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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/19/2026 has been entered.
Claim Status
Claims 1-6, 8-13, and 15-20 are pending. Claims 7 and 14 are canceled. Claims 1-4, 8-11, and 15-18 are amended. Claims 5-6, 12-13, and 19-20 are previously presented.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 8, and 15 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-6, 8-13, and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1, the application as filed does not disclose the amended recitation “before the future increase, controlling a vehicle…to charge…”. Paragraph 0052 discloses “vehicles and energy storage systems within the location may be directed to make use of charging stations prior to the time of a greater need”, and paragraph 0060 discloses “By encouraging local electric vehicles 122 and energy storage devices 127 to be sufficiently charged prior to the anticipated surge”. It appears the specification discloses directing and encouraging the vehicles to be charged before the future increase, not controlling a vehicle before the future increase as recited. Therefore, the amended recitation constitutes new matter.
Claims 2-6 are dependent from claim 1 and are therefore rejected for the same reasons as independent claim 1.
Regarding claim 5, the application as filed does not disclose the amended recitation “controlling a visitor vehicle to charge”. Paragraphs 0066 and 0083 appear to disclose directing the visitor vehicles to charge, not controlling as recited.
Regarding claim 8, the application as filed does not disclose the amended recitation “before the future increase, control a vehicle to charge…”.
Claims 9-13 are dependent from claim 8 and are therefore rejected for the same reasons as independent claim 8.
Regarding claim 12, the application as filed does not disclose the amended recitation “control a visitor vehicle to charge”.
Regarding claim 15, the application as filed does not disclose the amended recitation “before the future increase, controlling a vehicle to charge…”.
Claims 16-20 are dependent from claim 15 and are therefore rejected for the same reasons as independent claim 15.
Regarding claim 19, the application as filed does not disclose the amended recitation “controlling a visitor vehicle to charge”.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 8-11, and 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GAUL (Pub. No.: US 2012/0146583; cited on IDS; cited in previous office action) in view of HAFNER (Pub. No.: US 2009/0313104 A1).
Regarding claim 1, GAUL discloses a method, comprising:
determining a future increase in a charging requirement (¶ 0012: at least one load prediction (prognosis) is created for the group from at least the actual charging parameters. A load prediction may, for example, contain information about how the electrical load within the group, i.e. the energy taken by the charging stations, will change in the future. For example, with the aid of the actual charging parameters, it is possible to predict the energy which must be made available in half an hour, one hour or in two hours, as well as the capacity which is still available in the group. The actual charging parameters may, for example, also contain information about the power presently made available in combination with the energy still required by a vehicle. From this information, for example, it is possible to ascertain how much longer a charging process will last. With this information, in a load prediction, it is possible to establish that a particular charging station will not take any more electrical energy at a particular time since the charging process presently taking place will then be completed; ¶ 0022: the generation of the load prediction is additionally dependent at least on a daily load curve of at least one charging station in the group and/or a weekly load curve of at least one charging station in the group. As a function of past data, it is possible to estimate the energy demand in the region of a transformer station) at a location (e.g., at low-voltage transformation station 6a shown in Fig. 1; ¶ 0009: a plurality of charging stations may be allocated to a common transformer station. A multiplicity of charging stations allocated to a transformer station may in this case form a group; ¶ 0044: In the region of a low-voltage transformation station 6, 100 or more charging stations 10 may be connected in the future in order to provide a sufficient supply of electrical vehicles with charging points);
before the future increase, controlling a vehicle associated with the location (e.g., at least one vehicle connected to a charging station; ¶ 0010: exchanging at least actual charging parameters of the charging stations within the group. Actual charging parameters may, for example, be information about the electrical power presently made available at a charging station. For example, a vehicle may currently be drawing a power of 10 kVA. This information may constitute an actual charging parameter; ¶ 0044: see above) to charge above a threshold (¶ 0027: when a high load is expected in two hours but there is currently a low load, and the vehicle merely requires a small quantity of energy, a charging duration of one hour may be established and charging may be carried out with an maximum amperage in this hour; the “small quantity of energy” implies a threshold) at a charging station at the location (e.g., 10a, Fig. 1).
GAUL fails to disclose providing a financial incentive to charge the vehicle before the future increase.
