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 .
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 19 and 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.
Claim 19 recites “the storage tank is configured to maintain increased pressure by the received boiled-off vapor from the external component and the connecting lines to cause the liquid cryogen in the storage tank to become subcooled.” The specification fails to provide written description support for this limitation. The specification generally discloses boil-off vapor generation and handling, as well as circulation of liquid cryogen between a storage tank and external components (see, e.g., ¶¶ [0026]–[0030], [0033]–[0036]). These portions describe that: liquid cryogen is delivered to an external component, and liquid (including subcooled liquid) may be returned to the storage tank. In particular, the specification indicates that subcooling is associated with the liquid returned from the external component, rather than being caused by pressure increase within the storage tank (see, e.g., ¶ [0034]–[0036]). While the specification also describes boil-off vapor generation and routing (see, e.g., ¶¶ [0026]–[0028]), it does not disclose: that boil-off vapor from the external component or connecting lines is used to increase pressure within the storage tank, and that increasing pressure within the storage tank causes subcooling of the liquid cryogen. Accordingly, the claimed relationship—wherein received boil-off vapor increases pressure in the storage tank to thereby cause subcooling of the liquid cryogen—is not described in the originally filed specification. Furthermore, the specification attributes subcooling to returned subcooled liquid, not to pressure increase within the storage tank. Thus, the claimed mechanism is not supported by the disclosed embodiments. Therefore, the specification does not reasonably convey to one of ordinary skill in the art that the inventor had possession of the claimed subject matter at the time of filing. Accordingly, the subject matter of claim 19 constitutes new matter not supported by the originally filed disclosure.
Claim 20 recites: “the recovery cryostat is located at a position such that the liquid in the recovery cryostat cannot be drained back to the storage tank” The specification does not reasonably convey to one of ordinary skill in the art that the inventor had possession of a configuration in which liquid cannot be drained back into the recovery cryostat based on positioning alone. While the specification discloses liquid return lines and general fluid transfer between a recovery cryostat and a storage tank (see, e.g., Fig. 1-3, corresponding to return flow), the specification does not disclose: any specific structural positioning of the return line that prevents reverse drainage, any hydrostatic or geometric constraint ensuring one-way liquid flow based solely on positioning, or any teaching that reverse flow is entirely prevented. The recited limitation “cannot be drained back” represents an absolute functional limitation, which requires corresponding structural disclosure. The specification fails to describe how such prevention is achieved. Accordingly, claim 20 introduces subject matter not supported by the original disclosure. Contrary to applicant’s assertion, applicant’s disclosure in fact discloses liquid flowing/draining back from the recovery cryostat (45) to the storage tank (10) using (line 55, 56 and valve 33).
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 1-3, 5-6, 13-15 and 17-20 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the storage tank" in line 2 lacks proper antecedent basis. The limitation should read –the cryogenic storage tank--. Appropriate correction required throughout the claims.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "a storage tank" in line 4 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear how it relates with the previously cited limitation “a cryogenic storage tank” in line 2 or “the storage tank” in line 2-3 of the claim. For examination purposes, examiner read the limitation as –the cryogenic storage tank--.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "said storage tank configured to receive vapor at an upper portion of the storage tank from the liquid cryogen that boils off when said external component and connecting lines are cooled down” in line 5-7 renders the claim indefinite because the scope of the vapor source is unclear. For purposes of examination, it is unclear whether: the vapor is generated from liquid cryogen within the storage tank itself, the vapor originates from the external component or connecting lines, or the vapor is generated from another unspecified source. Furthermore, the phrase “when said external component and connecting lines are cooled down” lacks a clear relationship to the recited vapor, such that it is unclear how the cooling of the external component and connecting lines results in vapor being received at the upper portion of the storage tank. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recite: “an external component” line 5 renders the claim indefinite because the term “external component” fails to provide a clear structural limitation and does not define the boundaries of the claimed system. For purposes of examination, the Examiner interprets “external component” as any component external to the storage tank; however, the claims do not specify what structures qualify or the required structural relationship. Accordingly, the scope of the claims is unclear.
