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 Objections
Claims 14 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 14 lines 1-6 applicant claims “the heat exchanger system is concealed from public view within a roadway adjacent a bus stop, and wherein an outgoing coolant pipe provides heated coolant from the wireless charger to one or more of a bus stop shelter, a bench within the bus stop shelter, and a sidewalk adjacent the bus stop to heat the bus stop shelter, the bench within the bus stop shelter, or the sidewalk adjacent the bus stop.” Emend to remove the “and” language in line 4 as it appears to not be required with the later “or” language in line 6.
Claim 15 recites “the ambient air”. Emend to “[[the]] ambient air” to provide proper Antecedent basis.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because
Figs. 1A-1D are missing units and labels for the X-Y axes
The following elements lack clear symbols/text/legends to identify them only from the drawings themselves:
Elements 201, 203-206, 230-235, 215, 217-224, 226-228 of Fig. 2
All elements of Figs. 3A & 3B
411 of Fig. 4B
602-604 & 609-611 of Figs. 6A & 6B
703-705, 710, 712 of Figs. 7A & 7B
All elements of Fig. 8 & 9
1004-1006 of Fig. 10
1201-1212, 1215-1226 of FI. 12
All elements of Figs. 12A-14D
1606, 1605 of Figs. 16A & 16B
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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 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.
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 12, 17, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Laemmle (USPGPN 20200143978; hereinafter Laem) in view of Findeisen (USPGPN 20190259521; hereinafter Find).
Independent Claim 12, Laem discloses a thermal management system for a wireless power transfer (WPT) system for charging electric vehicles (2) with a ground based wireless charger, the thermal management system (Figs. 1-3) comprising:
a heat exchanger system concealed from public view (¶[67]) within a structure (1, 8, 11, 10, esp. 1), the heat exchanger system being thermally coupled to the wireless charger (4) of the WPT system, the heat exchanger system comprises one or more of a passive heat exchange element, a semi-active heat exchange element, and an active heat exchange element (6 & 6a are heat sink/conductor= passive heat exchange element, 7 is a cooling element with fluid circuit 8 flowing through it is passive with coolant flowing through it, fluid conveyor 9 is semiactive ¶[71], with heat-exchanger/heat storage units, fan is active ¶[28], see ¶’s [28, 67-76, esp. 28, 69, 71-73, 75, 76]);
the concealed heat exchanger system removes heat from the wireless charger during operation of the wireless charger by using one or more of the passive heat exchange element, the semi-active heat exchange element, and the active heat exchange element to maintain the temperature of the wireless charger below a predefined temperature limit (it would be inherent to one of ordinary skill in the art that the components have an operating temperature at which the system would no longer function, set by the manufacturer, who set up the cooling system to prevent it; or in the alternative, assuming the applicant believes the predefined temperature limit is not inherent, one of ordinary skill in the art understands the point of a cooling system is to provide the protection, where Laem does not explicitly describe a predefined temperature limit).
Find teaches a cooling system used to maintain the temperature of the inductive system below a maximum [i.e. predetermined] temperature threshold (¶’s [02, 08, 24, 33, 65] at least abstract describes an inductive system in transformers, which are analogous to wireless power systems, esp. the inductive wireless power system of the present application and Laem [abstract]). Find describes the cooling system keeps the system below the maximum threshold to prevent damage (¶[02]), i.e. improve safety (overheated electrical/electronic system can damage the rest of the device and/or cause safety issues for humans for example dangerous gases/fires/explosions) and lifetime (partially damaged devices do not last as long).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Laem with Find to provide improved lifetime and safety.
Independent Claim 17, Laem discloses a thermal management system for a wireless power transfer (WPT) system for charging electric vehicles (2) with a ground based wireless charger, the thermal management system (Figs. 1-3) comprising:
a heat exchanger system thermally coupled to the wireless charger (4) of the WPT system, the heat exchanger system comprises one or more of a passive heat exchange element, a semi-active heat exchange element, and an active heat exchange element (6 & 6a are heat sink/conductor= passive heat exchange element, 7 is a cooling element with fluid circuit 8 flowing through it is passive with coolant flowing through it, fluid conveyor 9 is semiactive ¶[71], with heat-exchanger/heat storage units, fan is active ¶[28], see ¶’s [28, 67-76, esp. 28, 69, 71-73, 75, 76]);
the heat exchanger system removes heat from the wireless charger during operation of the wireless charger by using the one or more of the passive heat exchange element, the semi-active heat exchange element, and the active heat exchange element to maintain the temperature of the wireless charger below a predefined temperature limit (it would be inherent to one of ordinary skill in the art that the components have an operating temperature at which the system would no longer function, set by the manufacturer, who set up the cooling system to prevent it); and
wherein the heat removed from the wireless charger of the WPT system is utilized to add heat to a fluid or substance separate from the thermal management system (Fluid via 15 in 8 & 9 to 10 & 11, see ¶’s [71-73, 75]).
