Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Examiner has provided an updated grounds of rejection, as necessitated by amendment; please see below for further details. This action is made final herein.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a support device configured to support the hand-held power tool in an operating state and to limit a maximum cutting depth T of the accessory device” in claim 5. Specification paragraph [0194-0196] describes that support device 109 is provided to limit a maximum cutting depth T, wherein the support device 109 forms a cutting depth stop. The support device comprises a first support element 111 designed as a support surface.
a support device (…) configured to support the hand-held power tool in an operating state in claim 7.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1-9, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18, and 21-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Whelan (US 8,277,292).
Regarding claim 1, Whelan discloses a hand-held power tool (see Abstract), comprising:
a tool housing comprising:
a handle casing configured for holding the hand-held power tool (see handle portion H outlined by a dotted box in annotated Figure 1A; see also Col. 2 lines 61-65; Col. 3, lines 4-9);
a drive casing arranged on the handle casing (see drive casing D outlined by a dotted rectangle, annotated Figure 1A, including assembly 14), the drive casing comprising a first bearing region with a curve first bearing region portion and a second flat bearing region portion that are continuous with one another, the first bearing region portion and the second bearing region portion defining a first bearing surface that is configured to be rested on a workpiece to be machined (see at least Figures 1A and 3-5 regarding the exterior surfaces of the powerhead assembly 14, including at least flat surfaces 22, 24, edges 28 and 30, guide surface 27, rounded ends 32 and 34, as well as the rounded transition areas shown in Figure 1C between the tapered end of assembly 14 and the surface profiles that are parallel to the longitudinal axis of handle 17; see also Col. 3, line 45-Col. 4, lines 5; see also Col. 4, lines 29-65; i.e. wherein the surfaces of the powerhead assembly 14, which are continuous, are configured to perform the claimed function of being rested on a workpiece to be machined); and
a drive unit accommodated inside the drive casing (see Figures 5-8; see also Col. 6, lines 48-64), the drive unit comprising:
an input shaft mounted rotatably about an input axis (see at least shaft 80);
an electric motor arranged in the drive casing and configured to drive the input shaft (Col. 5, lines 9-15; Col. 7, lines 45-67); and
an output shaft mounted rotatably about an output axis (see rotational axis 19, as well as bolts 94/95, arbors 90a/90b; see also Col. 8, line 32-Col. 9, line 4) and arranged on a side of the input shaft which faces away from the handle casing, wherein the output shaft is configured to drive an accessory device (wherein the accessory tool 16 is mounted for rotation about a rotational axis 19, wherein the shaft for rotating the tool is arranged on a side of the drive shaft 80 which faces away from the handle H),
wherein the first bearing surface extends on the drive casing (D) in an axial direction along the output axis and in a circumferential direction around the output axis (wherein the thickness of the powerhead assembly 14, as shown in Figures 2-4, extends along the axial direction along the axis 19, and wherein Figure 1A shows the bearing surface(s) of the power assembly also extend in a circumferential direction around the axis 19).
PNG
media_image1.png
391
678
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1A
Regarding claim 2, Whelan discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Whelan further discloses wherein a maximum cutting depth of the hand-held power tool is adjustable depending on an angular position of the hand-held power tool relative to the workpiece (see Col. 4, lines 45-64).
Regarding claim 3, Whelan discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Whelan further discloses wherein the maximum cutting depth is controllable by a rotational movement of the hand-held power tool about the output axis relative to the workpiece (Col. 4, lines 45-64 disclose using the surfaces as pivot points and allowing different cutting depths based on the position of the tool relative to the workpiece).
Regarding claim 4, Whelan discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Whelan further discloses:
the drive casing further comprises a second bearing region (see at least annotated Figure 1C, regarding a surface D of a second bearing region),
the first bearing surface defining a first distance from the output axis (see at least region defined by 27, 34, located at a first distance from axis 19), and
the second bearing region defines a second bearing surface defining a second distance from the output axis that is greater than the first distance (wherein as shown in annotated Figure 1C, surface D is located at a distance from the axis 19 that is greater than the distance of the surface formed by 27, 34), wherein the second bearing surface is a flat surface (Col. 3, lines 58-62; see also Figures 5 and 7).