Claim 1 recite “a recovery cryostat” in line 8 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear how it relates with the previously cited limitation “an external recovery cryostat” in line 2 of the claim. Appropriate correction required throughout the claims.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "said storage tank configured to receive vapor at an upper portion of the storage tank from the liquid cryogen that boils off when said external component and connecting lines are cooled down” in line 3-5 renders the claim indefinite because the scope of the vapor source is unclear. For purposes of examination, it is unclear whether: the vapor is generated from liquid cryogen within the storage tank itself, the vapor originates from the external component or connecting lines, or the vapor is generated from another unspecified source. Furthermore, the phrase “when said external component and connecting lines are cooled down” lacks a clear relationship to the recited vapor, such that it is unclear how the cooling of the external component and connecting lines results in vapor being received at the upper portion of the storage tank. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the claimed invention.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the liquid line return valve” in line 11 lacks proper antecedent basis. It should read –the on-off liquid line return valve--. Appropriate correction required throughout claim 13 and the rest of the dependent claims.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the gas line supply valve” in line 12 lacks proper antecedent basis. It should read –the on-off gas line supply valve--. Appropriate correction required throughout claim 13 and the rest of the dependent claims.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the liquid line return valve” in line 1-2 lacks proper antecedent basis. It should read –the on-off liquid line return valve--.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the pressure” in line 2 lacks proper antecedent basis.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the liquid line” in line 3 lacks proper antecedent basis. The limitation should read –the return liquid line--.
Claim 19 recites “the storage tank is configured to maintain increased pressure by the received boiled-off vapor from the external component and the connecting lines to cause the liquid cryogen in the storage tank to become subcooled” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear how the recited limitations are related and what is required to satisfy the claimed causation. The phrase: “maintain increased pressure by the received boiled-off vapor … to cause the liquid cryogen … to become subcooled” introduces ambiguity as to: whether the increased pressure is directly caused by the received boiled-off vapor, whether the increased pressure alone causes the subcooling, or whether additional, unrecited structure or processes are required to achieve subcooling. Accordingly, the causal relationship between receiving boiled-off vapor, increasing pressure, and achieving subcooling is unclear, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the claimed invention.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the received boil-off vapor from the external component” in line 2 lacks proper antecedent basis. The limitation should read –the return liquid line--.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the liquid return line valve” in line 3 lacks proper antecedent basis. The limitation should read –the liquid line return valve—to be consistent with previously cited limitation of claim 1 “a liquid line return valve”.
Claims 2, 3, 5-6, 14-15 and 17 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being dependent upon a rejected claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 6, 13-15 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tyree et al. (US 5,934,095) in view of Zia et al. (US 2007/0006597 A1) and further in view of Mackey (US 2013/0263609 A1).
In regard to claims 1, Tyree teaches a cryogenic system for condensing vapor of cryogen from a cryogenic storage tank (10) and returning the cryogen to the storage tank (31) as a liquid, comprising:
a storage tank (10) and a recovery cryostat (refrigeration unit 28/ condenser 36 and sump 45) configured to receive vapor from the storage tank (10) through a supply gas line (18) that has gas line supply valve (valve 34a), coupled to a cryocooler (36) that is configured to condense into liquid the vapor received from said storage tank (see fig. 1; col. 7, ln 54 to col. 8, ln 3), and configured to return the liquid to said storage tank (10) through a return liquid line (56/58b) that is connected to a lower portion (via 58b) of the storage tank (10) (see fig. 1; col. 8, line 20-29) and has a liquid line return valve (34b) (see fig. 1).
Tyree teaches a storage tank (10) that is configured to store a liquid cryogen, but does not explicitly teach to deliver the liquid cryogen to an external component, said storage tank configured to receive vapor at an upper portion of the storage tank from the liquid cryogen that boils off when said external component and connecting lines are cooled down.