Or in the alternative, assuming the applicant believes the predefined temperature limit is not inherent to Laem, one of ordinary skill in the art understands the point of a cooling system is to provide the protection, where Laem does not explicitly describe a predefined temperature limit
Find teaches a cooling system used to maintain the temperature of the inductive system below a maximum [i.e. predetermined] temperature threshold (¶’s [02, 08, 24, 33, 65] at least abstract describes an inductive system in transformers, which are analogous to wireless power systems, esp. the inductive wireless power system of the present application and Laem [abstract]). Find describes the cooling system keeps the system below the maximum threshold to prevent damage (¶[02]), i.e. improve safety (overheated electrical/electronic system can damage the rest of the device and/or cause safety issues for humans for example dangerous gases/fires/explosions) and lifetime (partially damaged devices do not last as long).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Laem with Find to provide improved lifetime and safety.
Dependent Claim 18, Laem discloses a heat reuse system of a building is positioned adjacent the WPT system, and wherein the thermal management system provides heated coolant from the heat exchanger system to the heat reuse system of the building to heat a fluid for use within the building (one of ordinary skill in the art understands that a living space ¶[73] would inherently imply a building, or in the alternative, if applicant does not feel it is inherent, one of ordinary skill in the art understands that it would be obvious to heat a building as the heat generated/reused is more efficiently retained in a building than externally).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3 and 5-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laemmle (USPGPN 20200143978; hereinafter Laem) in view of Findeisen (USPGPN 20190259521; hereinafter Find)
Independent Claim 1, Laem teaches a thermal management system for a wireless power transfer (WPT) system for charging electric vehicles (2) with a ground based wireless charger, the thermal management system (Figs. 1-3) comprising:
a heat exchanger system thermally coupled to the wireless charger (4) of the WPT system, the heat exchanger system comprises a first passive heat exchange element and at least one of a second passive heat exchange element, a semi-active heat exchange element, or an active heat exchange element (6 & 6a are heat sink/conductor= passive heat exchange element, 7 is a cooling element with fluid circuit 8 flowing through it is passive with coolant flowing through it, fluid conveyor 9 is semiactive ¶[71], with heat-exchanger/heat storage units, fan is active ¶[28], see ¶’s [28,67-76,esp.28,69,71-73,75, 76]);
and the heat exchanger system removes heat from the wireless charger during operation of the wireless charger to maintain a temperature by using the first passive heat exchange element (fluid loop 15/8).
Laem is silent to when the first passive heat exchange element is not sufficient to maintain the temperature of the wireless charger below a predefined temperature limit, to selectively use the second passive heat exchange element, semi-active heat exchange element, or the active heat exchange element.
Find teaches when the first passive heat exchange element is not sufficient to maintain the temperature of the wireless charger below a predefined temperature limit, to selectively use the second passive heat exchange element, semi-active heat exchange element, or the active heat exchange element (¶[24], refers to pump 11 ¶’s [47-52, esp. 47-49], insulating fluid 8 can be considered passive heat exchange element, becomes active/semi-active when the pump 11/cooling device 10/cooling register 9 is turned on).
Find teaches a cooling system used to maintain the temperature of the inductive system below a maximum [i.e. predetermined] temperature threshold (¶’s [02, 08, 24, 33, 65] at least abstract describes an inductive system in transformers, which are analogous to wireless power systems, esp. the inductive wireless power system of the present application and Laem [abstract]). Find describes the cooling system keeps the system below the maximum threshold to prevent damage (¶[02]), i.e. improve safety (overheated electrical/electronic system can damage the rest of the device and/or cause safety issues for humans for example dangerous gases/fires/explosions) and lifetime (partially damaged devices do not last as long).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Laem with Find to provide improved lifetime and safety.
Dependent Claim 2, the combination of Laem and Find teaches the heat exchanger system is fluidly coupled to the wireless charger (Laem ¶’s [71, 72]).
Dependent Claim 3, the combination of Laem and Find teaches the heat exchanger system is fluidly coupled to the wireless charger using a liquid coolant (Laem ¶’s [71, 72]).
Dependent Claim 5, the combination of Laem and Find teaches the heat exchanger system uses the semi-active heat exchange element when the first passive heat exchange element is not sufficient to maintain the temperature of the wireless charger below the predefined temperature limit (as noted, Laem has the three heat exchangers, Find teaches the use of non-passive elements to maintain the temperature below a threshold).
Dependent Claim 6, the combination of Laem and Find teaches the heat exchanger system uses the active heat exchange element when the semi-active heat exchange element is not sufficient to maintain the temperature of the wireless charger below the predefined temperature limit (as noted, Laem has the three heat exchangers, Find teaches the use of non-passive elements to maintain the temperature below a threshold, see ¶[28] of Find).
Dependent Claim 7, the combination of Laem and Find teaches the first passive heat exchange element does not require the application of external power to produce a cooling effect of the wireless charger (¶[19] Cooling Plate 7 of Laem is not described to use external electrical power for the cooling effect).
Dependent Claim 8, the combination of Laem and Find teaches the first passive heat exchange element removes heat from the wireless charger and transfers the heat to ambient air (Laem ¶[73]).
Dependent Claim 9, the combination of Laem and Find teaches the semi-active heat exchange element includes a fan or a pump that selectively assists in cooling the wireless charger by selectively inducing a flow of coolant to remove heat from the wireless charger to maintain the temperature of the wireless charger below the predefined temperature limit (Find for the temperature limit, Laem fan ¶[24], pump ¶’s [54-56], where selectively applies the cooling except when the temperature becomes below the threshold).
Dependent Claim 10, the combination of Laem and Find teaches the active heat exchange element includes at least one pump, fan, or chiller that continuously operates to produce a continuous flow of coolant past or through the wireless charger to assist in cooling the wireless charger and maintaining the temperature of the wireless charger below the predefined temperature limit (Find for the temperature limit, Laem fan ¶[24], pump ¶’s [54-56], where continuous in Find until below the limit as one of ordinary skill in the art understands).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laemmle (USPGPN 20200143978; hereinafter Laem) in view of Findeisen (USPGPN 20190259521; hereinafter Find), further in view of Watanabe et al (USPN 5909099; hereinafter Wata)
Dependent Claim 4 the combination of Laem and Find teaches the limitations of Claim 1
Laem is silent to the heat exchanger system is thermally coupled to the wireless charger using a gaseous coolant (noted that Laem uses Fluid, and say can be liquid, but does not say it cannot be gaseous).
Wata teaches the heat exchanger system is thermally coupled to the wireless charger using a gaseous coolant (Col 5 L1-9, Fig. 1 heat exchanger 52, pump 54, fan 53, fluid pipe 40, charger is inductive Col 1 L5-8, coupler 30). Wata describes the gaseous coolant improving cooling efficiency (Col 5 L1-9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Laem in view of Find with Wata to provide improved efficiency.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laemmle (USPGPN 20200143978; hereinafter Laem) in view of Findeisen (USPGPN 20190259521; hereinafter Find), further in view of McGrath (USPN 9260025; hereinafter Grath), as evidenced by Brody (USPN 4100763)
Dependent Claim 14, the combination of Laem and Find teaches the heat exchanger system is concealed from public view within a roadway wherein an outgoing coolant pipe provides heated coolant to the ambient air (¶’s [27, 73, esp. 73] of Laem)
Laem is silent to the heat exchanger system is adjacent a bus stop, and wherein an outgoing coolant pipe provides heated coolant from the charger to one or more of a bus stop shelter, a bench within the bus stop shelter, and a sidewalk adjacent the bus stop to heat the bus stop shelter, the bench within the bus stop shelter, or the sidewalk adjacent the bus stop.
Grath teaches the heat exchanger system is adjacent a bus stop, and wherein an outgoing coolant pipe provides heated coolant from the charger to one or more of a bus stop shelter, a bench within the bus stop shelter, and a sidewalk adjacent the bus stop to heat the bus stop shelter, the bench within the bus stop shelter, or the sidewalk adjacent the bus stop ([Col 4 L6-22, Col 4 L40 to Col 5 L22, and Col 5 L44-57] describes that a charger for a bus at a bus station may provide heat from the charger to the bus station area for heating it, see charging and cooling structure of Figs. 1-3, with [Col 5 L44-57] specifically describing providing the heat from underground which is analogous to the system, and charging of vehicles while dealing with the heat means Grath is analogous to the present application and Laem).
One of ordinary skill in the art understands that by reusing the heat, it can serve to provide improved efficiency and further reduced/improved costs by assisting with heating elsewhere (Col 5 L58 to Col 6L19; see as evidence analogous system in Brody [Col 2 L20-30, Col 3 L50-53 & 56-62, Col 9 L10-53])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Laem in view of Find with Grath to provide improved costs and efficiency
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laemmle (USPGPN 20200143978; hereinafter Laem) in view of Findeisen (USPGPN 20190259521; hereinafter Find), further in view of Brody (USPN 4100763)
Dependent Claim 19, Laem teaches the heated fluid coolant from an incoming coolant pipe to the thermal management system of the WPT system (whichever part of 8/15 which is flowing into 1 represents the incoming coolant, ¶’s [44-46] describes liquid).
