Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The amendment presents claims 1-6, 10, and 11 as amended, claims 8 and 13 as cancelled, and claims 14-16 as added. Claims 1-7, 9-12, and 14-16 remain pending examination.
The amendment is sufficient in overcoming the previously indicated claim objections of claims 3, 5, 8, 10, 11, and 13.
The amendment to claim 6 obviates the invocation of claim 6 under 35 USC 112 (f) and the associated rejections under 35 USC 112 (a) and (b).
The amendment to claim 1 is sufficient in overcoming the previously indicated rejections under 35 USC 112 (b) except as maintained herein.
Further grounds of rejection, necessitated by amendment, are presented herein.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Rejections of Claims Under 35 USC 112 (b)
Applicant has amended claim 1 to address the previously indicated rejection with respect to the transducer means. Applicant contends that:
In view of this amendment, the phrase "an atmospheric condition on the outside of the motor vehicle (1) and/or of a thermodynamic condition on the inside of a passenger compartment" is now clear-in embodiments where both are sensed, the transducer means (6) can include two (or more) transducers.
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagrees as the claim language allows for one transducer that is configured to detect both one or more atmospheric conditions outside of the motor vehicle and of thermodynamic conditions on the inside of a passenger compartment. The claim remains unclear for the reasons stated herein.
Rejections of Claims Under 35 USC 102/103
Applicant traverses the prior art rejection of claim 1 in that (emphasis original):
According to claim 1, the functional relationship is an actual function that is stored in the control unit and perform the determination of the output quantities as a function of the input quantities, where the reference power is specifically sufficient to defrost or defog the vehicle within a predefined time span. The time span is not "any time span", but it is specifically the one that defines the reference power which is outputted by the functional relationship. Actually, there is claimed a linkage between the reference power and the predefined time span. Indeed, the reference power that is in the output of the functional relationship must be sufficient (so, for example, it cannot be less than a certain threshold) to defog or defrost in the predefined time span. The time span, being predefined, introduces a constraint on the reference power given by the functional relationship that Hoke does not contemplate.
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claim recites “a functional relationship” that is between the input quantities (detected by the transducer means) and the output quantity (corresponding to a reference power. The claim also recites that the reference power is sufficient to defrost or defog the glass. Applicant’s position that the functional relationship is an “actual function” is unclear. Specifically, it is unclear if Applicant intends for the functional process to be a software or algorithm stored and operated by the control unit. In other words, it is unclear what makes a functional relationship and “actual function.” In any event, the Examiner disagrees in that the broadest reasonable interpretation is not so limited. Rather, the functional relationship is open ended and includes any relationship between the input quantities (detected by the transducer means) and output. Hoke teaches transducer means detecting various environmental and state quantities and relaying that information to the control unit. Hoke also teaches that the control unit supplies power to the heatable glass to defog the same. (see Example 3 and Fig. 1). While Hoke does not use the term “functional relationship,” such a relationship between the measured parameters and the output power necessarily exists. In Example 3, Hoke teaches that the control unit is operable to vary the duty cycle to the heating elements. In fact, in para. 0004 Hoke states that the controller is “configured to calculate a fogging probability value and the duty cycle is selected by the controller based upon air circulation system operating parameters, that fogging probability value and ambient temperature” (see also para. 0033, 0041, and 0055). As such, Hoke teaches that a functional relationship exists between the measured parameters and the output power such that the duty cycle is controlled in order to defog the windshield. Accordingly, Hoke teaches this limitation.
Applicant further traverses in that the time span is not "any time span", but it is “specifically the one that defines the reference power which is outputted by the functional relationship.” The claim language is “the reference power being sufficient to defrost or defog the heatable motor vehicle glass within a predefined time span.” Here, the predefined time span refers to the time it takes to defrost/defog the glass. The time span does not directly define the reference power. The only requirement in the claim is that the reference power must be of some value that is sufficient to defrost/defog the glass within some time period. Hoke teaches that the one or more transducers (62) provide input parameters to the control unit and that, based on those parameters, the control unit calculates the duty cycle that is needed to power the heating elements in order to defog the windshield. As such, Hoke teaches this limitation.