PNG
media_image2.png
423
535
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1C
Regarding claim 5, Whelan discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Whelan further discloses a support device configured to support the hand-held power tool in an operating state and to limit a maximum cutting depth of the accessory device, wherein the support device is formed at least partly as a portion of the tool housing (see at least one of shoulders 22, 24, or ends 32, 34; see also Col. 3, line 44-Col. 4, line 5; see also Col. 4, lines 29-65; wherein the claimed invention requires at least one flat bearing region, one curved bearing region, and a support device, and wherein the prior art discloses a sufficient quantity of ends, shoulders, edges, and guide surfaces to teach the combination of claim elements).
Regarding claim 6, Whelan discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Whelan further discloses wherein the support device has a first support element which is arranged on the tool housing, extends parallel to the output axis, and is spaced apart from the output shaft in the axial direction along the output axis (wherein the surface of one of the shoulders 22 or 24 or ends 32 or 34 provides a support element, and wherein the surface of one of the listed elements extends along the thickness of power assembly 14, i.e. along axis 19, and is spaced from the axis and shaft 19).
Regarding claim 7, Whelan discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Whelan further discloses a support device formed at least partly as a portion of a guard device of the hand-held power tool, the support device configured to support the hand-held power tool in an operating state (wherein Figure 1B shows guard 108 which is a safety device, i.e. guard 108 supports the safety of the apparatus; see also Col. 2, lines 40-68).
Regarding claim 8, Whelan discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Whelan further discloses a bearing housing configured to surround, at least in portions, two housing half-shells that form the tool housing and to connect the two housing half-shells in a form-fitting manner (see at least halves shown in Figure 5, and wherein there are multiple bearing elements which surround interior portions of bearing recesses 107, 109, in order to connect the halves; see also access opening 111, as well as Col. 6, lines 1-47).
Regarding claim 9, Whelan discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Whelan further discloses wherein the bearing housing is configured to cover a recess in the housing half-shells (see Col. 6, line 48-Col. 7, line 9) and/or has a guide device configured to accommodate a guard device (108, see Figures 5 and 9) and to mount the guard device to be movable about the output axis (see Figures 5 and 9, as well as Col. 11, lines 19-38).
Regarding claim 12, Whelan discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Whelan further discloses wherein the output axis of the output shaft intersects the electric motor (Col. 3, lines 32-43; Col. 2, lines 1-13; Col. 5, lines 9-13).
Regarding claim 13, Whelan discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Whelan further discloses
a gear unit comprising a spur gear element of the output shaft (see at least Figure 8, as well as gear portion(s) 98; see also Col. 8, lines 32-60), wherein:
the tool housing defines a recess configured to at least partially accommodate the spur gear element (see at least Figures 5-7 regarding the recess 107 and access opening 111); and
the spur gear element projects at least in portions in a radial direction relative to the recess and/or to housing half-shells which form the tool housing (wherein the gear portion(s) 98 extend radially relative to either the recess components and/or to halves 22, 24); and
a bearing unit configured to mount the output shaft relative to the input shaft (80) such that a section through the bearing unit (56) running perpendicularly to the output axis (rotational axis 19) intersects a first bearing element (84) of the input shaft and a second bearing element (96) of the output shaft (wherein there is at least bearings 84, 96, interconnected by belt 56, and the bearing unit comprising element 56 extends in a direction transverse to axis 19 and intersects the shafts).
Regarding claim 15, Whelan discloses a system comprising:
a hand-held power tool (see Figures 5-8 and Abstract) comprising:
a tool housing comprising:
a handle casing configured for holding the hand-held power tool (see handle portion H, Col. 2 lines 61-65; Col. 3, lines 4-9); and
a drive casing arranged on the handle casing (see drive casing D, annotated Figure 1A), the drive casing comprising a first bearing region with a curved first bearing region portion and a second flat bearing region portion that are contiguous to one another, the first bearing region portion and the second bearing region portion defining a first bearing surface that is configured to be rested on a workpiece to be machined (see at least Figures 1A and 3-5 regarding the exterior surfaces of the powerhead assembly 14, including at least flat surfaces 22, 24, edges 28 and 30, guide surface 27, rounded ends 32 and 34, as well as the rounded transition areas shown in Figure 1C between the tapered end of assembly 14 and the surface profiles that are parallel to the longitudinal axis of handle 17; see also Col. 3, line 45-Col. 4, lines 5; see also Col. 4, lines 29-65; i.e. wherein the surfaces of the powerhead assembly 14, which are continuous, are configured to perform the claimed function of being rested on a workpiece to be machined); and
a drive unit accommodated inside the drive casing (see Figures 5-8; see also Col. 6, lines 48-64), the drive unit comprising:
an input shaft mounted rotatably about an input axis (see at least shaft 80);
an electric motor arranged in the drive casing and configured to drive the input shaft (Col. 5, lines 9-15; Col. 7, lines 45-67); and
an output shaft mounted rotatably about an output axis (see rotational axis 19, as well as bolts 94/95, arbors 90a/90b; see also Col. 8, line 32-Col. 9, line 4) and arranged on a side of the input shaft which faces away from the handle casing (wherein the accessory tool 16 is mounted for rotation about a rotational axis 19, wherein the shaft for rotating the tool is arranged on a side of the drive shaft 80 which faces away from the handle 17); and
an accessory device driven by the output shaft (see implement 16, as well as Col. 3, lines 32-43),
wherein the first bearing surface extends on the drive casing (14) in an axial direction along the output axis and in a circumferential direction about the output axis (wherein the thickness of the powerhead assembly 14, as shown in Figures 2-4, extends along the axial direction along the axis 19, and wherein Figure 1A shows the bearing surface(s) of the power assembly also extend in a circumferential direction around the axis 19),
wherein the accessory device (16) projects in a radial direction relative to the drive casing on a side of the hand-held power tool facing away from the handle casing (wherein implement 16 projects in a radial direction relative to the powerhead assembly 14 on a side of the tool facing away from the handle section 17) and/or does not project in the radial direction relative to the drive casing on a side of the hand-held power tool facing the handle casing.
Regarding claim 16, Whelan discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Whelan further discloses further comprising a battery unit via which the drive unit is operated (Col. 1, 31-40; Col. 3, lines 1-3), wherein the hand-held power tool is an angle grinder (Col. 1, lines 25-40).
Regarding claim 18, Whelan discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Whelan further discloses wherein the first support element is arranged on a housing half-shell of the tool housing (see at least the half housings shown in Figures 5-7 comprising the surfaces and support element as claimed).
Regarding claim 21, Whelan discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Whelan further discloses wherein the drive casing further comprises an intermediate bearing region between the first bearing region and the second bearing region, the intermediate bearing region forming an intermediate bearing surface between the first and second bearing surfaces (see at least the Intermediate region labeled below in annotated Figure 1C).
Regarding claim 22, Whelan discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Whelan further discloses wherein:
the input axis and the output axis define a connecting plane (wherein there is a connecting plane defined by axis 19 and the axis of shaft 80; see also Col. 3, lines 32-43),
the second bearing region portion of the first bearing region defines a first angle relative to the connecting plane (wherein the flat bearing region portion 27 is located at an angle relative to the plane defined by a connection between axis 19 and the axis of shaft 18), and
the second bearing region defines a second angle relative to the connecting plane, the second angle being less than the first angle (wherein the angle of surface D of annotated Figure 1C is less than the angle of surface 27, as the angle of surface D is parallel to the connecting plane).
Regarding claim 23, Whelan discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Whelan further discloses wherein the electric motor extends along a motor axis that coincides with the input axis and with a transverse axis defined by the drive casing (wherein a transverse axis defined by the drive casing D is represented by axis 1 in annotated Figure 1A below; wherein the input axis is defined by shaft 80, i.e. an axis comping into and extending out of Figure 1A; wherein the motor contained within drive casing D, see annotated Figure 1A, extends along a motor axis, and wherein the motor axis coincides with axis 1 and coincides with the axis of shaft 80 at a point where axis 1 and axis of shaft 80 meet, i.e. at a location wherein shaft 50 and shaft 80 coincide).
PNG
media_image3.png
391
678
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1A, provided for the rejection of claim 23
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whelan (US 8277292) in view of Kopras (US 6,048,260).
Regarding claim 10, Whelan discloses the claimed invention as applied above. However, Whelan does not explicitly teach wherein the tool housing defines an air inlet opening and an air discharge opening, which are arranged adjacent to one another with an air deflecting web separating the air inlet opening from the air discharge opening.
However, from the same or similar field of endeavor of power tool devices, Kopras teaches wherein the tool housing defines an air inlet opening and an air discharge opening, which are arranged adjacent to one another with an air deflecting web separating the air inlet opening from the air discharge opening (wherein the cutting tool 10 is provided with a motor housing 14 and a fan for drawing air, and the motor housing 14 is provided with air intake and exhaust vents 30; wherein Figure 1 shows the intake and exhaust vents 30, which are arranged adjacent to one another with a physical web separating the vents 30; see also Col. 6, lines 7-19).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the air ventilation structure as taught by Kopras into the invention of Whelan. One would be motivated to do so in order to provide sufficient cooling to the motor such that overheating of the device is avoided (Kopras: Col. 6, lines 7-19), thus decreasing the possibility of damaging the internal components and increasing the lifespan of the tool.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whelan (US 8277292).
Regarding claim 11, Whelan discloses the claimed invention as applied above, wherein Whelan further discloses wherein the drive casing has a height in a plane running parallel to the input axis and the output axis (wherein the thickness of the handle casing H, as shown in annotated Figure 1A and Figures 2-4, extends along the direction along axis 19, i.e. the total of X and Y in Figures 2 and 3), and the accessory device has a maximum diameter (wherein implement 16 has a diameter).
While Whelan contemplates diameters for the implement in Col. 4, lines 45-58, Whelan does not explicitly teach a correlation between the maximum diameter of the implement and the dimension of the casing (14) in the direction running parallel to the rotational axis of the tool, i.e. the height of the drive casing being greater than the maximum diameter of the accessory device.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Whelan such that the dimension of the drive casing is greater than the maximum diameter of the blade since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the device of Whelan would not operate differently with the claimed relationship since the blade can still perform the required operations; additionally, modifying the dimensions of the device in the direction running parallel to the rotational axis 19 would provide additional contact area with the surface of a workpiece, thus increasing stability. Further, it appears that applicant places no criticality on the range claimed, indicating simply that the diameter “may” be within the claimed range in a wide variety of ratios (specification pp. [0019]).
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whelan (US 8277292) in view of Wilkinson (US 2006/0202571).
Regarding claim 24, Whelan discloses the claimed invention as applied above. However, Whelan does not explicitly teach wherein the handle casing has a longitudinal axis that is oriented at an angle of 60⁰ to 120⁰ relative to the transverse axis.
However, from the same or similar field of endeavor of tools which are handheld by a user, Wilkinson teaches wherein the handle casing has a longitudinal axis that is oriented at an angle of 60⁰ to 120⁰ relative to the transverse axis (wherein handle portion 40 is disposed at an angle relative to the axis 36, analogous to the transverse axis of Whelan established in the rejection of claim 23 above, wherein the angle is less than 180 degrees in magnitude, see [0024], as well as Figures 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the handle casing portion of Whelan to reflect the angled relationship taught by Wilkinson. One would be motivated to do so in order to provide a tool which is ergonomically pleasant to operate (see [0024]), and thus relieving strain on a user during operation of the device.
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 MAKENA S MARKMAN whose telephone number is (469)295-9162. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00 am-6:00pm.
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, David Posigian can be reached at 313-446-6546. 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.
/MAKENA S MARKMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723