Laem is silent to the heat reuse system receives the heated fluid coolant from an incoming coolant pipe fluidly coupling to the heat reuse system of the building to the thermal management system.
Brody teaches the heat reuse system receives the heated fluid coolant from an incoming coolant pipe fluidly coupling to the heat reuse system of the building to the thermal management system (abstract describes this HVAC system is used for a building, Fig. 1 has incoming coolant pipe 89, Col 6 L31-35 [The closed loop 44 is connected to a storage tank 88 through a heat exchange coil 89 which may be filled with water or another heat storage media], where 90 represents the thermal management system, with Fig. 1 showing both interior 12 and perimeter 10 zones for the reused heat for the building, described by abstract as “waste heat recovery” 84). Brody teaches this use of waste heat recovery with the building’s reuse system’s incoming coolant pipe serves to provide reduced costs and improved efficiency (Col 2 L20-30, Col 3 L50-53 & 56-62, Col 9 L10-53)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Laem in view of Find with Brody to provide improved costs and efficiency.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11, 13, 15, 16, and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding Dependent Claim 11, the prior art discloses the limitation of Claim 1; the prior art fails to disclose the further inclusion of and combination with the first passive heat exchange element comprises a cold plate disposed under or within the wireless charger of the WPT system, the cold plate comprising parallel bundles of Litz wire that are insulated and stranded together into groups that are cabled in a geometric pattern and extended into earth beneath and around the wireless charger to remove heat from the wireless charger, wherein the Litz wire does not produce eddy currents. Closest references found were:
USPGPN20160005531USPGPN20190057806 (¶[139])USPN 4737752 (claims 1, 3, 4, 5)
However, the scope requiring the parallel geometric patterns, extensions into earth, and the cold plate containing it were not found to be obvious to combine with the prior art.
Regarding Dependent Claim 13, the prior art discloses the limitation of Claim 12; the prior art fails to disclose the further inclusion of and combination with the heat exchanger system is concealed from public view within one or more of a light post heat exchanger and a bollard heat exchanger positioned proximate the wireless charger of the WPT system. Both the limitation of being concealed from view and the location (bollard, light post) of the heat exchanger were not found (some art was found for a light post/bollard on its own with heat exchange elements, but not for the purposes of exchanging heat with an external generation/charging system as claimed).
Regarding Dependent Claim 15, the prior art discloses the limitation of Claim 12; the prior art fails to disclose the further inclusion of and combination with the passive heat exchange element comprises a heat pipe having a first end and a second end, the first end of the heat pipe being thermally and mechanically coupled to the wireless charger and the second end of the heat pipe being thermally and mechanically coupled to a curb radiator positioned within a curb adjacent a road surface for transferring heat from the wireless charger to the ambient air through the curb radiator.
McGrath, as cited above, does describe providing heating to ambient air output from a curb, but does not appear to use a radiator and radiator connection to do so. Hemrle et al (USPGPN 20230052681) describes a charging system with a heat pipe 106 connecting to a radiator to the outside in an analogous way to McGrath (¶’s [54, 55]), but the radiator is not shown. Combining these two prior art elements into prior art such as Laem would not appear to be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to meet the missing claim limitations.
Regarding Dependent Claim 16, the prior art discloses the limitation of Claim 12; the prior art fails to disclose the further inclusion of and combination with the heat exchanger system is concealed within a loading dock including a loading platform and at least one of an incoming coolant pipe or an outgoing coolant pipe extending along a wall of the loading platform; the loading dock concealed heat exchanger system is configured to remove heat from the wireless charger positioned within a drivable surface of the loading dock; & the loading dock concealed heat exchanger system comprises a passive cooling pad disposed between wheels of the electric vehicle when parked at the loading dock, the passive cooling pad configured to transfer heat generated by the wireless charger to one or more of the air and the ground.
Regarding Dependent Claim 20, the prior art discloses the limitation of Claim 17; the prior art fails to disclose the further inclusion of and combination with the heat exchanger system comprises a contact heat exchanger side mounted to collocated piping for transferring heat from the wireless charger to one or more of drinking water, sewage, and high-pressure fire-fighting water within the collocated piping.
Heating of drinking water was found, but not in the collocated piping side mounted manner claimed (see ¶[108] of Schaefer et al USPGPN 20120206093).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN T TRISCHLER whose telephone number is (571)270-0651. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30A-3:30P (often working later), M-F, ET, Flexible. 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 5712722312. 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.
/JOHN T TRISCHLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859
Prosecution Insights