HAFNER discloses providing a financial incentive to charge the vehicle before the future increase (¶ 0071: if the energy demands on the power supplier are low, charging station 406 may push incentives to electric vehicle 400 that provide discounts for fully charging electric vehicle 400 with electricity at charging station 406 during the current time period in which energy demands are low. However, the incentives may be contingent on energy demands remaining low during the charging). It is noted that the disclosure of HAFNER of charging during a time period in which energy demands are low implies charging before a future increase in a charging requirement. In addition, GAUL explicitly discloses a time period of future increase of charging requirement and a time period before the time period of future increase as a time period of low demand, and therefore including the financial incentive for charging during the time period of low demand as disclosed in HAFNER, in the method of GAUL, teaches the recitation providing a financial incentive to charge the vehicle before the future increase.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the financial incentive to charge the vehicle before the future increase in order to induce specific vehicle charging behaviors (HAFNER, ¶ 0044) as part of an energy transaction plan that is used to control all aspects of charging transactions (HAFNER, ¶ 0098).
Regarding claim 2, GAUL discloses the controlling of the vehicle comprises: controlling the vehicle to charge at a time based on a current amount of charge of the vehicle (¶ 0023, 0027, 0058).
Regarding claim 3, GAUL discloses calculating the threshold based on a time that the charging station is to charge the vehicle and a historical usage of the vehicle (¶ 0012, 0014-0016, 0022, 0027, 0029, 0045, 0050, 0057-0058, 0060).
Regarding claim 4, GAUL discloses predicting the charging requirement for the vehicle from historical usage data; and determining one or more of the threshold or a time the vehicle is to be charged by the charging station based on the charging requirement (¶ 0012, 0014-0016, 0022, 0027, 0029, 0045, 0050, 0057-0058, 0060).
Regarding claim 8, GAUL discloses a system, comprising:
a processor that executes instructions stored in a memory (¶ 0037: The aforementioned method may also be embodied as a computer program or as a computer program stored on a storage medium. In this case, a microprocessor in the vehicle, in the charging station and/or in the transformer station may be suitably programmed in order to carry out the respective method steps using a computer program) to configure the processor to:
determines a future increase in a charging requirement (¶ 0012: at least one load prediction (prognosis) is created for the group from at least the actual charging parameters. A load prediction may, for example, contain information about how the electrical load within the group, i.e. the energy taken by the charging stations, will change in the future. For example, with the aid of the actual charging parameters, it is possible to predict the energy which must be made available in half an hour, one hour or in two hours, as well as the capacity which is still available in the group. The actual charging parameters may, for example, also contain information about the power presently made available in combination with the energy still required by a vehicle. From this information, for example, it is possible to ascertain how much longer a charging process will last. With this information, in a load prediction, it is possible to establish that a particular charging station will not take any more electrical energy at a particular time since the charging process presently taking place will then be completed; ¶ 0022: the generation of the load prediction is additionally dependent at least on a daily load curve of at least one charging station in the group and/or a weekly load curve of at least one charging station in the group. As a function of past data, it is possible to estimate the energy demand in the region of a transformer station) at a location (e.g., at low-voltage transformation station 6a shown in Fig. 1; ¶ 0009: a plurality of charging stations may be allocated to a common transformer station. A multiplicity of charging stations allocated to a transformer station may in this case form a group; ¶ 0044: In the region of a low-voltage transformation station 6, 100 or more charging stations 10 may be connected in the future in order to provide a sufficient supply of electrical vehicles with charging points);
before the future increase, control a vehicle associated with the location (e.g., at least one vehicle connected to a charging station; ¶ 0010: exchanging at least actual charging parameters of the charging stations within the group. Actual charging parameters may, for example, be information about the electrical power presently made available at a charging station. For example, a vehicle may currently be drawing a power of 10 kVA. This information may constitute an actual charging parameter; ¶ 0044: see above) to charge above a threshold (¶ 0027: when a high load is expected in two hours but there is currently a low load, and the vehicle merely requires a small quantity of energy, a charging duration of one hour may be established and charging may be carried out with an maximum amperage in this hour; the “small quantity of energy” implies a threshold) at a charging station at the location (e.g., 10a, Fig. 1).
