Detailed Action
Status of Claims
This is the first office action on the merits. Claims 1-20 are currently pending and addressed below.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/25/2024 has being considered by the examiner.
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 9-15 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.
The metes and bounds of claim 9 are unclear as it is ambiguous in the claim language what the limitation generating a mud fully encompasses. Is the mud being mixed autonomously? Is the mud being generated just a recipe that the operator than mixes? How is the mud generated? As it is unclear what the claim limitation of generating a mud fully encompasses, the metes and bounds of the claim language is unclear. Examiners note: Examiner recommends using language similar to the limitations of claim 18 specifically a mud mixing device configured to mix a drilling mud to provide clarity to the claim limitations.
Therefore claim 9 is rejected on this basis.
Claims 10-15 are rejected for depending on a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed towards an abstract idea.
Step 1 of the USPTO’s eligibility analysis entails considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101: Process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.
Claims 1, 9, and 16 are directed to a method (process), method (process) and a system (machine or manufacture), respectively. As such, the claims are directed to statutory categories of invention.
If the claim recites a statutory category of invention, the claim requires further analysis in Step 2A. Step 2A of the 2019 Revised Patent SUBJECT Matter Eligibility Guidance is a two-prong inquiry. In Prong One, examiners evaluate whether the claim recites a judicial exception
The claim(s) recite(s) abstract limitations including:
Claim 1: applying a transform to the electronic drilling recorder data and to the bit vibration data; filtering at least one undesirable component from the filterable data;
Claim 9: applying a transform to the electronic drilling recorder data and to the bit vibration data; filtering at least one undesirable component from the filterable data; generating requirements for a mud weight window
Claim 16: apply a function to transform a continuous time signal into different scale components all assigned with a frequency range to the electronic recorder data and to the bit vibration data so as to generate filterable data; filter at least one undesirable component from the filterable data
Furthermore, Claims 2, 10, and 17 are directed to a method (process), method (process) and a system (machine or manufacture), respectively. As such, the claims are directed to statutory categories of invention.
If the claim recites a statutory category of invention, the claim requires further analysis in Step 2A. Step 2A of the 2019 Revised Patent SUBJECT Matter Eligibility Guidance is a two-prong inquiry. In Prong One, examiners evaluate whether the claim recites a judicial exception
The claim(s) recite(s) abstract limitations including:
Claim 2: a function to transform a continuous-time signal into different scale components all assigned with a frequency range
Claim 10: a function to transform a continuous-time signal into different scale components all assigned with a frequency range
Claim 17: generating a mud weight window
These limitations, as drafted, are abstract mental processes that, under the broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitations in the mind, or by a human using pen and paper, and therefore recite mental processes. More specifically, nothing in the claim element precludes the aforementioned steps from practically being performed in the human mind, or by a human using pen and paper. The mere recitation of generic computing elements and/or sensors does not take the claim out of the mental process grouping. Thus the claim recites an abstract idea.
If the claim recites a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea enumerated in Section I of the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, a law of nature, or a natural phenomenon), the claim requires further analysis in Prong Two. In Prong Two, examiners evaluate whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception.
Claims 1, 9, 16 recites the additional element of:
Claim 1:
A drill bit which merely links said method to a particular technical environment or field of use;
At least one vibration sensor, receiving electronic drilling recorder data, receiving bit vibration data from the vibration sensor, geomechanical model, geomechanical model components which are considered an insignificant extra solution activity;
generate filterable data, generate clean data, applying the clean data to a…model…trained to associate data which are recited at a high level of generality amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception.
Claim 9:
A drill bit, a mud which merely links said method to a particular technical environment or field of use;
A vibration sensor, receiving electronic drilling recorder data, receiving vibration data, geomechanical model, geomechanical model components, drilling recorder data consists of: depth, weight on bit, torque on bit, rate of penetration, bit angular velocity, fluid pressure, three axis acceleration measured downhole near the bit at a high sampling rate which are considered an insignificant extra solution activity;
Drilling into the strata, generate filterable data, generate clean data, applying the clean data to a…model…trained to associate data, a mud weight window which are recited at a high level of generality amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception.
Claim 16:
A drill bit which merely links said method to a particular technical environment or field of use;
At least one vibration sensor, receiving electronic drilling recorder data, receiving bit vibration data from the vibration sensor, geomechanical model, geomechanical model components which are considered an insignificant extra solution activity;
generate filterable data, generate clean data, applying the clean data to a…model…trained to associate data which are recited at a high level of generality amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception.
