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 .
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-21 objected to because of the following informalities: The claims do not provide descriptors of what is “(Original)”,”(Currently Amended)” or “(New)”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-4 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aaron (US 2021/0361118) in view of Georges (US 5,313,049).
Regarding claim 1, Aaron discloses a multi-piece cooktop comprising:
a ringed cooking member (griddle 140) defining a cooking orifice (705), said ringed cooking member having a ringed cooking surface (surface 910, as shown in figures 9/10), a bottom surface (915) and an orifice perimeter (perimeter defining 705), said orifice perimeter is angled with respect to vertical by an angle Beta (90 degree angle and 180 degree angle (at 1005) as shown in figure 10);
an inner cooking member (grate 605) received in said cooking orifice, said inner cooking member defining a cooking surface (surface of grate 605), a bottom surface (bottom surface of grate 605) and an outer edge (outer edge of gate 605), wherein said outer edge is angled with respect to vertical by an angle alpha (90 degree and 180 degree angle, as shown in figure 10);
wherein when said inner cooking member is received within said cooking orifice of said ringed cooking member (as shown in figures 6 and 10), said ringed cooking surface of said ringed cooking member and said cooking surface of said inner cooking member are substantially co- planar (as shown in figure 10).
Aaron is silent regarding wherein said angle Alpha and said angle Beta are between 15 degrees and 60 degrees from vertical.
However Georges teaches (Fig-3) wherein said angle Alpha and said angle Beta are between 15 degrees and 60 degrees (see angle between 5 and 6 of cook surface 1) from vertical (the range of angle (15-60 degrees) would be Routine Optimization because these ranges of angles are result-effective variables between vertical and horizontal. A near vertical angle range increases friction and precision required to form water tight seal and flush fitment, a near horizontal angle range reduced centering force and increases area of mating surface in relation to depth of substrate, see MPEP 2144.05 II. B. Routine Optimization).
The advantage of wherein said angle Alpha and said angle Beta are between 15 degrees and 60 degrees from vertical, is to provide a cook surface component with closure that does not allow ingress of fluid there at closure seam “[i]t is advantageous to provide good watertightness when the moving plug is in its closure position. As can be seen in FIG. 3a, the moving plug 203 has a chamfered outside edge 207 which is preferably conical in shape, and which co-operates with a corresponding inside edge 5 of the associated opening 4 in the cooking plate 1 when said plug is in its closure position.” (column 6, lines 37-60) the closure being flush to cooking surface “the moving plug (203) then being flush with the top surface (2) of the cooking plate (1)” (abstract).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Aaron and Georges before him or her, to modify vertical angled cooktop component fitment of Aaron to include the less than vertical angle cooktop component fitment of Georges, because an angled fitment enhances resistance to fluid ingress at seam and may enable alignment between surfaces without additional features/structure.
Regarding claim 2, Aaron as modified teaches the multi-piece cooktop of claim 1, Aaron as already modified teaches wherein said ringed cooking member is circular (as shown in figure 6).
Regarding claim 3, Aaron as modified teaches the multi-piece cooktop of claim 1, Aaron as already modified teaches wherein said inner cooking member is circular (as shown in figure 6).
Regarding claim 4, Aaron as modified teaches the multi-piece cooktop of claim 1, Aaron as already modified teaches wherein said inner cooking member defines a plurality of alternating raised members and channels (the grill may be gridded of high and low members vs the open high members of grate depicted in in figure 6/10 “Additionally, grills may be a variety of shapes from the typical rectangular grill to a cylindrical shaped grill. Grills typically include a cooking grate or cooking grid used to place food for cooking. Alternately, a grill may include a griddle like flat surface as opposed to the more common cooking grate” [0104]).
Regarding claim 7, Aaron as modified teaches the multi-piece cooktop of claim 1, Aaron as already modified teaches wherein:
said inner cooking member defines a grate (grate 605); and
said ringed cooking member defines interior projections for receiving and supporting said grate (projection 710, see figure 7 and 10).
Regarding claim 8, Aaron as modified teaches the multi-piece cooktop of claim 1 Aaron as already modified teaches wherein said angle Alpha is approximately 30 degrees (as already modified by Georges, see claim 1 regarding MPEP 2144.05 II. B. Routine Optimization).