Applicant further traverses in that:
Hoke appears silent about time constraints in connection to the proposed duty cycles. On the contrary, the table A shows a fixed timeout for a 100% duty cycle (duration of the HWS), but nowhere it is disclosed that this timeout is calculated to be certainly sufficient to defog or defrost the window.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., calculating time) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Here, claim 1 is not limited to arrangements in which the control unit calculates the predefined time span. So Hoke not disclosing that the “timeout” is calculated is not relevant to the claimed invention. As detailed above, the claim requires that the control unit processes a functional relationship between input quantities detected from the one or more transducers and an output quantity corresponding to a reference power where the reference power is sufficient to defrost or defog the glass within a predefined time span. Claim 1 does not require, nor is limited to, the control unit calculating the time span.
Additionally, paragraph 0055 of Hoke states that the controller selects a duty cycle for the heating element from predetermined data (The Tables outlined in Figs. 7-13) which Hoke describes as “lookup tables.” Hoke, therefore, teaches that the control unit process a functional relationship as claimed in order to provide power to the heating element and the control unit uses stored data to determine the duty cycle and the time of operation. Claim 1 does not recite, nor require, the control unit to supply the reference power to entirely defrost or defog the glass or that the control unit receives an input quantity indicating that there is an amount of fog on the glass. Rather, claim 1 merely requires that the control unit processes a relationship between the input parameters from the transducer(s) and a reference power that is of sufficient value to defrost or defog, at least partially, the glass within some time span. Hoke, for the reasons stated above, teaches such an arrangement.
For the reasons detailed herein, the Examiner maintains that claims 1-7, 9-12, and 14-16 are unpatentable over the prior art of record.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-7, 9-12, and 14-16 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, in relevant part, a transducer means comprising one or more transducers configured to “detect one or more environmental quantities indicative of an atmospheric condition on the outside of the motor vehicle and/or of a thermodynamic condition on the inside of a passenger compartment of the motor vehicle” which renders the claim indefinite as the use of “and/or” allows for an interpretation in which the transducer means performs both functions. Under this interpretation the claim could be understood to mean that the transducer means is configured to “detect one or more environmental quantities indicative of an atmospheric condition on the outside of the motor vehicle and of a thermodynamic condition on the inside of a passenger compartment of the motor vehicle” (emphasis added). As is conventional in the art, sensors are used to detect atmospheric conditions (e.g.; temperature, humidity, pressure, etc.) and to detect thermodynamic conditions inside a passenger compartment (e.g., temperature inside the vehicle). Claim 1 stands amended to define the transducer means as comprising one or more transducers. Since a single transducer is included in the claim’s scope, it is unclear as to the structural cooperative relationship between such a single transducer, the window, and the passenger compartment that allows a single sensor to detect conditions inside the vehicle and outside the vehicle.
Remaining dependent claims inherit the above deficiency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hoke et al. (US20160052366).
Regarding claim 1, Hoke teaches an apparatus for a motor vehicle, the apparatus comprising (Title; Figure 1):
a heatable motor vehicle glass (windshield 12), comprising an electrically conductive material (electrical heating element 14),
an electric power source electrically connected to the electrically conductive material (an electric power source is inherently required in order for electrical heating element 14 to function),
transducer means (sensors 62) comprising one or more transducers configured to
a) detect one or more environmental quantities indicative of an atmospheric condition on the outside of the motor vehicle and/or of a thermodynamic condition on the inside of a passenger compartment of the motor vehicle (para. 0031; “Sensors utilized in the defogging system 10 may include one or more of an outside ambient temperature sensor, a rain sensor, a passenger compartment humidity sensor, a passenger compartment temperature sensor, a windshield wiper activation sensor, seat sensors to determine the number of occupants in the vehicle, an air circulation system duct temperature sensor, an air circulation system duct humidity sensor, an air circulation system evaporator thermistor, a sun load sensor, a vehicle speed sensor and combinations thereof. For purposes of this document the term sensor may also include a fogging detection camera which is used to detect the presence of any fogging on the windshield 12. In one particularly useful embodiment of the defogging system 10, the sensors 62.sub.1-62.sub.n include passenger compartment humidity, outside temperature air circulation system discharge temperature, HVAC/air circulation system operating point (blower speed and mode) and passenger compartment temperature.”) [“one or more environmental quantities indicative of an atmospheric condition on the outside of the motor vehicle” is understood to refer to outside ambient temperature sensor, rain sensor, sun load sensor, etc.],