If the additional elements do not integrate the exception into a practical application, then the claim is directed to the recited judicial exception, and requires further analysis under Step 2B to determine whether they provide an inventive concept (i.e., whether the additional elements amount to significantly more than the exception itself).
Claim 1:
As discussed above, a drill bit, merely link the method to a particular environment or field of use. As they merely confine the use of the abstract idea to a particular technical field of use they fail to add an invention concept to the claim. These limitations represent mere token acquiescence to limiting the reach of the claim (see Flook and MPEP 2106.5(h)).
Additionally, at least one vibration sensor is recited at a high level of generality. Given the generality of the type of sensor, and the type of data collected by the sensor, these limitations do not contain significantly more to provide a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Regarding the recited process in the “receiving electronic drilling recorder data, receiving bit vibration data from the vibration sensor, geomechanical model, geomechanical model components” steps are considered an insignificant extra solution activity as the limitations amount to selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated. As noted in Electric Power Group, selecting information, based on types of information and availability of information for collection, analysis, and display is considered insignificant extra solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). Additionally, the Symantec, TLI, OIP Techs. And buySAFE court decisions cited in MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicate that mere receiving or transmitting data over a network is considered insignificant extra solution activity.
Claim 9:
As discussed above, drill bit and mud merely link the method to a particular environment or field of use. As they merely confine the use of the abstract idea to a particular technical field of use they fail to add an invention concept to the claim. These limitations represent mere token acquiescence to limiting the reach of the claim (see Flook and MPEP 2106.5(h)).
Additionally, vibration sensor is recited at a high level of generality. Given the generality of the type of sensor, and the type of data collected by the sensor, these limitations do not contain significantly more to provide a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Regarding the recited process in the receiving electronic drilling recorder data, receiving vibration data, geomechanical model, geomechanical model components, drilling recorder data consists of: depth, weight on bit, torque on bit, rate of penetration, bit angular velocity, fluid pressure, three axis acceleration measured downhole near the bit at a high sampling rate steps are considered an insignificant extra solution activity as the limitations amount to selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated. As noted in Electric Power Group, selecting information, based on types of information and availability of information for collection, analysis, and display is considered insignificant extra solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). Additionally, the Symantec, TLI, OIP Techs. And buySAFE court decisions cited in MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicate that mere receiving or transmitting data over a network is considered insignificant extra solution activity.
With respect to Drilling into the strata, generate filterable data, generate clean data, applying the clean data to a…model…trained to associate data, a mud weight window merely amounts to “apply it”. The recipting of claim limitations that attempt to cover any solution (i.e. Drilling into the strata, generate filterable data, generate clean data, applying the clean data to a…model…trained to associate data, a mud weight window) to an identified problem (i.e. creating a borehole, managing data, and wellbore control) with no restriction on how the result is accomplished and no description of the mechanism for accomplishing the result (i.e. what aspects are changed or how the change is affected by the abstract idea) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more than this type of recitation is equivalent to the words “apply it”. See MPEP 2106.05(f)(1).
Claim 16:
As discussed above, a drill bit, merely link the method to a particular environment or field of use. As they merely confine the use of the abstract idea to a particular technical field of use they fail to add an invention concept to the claim. These limitations represent mere token acquiescence to limiting the reach of the claim (see Flook and MPEP 2106.5(h)).
Additionally, at least one vibration sensor is recited at a high level of generality. Given the generality of the type of sensor, and the type of data collected by the sensor, these limitations do not contain significantly more to provide a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Regarding the recited process in the “receiving electronic drilling recorder data, receiving bit vibration data from the vibration sensor, geomechanical model, geomechanical model components” steps are considered an insignificant extra solution activity as the limitations amount to selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated. As noted in Electric Power Group, selecting information, based on types of information and availability of information for collection, analysis, and display is considered insignificant extra solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g)). Additionally, the Symantec, TLI, OIP Techs. And buySAFE court decisions cited in MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicate that mere receiving or transmitting data over a network is considered insignificant extra solution activity.
With respect to generate filterable data, generate clean data, applying the clean data to a…model…trained to associate data merely amounts to “apply it”. The recipting of claim limitations that attempt to cover any solution (i.e. generate filterable data, generate clean data, applying the clean data to a…model…trained to associate data) to an identified problem (i.e. creating a borehole, managing data, and wellbore control) with no restriction on how the result is accomplished and no description of the mechanism for accomplishing the result (i.e. what aspects are changed or how the change is affected by the abstract idea) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more than this type of recitation is equivalent to the words “apply it”. See MPEP 2106.05(f)(1).
Therefore, the claim does not provide an inventive concept (significantly more than the abstract idea). The claim is ineligible.
Thus, even when viewed as an ordered combination, nothing in the claims add significantly more (i.e., an inventive concept) to the abstract idea.
The various metrics of claims 3, 11, 18 further characterize the measuring and acquiring of the data and apply the data of the previously recited abstract idea limitations (e.g. further characterizing the threshold and the source of the data). For the reasons described above with respect to claims 1 this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
The various metrics of claims 4-8, 13-15, 19-20 merely narrow the recitation of the specific variables and data limitations are insufficient as “merely selecting information, by content or source, for collection, analysis, and display does nothing significant to differentiate a process from ordinary mental processes, whose implicit exclusion from §101 undergirds the information-based category of abstract ideas," (See Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom, S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2016)). Similar to claim 1, 9 and 16 this recitation does not provide a practical application of the abstract idea, and is not significantly more.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Colombo (US Pub No 20230288592).
Colombo discloses in claim 1. A method of generating a geomechanical model of a wellbore, comprising the steps of:
(a) affixing at least one vibration sensor (Colombo Fig 6a; 621 [0095] acoustic sensors such as accelerometers affixed to the drill bit) to a drill bit unit;
(b) receiving electronic drilling recorder data (Colombo Fig 6a; 644 [0095] sensors connected to control system for generating well data and transmitting of well data during drilling) regarding drilling of the wellbore (Colombo [0095] logging while drilling data transmitted to the surface);
(c) receiving bit vibration data from the vibration sensor (Colombo [0095] logging while drilling data transmitted to the surface from drill bit acoustic sensors);
(d) applying a transform to the electronic drilling recorder data and to the bit vibration data so as to generate filterable data (Colombo [0057] seismic data processed via acquisition geometry regularization, noise reduction techniques, filtering, estimation and correction of near surface effects and smoothing);
(e) filtering at least one undesirable component from the filterable data, thereby generating clean data (Colombo [0057] seismic data processed via acquisition geometry regularization, noise reduction techniques, filtering, estimation and correction of near surface effects and smoothing to produce preprocessed seismic data sets); and
(f) applying the clean data to an artificial intelligence model trained to associate data with a plurality of geomechanical model components (Colombo Fig 4 preprocessed seismic data is applied to a current seismic model and a predicted seismic model), thereby generating geomechanical model corresponding to the electronic drilling recorder data and the bit vibration data (Colombo Fig 4; 490 Models are determined to be converged or not with the Determined seismic model and the current geophysical model being equal).
Colombo discloses in claim 2. The method of generating a geomechanical model of a wellbore of Claim 1, wherein the transform comprises a function to transform a continuous-time signal into different scale components all assigned with a frequency range (Colombo [0077] data processing includes using a numerical solution of the elastic of acoustic wave equation operating in the frequency domain).
Colombo discloses in claim 3. The method of generating a geomechanical model of a wellbore of Claim 1, wherein the artificial intelligence model comprises a deep neural network (Colombo [0031] & [0033] applying deep learning methodologies to the modeler).
Colombo discloses in claim 4. The method of generating a geomechanical model of a wellbore of Claim 1, wherein the electronic drilling recorder data includes drilling recorder data selected from a list consisting of: depth (Colombo [0025] well logs provide depth measurements [0098]-[0099] further disclosing of drill bit location within a well (depth of the drill bit)); weight-on-bit; torque-on-bit; rate of penetration; bit angular velocity; fluid pressure; three-axis acceleration measured downhole near the bit at a high sampling rate (Colombo Fig 6a; 621 [0095] acoustic sensors such as accelerometers affixed to the drill bit); and combinations thereof.
Colombo discloses in claim 5. The method of generating a geomechanical model of a wellbore of Claim 1, further comprising the steps of:
(a) receiving offset data from at least one offset well (Colombo [0100] seismic data from off set well); and
(b) applying the offset data to the neural network (Colombo Fig 4 observed seismic data is applied to the data loop such as in Fig 2 [0033] in the input layer).
Colombo discloses in claim 6. The method of generating a geomechanical model of a wellbore of Claim 5, wherein the offset data includes offset data selected from a list consisting of: well logs (Colombo [0095] well logs collected during drilling); mud logs; daily drilling and geology reports (Colombo [0095] well logs collected during drilling including porosity, gas saturation, and bed boundaries); end of well reports; and combinations thereof.
7. The method of generating a geomechanical model of a wellbore of Claim 5, wherein the well logs data include well logs data selected from a list consisting of: gamma ray data (Colombo [0095] gamma ray detectors); sonic data (Colombo [0028] sonic logs); density data (Colombo [0028] Density logs logs); resistivity data (Colombo [0025] resistivity logs); neutron porosity data (Colombo [0028] neutron porosity); image data (Colombo [0049] Seismic image data); and combinations thereof.
Colombo discloses in claim 8. The method of generating a geomechanical model of a wellbore of Claim 1, wherein the geomechanical model components include geomechanical model components selected from a list consisting of: in-situ stresses (Colombo [0091] subterranean stress conditions);
Colombo discloses in claim 9. A method of drilling a well into strata, comprising the steps of:
(a) drilling into the strata using a drill bit unit (Colombo Fig 6a; 624 [0095] drill bit during drilling operations);
(b) receiving vibration data from a vibration sensor affixed to the drill bit unit (Colombo Fig 6a; 621 [0095] acoustic sensors such as accelerometers affixed to the drill bit);
(c) receiving electronic drilling recorder data regarding drilling of the wellbore (Colombo [0095] logging while drilling data transmitted to the surface), wherein the electronic drilling recorder data includes drilling recorder data selected from a list consisting of: depth (Colombo [0025] well logs provide depth measurements [0098]-[0099] further disclosing of drill bit location within a well (depth of the drill bit)); weight-on-bit; torque-on-bit; rate of penetration; bit angular velocity; fluid pressure; three-axis acceleration measured downhole near the bit at a high sampling rate (Colombo Fig 6a; 621 [0095] acoustic sensors such as accelerometers affixed to the drill bit); and combinations thereof (Colombo [0095] modification of the drilling operation includes Rate of penetration, direction, and other drilling parameters. Examiners note: other drilling parameters could include weight on bit, torque on bit, bit angular velocity, fluid pressure etc);
(d) calculating a geomechanical model of the strata at a specific bit location by executing the following steps:
(i) applying a transform to the electronic drilling recorder data and to the bit vibration data so as to generate filterable data (Colombo [0057] seismic data processed via acquisition geometry regularization, noise reduction techniques, filtering, estimation and correction of near surface effects and smoothing);
(ii) filtering at least one undesirable component from the filterable data, thereby generating clean data (Colombo [0057] seismic data processed via acquisition geometry regularization, noise reduction techniques, filtering, estimation and correction of near surface effects and smoothing to produce preprocessed seismic data sets); and
(iii) applying the clean data to an artificial intelligence model trained to associate data with a plurality of geomechanical model components (Colombo Fig 4 preprocessed seismic data is applied to a current seismic model and a predicted seismic model), thereby generating the geomechanical model corresponding to the electronic drilling recorder data and the bit vibration data (Colombo Fig 4; 490 Models are determined to be converged or not with the Determined seismic model and the current geophysical model being equal);
(e) generating requirements for a mud weight window at the specific bit location based on the geomechanical model (Colombo [0095] modifying mud weight based on data collected); and
(f) generating a mud meeting the requirements of the mud weight window (Colombo [0092] [0095] modifying mud weight based on data collected in real time).
Colombo discloses in claim 10. The method of drilling a well into strata of Claim 9, wherein the transform comprises a function to transform a continuous-time signal into different scale components all assigned with a frequency range (Colombo [0077] data processing includes using a numerical solution of the elastic of acoustic wave equation operating in the frequency domain).
Colombo discloses in claim 11. The method of drilling a well into strata of Claim 9, wherein the artificial intelligence model comprises a deep neural network (Colombo [0031] & [0033] applying deep learning methodologies to the modeler).
Colombo discloses in claim 12. The method of drilling a well into strata of drilling a well into strata of Claim 9, further comprising the steps of:
(a) receiving offset data from at least one offset well (Colombo [0100] seismic data from off set well); and
(b) applying the offset data to the neural network (Colombo Fig 4 observed seismic data is applied to the data loop such as in Fig 2 [0033] in the input layer).
Colombo discloses in claim 13. The method of drilling a well into strata of Claim 12, wherein the offset data includes offset data selected from a list consisting of: well logs (Colombo [0095] well logs collected during drilling); mud logs; daily drilling and geology reports (Colombo [0095] well logs collected during drilling including porosity, gas saturation, and bed boundaries); end of well reports; and combinations thereof.
Colombo discloses in claim 14. The method of drilling a well into strata of Claim 13, wherein the well logs data include well logs data selected from a list consisting of: gamma ray data (Colombo [0095] gamma ray detectors); sonic data (Colombo [0028] sonic logs); density data (Colombo [0028] Density logs logs); resistivity data (Colombo [0025] resistivity logs); neutron porosity data (Colombo [0028] neutron porosity); image data (Colombo [0049] Seismic image data); and combinations thereof. .
Colombo discloses in claim 15. The method of drilling a well into strata of Claim 9, wherein the geomechanical model components include geomechanical model components selected from a list consisting of: in-situ stresses (Colombo [0091] subterranean stress conditions);
Colombo discloses in claim 16. A drilling system, comprising:
(a) a vibration sensor affixed to a drill bit unit (Colombo Fig 6a; 621 [0095] acoustic sensors such as accelerometers affixed to the drill bit);
(b) a computer that is responsive to the vibration sensor so as to receive bit vibration data from the vibration sensor (Colombo Fig 6a; 644 [0095] sensors connected to control system for generating well data and transmitting of well data during drilling [0095] logging while drilling data transmitted to the surface), the computer programmed to:
(i) receive electronic drilling recorder data regarding drilling of the wellbore (Colombo [0095] logging while drilling data transmitted to the surface from drill bit acoustic sensors);
(ii) apply a function to transform a continuous-time signal into different scale components all assigned with a frequency range to the electronic drilling recorder data and to the bit vibration data so as to generate filterable data (Colombo [0057] seismic data processed via acquisition geometry regularization, noise reduction techniques, filtering, estimation and correction of near surface effects and smoothing);
(iii) filter at least one undesirable component from the filterable data, so as to generate clean data (Colombo [0057] seismic data processed via acquisition geometry regularization, noise reduction techniques, filtering, estimation and correction of near surface effects and smoothing to produce preprocessed seismic data sets); and
(iv) apply the clean data to a neural network trained to associate data with a plurality of geomechanical model components (Colombo Fig 4 preprocessed seismic data is applied to a current seismic model and a predicted seismic model), so as to generate a geomechanical model corresponding to the electronic drilling recorder data and the bit vibration data (Colombo Fig 4; 490 Models are determined to be converged or not with the Determined seismic model and the current geophysical model being equal).
Colombo discloses in claim 17. The drilling system of Claim 16, wherein the computer is further programmed to generate a mud weight window based on the geomechanical model (Colombo [0095] modifying mud weight based on data collected).
Colombo discloses in claim 18. The drilling system of Claim 17, further comprising a mud mixing device configured to mix a drilling mud that conforms to the mud weight window (Colombo [0092] [0095] modifying mud weight based on data collected in real time).
Colombo discloses in claim 19. The drilling system of Claim 16, wherein the computer is further programmed to: (a) receive offset data from at least one offset well (Colombo [0100] seismic data from off set well), the offset data including offset data selected from a list consisting of: well logs (Colombo [0095] well logs collected during drilling); mud logs; daily drilling and geology reports (Colombo [0095] well logs collected during drilling including porosity, gas saturation, and bed boundaries); end of well reports; and combinations thereof, and (b) apply the offset data to the neural network (Colombo Fig 4 observed seismic data is applied to the data loop such as in Fig 2 [0033] in the input layer).
Colombo discloses in claim 20. The drilling system of Claim 16, wherein the geomechanical model components include geomechanical model components selected from a list consisting of: in-situ stresses (Colombo [0091] subterranean stress conditions);
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Albassam (US Pub No 20240191610): cutting image data for machine learning process to deteremine equivalent circulating density of a drilling fluid and modification of the drilling fluid for optimization (Abstract, Fig 1)
Feng (US Pub No 20240141780): Machine learning system to develop optimized drilling fluids during drilling operations (abstract Fig 2)
Li (US Pub No 20230184107): Drilling mud optimization via machine learning (Abstract)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nicholas D Wlodarski whose telephone number is (571)272-3970. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 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, Nicole Coy can be reached at (571) 272-5405. 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.
/NICHOLAS D WLODARSKI/Examiner, Art Unit 3672
/Nicole Coy/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3672