Regarding claim 9, Aaron as modified teaches the multi-piece cooktop of claim 1, Aaron as already modified teaches wherein said angle Beta is approximately 30 degrees (as already modified by Georges, see claim 1 regarding MPEP 2144.05 II. B. Routine Optimization).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aaron in view of Georges and in further view of Mehler (US 2015/0068512).
Regarding claim 5, Aaron as modified teaches the multi-piece cooktop of claim 1, Aaron is silent regarding wherein said inner cooking member defines an integral handle.
However Mehler teaches wherein said inner cooking member defines an integral handle “The cooking rack 158 can have handle cutouts 160” [0198].
The advantage of wherein said inner cooking member defines an integral handle, is to provide handling means to cooking member “The cooking rack 158 can have handle cutouts 160” [0198].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Aaron and Mehler before him or her, to modify central cooking member Aaron to include the cooking member handle of Mehler, because a handled cooking member enhances handling thereof.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aaron in view of Georges and in further view of Schellens (US 4,051,831).
Regarding claim 6, Aaron as modified teaches the multi-piece cooktop of claim 1, Aaron is silent regarding wherein said inner cooking member defines a handle receiving orifice for receiving a handle.
However Schellens teaches wherein said inner cooking member defines a handle receiving orifice for receiving a handle.
The advantage of wherein said inner cooking member defines a handle receiving orifice for receiving a handle, is to provide user means of removing hot plate from working stove “For purposes of removing or replacing the lid 48, the end of the lid lifter 58 is inserted in the aperture 60 and lodged under the lip 64 to thereby serve as a handle. In this embodiment, the entire upper surface of the lid 48 is flush with respect to the cover 42, which makes it more convenient to place articles on top of the stove, as well as improving the appearance.” (column 4, lines 3-19) “A removable center lid 48 is centrally disposed in the cover 42 for purposes of providing access to the interior of the fire box. This is where the logs are added and the ash is removed.” (column 3-4, lines 55-2).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Aaron and Schellens before him or her, to modify vertical angled cooktop component fitment of Aaron to include the less than vertical angle cooktop component fitment of Schellens, because a orifice in cooking plate permits a user to apply a handle during stove operation for access to stove fire pit.
Claims 10-12, 14-17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aaron in view of Hamlin (US 2014/0360383), Jan (US 2021/0018180), Martenson (US 4,328,783) and Mehler.
Regarding claim 10, Aaron discloses a firepit assembly including a multi-piece cooktop (140 and associated structures, see figure 1) compatible with a small (little weight is given to relative terminology of small) firepit (generally 110 and associated structure) and a large (little weight is given to relative terminology of small) firepit (generally 110 and associated structure. Examiner notes that the change of size/proportion is merely scaling and does not establish patentability, see MPEP 2144.04 IV. A.), the firepit assembly comprising:
the multi-piece cooktop having a ringed cooking member (area if 140 forming ring) defining a ringed cooking surface (910) and a cooking orifice (705), a bottom surface (915) defining a bottom surface inner edge (1005 or bottom edge of 710, see figure 10) where said bottom surface meets said cooking orifice (as shown in figure 10), wherein said ringed cooking surface defines an outer cooking surface edge (outer edge of 140) surrounded by a surrounding inner cooking member defining a cooking surface (top surface of 605), a bottom surface (bottom surface of 605) and an outer edge (outer edge of 605);
wherein the small firepit is configured for selectively receiving said multi-piece cooktop by said small firepit having a top
wherein the large firepit is configured for selectively receiving said multi-piece cooktop by said large firepit having a top
Aaron is silent regarding a surrounding channel.
However Hamlin teaches a surrounding channel (12).
The advantage of a surrounding channel (12), is to capture grease and oil from cooking “the top of the griddle plate 10 has a flat cooking surface 11 and a grease well 12 around the perimeter of the cooking surface 11 for catching grease and oils and the like from the cooking surface while cooking thereon.” [0016].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Aaron and Hamlin before him or her, to linear outer surface cooktop of Aaron to include the grease recess of Hamlin, because a recess enables the capture/containment of grease and oil from cooking.
Aaron is silent regarding the top of the firepit being a panel.
However Jan teaches (Fig-1-2) the top of the firepit being a panel (see horizontal top wall between inner/outer wall 110/120 supporting ring 202/204/115 in figures 1/2).
