is turned on, the second switch is turned off, and a switch of the shared bridge arm that operates with the front-end bridge arm is turned on so that the DC power charges the battery.
Sakurai teaches a first end of the third switch coupled to an end, which is not commonly coupled to the upper switch, of the lower switch (In Fig. 9 switch Q2 is coupled to Q11 and it is not commonly coupled to Q12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Kim’s integrated module, Hosaka’s DC power I/O, and Kim Tae-won’s boosting circuit with Sakurai’s voltage conversion circuit. The advantage of this modification being a voltage conversion circuit is designed to operate efficiently reducing switching losses and improving motor efficiency thereby reducing costs due to operation and manufacturing (in ¶ [15-20] of Sakurai).
Kim discloses the claimed invention except for the first switch is turned on, the second switch is turned off, and a switch of the shared bridge arm that operates with the front-end bridge arm is turned on so that the DC power charges the battery. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Kim, Hosaka, Wang, Kim Tae-won, and Sakurai to turn on and off switches in order to enable DC power that charges the battery, since it has been held that choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).)
Claims 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (Korean Patent KR-20120114852-A), in view of Hosaka et al. (Japanese Patent JP-2017135785-A) and Wang et al. (USPGPN 20220329096), and further in view of Kim Tae-won et al. (Korean Patent KR-20120125886-A).
With respect to dependent claims 5 and 15, Kim teaches the invention as discussed above in claims 1 and 12, respectively. Further, Kim teaches a common-connected node of the control unit to a first end of the first energy-storing inductor and a second end of the first energy-storing inductor coupled to the battery (In Fig. 4 a common-connected node of control unit 150 is connected to a first end of inductor L2 and a second end of inductor L2 is coupled to the battery 200).
Kim teaches wherein when the charging unit of the charger operates in the boost mode or in the buck mode (¶ [31-35]; the charger boosts the voltage above the grid peak, and if the battery sits below that level, it must buck the voltage down before charging).
However, Kim fails to explicitly teach wherein the front-end bridge arm comprises a first switch and a second switch, a common-connected node of the first switch and the second switch coupled to a first end of the first energy-storing inductor, wherein the sub path comprises a third switch, a first end of the third switch coupled in series to the second energy-storing inductor, and a second end of the third switch coupled to the DC power apparatus; and the first switch is turned on, the second switch is turned off, and a switch of the shared bridge arm that operates with the front-end bridge arm is turned on so that the DC power charges the battery.
Hosaka teaches wherein the sub path comprises a third switch (In Figs. 5-6 an I/F circuit 1031 comprises a switching element 10312. In ¶ [40] switching element 10312 may be a relay, a FET, an IGBT, or the like).
Hosaka teaches a first end of the third switch coupled in series to the second energy-storing inductor and a second end of the third switch coupled to the DC power apparatus (In Figs. 5-6 a first end of switching element 10312 is coupled in series to the inductor 10311 and the second end of switching element 10312 is coupled to the solar power generation panel 107 through cable 108 into charging terminal 1032).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Kim’s integrated module of an inverter and a charging circuit by adding Hosaka’s DC power input and output capabilities. The advantage to this modification being the number of circuit elements required for charging can be reduced leading to cost reduction (in ¶ [42] of Hosaka).
However, Kim fails to explicitly teach wherein the front-end bridge arm comprises a first switch and a second switch, a common-connected node of the first switch and the second switch coupled to a first end of the first energy-storing inductor; and the first switch is turned on, the second switch is turned off, and a switch of the shared bridge arm that operates with the front-end bridge arm is turned on so that the DC power charges the battery.
Kim Tae-won teaches wherein the front-end bridge arm comprises a first switch and a second switch (In Fig. 3 circuit 40 comprises a first switch and a second switch).
Kim Tae-won teaches a common-connected node of the first switch and the second switch coupled to a first end of the first energy-storing inductor (In Fig. 3 a common-connected node of the first switch and the second switch of circuit 40 are coupled to a first end of the inductor towards battery 10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Kim’s integrated module and Hosaka’s DC power I/O with Kim Tae-won’s boosting circuit 40. The advantage of this modification being the boosted voltage can be applied to rotate the motor in an efficient and safe manner (in ¶ [50] of Kim Tae-won).