b) detect one or more state quantities indicative of a state of the heatable motor vehicle glass (para. 0031; “Sensors utilized in the defogging system 10 may include one or more of an outside ambient temperature sensor, a rain sensor, a passenger compartment humidity sensor, a passenger compartment temperature sensor, a windshield wiper activation sensor, seat sensors to determine the number of occupants in the vehicle, an air circulation system duct temperature sensor, an air circulation system duct humidity sensor, an air circulation system evaporator thermistor, a sun load sensor, a vehicle speed sensor and combinations thereof. For purposes of this document the term sensor may also include a fogging detection camera which is used to detect the presence of any fogging on the windshield 12. In one particularly useful embodiment of the defogging system 10, the sensors 62.sub.1-62.sub.n include passenger compartment humidity, outside temperature air circulation system discharge temperature, HVAC/air circulation system operating point (blower speed and mode) and passenger compartment temperature.”) [“one or more state quantities indicative of a state of the heatable motor vehicle window” is understood to refer to, for instance, the detecting of fogging on the windshield], and
c) generate one or more signals related to the detected environmental quantities and state quantities, respectively (Sensors, as described, by definition, generate signals relating to the parameter in which they are designed to detect. For instance, a temperature sensor generates a signal relating to the detected temperature. Accordingly, sensors 62 of Hoke, similarly, generate respective signals relating to the parameter in which they are detecting.),
a control unit (40) coupled (via communication module) to the transducer means (62) to acquire said signals (para. 0031 and Figure 1, wherein the control unit (15) is configured to adjust a power supplied to the electrically conductive material by the power source as a function of at least one of the acquired signals (para. 0004, 0010, and 0033) (See Also Figures 5a/5b and paragraphs 0036-0041 and 0055) [The controller 40 relies on data from sensors 62 for operating the heating element 14],
characterized in that the control unit (40) is configured to process a functional relationship between input quantities, comprising the environmental quantities and the state quantities, and an output quantity corresponding to a reference power, the reference power being sufficient to defrost or defog the motor vehicle heatable glass within a predetermined time span (para. 0003 describes defogging the windshield with heating element 14 producing heat to defog the windshield) (Figure 1 illustrates controller 40 communicatively coupled with sensors 62 via communication module 56 and communicatively coupled to the heating element 14 via electrical control device 52. As stated above, Hoke teaches the controller receiving signals from the sensors 62 and controlling the heating element 14 based, as least in part, on the signals. As such, controller 40 processing a functional relationship that exists between the received signals from sensor 62 and the power sent to the heating element 14 in order to defog the windshield, which, necessarily, occurs within some time period.), whereby the control unit is configured to adjust the supplied power by setting the reference power as an adjustment target (See also Example 3 in paragraphs 0073-0089; duty cycle starts at 0% and increases after the sensors provide feedback to the controller), wherein the control unit stores (Fig. 3 and para. 0031; controller includes a main process 42, a memory 44, a network interface 46 and a communication bus 48) the functional relationship (para. 0004, 0033, 0041, 0055) and is configured to process the functional relationship by applying the functional relationship to the input quantities so as to determine the output quantity (see para. 0031 and Example 3, including paragraphs 0073-0091 in which the controller relying on the functional relationship between the input quantities and the output power, controls the heating of the heated windscreen).
Regarding claim 2, Hoke teaches the claimed invention, as detailed in claim 1, and further teaches wherein at least one of the environmental quantities is indicative of a quantity among an ambient temperature, an ambient pressure, an ambient relative humidity, a solar radiation intensity (para. 0031; “Sensors utilized in the defogging system 10 may include one or more of an outside ambient temperature sensor, a rain sensor, a passenger compartment humidity sensor, a passenger compartment temperature sensor, a windshield wiper activation sensor, seat sensors to determine the number of occupants in the vehicle, an air circulation system duct temperature sensor, an air circulation system duct humidity sensor, an air circulation system evaporator thermistor, a sun load sensor, a vehicle speed sensor and combinations thereof. For purposes of this document the term sensor may also include a fogging detection camera which is used to detect the presence of any fogging on the windshield 12. In one particularly useful embodiment of the defogging system 10, the sensors 62.sub.1-62.sub.n include passenger compartment humidity, outside temperature air circulation system discharge temperature, HVAC/air circulation system operating point (blower speed and mode) and passenger compartment temperature.”) [“one or more environmental quantities indicative of an atmospheric condition on the outside of the motor vehicle” is understood to refer to outside ambient temperature sensor, rain sensor, sun load sensor, etc.].
Regarding claim 3, Hoke teaches the claimed invention, as detailed in claim 1, and further teaches wherein at least one of the state quantities is indicative of a quantity of condensation or of a presence of condensation on the heatable motor vehicle glass (para. 0031; detecting fogging on the windshield).
Regarding claim 6, Hoke teaches the claimed invention, as detailed in claim 1, and further teaches including a command device comprising a physical control being operable physically by a driver of the motor vehicle to send a command signal to the control unit, whereby the control unit is configured to increase the supplied power in response to the command signal sent by the command device (Figs. 5a/b and para 0036-0040; user actuatable buttons to activate heating element) (See also Example 3 in paragraphs 0073-0089; user actuatable buttons to activate the heating element, which the controller uses to control increase the duty cycle to the heating element).
Regarding claim 7, Hoke teaches the claimed invention, as detailed in claim 1, and further teaches including wherein the control unit (40) is configured to start adjusting the supplied power starting from a zero value when the acquired signals indicate that one or more of the environmental quantities and/or one or more of the state quantities fulfil respective relationships with corresponding thresholds (See also Example 3 in paragraphs 0073-0089; duty cycle starts at 0% and increases after the sensors provide feedback to the controller).
Regarding claim 9, Hoke teaches the claimed invention, as detailed in claim 1, and further teaches a motor vehicle comprising the apparatus according to claim 1 (Hoke teaches the structure outlined in claim 1 and further teaches the motor vehicle (para. 0002).
Claim 10 recites substantially the same language recited in claim 1 and, therefore, is rejected under the same rational.
Claim 12 recites substantially the same language recited in claim 7 and, therefore, is rejected under the same rational.
Regarding claim 14, Hoke teaches the claimed invention, as detailed in claim 1, and further teaches including wherein the heatable motor vehicle glass comprises a heatable windshield (See Figure 1 and Abstract).
Regarding claim 15, Hoke teaches the claimed invention, as detailed in claim 1, and further teaches including wherein the functional relationship is experimentally calibrated so that a value of the output quantity corresponds to the supplied power sufficient to defrost the glass within the predefined time span [Para. 0073-0091; Customer begins their drive in the following conditions:A. Outside Ambient temperature=20° C. (68° F.). B. Relative Humidity inside the cabin is =50% (as measured by the sensor) C. Climate controls set the air distribution mode to Face/Feet (or Panel/Floor).D. The HVAC fan (or HVAC blower) is set to speed 3. As a result, the automatic climate system will initially set the heated windscreen duty cycle to 0% (based on Table C). Soon thereafter (milliseconds later given software speed), the controls increment the duty cycle by 50% (Based on Table D). The climate controls will set the commanded heated windscreen operating duty cycle to 50% (0%+50%). The user then pushes the Heated Windscreen button. The indicator on the button will turn ON. The controls will then set the Heated Windscreen duty cycle to 100% for 8 minutes (based on Table A). After 8 minutes, the indicator on the button will turn OFF. (The user request will time out per Table A). Assuming the conditions are now: [0085] A. Outside Ambient temperature=20° C. (68° F.). B. Relative Humidity inside the cabin is =100% (as measured by the sensor).C. Climate controls set the air distribution mode to Feet/Defrost (or Floor/Windscreen). D. The HVAC fan (or HVAC blower) is set to speed 7. As a result, the automatic climate system will then set the heated windscreen duty cycle to 50% (based on Table C). Soon thereafter (milliseconds later given software speed), the controls increment the duty cycle by 50% (Based on Table D). The climate controls will set the commanded heated windscreen operating duty cycle to 100% (50%+50%). This process altering the duty cycle, based on feedback control, is considered a calibration].
Regarding claim 16, Hoke teaches the claimed invention, as detailed in claim 1, and further teaches including wherein the time span is stored and/or adjusted by the control unit (see para. 0073-0091, Example, 3, the time span is adjusted by the control unit).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 4-5 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoke in view of Kim et al. (US20060289458).
Regarding claims 4-5, Hoke teaches substantially the claimed invention, as applied in claim 1, except for wherein at least one of the state quantities is indicative of a temperature of the heatable motor vehicle glass (claim 4) and wherein the control unit is configured to reduce or cancel the supplied power when the acquired signals indicate that the temperature of the heatable motor vehicle glass exceeds a threshold (claim 5).