GAUL fails to discloses configuring the processor to provide a financial incentive to charge the vehicle before the future increase.
HAFNER discloses configuring the processor to provide a financial incentive to charge the vehicle before the future increase (¶ 0071: if the energy demands on the power supplier are low, charging station 406 may push incentives to electric vehicle 400 that provide discounts for fully charging electric vehicle 400 with electricity at charging station 406 during the current time period in which energy demands are low. However, the incentives may be contingent on energy demands remaining low during the charging). It is noted that the disclosure of HAFNER of charging during a time period in which energy demands are low implies charging before a future increase in a charging requirement. In addition, GAUL explicitly discloses a time period of future increase of charging requirement and a time period before the time period of future increase as a time period of low demand, and therefore including the financial incentive for charging during the time period of low demand as disclosed in HAFNER, in the method of GAUL, teaches the recitation providing a financial incentive to charge the vehicle before the future increase.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the financial incentive to charge the vehicle before the future increase in order to induce specific vehicle charging behaviors (HAFNER, ¶ 0044) as part of an energy transaction plan that is used to control all aspects of charging transactions (HAFNER, ¶ 0098).
Regarding claim 9, GAUL discloses when the processor controls the vehicle, the processor is configured to: control the vehicle to charge at a time based on a current amount of charge of the vehicle (¶ 0023, 0027, 0058).
Regarding claim 10, GAUL discloses the processor is configured to: calculate the threshold based on a time that the charging station is to charge the vehicle and a historical usage of the vehicle (¶ 0012, 0014-0016, 0022, 0027, 0029, 0045, 0050, 0057-0058, 0060).
Regarding claim 11, GAUL discloses the processor is configured to: predict the charging requirement for the vehicle from historical usage data; and determine one or more of the threshold or a time the vehicle is to be charged by the charging station based on the charging requirement (¶ 0012, 0014-0016, 0022, 0027, 0029, 0045, 0050, 0057-0058, 0060).
Regarding claim 15, GAUL discloses a computer-readable medium comprising instructions that, when executed by a processor (¶ 0037: The aforementioned method may also be embodied as a computer program or as a computer program stored on a storage medium. In this case, a microprocessor in the vehicle, in the charging station and/or in the transformer station may be suitably programmed in order to carry out the respective method steps using a computer program), cause the processor to perform:
determining a future increase in a charging requirement (¶ 0012: at least one load prediction (prognosis) is created for the group from at least the actual charging parameters. A load prediction may, for example, contain information about how the electrical load within the group, i.e. the energy taken by the charging stations, will change in the future. For example, with the aid of the actual charging parameters, it is possible to predict the energy which must be made available in half an hour, one hour or in two hours, as well as the capacity which is still available in the group. The actual charging parameters may, for example, also contain information about the power presently made available in combination with the energy still required by a vehicle. From this information, for example, it is possible to ascertain how much longer a charging process will last. With this information, in a load prediction, it is possible to establish that a particular charging station will not take any more electrical energy at a particular time since the charging process presently taking place will then be completed; ¶ 0022: the generation of the load prediction is additionally dependent at least on a daily load curve of at least one charging station in the group and/or a weekly load curve of at least one charging station in the group. As a function of past data, it is possible to estimate the energy demand in the region of a transformer station) at a location (e.g., at low-voltage transformation station 6a shown in Fig. 1; ¶ 0009: a plurality of charging stations may be allocated to a common transformer station. A multiplicity of charging stations allocated to a transformer station may in this case form a group; ¶ 0044: In the region of a low-voltage transformation station 6, 100 or more charging stations 10 may be connected in the future in order to provide a sufficient supply of electrical vehicles with charging points);
before the future increase, controlling a vehicle associated with the location (e.g., at least one vehicle connected to a charging station; ¶ 0010: exchanging at least actual charging parameters of the charging stations within the group. Actual charging parameters may, for example, be information about the electrical power presently made available at a charging station. For example, a vehicle may currently be drawing a power of 10 kVA. This information may constitute an actual charging parameter; ¶ 0044: see above) to charge above a threshold (¶ 0027: when a high load is expected in two hours but there is currently a low load, and the vehicle merely requires a small quantity of energy, a charging duration of one hour may be established and charging may be carried out with an maximum amperage in this hour; the “small quantity of energy” implies a threshold) at a charging station at the location (e.g., 10a, Fig. 1).
GAUL fails to disclose providing a financial incentive to charge the vehicle before the future increase.
HAFNER discloses providing a financial incentive to charge the vehicle before the future increase (¶ 0071: if the energy demands on the power supplier are low, charging station 406 may push incentives to electric vehicle 400 that provide discounts for fully charging electric vehicle 400 with electricity at charging station 406 during the current time period in which energy demands are low. However, the incentives may be contingent on energy demands remaining low during the charging). It is noted that the disclosure of HAFNER of charging during a time period in which energy demands are low implies charging before a future increase in a charging requirement. In addition, GAUL explicitly discloses a time period of future increase of charging requirement and a time period before the time period of future increase as a time period of low demand, and therefore including the financial incentive for charging during the time period of low demand as disclosed in HAFNER, in the method of GAUL, teaches the recitation providing a financial incentive to charge the vehicle before the future increase.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include the financial incentive to charge the vehicle before the future increase in order to induce specific vehicle charging behaviors (HAFNER, ¶ 0044) as part of an energy transaction plan that is used to control all aspects of charging transactions (HAFNER, ¶ 0098).
Regarding claim 16, GAUL discloses the controlling of the vehicle comprises: controlling the vehicle to charge at a time based on a current amount of charge of the vehicle (¶ 0023, 0027, 0058).
Regarding claim 17, GAUL discloses the instructions cause the processor to perform: calculating the threshold based on a time that the charging station is to charge the vehicle and a historical usage of the vehicle (¶ 0012, 0014-0016, 0022, 0027, 0029, 0045, 0050, 0057-0058, 0060).
Regarding claim 18, GAUL discloses the instructions cause the processor to perform: predicting the charging requirement for the vehicle from historical usage data; and determining one or more of the threshold or a time the vehicle is to be charged by the charging station based on the charging requirement (¶ 0012, 0014-0016, 0022, 0027, 0029, 0045, 0050, 0057-0058, 0060).
Claim(s) 5, 12, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GAUL in view of HAFNER as applied to claims 1-4, 8-11, and 15-18 above, and further in view of NAKAZAWA (PG Pub.: US 2013/0035804; cited in previous office action).
Regarding claim 5, GAUL as modified by HAFNER teaches the method as applied to claim 1, but GAUL fails to disclose determining that the charging requirement is due to a predicted increase in visitor electric vehicles in the location; and controlling a visitor vehicle to charge above a second threshold before entering the location.
NAKAZAWA discloses determining that the charging requirement is due to a predicted increase in visitor electric vehicles in the location; and controlling a visitor vehicle to charge before entering the location (¶ 0026, 0034, 0039). Charging the visitor electric vehicle to be above a second threshold is implied, e.g., a minimum threshold for the visitor vehicle would be implied such that the visitor vehicle would not need to stop for charging in the location where the increased charging need is determined. Furthermore, charging a vehicle to a threshold is well known in the art, as evidenced by GAUL (¶ 0027), and it would be obvious to charge the visitor electric vehicles of NAKAZAWA such that they are above a threshold prior to entering the location.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include controlling a visitor vehicle to charge above a second threshold before entering the location in order to further suppress a charge amount shortage in the location (NAKAZAWA, ¶ 0005-0007).
Regarding claim 12, GAUL as modified by HAFNER teaches the system as applied to claim 8, but GAUL fails to disclose the processor is configured to: determine that the charging requirement is due to a predicted increase in visitor electric vehicles in the location; and control a visitor vehicle to charge above a second threshold before entering the location.
NAKAZAWA discloses the processor is configured to: determine that the charging requirement is due to a predicted increase in visitor electric vehicles in the location; and control a visitor vehicle to charge before entering the location (¶ 0026, 0034, 0039). Charging the visitor electric vehicle to be above a second threshold is implied, e.g., a minimum threshold for the visitor vehicle would be implied such that the visitor vehicle would not need to stop for charging in the location where the increased charging need is determined. Furthermore, charging a vehicle to a threshold is well known in the art, as evidenced by GAUL (¶ 0027), and it would be obvious to charge the visitor electric vehicles of NAKAZAWA such that they are above a threshold prior to entering the location.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include controlling a visitor vehicle to charge above a second threshold before entering the location in order to further suppress a charge amount shortage in the location (NAKAZAWA, ¶ 0005-0007).