Kim discloses the claimed invention except for the first switch is turned on, the second switch is turned off, and a switch of the shared bridge arm that operates with the front-end bridge arm is turned on so that the DC power charges the battery. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Kim, Hosaka, Wang, and Kim Tae-won to turn on and off switches in order to enable DC power that charges the battery, since it has been held that choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).)
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (Korean Patent KR-20120114852-A), in view of Hosaka et al. (Japanese Patent JP- 2017135785-A) and Wang et al. (USPGPN 20220329096), and further in view of Kim Tae-won et al. (Korean Patent KR-20120125886-A) and Uryu et al. (USPGPN 20170297612).
With respect to dependent claims 6 and 16, Kim teaches the invention as discussed above in claims 1 and 12, respectively. Further, Kim teaches a common-connected node of the control unit to a first end of the first energy-storing inductor and a second end of the first energy-storing inductor coupled to the battery (In Fig. 4 a common-connected node of control unit 150 is connected to a first end of inductor L2 and a second end of inductor L2 is coupled to the battery 200).
Kim teaches wherein when the charging unit of the charger operates in the boost mode or in the buck mode (¶ [31-35]; the charger boosts the voltage above the grid peak, and if the battery sits below that level, it must buck the voltage down before charging).
However, Kim fails to explicitly teach wherein the front-end bridge arm comprises a first switch and a second switch, a common-connected node of the first switch and the second switch coupled to a first end of the first energy-storing inductor, wherein the sub path comprises a first diode, an anode of the first diode coupled to an end, which is not commonly coupled to the upper switch, of the lower switch, and a cathode of the first diode coupled to the DC power apparatus; and the first switch is turned on, the second switch is turned off, and a switch of the shared bridge arm that operates with the front-end bridge arm is turned on so that the DC power charges the battery.
Kim Tae-won teaches wherein the front-end bridge arm comprises a first switch and a second switch (In Fig. 3 circuit 40 comprises a first switch and a second switch).
Kim Tae-won teaches a common-connected node of the first switch and the second switch coupled to a first end of the first energy-storing inductor (In Fig. 3 a common-connected node of the first switch and the second switch of circuit 40 are coupled to a first end of the inductor towards battery 10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Kim’s integrated module and Hosaka’s DC power I/O with Kim Tae-won’s boosting circuit 40. The advantage of this modification being the boosted voltage can be applied to rotate the motor in an efficient and safe manner (in ¶ [50] of Kim Tae-won).
However, Kim fails to explicitly teach wherein the sub path comprises a first diode, an anode of the first diode coupled to an end, which is not commonly coupled to the upper switch, of the lower switch, and a cathode of the first diode coupled to the DC power apparatus; and the first switch is turned on, the second switch is turned off, and a switch of the shared bridge arm that operates with the front-end bridge arm is turned on so that the DC power charges the battery.
Uryu teaches wherein the sub path comprises a first diode (Fig. 4; diode D2 as a sub path towards power supply 110).
Uryu teaches an anode of the first diode coupled to an end, which is not commonly coupled to the upper switch, of the lower switch (In Fig. 4 the anode of diode D2 is coupled to a side of switch FET1-3 and not commonly coupled to switch FET4-6).
Uryu teaches a cathode of the first diode coupled to the DC power apparatus (In Fig. 4 the cathode of the diode D2 is coupled to power supply 110).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Kim’s integrated module, Hosaka’s DC power I/O, and Kim Tae-won’s boosting circuit with Uryu’s motor control unit. The advantage of this modification being the diode D2 prevents a backflow when power is being supplied to power supply 110 (in ¶ [58] of Sakurai) thereby improving discharge efficiency.
Kim discloses the claimed invention except for the first switch is turned on, the second switch is turned off, and a switch of the shared bridge arm that operates with the front-end bridge arm is turned on so that the DC power charges the battery. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Kim, Hosaka, Wang, Kim Tae-won, and Uryu to turn on and off switches in order to enable DC power that charges the battery, since it has been held that choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 127 S. Ct. 1727, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).)
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 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