Kim relates to a system for detecting fogging on a windshield and defogging a windshield (para. 0002) and teaches that fog is produced when the humidity at the inside of the vehicle is high and the exterior temperature is low. More specifically, Kim states that fog is produced when the surface temperature of the windshield is lower than the dew point temperature determined by the humidity around the windshield (para. 0004 and Fig. 1.)
Kim teaches using a temperature sensor (11) for detecting a surface temperature of the windshield (Fig. 2 and para. 0037). Kim also teaches a control unit (Fig. 2; 10) being configured to reduce or cancel the supplied power when the acquired signals indicate that the temperature of the windshield exceeds a threshold (para. 0037; “controlling a system 30 by determining if the fog is present or not by comparing the dew point temperature Td with the surface temperature Ts, after obtaining a dew point temperature Td by using the humidity H and a temperature Tc determined based on the temperature combination of the surface temperature sensor 11 and the peripheral temperature sensor 13.”) (para. 0062; “In response to the surface temperature Ts being lower than the dew point temperature Td, the automotive vehicle defogging system 30 is operated. If Ts is not lower than Td, the automotive vehicle defogging system 30 is stopped, after comparing the dew point temperature Td with the surface temperature Ts. That is, because the vapor can be frozen to produce the fog when the surface temperature Ts is lower than the dew point temperature Td, the defogging system 30 is operated to supply warm air or cold air to the wind shield glass to thereby prevent the occurrence of fog. Of course, fog cannot occur, if the surface temperature Ts is higher than the dew point temperature Td. Therefore, the operation of the defogging system 30 is stopped to prevent a fuel efficiency decrease.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Hoke with Kim, by substituting the fog detecting sensor and control over the heating element of Hoke with the temperature sensor detecting a temperature of the surface of the windshield and the controlling of defogging the windshield in response taught by Kim, for in doing so would provide an alternative means for determining the presence of fog on the windshield and controlling the heating element, based on the sensor data, to function when the temperature of the windshield is lower than the dew point.
Regarding claim 11, Hoke teaches substantially the claimed invention, as applied in claim 10, except for wherein one of the state quantities is indicative of a temperature of the heatable motor vehicle glass, the method further comprising the step of reducing or cancelling the supplied power when the generated signals indicate that the temperature of the heatable motor vehicle glass exceeds a threshold.
Kim relates to a system for detecting fogging on a windshield and defogging a windshield (para. 0002) and teaches that fog is produced when the humidity at the inside of the vehicle is high and the exterior temperature is low. More specifically, Kim states that fog is produced when the surface temperature of the windshield is lower than the dew point temperature determined by the humidity around the windshield (para. 0004 and Fig. 1.)
Kim teaches using a temperature sensor (11) for detecting a surface temperature of the windshield (Fig. 2 and para. 0037). Kim also teaches a control unit (Fig. 2; 10) being configured to reduce or cancel the supplied power when the acquired signals indicate that the temperature of the windshield exceeds a threshold (para. 0037; “controlling a system 30 by determining if the fog is present or not by comparing the dew point temperature Td with the surface temperature Ts, after obtaining a dew point temperature Td by using the humidity H and a temperature Tc determined based on the temperature combination of the surface temperature sensor 11 and the peripheral temperature sensor 13.”) (para. 0062; “In response to the surface temperature Ts being lower than the dew point temperature Td, the automotive vehicle defogging system 30 is operated. If Ts is not lower than Td, the automotive vehicle defogging system 30 is stopped, after comparing the dew point temperature Td with the surface temperature Ts. That is, because the vapor can be frozen to produce the fog when the surface temperature Ts is lower than the dew point temperature Td, the defogging system 30 is operated to supply warm air or cold air to the wind shield glass to thereby prevent the occurrence of fog. Of course, fog cannot occur, if the surface temperature Ts is higher than the dew point temperature Td. Therefore, the operation of the defogging system 30 is stopped to prevent a fuel efficiency decrease.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Hoke with Kim, by substituting the fog detecting sensor and control over the heating element of Hoke with the temperature sensor detecting a temperature of the surface of the windshield and the controlling of defogging the windshield in response taught by Kim, for in doing so would provide an alternative means for determining the presence of fog on the windshield and controlling the heating element, based on the sensor data, to function when the temperature of the windshield is lower than the dew point.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN C DODSON whose telephone number is (571)270-0529. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 1:00-9:00 PM (ET).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steven Crabb can be reached at (571)270-5095. 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.
/JUSTIN C DODSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights