DETAILED ACTION
This is the first action in response to US application 18/258,019, filed 16 June, 2023, as the National Stage Entry of International Application PCT/GB2021/053378, filed 20 December, 2021, with priority to foreign application GB 2020149.7, filed 18 December, 2020.
It is noted that no preliminary amendment was found in the file wrapper of the instant application. Consequently, the claims presented for examination have not been adapted for standard US practice, which has created several issues with respect to improper multiple dependent claims, and additional issues with antecedent basis and subject matter eligibility, which are set forth below.
Claims 1-30 are pending and have been considered to the fullest possible extent
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Interpretation
The claims refer to a high frequency alternating current (HFAC) source. In view of the instant specification at page 8, lines 29-33, a high frequency alternating current source is characterized by generating alternating current at a frequency above at least 1 kHz.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 6-12, 17-26, and 29-30 are objected to for the informalities indicated below.
Claim 2 recites “an ultra violet, UV, LED” (line 2). This phrasing is irregular because it essentially repeats itself by stating “ultra violet, UV” because UV is an abbreviation for ultraviolet, and because the single word “ultraviolet” is more typical than the two word construction “ultra violet” recited in the claim. Accordingly, the claim should be adjusted to read “an ultraviolet (UV) LED” to clarify that “UV” is an abbreviation for “ultraviolet”, or the claim should otherwise be adjusted to remove the redundant language. Claim 2 also recites “light emitting diode, LED” at lines 1-2, which should similarly be adjusted to read “light emitting diode (LED)” to clarify that LED is an abbreviation for “light emitting diode”, or the redundant language should be removed.
Claims 6-9 and 11-12 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim cannot depend from any other multiple dependent claim. See MPEP § 608.01(n). All of claims 6-9 and 11-12 are multiple dependent claims which include a dependency (directly or indirectly) on claim 3, which is itself a multiple dependent claim.
Claim 10 depends from claim 9 and is objected to for being dependent on an improper multiple dependent claim.
Claims 17, 19-20, 22-26, and 30 are also objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim cannot depend from any other multiple dependent claim. See MPEP § 608.01(n). All of claims 17, 19, 20, 22-26, and 30 are multiple dependent claims which include a dependency (directly or indirectly) on claim 16, which is itself a multiple dependent claim.
Claims 18 and 21 depend from claims 17 and 20, respectively, and are thus objected to for being dependent on improper multiple dependent claims.
Claim 29 is stated as a “use” claim which requires “the device of any of claims 1 to 26”, and is thus treated as an improper multiple dependent claim because it effectively depends from other multiple dependent claims.
It is noted that claims 1-5, 13-16, and 27-28 are the only claims which are not improper multiple dependent claims or dependent upon an improper multiple dependent claims. MPEP 608.01(n) indicates that improper multiple dependent claims are not to be treated on the merits. Therefore, only claims 1-5, 13-16, and 27-28 have been fully treated on the merits.
It is suggested that all multiple dependent claims be adjusted to recite dependency on only a single claim to ensure that no claims are improper multiple dependent claims and to reduce confusion with respect to the scope of each claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claim is directed toward the “use” of a device, the claimed “use” not clearly defining a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. See MPEP 2173.05(q). Particularly, although the claim recites “use of the device of any of claims 1 to 26 to disinfect an article, wherein the light source comprises a UV light source”, wherein the language of “to disinfect an article” in the claim preamble may suggest a step of disinfecting, the claim fails to set forth any active, positive steps delimiting how such use of the device for disinfecting is performed. Accordingly, the claim does not properly define a process. Furthermore, a “use” clearly does not correspond to a machine, manufacture or composition of matter. It is suggested that claim 29 be cancelled as method claim 27 appears to already encompass a method which delimits how to use a lighting device corresponding to one of claims 1-26 to disinfect an article. Alternatively, claim 29 can be rewritten as a process that positively recites at least one active step delimiting how to use the device for disinfecting an article.
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.
Claims 2-12, 20, 22-26, and 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 2, the phrase "for example" (line 2) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Particularly, it is not clear if the claim encompasses any type of light emitting diode, or requires an ultraviolet LED.
All of claims 3-12, 22-26, and 29 are written as including a dependency on claim 2, and thus inherent the issue of indefiniteness identified with respect to claim 2 above.
Regarding claim 4, the phrase "for example" (line 2) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Particularly, it is not clear if the claim encompasses any time ranges between 1ms and 1 second, or requires a time of 100ms.
Regarding claim 8, the phase “for example” (line 2) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. Particularly, it is not clear if the claim encompasses any frequency within the range of 1 kHz to 1 MHz, or particularly requires a frequency of 100 kHz.
Regarding claim 8, the term “the second frequency” (claim 8, line 1) lacks proper antecedent basis. The term is understood to refer to a frequency of the second alternating current of the second power supply circuitry. Accordingly, it is suggested that claim 1 be adjusted to recite “a second power supply circuitry providing a second alternating current having a second frequency…” at lines 3-4 of claim 1.
Regarding claim 9, the term “the bus of an HFAC power supply system” as first recited in the claim at lines 2-3 lacks proper antecedent basis; it is suggested the limitation be adjusted to read “a bus of an HFAC power supply system”.
Claims 12 recites the term “the output of the DC to AC driver”, which lacks proper antecedent basis. It is suggested that the term be adjusted to read “an output of the DC to AC driver” and the dependency of the claims be adjusted so that claim 12 depends from a claim that recites “a DC to AC driver”. Particularly, it is suggested claim 12 be adjusted to depend from claim 10, and claim 9 be adjusted to depend from claim 7. Currently, claim 12 is an improper multiple dependent claim which includes embodiments that depend from claims which do not provide proper antecedent basis for the limitation identified above.
Claim 20 recites the term “the second light“ (lines 2-3) which lacks proper antecedent basis because claim 20 is written as depending from any of claims 13-19, but claims 13-18 do not recite “a second light”. It is suggested that claim 20 be adjusted to only depend from claim 19.
Furthermore, claim 20 recites a “third electrical circuit” comprising a list of components that are recited in an identical manner as the list of components which define the “second circuit” of claim 13, from which claim 20 depends. It is not clear if any of the components are common between the second circuit and third circuit, or if each circuit contains all of its own parts. In order to distinguish between the components of each circuit, it is suggested that claim 20 be adjusted to read “a third electrical circuit electrically connected to the second light and comprising: a third secondary coil configured to be coupled to a third HFAC power supply; a third HFAC to DC converter; a third DC to AC driver; a third clock pulse generator; and a third transformer” (claim 20, lines 2-8); similar adjustments which recite the components of the third circuit with a qualifier that identifies the component as being associated with the third circuit and distinguishes the components of the third circuit from the components of the second circuit would also be acceptable. If any of the components of the third circuit are shared between the circuits, such components instead may be recited as “the [component]” or “said [component]” to refer back to a previously recited shared component.
Claims 22 recite the term “the HFAC to DC converter”. There is improper antecedent basis for this claim because claim 22 is written as depending on “any one of the preceding claims”, but not all preceding claims (e.g., claims 1-8) recite “a HFAC to DC converter”. Also, when claim 22 depends from claim 20, it is not clear if “the HFAC to DC converter” of claim 22 refers to the HFAC to DC converter associated with the third circuit (see claim 20) or the second circuit (see claim 13).
Claim 23 recites the term “the DC to AC driver”. There is improper antecedent basis for this claim because claim 23 is written as depending on “any one of the preceding claims”, but not all preceding claims (e.g., claims 1-9) recite “a DC to AC driver”. Also, when claim 23 depends from claim 20, it is not clear if “the DC to AC driver” of claim 23 refers to the AC to DC driver associated with the third circuit (see claim 20) or the second circuit (see claim 13).
Claim 24 recites the term “the HFAC to DC converter” while depending from “any of the preceding claims”, and thus shares the same antecedent basis issues identified with respect to claim 22 above.
Claim 25 recites the term “the clock pulse generator” while depending from “any of the preceding claims”, and thus similarly lacks proper antecedent basis because not all preceding claims (e.g., claims 1-10) comprise a clock pulse generator, and it is unclear if the clock pulse generator recited in claim 25 is the clock pulse generator of the third circuit (claim 20) or second circuit (claim 13).
Claim 29 recites “the light source” which lacks proper antecedent basis because claims 13-26, from which claim 29 effectively depends, do not recite “a light source”, instead reciting a “light”.
Further regarding claim 29, the claim is constructed as a “use” claim which does not clearly constitute a process/method because it does not positively recite any active steps for using the device. Accordingly, claim 29 is indefinite; see MPEP 2173.05(q).
Claim 30 recites “the light source”, which lacks proper antecedent basis and should be adjusted to read “the light
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.
Claims 1-5 and 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh Jung Hun (KR 20200009406 A; reference is made to the machine translation provided with this correspondence), hereinafter “Hun”, in view of and/or evidenced by Ellis et al. (US 2020/0196413 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hun (KR 20200009406 A) teaches the circuit arrangement depicted in Fig. 1 below, comprising a UV LED (100A, 100B) (semiconductor light emitting device having a peak intensity at a wavelength of 100 to 300 nm; abstract, [0002]-[0004], [0011]; light emitting unit 50 comprises first and second semiconductor light emitting device 100A and 100B—[0022]—with a peak wavelength of about 100 nm to about 400 nm—[0023]) which receives power from a first power supply circuit (205) and a second power supply circuit (207) (power supply 150 with first circuit unit 205 and second circuit unit 207—[0028]) which each output an alternating current (each of first circuit portion 205 and second circuit portion 207 output a variable voltage—[0029]—wherein the variable voltage is an AC voltage which may be modulated from an AC voltage of a voltage source 200—Fig. 5, [0031], [0036]).
PNG
media_image1.png
438
464
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The frequency of the alternating current from either the first (205) or second (207) power supply circuit can range from 1 kHz to 100 MHz ([0059]). When an alternating current is supplied to the light unit (50), the first LED (100A) will light when the variable voltage of the alternating current is more positive than the voltage threshold of the first LED, and the second LED (100B) will similarly light when the magnitude of the variable voltage of the alternating current exceeds the voltage threshold of the second LED [and the current is properly aligned with the polarity of the LED] (see Fig. 7, [0038], [0041]).
Accordingly, it is understood that the device of Hun is capable of operating such that the first (205) and second (2070 power supply circuits supply the light unit (50) with superimposed alternating currents having selected frequencies.
Also, it is noted that Hun recognized that an alternating current can be used as a substitute for the pulsed driving of an LED light source (an AC voltage may be used as a pulse signal so that a circuit configuration is simple and a cost can be reduced—[0015]), and it is known in the art to operate UV LEDs at optimized pulse rates for destroying target pathogens and improving system efficiency, as demonstrated by Ellis (Ellis teaches systems and method for applying ultraviolet light—title—wherein LEDs are pulsed on an off—abstract; the pulsing advantageously lowers a junction temperature of the LED, which increases the working life of the LEDs in the system, and allows for the use of a higher current to drive the LEDs, yielding a greater germicidal UV output—[0062]; the pulsing also allows for designs with smaller heatsinks, reducing manufacturing costs, and operation of LED arrays in hotter environments—[0063]; Ellis suggest pulse frequencies as high as 50 kHz, or any pulse frequency that maximizes lethality to a target microbe species—[0056]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to configure the circuit arrangement of Hun such that the first (205) and second (207) circuit components deliver superimposed alternating currents to the lighting device (50, 100A-B), wherein one of the alternating currents has a greater frequency, for the benefit of activating the LEDs with an effective pulse rate that is optimized for the destruction of target microbe species (consider Hun at [0015] and Ellis at [0056]). Super positioning of AC currents to achieve a desired LED activation pattern is reasonably within the abilities of a person having ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 2, Hun evidenced by Ellis teaches the device of claim 1. Hun further teaches the light source comprises a UV LED (emitter 50 may emit light having a maximum intensity of about 100 nm to about 400 nm, for example 100 nm to 300nm—[0023]; LED—[0002]; UV LEDs for sterilization—[0004]).
Regarding claim 3, Hun evidenced by Ellis teaches the device of claim 1 or 2. Hun further suggests embodiments wherein wherein the second power supply circuitry (207) is configured to switch the second alternating current on and off to provide a series of pulses of alternating current (a switch may be provided at the output terminal of the second circuit unit 207…a controller may turn on the switch of the second circuit unit 207 during a second time Td2 so that an AC voltage input from the voltage source 200 may be output to the second light emitting device 100B as a variable voltage—[0049]).
Regarding claim 4, Hun evidenced by Ellis teaches the device of claim 3. Hun further suggest embodiments wherein each pulse comprises the second alternating current being switched on for a time period (a switch may be provided at the output terminal of the second circuit unit 207…a controller may turn on the switch of the second circuit unit 207 during a second time Td2 so that an AC voltage input from the voltage source 200 may be output to the second light emitting device 100B as a variable voltage—[0049]). Hun does not recite a particular duration for the time period. However, Ellis teaches powering LEDs with a pulsed power source for an active period of time followed by an inactive period of time, wherein the length of the active period relative to the inactive should be selected to allow time for heat dissipation ([0059]-[0060]), with Ellis also teaching an exemplary “on” time of 2 seconds ([0059]). Although two seconds falls outside of the claimed range, it would nonetheless be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to arrive at a pulse “on” time between 1 ms and 1 second by way of routine optimization of the circuit operations for the benefit of improving heat dissipation by reducing LED on time.
Regarding claim 5, Hun in view of Ellis teaches the device of claim 4. Hun teaches the series of pulses are provided in a repeating pattern which repeats with a period of time (see Fig. 8, [0049]), but does not teach the period of time is between 10ms and 10 seconds. However, Ellis teaches embodiments of the UV LED pulsed lighting systems discussed above, wherein a cycle length is 10 seconds, during which cycle an individual LED array is activated for only 2 seconds by a pulsed power source, the relative timing of the on and off phase promoting heat dissipation within the device ([0059]). Accordingly, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further modify the device of Hun such that the pulses are provided every 10 seconds as suggested by Ellis, which substantially falls within the claimed range of between 10 ms and 10 seconds, for the benefit of improving heat dissipation within the system (consider Ellis at [0059], and Hun at Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 27, the method claim corresponds to a method of using the device of claim 1. As discussed with respect to claim 1 above, Hun evidenced by Ellis teaches the device of claim 1. The device of Hun is capable of operating by combining alternating currents generated by first (205) and second (207) power supply circuits to power a UV LED (100A-B) with an alternating current at an optimized frequency (see rejection of claim 1 above). Furthermore, Ellis demonstrates that it is advantageous to activate UV LEDs with pulses frequencies that maximize lethality to target microbes (see Ellis at [0056]), Hun recognized that an AC voltage can be used to drive an LED light source to activate in pulses (see Hun at [0015]), and it is within the ability of a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine electrical signals (i.e., alternating currents) to achieve a desired combined signal. Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to arrive at a method of lighting by generating a first electrical signal at a first frequency (first AC voltage of circuit portion 205 of Hun), superimposing a second electrical signal having a second frequency onto the fist frequency to provide a combined electrical signal (second AC voltage of circuit portion 207 of Hun), and driving a light (light emitting unit 50 with LEDs 100A-B of Hun) with the combined signal for the benefit of driving the LEDs to activate with pulses having a frequency that is optimized for the destruction of target microbes (see Ellis at [0056]).
Regarding claim 28, Hu evidenced by Ellis teaches the method of lighting according to claim 27. As discussed with respect to claim 3 above, Hu suggests embodiments wherein the a switch can by activated by a controller to control when the second frequency is applied to the light source (Hu at [0049], see rejection of claim 3 above). Furthermore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that controlling when the second frequency is superimposed on the light source would expand the range of frequencies which can be applied to the light source, and the teachings of Ellis fairly imply that different frequencies can be more suitable for destroying different microbes ([0056]). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of using the device of Hu set forth with respect to claim 27 above such that the second frequency is superimposed for an interval, followed by a period where it is not superimposed, for the benefit of driving the LEDs to operate at different pulse frequencies which can target a broader range of microbes.
Claims 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hun (KR 20200009406 A) in view of Christiano (technical article “Transformer Isolation” published 31 July, 2015, by Marie Christiano on the All About Circuits Webpage), Kimsey-Lin (US 20180373157 A1), and Tsutsumi (US 5742496 A, cited in the IDS filed 04 December, 2023).
Regarding claim 13, Hu teaches a lighting device configured to be driven by an HFAC power supply, the lighting device comprising: a light (light emitter 50 including first semiconductor light emitting device 100A and a second semiconductor light emitting device 100B—[0022]); a first circuit (205) … connected to the light (50) and configured to be coupled to an HFAC power supply (200); and a second circuit electrically connected to the light and configured to be coupled to an HFAC power supply (200) (the variable voltage output form the first circuit unit 205 or the second circuit unit 207 may be the same as the AC voltage provided from the voltage source 200—[0035]—or the voltage output from the circuit units 205 and 207 may be different from the AC voltage provided by the voltage source 200—[0036]; variable voltage may have a frequency of 1 kHz or more—[0034], [0057]-[0058]).
Hun further indicates that a controller can control when the second circuit supplies power to the light (switch provided at output terminal of second circuit unit 207…and controller may turn on the switch of the second circuit 207 during a time Td2—[0049]) and that the second circuit includes means for converting the AC voltage from the HFAC (200) to a different AC voltage ([0036]). Hun does not particularly indicate that the first and second circuit each comprise a coil coupled to the HFAC power supply and connected to the light, and that the second circuit includes an HFAC to DC converter, a DC to AC driver, a clock pulse generator, and a transformer.
However, the components recited in claim 13 are common electronic components known to be useful for inductively coupling components, adjusting the frequency and voltage of an alternating current.
With respect to the coils and transformer, the use of coils to transfer power while isolating a system is commonplace, as demonstrated by Christiano (technical article “Transformer Isolation” published 31 July, 2015, by Marie Christiano on the All About Circuits Webpage) teaching that a transformer comprises two coils surrounding a ferromagnetic core, wherein an electric source having a first AC input is connected to a first coil and induces an AC output in the second coil without an electrical path between the two coils, and wherein transformers designed to couple AC sources to devices often include special insulating materials to ensure DC signals are blocked and to prevent and other noise from affecting the device (see “Isolation Transformer Construction”, pages 4-6). Accordingly, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to include coils within the first (205) and second (207) circuits of Hun associated with transformers for inductively coupling to the HFAC (200) for the benefit of isolating the outputs from the first and second circuits from DC signals or other noise associated with the HFAC (200).
With respect to frequency converting components, Kimsey-Lin teaches systems and methods for operating a light system (title) including UV light sources (abstract) such as LEDs ([0040]), wherein the light control system (100) includes a power converter (110) which can adjust the frequency of supply power delivered to a UV source based on a signal from a control device (118) ([0035], [0037]-[0038],[0044]-[0045]). The power converter (110) includes an input (444) which receives an AC input power, a rectifier (446) which converts the input AC power into DC power, an inverter (450) coupled to the rectifier for converting DC power from the rectifier into an AC power, and a DC link (448) coupling the rectifier and inverter ([0058]-[0059]). A pulse with modulator (460) of the inverter allows for control of a frequency of the supplied AC power ([0062]). A power buffer associated with the DC link comprises a plurality of DC-to-DC converters ([0061]-[0062]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to configure the second circuit (207) of Hun to include at least an HFAC to DC converter (rectifier 446) and a DC to AC driver (inverter 450 including pulse width modulator 460), based on the design of power converter (110) of Kimsey-Lin, for the benefit of enabling adjustment of the frequency of the AC power delivered by the second circuit (Kimsey-Lin indicates that power converter 110 can control frequency and wattage of power supply through pulse-width modulator 460—[0044]-[0045],[0062]). That is, a circuit including a FHAC to DC converter (rectifier) and DC to AC driver (inverter) is a known solution for transforming an AC voltage, in accordance with Hun suggesting the second circuit transforms an AC voltage from the source (200) (see Hun at [0036]).
Furthermore, Tsutsumi teaches an inverter apparatus for converting a DC voltage to a single-phase AC voltage which includes a pulse width modulation circuit (7) and a clock generator (9), the clock generator providing a reference clock signal to the pulse width modulator to allow for synchronous operations (Fig. 3, column 6, lines 25-32; column 7, lines 26-31). Therefore, it would be obvious include a clock pulse generator (as seen in Tsutsumi) as part of the inverter of the modified device of Hun for the benefit of promoting synchronous circuit operations (Fig. 3, column 6, limes 25-32).
Regarding claim 14, Hun in combination with Christiano, Kimsey-Lin, and Tsutsumi teaches the lighting device according to claim 13. Hun further teaches that the light is an LED (semi conductor light emitting device such as a LED—[0002]).
Regarding claim 15, Hun in combination with Christiano, Kimsey-Lin, and Tsutsumi teaches the lighting device according to claim 14. Hun further teaches the LED is a UV LED (UV LEDs—[0004]).
Regarding claim 16, Hun in combination with Christiano, Kimsey-Lin, and Tsutsumi teaches the lighting device according to claims 13, 14, or 15. Hun indicates that the first and second circuits generate alternating currents having frequencies between 1 kHz and 100 MHz (1 kHz or more—[0034],[0040]; upper limit of the frequency of the AC voltage may be 100 MHz or less), which would require the clock pulse generator to generate a pulse at similar frequencies which would reasonably overlap with the claimed frequencies of between 1 kHz and 1 MHz. Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to configure the clock pulse generator to generate a pulse at a frequency within the overlapping portion of the claimed range of 1 kHz to 1 MHz for the benefit of selecting a frequency capable of driving the second circuit to deliver AC power having a desired frequency to the light source.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADY C PILSBURY whose telephone number is (571)272-8054. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30a-5:00p.
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, MICHAEL MARCHESCHI can be reached at (571) 272-1374. 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.
/BRADY C PILSBURY/Examiner, Art Unit 1799
/JENNIFER WECKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1797