The advantage of the top of the firepit being a panel, is to provide a top for a double wall air flow system “The stove 150 further includes a top lip 115 attached to or formed as a single piece with either of the inner body 110 and outer body 120. The stove 150 further includes a plurality of outer ventilation holes 122 located in the bottom portion 154 of the outer body 120, and a plurality of inner ventilation holes 124 located in the top portion 152 of the inner body 110. In the middle portion 156 of the stove 150, the inner body 110 terminates in an upward-facing support lip or rollover 153 into which the fire grate 151 fits, or upon which the fire grate 151 rests.” [0046].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Aaron and Jan before him or her, to modify the central support feature of Aaron to include the panel of Jan, because a panel provides a top structure to a double wall airflow system that enhances fire supporting air flow.
Aaron is silent regarding wherein said inner surface of said surrounding channel is sized to be received on said ring of said small fire pit;
wherein said bottom surface inner edge of said bottom surface of said ringed cooking member is sized to be received on said ring of said large fire pit.
However it would be obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, to modify exposed areas of the finite area under the cooktop to be supported (see MPEP 2144.05 II. B. Routine Optimization). Aaron (as shown in figure 2 and in view of figure 9) provides cooktop support (at 132) relatively inward to outer features of surrounding feature 920. Additionally Martenson teaches (Fig-1-3-4) a peripheral of cooktop (14), supported (26/28).
The advantage of wherein said inner surface of said surrounding channel is sized to be received on said ring of said small fire pit;
wherein said bottom surface inner edge of said bottom surface of said ringed cooking member is sized to be received on said ring of said large fire pit, is to provide support to the cooktop from within the finite area of the bottom of the cooktop exposed and able to be supported.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Aaron and Martenson before him or her, to modify the central support feature of Aaron to include support of the finite support surface ranging to peripheral of cooking surface Martenson, because the area enabling support is limited/finite to the surfaces exposed downwardly of the multipiece cooktop.
Additionally Mehler teaches that a cooktop (9) can be used with various firepits of various shapes with varied range to supporting structure “A griddle 9 of the cooking grill 19 can have a periphery rim 21 that is substantially square. The square periphery rim 21 can have, for example, rounded corners. The griddle 9 can be used with fire pits or other stoves having square openings for burners and burning or hot media. The griddle 9 can be used with fire pits or other stoves having circular openings for burners and burning or hot media. The griddle 9 can have a lip 46. The lip 46 can be substantially circular. The lip 46 can form a channel 47 between a cooking surface 8 and a landing surface 48. The landing surface 48 can be formed between the periphery rim 21 and the cooking surface 8 or the lip 46. The landing surface 48 can accommodate legs 24, 25 as discussed herein, and in particular, in reference to FIGS. 20-22.” [0128].
The advantage of flexibility in interface between cooktop and firepit is to use the cooktop on multiple configurations of heating structures “A griddle 9 of the cooking grill 19 can have a periphery rim 21 that is substantially square. The square periphery rim 21 can have, for example, rounded corners. The griddle 9 can be used with fire pits or other stoves having square openings for burners and burning or hot media. The griddle 9 can be used with fire pits or other stoves having circular openings for burners and burning or hot media. The griddle 9 can have a lip 46. The lip 46 can be substantially circular. The lip 46 can form a channel 47 between a cooking surface 8 and a landing surface 48. The landing surface 48 can be formed between the periphery rim 21 and the cooking surface 8 or the lip 46. The landing surface 48 can accommodate legs 24, 25 as discussed herein, and in particular, in reference to FIGS. 20-22.” [0128].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Aaron and Mehler before him or her, to modify the cooktop resting on firepit of Aaron to include the various anticipated configurations of firepits supporting to cooktop of Mehler, because the area enabling support is limited/finite to the surfaces exposed downwardly of the multipiece cooktop but may still enable various contact support to many different configurations of firepits.
Regarding claim 11, Aaron as modified teaches the firepit assembly of claim 10, Aaron as already modified teaches further comprising:
an accessory body (Jan as modifying, spark arrestor 100/203, see figure 1/2) on said top panel of said small firepit (Jan, see figure 1/2), said accessory body for supporting said multi-piece cooktop (Jan cooktop 214, see figure 2).
Regarding claim 12, Aaron as modified teaches the firepit assembly of claim 11, Aaron as already modified teaches wherein: said accessory body is a screen member (Jan as modifying, “mesh screen 203” [0054]).
Regarding claim 14, Aaron as modified teaches the firepit assembly of claim 10, Aaron as already modified teaches wherein said ringed cooking member is circular (as shown in figure 6).
