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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 3, 6-11, and 17-19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 05/18/2026.
Applicant's election with traverse of claims 1, 2, 4, 5, and 20 (Species B) in the reply filed on 05/18/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the Ozawa reference (JP 3720480 does not disclose or suggest the technical feature of claim 1, specifically generating rotational a rotational moment).
This is not found persuasive because as discussed in the previous restriction, Ozawa discloses all of the rotational moment limitations of claim 1, e.g. see specifically Fig 2a and 2c of Ozawa in which the fixing means 5 are asymmetric, therefore it is inherent that this asymmetry would produce a rotational moment from the urging force of the ejector 4, Ozawa discloses that the fixing means 5 being asymmetric locks the nozzle body 3 against the surface of the sliding hole 8 to prevent the inclination of the nozzle body 3 in Translation Para 0031 and 0034, wherein the prevention of the inclination of the nozzle body 3 corresponds to the rotational moment applied to the nozzle body 3. Further this argument does not address each of the listed species including separate and distinct technical features that would cause an examination burden should they be examined together. Therefore, this argument is not persuasive.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information disclosure statements (IDS) filed on 05/17/2023 and 04/05/2024 has/have been acknowledged.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function.
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a holder member configured to slidably hold…” in Claim 1 line 3.
“an urging member configured to generate an urging force…” in Claim 1 line 5.
“a locking part configured to lock…” in Claim 1 line 8.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 4-5 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 4 line 12 recites the limitation “the second locking portion”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the second locking portion in the claims, therefore rendering the claim indefinite. For the purpose of examination, the examiner interprets this limitation to read as “the second locking position”. The examiner also suggests changing all instances of “the second locking portion” in claims 4-5 to “the second locking position” so as to have antecedent basis in the claims
Claim 4 line 14-15 recites the limitation “the first locking portion”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the first locking portion in the claims, therefore rendering the claim indefinite. For the purpose of examination, the examiner interprets this limitation to read as “the second locking position”. The examiner also suggests changing all instances of “the first locking portion” in claims 4-5 to “the first locking position” so as to have antecedent basis in the claims
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.
(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.
Claims 1-2 and 14-15 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2008-300598 to Akiyoshi (translation provided by examiner).
As per claim 1, Akiyoshi discloses an adsorption nozzle, comprising:
an axial nozzle member (see nozzle body 22 in Fig 1 and 4) having a tip portion (see nozzle tip 42 in Fig 1, 4, and 9) configured to adsorb a component;
a holder member (see nozzle holder 21 in Fig 1, 4, and 9) configured to slidably hold the nozzle member in a nozzle projection direction (down in Fig 1, 4, and 9) parallel to an axis line of the nozzle member (see up/down direction in Fig 1, 4, and 9);
an urging member (see compression coil spring 25 in Fig 1, 4, and 9) configured to generate an urging force to slide the nozzle member in the nozzle projection direction and cause the tip portion of the nozzle member to be projected from the holder member (see Fig 4); and
a locking part (see pin 23 in Fig 4) configured to lock the nozzle member projected from the holder member by the urging force, to position the tip portion of the nozzle member at a projection limit position (see Fig 4 which shows the nozzle body 22 locked at the projection limit position by the urging of the pin 23 by the compression coil spring 25 along the engagement groove 48),
wherein the locking part is configured to lock the nozzle member at a first locking position and a second locking position (see Fig 1, 4, and 9 in which the pin 23 extends through the pin hole 37 of the nozzle holder 21 to interact with the engagement groove 48 of the nozzle body, wherein the first locking position and the second locking position are interpreted to be opposite sides of the pin hole 37 of the nozzle holder 21, for example see Fig 6d in which the top and bottom portions of the pin hole 37 are the first and second locking positions respectively) which are asymmetric with respect to the axis line (see Fig 4, 6a, 6c, 6d, and 9 that show that the pin hole 37 and therefore the first and second locking positions are asymmetric with respect to a nozzle axis located at the center of the nozzle holder 21), to give a rotational moment to the nozzle member projected in the nozzle projection direction by the urging force, in a rotation direction which is uniquely determined by a relative relationship between the first locking position and the second locking position with respect to the axis line (it is inherent that the pin 23 being located asymmetrically to the nozzle axis would produce a rotational moment from the urging force of the compression coil spring, Akiyoshi discloses that the pin 23 used in this manner restricts the rotation of the nozzle body 22; see Translation Page 6 and 10).
As per claim 2, Akiyoshi discloses the elements of the current invention as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Akiyoshi further discloses that the nozzle member has a first engagement portion (see left edge of the engagement groove in Fig 9) and a second engagement portion (see right edge of the engagement groove in Fig 9) which extend in parallel to the nozzle projection direction, and the locking part is configured to support the nozzle member slidably in the nozzle projection direction while engaging with the first engagement portion and the second engagement portion, so as to restrict rotation of the nozzle member around the axis line (see Fig 1, 4, 6, and 9; see Translation Page 6 and 10).
As per claim 14, Akiyoshi discloses an adsorption nozzle, comprising:
an axial nozzle member (see nozzle body 22 in Fig 1 and 4) having a tip portion (see nozzle tip 42 in Fig 1, 4, and 9) configured to adsorb a component;
a holder member (see nozzle holder 21 in Fig 1, 4, and 9) configured to slidably hold the nozzle member in a nozzle projection direction (down in Fig 1, 4, and 9) parallel to an axis line of the nozzle member (see up/down direction in Fig 1, 4, and 9);
an urging member (see compression coil spring 25 in Fig 1, 4, and 9) interposed between the nozzle member and the holder member (see Fig 1 and 4) and configured to generate an urging force in the nozzle projection direction for causing the nozzle member to slide in the nozzle projection direction and projecting the tip portion of the nozzle member from the holder member (see Fig 4); and
a locking part (see pin 23 in Fig 4) configured to locking the nozzle member projected from the holder member by the urging force, to position the tip portion of the nozzle member at a projection limit position (see Fig 4 which shows the nozzle body 22 locked at the projection limit position by the urging of the pin 23 by the compression coil spring 25 along the engagement groove 48),
wherein the nozzle member has a hollow structure (see air passage 47 in Fig 4) inside which configures a suction path leading to the tip portion (see Fig 4), and
the locking part includes a rotation restricting pin (see pin 23 in Fig 4 and 9) inserted along a direction orthogonal to the axis line and passing into the suction path to attach to the holder member and locks the nozzle member at a first locking position (left portion of the pin 23 in Fig 9) and a second locking position (right portion of the pin 23 in Fig 9) which are asymmetric with respect to the axis line by the rotation restricting pin (see Fig 4, 6a, 6c, 6d, and 9 that show that the pin hole 37 and therefore the first and second locking positions are asymmetric with respect to a nozzle axis located at the center of the nozzle holder 21), to give a rotational moment to the nozzle member projected in the nozzle projection direction by the urging force, in a rotation direction which is uniquely determined by a relative relationship between the first locking position and the second locking position with respect to the axis line (it is inherent that the pin 23 being located asymmetrically to the nozzle axis would produce a rotational moment from the urging force of the compression coil spring 25, Akiyoshi discloses that the pin 23 used in this manner restricts the rotation of the nozzle body 22; see Translation Page 6 and 10).
As per claim 15, Akiyoshi discloses an attitude control method of an adsorption nozzle having an axial nozzle (see nozzle body 22 in Fig 1 and 4) member having a tip portion (see nozzle tip 42 in Fig 1, 4, and 9) configured to adsorb a component; a holder member (see nozzle holder 21 in Fig 1, 4, and 9) configured to slidably hold the nozzle member in a nozzle projection direction (down in Fig 1, 4, and 9) parallel to an axis line of the nozzle member (see up/down direction in Fig 1, 4, and 9); an urging member (see compression coil spring 25 in Fig 1, 4, and 9) interposed between the nozzle member and the holder member (see Fig 1 and 4) and configured to generate an urging force in the nozzle projection direction for causing the nozzle member to slide in the nozzle projection direction and projecting the tip portion of the nozzle member from the holder member (see Fig 4); and a locking part (see pin 23 in Fig 4) configured to locking the nozzle member projected from the holder member by the urging force, to position the tip portion of the nozzle member at a projection limit position (see Fig 4 which shows the nozzle body 22 locked at the projection limit position by the urging of the pin 23 by the compression coil spring 25 along the engagement groove 48), the method comprising:
controlling an attitude of the nozzle member by giving a rotational movement to the nozzle member in a rotation direction when the nozzle member is projected from the holder member by the urging force in the nozzle projection direction, the rotational movement being given by locking the nozzle member at a first locking position (left portion of the pin 23 in Fig 9) and a second locking position (right portion of the pin 23 in Fig 9) which are asymmetric with respect to the axis line of the nozzle member (see Fig 4, 6a, 6c, 6d, and 9 that show that the pin hole 37 and therefore the first and second locking positions are asymmetric with respect to a nozzle axis located at the center of the nozzle holder 21) with a rotation restricting pin (see pin 23 in Fig 4 and 9) of the locking part, the rotation direction uniquely being determined by a relative relationship between the first locking position and the second locking position with respect to the axis line (it is inherent that the pin 23 being located asymmetrically to the nozzle axis would produce a rotational moment from the urging force of the compression coil spring 25, Akiyoshi discloses that the pin 23 used in this manner restricts the rotation of the nozzle body 22; see Translation Page 6 and 10),
wherein the nozzle member has a hollow structure (see air passage 47 in Fig 4) inside which configures a suction path leading to the tip portion (see Fig 4), and
the rotation restricting pin is inserted along a direction orthogonal (in/out of page in Fig 4) to the axis line and passes into the suction path to attach to the holder member (see Fig 6 that shows the pin hole 37 for the pin 23 intersects the suction path of the nozzle holder 21 which shares a suction path with the nozzle body 22 as shown in Fig 4).
Claims 1-2 and 13 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 3720480 to Ozawa (translation previously provided by examiner).
As per claim 1, Ozawa discloses an adsorption nozzle, comprising:
an axial nozzle member (see nozzle body 3 in Fig 1) having a tip portion (see the bottom tip of the nozzle body 3 in Fig 1) configured to adsorb a component (see Translation Para 0018-0019);
a holder member (see nozzle holder 2 in Fig 1) configured to slidably hold the nozzle member in a nozzle projection direction (down direction in Fig 1) parallel to an axis line of the nozzle member (see Fig 1 where the axis line of the nozzle body 3 is arranged in the up/down direction);
an urging member (see ejector 4 in Fig 1; Para 0023) configured to generate an urging force to slide the nozzle member in the nozzle projection direction and cause the tip portion of the nozzle member to be projected from the holder member (see Fig 1); and
a locking part (see fixing means 5 including spherical bodies 14 in Fig 1-2) configured to lock the nozzle member projected from the holder member by the urging force, to position the tip portion of the nozzle member at a projection limit position (see Translation Para 0022-0045),
wherein the locking part is configured to lock the nozzle member at a first locking position and a second locking position (see Fig 2 that show different configuration of the fixing means 5 with different numbers of spherical bodies 14 and mounting holes 13, wherein each of the spherical bodies 14 represents a locking position), to give a rotational moment to the nozzle member projected in the nozzle projection direction by the urging force, in a rotation direction which is uniquely determined by a relative relationship between the first locking position and the second locking position with respect to the axis line (see specifically Fig 2a and 2c in which the fixing means 5 are asymmetric; it is inherent that this asymmetry would produce a rotational moment from the urging force of the ejector 4, Ozawa discloses that the fixing means 5 being asymmetric locks the nozzle body 3 against the surface of the sliding hole 8 to prevent the inclination of the nozzle body 3 in Translation Para 0031 and 0034, wherein the prevention of the inclination of the nozzle body 3 corresponds to the rotational moment applied to the nozzle body 3)
As per claim 2, Ozawa discloses the elements of the current invention as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Ozawa further discloses that the nozzle member has a first engagement portion and a second engagement portion (see locking grooves 12 in Fig 1 and 2c for each of the spherical bodies 14) which extend in parallel to the nozzle projection direction (see Fig 1), and the locking part is configured to support the nozzle member slidably in the nozzle projection direction while engaging with the first engagement portion and the second engagement portion, so as to restrict rotation of the nozzle member around the axis line (see Translation Para 0022-0045).
As per claim 13, Ozawa discloses an attitude control method of an adsorption nozzle (see adsorption nozzle in Fig 1) having an axial nozzle member (see nozzle body 3 in Fig 1) having a tip portion (see the bottom tip of the nozzle body 3 in Fig 1) configured to adsorb a component (see Translation Para 0018-0019); a holder member (see nozzle holder 2 in Fig 1) configured to slidably hold the nozzle member in a nozzle projection direction (down direction in Fig 1) parallel to an axis line of the nozzle member (see Fig 1 where the axis line of the nozzle body 3 is arranged in the up/down direction); an urging member (see ejector 4 in Fig 1; Para 0023) configured to generate an urging force to slide the nozzle member in the nozzle projection direction and cause the tip portion of the nozzle member to be projected from the holder member (see Fig 1); and a locking part (see fixing means 5 including spherical bodies 14 in Fig 1-2) configured to locking the nozzle member projected from the holder member by the urging force, to position the tip portion of the nozzle member at a projection limit position (see Translation Para 0022-0045), the method comprising:
controlling an attitude of the nozzle member by giving a rotational movement to the nozzle member in a rotation direction when the nozzle member is projected from the holder member by the urging force in the nozzle projection direction, the rotational movement being given by locking the nozzle member at a first locking position and a second locking position (see Fig 2 that show different configuration of the fixing means 5 with different numbers of spherical bodies 14 and mounting holes 13, wherein each of the spherical bodies 14 represents a locking position) which are asymmetric with respect to the axis line of the nozzle member, the rotation direction uniquely being determined by a relative relationship between the first locking position and the second locking position with respect to the axis line (see specifically Fig 2a and 2c in which the fixing means 5 are asymmetric; it is inherent that this asymmetry would produce a rotational moment from the urging force of the ejector 4, Ozawa discloses that the fixing means 5 being asymmetric locks the nozzle body 3 against the surface of the sliding hole 8 to prevent the inclination of the nozzle body 3 in Translation Para 0031 and 0034, wherein the prevention of the inclination of the nozzle body 3 corresponds to the rotational moment applied to the nozzle body 3).
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 of this title, 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 12 and 16 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 3720480 to Ozawa (translation provided by examiner).
As per claim 12, Ozawa discloses a component transfer apparatus (see Translation Para 0018-0019), comprising the adsorption nozzle according to claim 1 (see above rejection of claim 1) and an adsorption head (“head unit”) is configured to move while configured to hold the holder member of the adsorption nozzle (see Translation Para 0019). It is inherent and/or obvious that the component transfer apparatus as disclosed by Ozawa would be capable of absorbing a component at a first position and transferring the absorbed component to a second position different form the first position because that is the purpose of such component transfer apparatuses; further such a limitation is a recitation of an intended use of the claimed component transfer apparatus and therefore is not necessarily limiting to the claimed component transfer apparatus.
As per claim 16, Ozawa a component transfer apparatus (see Translation Para 0018-0019), comprising the adsorption nozzle according to claim 2 (see above rejection of claim 2); and an adsorption head (“head unit”) is configured to move while configured to hold the holder member of the adsorption nozzle (see Translation Para 0019). It is inherent and/or obvious that the component transfer apparatus as disclosed by Ozawa would be capable of absorbing a component at a first position and transferring the absorbed component to a second position different form the first position because that is the purpose of such component transfer apparatuses; further such a limitation is a recitation of an intended use of the claimed component transfer apparatus and therefore is not necessarily limiting to the claimed component transfer apparatus.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5 and 20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 4 is directed towards an adsorption nozzle dependent upon claims 1 and 2. The prior art fails to disclose or render obvious all of these limitations of claim 4, specifically the prior art fails to disclose or render obvious the following limitations in addition to the other limitations of claim 4:
an adsorption nozzle comprising an axial nozzle member with a hollow structure suction path and having a first oblong hole and a second oblong hole which extend in parallel to a nozzle projection direction in a sidewall of the nozzle member and are opposite each other across an axis line of the nozzle member, a nozzle holder that slidably holds the nozzle member, an urging member that generates an urging force to slide the nozzle member in the nozzle projection direction parallel to the axis line, a rotation restricting pin penetrating the first oblong hole, the suction path, and the second oblong hole to attach to the holder member that locks the nozzle member projected from the holder member by the urging force to position a tip portion of the nozzle member at a projection limit position, wherein when the tip portion of the nozzle member is projected from the holder member in the nozzle projection direction, the first locking position and the second locking portion are different from each other in an anti-projection direction opposite to the nozzle projection direction and asymmetric with respect to the axis line which gives a rotational moment to the nozzle member in a rotation direction, the first locking position being a position where the first oblong hole and the first locking portion of the rotation restricting pin are engaged with each other, the second locking position being a position where the second oblong hole and the second locking portion of the rotation restricting pin are engaged with each other.
As discussed above in the 102 rejections of claims 1 and 2, JP 3720480 to Ozawa and JP 2008-300598 to Akiyoshi both disclose similar adsorption nozzles including asymmetric locking which induces a rotational moment to the nizzle member projected from a nozzle holder by an urging member, but neither Ozawa nor Akiyoshi disclose a rotation restriction pin penetrating the first oblong hole, the suction path, and the second oblong hole, the attach to the holder member and wherein the first locking position is a position where the first oblong hole and the first locking position of the rotation restricting pin are engaged with each other is different in an anti-projection direction from the second locking position which is a position where the second oblong hole and the second locking position of the rotation restricting pin are engaged with each other.
Claims 5 and 20 are dependent upon claim 4 and are therefore also allowable over the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joshua D. Anderson, whose telephone number is (571) 270-0157. The examiner can normally be reached from Monday to Thursday between 6 AM and 10 AM Arizona time.
If any attempt to reach the examiner by telephone is unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas Hong, can be reached at (571) 272-0993.
Another resource that is available to applicants is the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR). Information regarding the status of an application can be obtained from the (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAX. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, please feel free to contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Applicants are invited to contact the Office to schedule an in-person interview to discuss and resolve the issues set forth in this Office Action. Although an interview is not required, the Office believes that an interview can be of use to resolve any issues related to a patent application in an efficient and prompt manner.
/JOSHUA D ANDERSON/
Examiner, Art Unit 3729
/THOMAS J HONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3729
Prosecution Insights