However, Zia teaches a cryogenic storage tank system comprising a storage tank (1) that is configured to store a liquid cryogen (2) and deliver the liquid cryogen (via conduit 3) to an external component (pump 6) (see fig. 1; 0021), said storage tank (1) configured to receive vapor at an upper portion of the storage tank (via line 10) from the liquid cryogen that boils off when said external component (pump 6) and connecting lines (lines 3, 5, 8, 10) are cooled down (see ¶ 0022; fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the cryogenic system/method of Tyree by deliver the liquid cryogen to an external component, and receive vapor from the liquid cryogen that boils off to the upper portion of the storage tank after said external component and connecting lines are cooled down, in view of the teachings of Zia, for the purpose of pressurizing the storage tank while providing cooling other equipment.
Tyree teaches a supply gas line having a gas line supply valve and a return liquid line having a liquid line return valve, but does not explicitly teach the valves are on-off valves.
However, Mackey teaches a fluid transfer between two cryogenic tanks (7 and 3), wherein a vapor is transferred from an upper region of dispense tank (7) into supply tank (3) via vapor line (6) having an on-off gas line valve (26) and a liquid is transferred from the supply tank (3) to dispense tank (7) via liquid line (5) having an on-off liquid line valve (27), wherein the valves are controlled using controller (34) (¶ 0046, 0053-0055, 0067-0068; fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the cryogenic system of Wang by providing an on-off valves in the supply gas line and in the return liquid line, in view of the teachings of Mackey, for the purpose of efficiently and effectively control the vapor and liquid transfer between the storage tank and the recovery cryostat.
In regard to claim 2, Tyree teaches the cryogenic system in accordance with claim 1 wherein Tyree teaches the cryogen includes CO2, but does not explicitly teach the cryogen includes one of helium, hydrogen, neon, oxygen, nitrogen, and argon.
However, Zia teaches cryogenic tank system wherein cryogenic liquid from a primary cryogenic liquid storage tank is subcooled by refrigeration generated by a cryocooler, wherein the cryogenic liquids can be one can name hydrogen, helium, neon, oxygen, nitrogen, argon, carbon dioxide, methane and mixtures such as air and natural gas (see ¶ 0020).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the cryogen fluid of Tyree, which uses CO₂ as a cryogenic process fluid, to instead use a cryogenic fluid selected from helium, hydrogen, neon, nitrogen, or argon as taught by Zia. Such fluids are well-known, functionally equivalent cryogens used in cryogenic systems. The selection of a particular cryogenic fluid constitutes a result-effective variable, where different fluids are routinely chosen based on desired temperature and performance characteristics. Substituting one known cryogen for another would have been a matter of routine optimization yielding predictable results.
In regard to claim 5, Tyree in view of Zia teaches the cryogenic system in accordance with claim 1 wherein Zia teaches said external component is one of a liquid pump (pump 6) and a liquid container (see Zia ¶ 0022; fig. 1; see also the rejection of claim 1).
In regard to claim 13, Tyree method to recover vapor that boils off in a cryogenic system comprising: a storage tank (10) and a recovery cryostat (refrigeration unit 28/ condenser 36 and sump 45) configured to receive vapor from the storage tank (10) through a supply gas line (18) that has gas line supply valve (valve 34a), coupled to a cryocooler (36) that is configured to condense into liquid the vapor received from said storage tank (see fig. 1; col. 7, ln 54 to col. 8, ln 3), and configured to return the liquid to said storage tank (10) through a return liquid line (56/58b) that is connected to a lower portion (via 58b) of the storage tank (10) (see fig. 1; col. 8, line 20-29) and has a liquid line return valve (34b) (see fig. 1), the method comprising condensing the vapor (18) in the recovery cryostat (28) (col. 8, ln 1-4); pressurizing the recovery cryostat (refrigeration unit 28/ condenser 36 and sump 45) by one or more of turning off the cryocooler (36), turning on a heater in the recovery cryostat, and pressurizing the recovery cryostat (28) with the same gas as the vapor (see col. 8, ln 48-58) and also teaches stopping said pressurizing the recovery cryostat (see col. 8, ln 48-58).
Tyree teaches a storage tank (10) that is configured to store a liquid cryogen, but does not explicitly teach to deliver the liquid cryogen to an external component, said storage tank configured to receive vapor at an upper portion of the storage tank from the liquid cryogen that boils off when said external component and connecting lines are cooled down.
However, Zia teaches a cryogenic storage tank system comprising a storage tank (1) that is configured to store a liquid cryogen (2) and deliver the liquid cryogen (via conduit 3) to an external component (pump 6) (see fig. 1; 0021), said storage tank (1) configured to receive vapor at an upper portion of the storage tank (via line 10) from the liquid cryogen that boils off when said external component (pump 6) and connecting lines (lines 3, 5, 8, 10) are cooled down (see ¶ 0022; fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the cryogenic system/method of Tyree by deliver the liquid cryogen to an external component, and receive vapor from the liquid cryogen that boils off to the upper portion of the storage tank after said external component and connecting lines are cooled down, in view of the teachings of Zia, for the purpose of pressurizing the storage tank while providing cooling other equipment.
Tyree teaches a supply gas line having a gas line supply valve and a return liquid line having a liquid line return valve, but does not explicitly teach the valves are on-off valves.
However, Mackey teaches a fluid transfer between two cryogenic tanks (7 and 3), wherein a vapor is transferred from an upper region of dispense tank (7) into supply tank (3) via vapor line (6) having an on-off gas line valve (26) and a liquid is transferred from the supply tank (3) to dispense tank (7) via liquid line (5) having an on-off liquid line valve (27), wherein the valves are controlled using controller (34) as desired (¶ 0046, 0053-0055, 0067-0068; fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the cryogenic system of Wang by providing an on-off valves in the supply gas line and in the return liquid line, in view of the teachings of Mackey, for the purpose of efficiently and effectively control the vapor and liquid transfer between the storage tank and the recovery cryostat.
In regards to the limitations wherein “closing the liquid line return valve; opening the gas line supply valve while keeping the liquid line return valve closed; closing the gas line supply valve; opening the liquid line return valve based on the pressure in the recovery cryostat to return the liquid to the storage tank or the external component; closing the liquid line return valve and opening the gas supply line valve”, the cited prior art (Tyree in view of Zig in view of Mackey) teaches all of the positively recited structure of the claimed apparatus. The Courts have held that a statement of intended use in an apparatus claim fails to distinguish over a prior art apparatus. See In re Sinex, 309 F.2d 488, 492, 135 USPQ 302, 305 (CCPA 1962). The Courts have held that the manner of operating an apparatus does not differentiate an apparatus claim from the prior art, if the prior art apparatus teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim. See Ex Parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (BPAI 1987). The Courts have held that apparatus claims must be structurally distinguishable from the prior art in terms of structure, not function. See In re Danley, 120 USPQ 528, 531 (CCPA 1959); and Hewlett-Packard Co. V. Bausch and Lomb, Inc., 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (see MPEP §§ 2114 and 2173.05(g)).
In regard to claim 14, Tyree teaches the method in accordance with claim 13 wherein Tyree teaches the cryogen includes CO2, but does not explicitly teach the cryogen includes one of helium, hydrogen, neon, oxygen, nitrogen, and argon.
However, Zia teaches cryogenic tank system wherein cryogenic liquid from a primary cryogenic liquid storage tank is subcooled by refrigeration generated by a cryocooler, wherein the cryogenic liquids can be one can name hydrogen, helium, neon, oxygen, nitrogen, argon, carbon dioxide, methane and mixtures such as air and natural gas (see ¶ 0020).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the cryogen fluid of Tyree, which uses CO₂ as a cryogenic process fluid, to instead use a cryogenic fluid selected from helium, hydrogen, neon, nitrogen, or argon as taught by Zia. Such fluids are well-known, functionally equivalent cryogens used in cryogenic systems. The selection of a particular cryogenic fluid constitutes a result-effective variable, where different fluids are routinely chosen based on desired temperature and performance characteristics. Substituting one known cryogen for another would have been a matter of routine optimization yielding predictable results.
In regard to claim 15, Tyree in view of Zia teaches the method in accordance with claim 13 wherein Zia teaches said external component is one of a liquid pump (pump 6) and a liquid container (see Zia ¶ 0022; fig. 1; see also the rejection of claim 13).
In regard to claim 18, Tyree in view of Mackey teaches the method in accordance with claim 13, wherein said opening the liquid line return valve (43b, as modified Mackey valve 27) comprises opening the liquid line return valve (43b) when the pressure in the recovery cryostat is able to force the liquid out through the liquid line (See Tyree col. 8, line 20-29; See also Mackey ¶ 0053).
In regard to claim 19, Wang in view of Zia teaches the cryogenic system in accordance with claim 1 wherein the storage tank is configured to maintain increased pressure by the received boiled-off vapor from the external component (6) and the connecting lines to cause the liquid cryogen in the storage tank to become subcooled (in this case, pressure increase due to boil-off; see also the 112(a) and (b) rejections above).
In regard to claim 20, Wang in view of Tyree teaches the cryogenic system in accordance with claim 1 wherein the recovery cryostat (28) is located at a position such that the liquid (56) in the recovery cryostat cannot be drained back to the storage tank (in this case, it is considered cannot be drained back because of the liquid return line valve 34b), and the liquid return line valve (34b) is a check valve (col. 8, line 22) (see fig. 1; see also the 112 rejections above).
Claim(s) 3, 6 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tyree, Zia and Mackey as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wang (US
2009/0049862 A1).
In regard to claim 3, Tyree teaches the cryogenic system in accordance with claim 1 wherein Tyree teaches the condensed liquid returns to the storage tank from the recovery cryostat, but does not explicitly teach said recovery cryostat is located above said storage tank such that the condensed liquid returns to the storage tank by gravity.
However, Wang teaches Wang teaches a cryogenic system for condensing vapor of cryogen, comprising a storage tank (cryostat or Dewar 31) and the recovery cryostat (32), wherein the recovery cryostat (32) is configured to receive vapor (41) from the storage tank (31) through a gas line (48) to condense the vapor (41) into liquid, wherein the recovery cryostat (32) is located above said storage tank (31) such that the condensed liquid returns to the storage tank (31) by gravity (see Wang, fig. 2-6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the cryogenic system of Tyree by positioning the recovery cryostat above said storage tank, as taught by wang, for purpose of an easier fluid transfer of the condensed liquid.
In regard to claims 6 and 17, Tyree teaches the cryogenic system/method in accordance with claim 1 or 13 wherein Tyree teaches cryocooler (condenser 36), but does not explicitly teach the cryocooler is one of a GM type cryogenic expander, a pulse tube, a Stirling type pulse tube, and a reverse Brayton type of cryocooler.
However, Wang teaches a cryogenic system and method for condensing vapor of cryogen from a cryogenic storage tank and returning the cryogen to the storage tank as a liquid, comprising: a storage tank (cryostat or Dewar 31) that is configured to store a liquid cryogen (¶ 0018); a recovery cryostat (32) connected to said storage tank (31), wherein the recovery cryostat (32) is configured to receive vapor (41) from the storage tank (31) through a gas line (48), is coupled to a cryocooler (36) that is configured to condense the vapor (41) received from said storage tank (31) into liquid (¶ 0018, 0023, 0025; fig. 2-6). Wang further teaches the cryocooler (36) is one of a GM type cryogenic expander, a pulse tube, a Stirling type pulse tube, and a reverse Brayton type of cryocooler (See Wang, ¶ 0016, Wang teaches a two stage pulse tube cryocooler). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the cryocooler of Tyree with one of a GM type cryogenic expander, a pulse tube, a Stirling type pulse tube and a reverse Brayton type of cryocooler, as taught by wang, since the selection of a specific cryocooler type (e.g., GM, pulse tube, Stirling-type pulse tube, or reverse Brayton) represents the use of known, interchangeable cryocooling technologies for providing low-temperature cooling. One of ordinary skill in the art would have selected a pulse tube cryocooler based on known performance advantages, as a matter of routine optimization, yielding predictable results.
In regard to claim 17, See the rejection above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the amended claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEBESHET MENGESHA whose telephone number is (571)270-1793. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7-4, alternate Fridays, EST.
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, Frantz Jules can be reached at 571-272-6681. 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.
/W.M/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/FRANTZ F JULES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763