Regarding claim 15, Aaron as modified teaches the firepit assembly of claim 10, Aaron as already modified teaches wherein said inner cooking member is circular (as shown in figure 6).
Regarding claim 16, Aaron as modified teaches the firepit assembly of claim 10, Aaron already modified teaches wherein said inner cooking member defines a plurality of alternating raised members and channels (the grill may be gridded of high and low members vs the open high members of grate depicted in in figure 6/10 “Additionally, grills may be a variety of shapes from the typical rectangular grill to a cylindrical shaped grill. Grills typically include a cooking grate or cooking grid used to place food for cooking. Alternately, a grill may include a griddle like flat surface as opposed to the more common cooking grate” [0104]).
Regarding claim 17, Aarron as modified teaches the firepit assembly of claim 10, Aarron as already modified is silent regarding wherein said inner cooking member defines an integral handle.
However Mehler teaches wherein said inner cooking member defines an integral handle “The cooking rack 158 can have handle cutouts 160” [0198].
The advantage of wherein said inner cooking member defines an integral handle, is to provide handling means to cooking member “The cooking rack 158 can have handle cutouts 160” [0198].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Aaron and Mehler before him or her, to modify central cooking member Aaron to include the cooking member handle of Mehler, because a handled cooking member enhances handling thereof.
Regarding claim 19, Aaron as modified teaches the firepit assembly of claim 10, Aaron as already modified teaches wherein: said inner cooking member defines a grate (grate 605); and
said ringed cooking member defines interior projections for receiving and supporting said grate (projection 710, see figure 7 and 10).
Claims 13, 20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aaron in view of Hamlin, Jan, Martenson and Mehler and in further view of Georges.
Regarding claim 13, Aaron as modified teaches the firepit assembly of claim 10, Aaron as already modified teaches wherein: said ringed cooking member further defines an orifice perimeter (perimeter defining 705), wherein said orifice perimeter is angled with respect to vertical by an angle (90 angle and 180 angle (at 1005) as shown in figure 10) said inner cooking member is received in said cooking orifice (as shown in figures 6 and 10),
wherein said outer edge of said inner cooking member is angled with respect to vertical by an angle Alpha (90 degree and 180 degree angle, as shown in figure 10);
wherein, when said inner cooking member is received within said ringed cooking member, said ringed cooking surface of said ringed cooking member and said cooking surface of said inner cooking member are substantially co-planar (as shown in figure 6).
Aaron is silent regarding wherein said angle Alpha and said angle Beta are between 15 degrees and 60 degrees from vertical.
However Georges teaches (Fig-3) wherein said angle Alpha and said angle Beta are between 15 degrees and 60 degrees (see angle between 5 and 6 of cook surface 1) from vertical (the range of angle (15-60 degrees) would be Routine Optimization because these ranges of angles are result-effective variables between vertical and horizontal. A near vertical angle range increases friction and precision required to form water tight seal and flush fitment, a near horizontal angle range reduced centering force and increases area of mating surface in relation to depth of substrate, see MPEP 2144.05 II. B. Routine Optimization).
The advantage of wherein said angle Alpha and said angle Beta are between 15 degrees and 60 degrees from vertical, is to provide a cook surface component with closure that does not allow ingress of fluid there at closure seam ”It is advantageous to provide good watertightness when the moving plug is in its closure position. As can be seen in FIG. 3a, the moving plug 203 has a chamfered outside edge 207 which is preferably conical in shape, and which co-operates with a corresponding inside edge 5 of the associated opening 4 in the cooking plate 1 when said plug is in its closure position.” (column 6, lines 37-60) the closure being flush to cooking surface “the moving plug (203) then being flush with the top surface (2) of the cooking plate (1)” (abstract).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Aaron and Georges before him or her, to modify vertical angled cooktop component fitment of Aaron to include the less than vertical angle cooktop component fitment of Georges, because an angled fitment enhances resistance to fluid ingress at seam and may enable alignment between surfaces without additional features/structure.
Regarding claim 20, Aaron as modified teaches the firepit assembly of claim 10, Aaron as already modified is silent regarding wherein said angle Alpha is approximately 30 degrees.
Aaron is silent regarding wherein said angle Alpha is approximately 30 degrees.
However Georges teaches (Fig-3) wherein said angle Alpha and said angle Beta is approximately 30 degrees (see angle between 5 and 6 of cook surface 1) from vertical (the range of angle (30 degrees) would be Routine Optimization because these ranges of angles are result-effective variables between vertical and horizontal. A near vertical angle range increases friction and precision required to form water tight seal and flush fitment, a near horizontal angle range reduced centering force and increases area of mating surface in relation to depth of substrate, see MPEP 2144.05 II. B. Routine Optimization).
The advantage of wherein said angle Alpha is approximately 30 degrees, is to provide a cook surface component with closure that does not allow ingress of fluid there at closure seam ”It is advantageous to provide good watertightness when the moving plug is in its closure position. As can be seen in FIG. 3a, the moving plug 203 has a chamfered outside edge 207 which is preferably conical in shape, and which co-operates with a corresponding inside edge 5 of the associated opening 4 in the cooking plate 1 when said plug is in its closure position.” (column 6, lines 37-60) the closure being flush to cooking surface “the moving plug (203) then being flush with the top surface (2) of the cooking plate (1)” (abstract).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Aaron and Georges before him or her, to modify vertical angled cooktop component fitment of Aaron to include the less than vertical angle cooktop component fitment of Georges, because an angled fitment enhances resistance to fluid ingress at seam and may enable alignment between surfaces without additional features/structure.
Regarding claim 21, Aaron as modified teaches the firepit assembly of claim 10, Aaronas modified is silent regarding wherein said angle Beta is approximately 30 degrees.
Aaron is silent regarding wherein said angle Beta is approximately 30 degrees.
However Georges teaches (Fig-3) wherein said angle Alpha and said angle Beta is approximately 30 degrees (see angle between 5 and 6 of cook surface 1) from vertical (the range of angle (30 degrees) would be Routine Optimization because these ranges of angles are result-effective variables between vertical and horizontal. A near vertical angle range increases friction and precision required to form water tight seal and flush fitment, a near horizontal angle range reduced centering force and increases area of mating surface in relation to depth of substrate, see MPEP 2144.05 II. B. Routine Optimization).
The advantage of wherein said angle Beta is approximately 30 degrees, is to provide a cook surface component with closure that does not allow ingress of fluid there at closure seam ”It is advantageous to provide good watertightness when the moving plug is in its closure position. As can be seen in FIG. 3a, the moving plug 203 has a chamfered outside edge 207 which is preferably conical in shape, and which co-operates with a corresponding inside edge 5 of the associated opening 4 in the cooking plate 1 when said plug is in its closure position.” (column 6, lines 37-60) the closure being flush to cooking surface “the moving plug (203) then being flush with the top surface (2) of the cooking plate (1)” (abstract).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Aaron and Georges before him or her, to modify vertical angled cooktop component fitment of Aaron to include the less than vertical angle cooktop component fitment of Georges, because an angled fitment enhances resistance to fluid ingress at seam and may enable alignment between surfaces without additional features/structure.
Claim 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aaron in view of Hamlin, Jan, Martenson and Mehler and in further view of Schellens.
Regarding claim 18, Aaron as modified teaches the firepit assembly of claim 10, Aaron as modified is silent regarding wherein said inner cooking member defines a handle receiving orifice for receiving a handle.
However Schellens teaches wherein said inner cooking member defines a handle receiving orifice for receiving a handle.
The advantage of wherein said inner cooking member defines a handle receiving orifice for receiving a handle, is to provide user means of removing hot plate from working stove “For purposes of removing or replacing the lid 48, the end of the lid lifter 58 is inserted in the aperture 60 and lodged under the lip 64 to thereby serve as a handle. In this embodiment, the entire upper surface of the lid 48 is flush with respect to the cover 42, which makes it more convenient to place articles on top of the stove, as well as improving the appearance.” (column 4, lines 3-19) “A removable center lid 48 is centrally disposed in the cover 42 for purposes of providing access to the interior of the fire box. This is where the logs are added and the ash is removed.” (column 3-4, lines 55-2).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Aaron and Schellens before him or her, to modify vertical angled cooktop component fitment of Aaron to include the less than vertical angle cooktop component fitment of Schellens, because a orifice in cooking plate permits a user to apply a handle during stove operation for access to stove/fire pit.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Spencer H Kirkwood whose telephone number is (469)295-9113. The examiner can normally be reached 12:00 am - 9:00 pm Eastern.
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, Steven Crabb can be reached at 571-270-5059. 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.
/Spencer H. Kirkwood/ Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/STEVEN W CRABB/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761