Regarding claim 19, GAUL as modified by HAFNER teaches the computer-readable medium as applied to claim 15, but GAUL fails to disclose the instructions cause the processor to perform: determining that the charging requirement is due to a predicted increase in visitor electric vehicles in the location; and controlling a visitor vehicle to charge above a second threshold before entering the location.
NAKAZAWA discloses the instructions cause the processor to perform: determining that the charging requirement is due to a predicted increase in visitor electric vehicles in the location; and controlling a visitor vehicle to charge before entering the location (¶ 0026, 0034, 0039). Charging the visitor electric vehicle to be above a second threshold is implied, e.g., a minimum threshold for the visitor vehicle would be implied such that the visitor vehicle would not need to stop for charging in the location where the increased charging need is determined. Furthermore, charging a vehicle to a threshold is well known in the art, as evidenced by GAUL (¶ 0027), and it would be obvious to charge the visitor electric vehicles of NAKAZAWA such that they are above a threshold prior to entering the location.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include controlling a visitor vehicle to charge above a second threshold before entering the location in order to further suppress a charge amount shortage in the location (NAKAZAWA, ¶ 0005-0007).
Claim(s) 6, 13, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GAUL in view of HAFNER as applied to claims 1-4, 8-11, and 15-18 above, and further in view of HIRUTA (PG Pub.: US 2011/0224900; cited in previous office action).
Regarding claim 6, GAUL as modified by HAFNER teaches the method as applied to claim 1, but GAUL fails to disclose controlling a visitor electric vehicle to the location to display an amount of energy required for a trip from a charging station outside of the location to the location.
HIRUTA discloses controlling a visitor electric vehicle to a location to display an amount of energy required for a trip from a charging station outside of the location to the location (¶ 0071-0072, 0085). It would be obvious to apply the teaching of HIRUTA of controlling a visitor electric vehicle to a location to display an amount of energy required for a trip from a charging station as recited, for a visitor electric vehicle to the location of GAUL.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include controlling a visitor electric vehicle to a location to display an amount of energy required for a trip from a charging station as recited in order to help plan for charging and reduce the fear associated with running out of power.
Regarding claim 13, GAUL as modified by HAFNER teaches the system as applied to claim 8, but GAUL fails to disclose the processor is configured to: control a visitor electric vehicle to the location to display an amount of energy required for a trip from a charging station outside of the location to the location.
HIRUTA discloses the processor is configured to: control a visitor electric vehicle to a location to display an amount of energy required for a trip from a charging station outside of the location to the location (¶ 0071-0072, 0085). It would be obvious to apply the teaching of HIRUTA of controlling a visitor electric vehicle to a location to display an amount of energy required for a trip from a charging station as recited, for a visitor electric vehicle to the location of GAUL.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include controlling a visitor electric vehicle to a location to display an amount of energy required for a trip from a charging station as recited in order to help plan for charging and reduce the fear associated with running out of power.
Regarding claim 20, GAUL as modified by HAFNER teaches the computer-readable medium as applied to claim 15, but GAUL fails to disclose the instructions cause the processor to perform: controlling in a visitor electric vehicle to the location to display an amount of energy required for a trip from a charging station outside of the location to the location.
HIRUTA discloses the instructions cause the processor to perform: controlling a visitor electric vehicle to a location to display an amount of energy required for a trip from a charging station outside of the location to the location (¶ 0071-0072, 0085). It would be obvious to apply the teaching of HIRUTA of controlling a visitor electric vehicle to a location to display an amount of energy required for a trip from a charging station as recited, for a visitor electric vehicle to the location of GAUL.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include controlling a visitor electric vehicle to a location to display an amount of energy required for a trip from a charging station as recited in order to help plan for charging and reduce the fear associated with running out of power.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MANUEL HERNANDEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-7916. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9a-5p 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.
/Manuel Hernandez/Examiner, Art Unit 2859 9/22/2026
/DREW A DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights