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 .
Drawings
Figure 1 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: Figure 1 discloses: #1101,1103,1201,1200,1303, and 1400 not found in the specification. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
Content of Specification
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION: See 37 CFR 1.72(a) and MPEP § 606. The title of the invention should be placed at the top of the first page of the specification unless the title is provided in an application data sheet. The title of the invention should be brief but technically accurate and descriptive, preferably from two to seven words. It may not contain more than 500 characters.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCES TO RELATED APPLICATIONS: See 37 CFR 1.78 and MPEP § 211 et seq.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT: See MPEP § 310.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT. See 37 CFR 1.71(g).
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM: The specification is required to include an incorporation-by-reference of electronic documents that are to become part of the permanent United States Patent and Trademark Office records in the file of a patent application. See 37 CFR 1.77(b)(5) and MPEP § 608.05. See also the Legal Framework for Patent Electronic System posted on the USPTO website (https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2019LegalFrameworkPES.pdf) and MPEP § 502.05
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR. See 35 U.S.C. 102(b) and 37 CFR 1.77.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(c). The specification should set forth the Background of the Invention in two parts:
(1) Field of the Invention: A statement of the field of art to which the invention pertains. This statement may include a paraphrasing of the applicable U.S. patent classification definitions of the subject matter of the claimed invention. This item may also be titled “Technical Field.”
(2) Description of the Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 37 CFR 1.98: A description of the related art known to the applicant and including, if applicable, references to specific related art and problems involved in the prior art which are solved by the applicant’s invention. This item may also be titled “Background Art.”
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(d). A brief summary or general statement of the invention as set forth in 37 CFR 1.73. The summary is separate and distinct from the abstract and is directed toward the invention rather than the disclosure as a whole. The summary may point out the advantages of the invention or how it solves problems previously existent in the prior art (and preferably indicated in the Background of the Invention). In chemical cases it should point out in general terms the utility of the invention. If possible, the nature and gist of the invention or the inventive concept should be set forth. Objects of the invention should be treated briefly and only to the extent that they contribute to an understanding of the invention.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S): See MPEP § 608.01(f). A reference to and brief description of the drawing(s) as set forth in 37 CFR 1.74.
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(g). A description of the preferred embodiment(s) of the invention as required in 37 CFR 1.71. The description should be as short and specific as is necessary to describe the invention adequately and accurately. Where elements or groups of elements, compounds, and processes, which are conventional and generally widely known in the field of the invention described, and their exact nature or type is not necessary for an understanding and use of the invention by a person skilled in the art, they should not be described in detail. However, where particularly complicated subject matter is involved or where the elements, compounds, or processes may not be commonly or widely known in the field, the specification should refer to another patent or readily available publication which adequately describes the subject matter.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS: See 37 CFR 1.75 and MPEP § 608.01(m). The claim or claims must commence on a separate sheet or electronic page (37 CFR 1.52(b)(3)). Where a claim sets forth a plurality of elements or steps, each element or step of the claim should be separated by a line indentation. There may be plural indentations to further segregate subcombinations or related steps. See 37 CFR 1.75 and MPEP 608.01(i) - (p).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE: See 37 CFR 1.72 (b) and MPEP § 608.01(b). The abstract is a brief narrative of the disclosure as a whole, as concise as the disclosure permits, in a single paragraph preferably not exceeding 150 words, commencing on a separate sheet following the claims. In an international application which has entered the national stage (37 CFR 1.491(b)), the applicant need not submit an abstract commencing on a separate sheet if an abstract was published with the international application under PCT Article 21. The abstract that appears on the cover page of the pamphlet published by the International Bureau (IB) of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is the abstract that will be used by the USPTO. See MPEP § 1893.03(e).
(m) SEQUENCE LISTING: See 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825 and MPEP §§ 2421 - 2431. The requirement for a sequence listing applies to all sequences disclosed in a given application, whether the sequences are claimed or not. See MPEP § 2422.01.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Page 41 of the specification has Figure 1 randomly pasted in the middle of the text with no description or relevance; it should be removed.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 in claim 36 is heating part.
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 38-42 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.
The term “close” in claim 38 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “close” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not sure if the overheat protection means is or is not in direct contact with the heat generating unit.
Additionally, the term “farther” in claim 41 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “farther” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is not sure where the overheat protection means is located, farther than what?
Claim Objections
Claim 28 is objected to because of the following informalities: The term “the frame” is used, but should be “a frame”, due to lack of an antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 35 is objected to because of the following informalities: The term “the floor duct” lacks antecedent basis. Appropriate correction is required.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 33 and 36 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art of record, alone or in combination does not disclose the vehicle heating device wherein the guide includes a body in which a first guide hole and a second guide hole having different sizes are formed with a guide projection formed to protrude from the body to guide air discharged through the first guide holes with the second guide hole is disposed closer to the air conditioning case t than the first guide hole.
Additionally, the closest prior art of record, alone or in combination does not disclose the vehicle heating device wherein the overheat protection means includes a heat generating element fixed in a case with a hook that is inserted into the hole of the frame.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 23, 35, and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Danieau (US 2002/0000314) and Francis (US 2020/0006935).
Regarding claim 23, Danieau (D) discloses a vehicle heating device comprising: a heat generating module (12, Abstract, Figure 5) disposed toward a passenger on an air flow channel connected to an air conditioning unit to emit heat, wherein the heat generating module includes a heat generating unit (62,64, [0046]), and wherein the heat generating unit is configured to heat the interior of the vehicle through at least one of heat convection formed by heating the air and heat radiation obtained by radiating heat directly toward the passenger ([0047]), but does not disclose and an overheat protection means configured to prevent the heat generating unit from overheating.
However, Francis (F) discloses a thermal hazard protection circuit (Abstract) wherein according to a predetermined temperature or higher, and an overheat protection means configured to prevent the heat generating unit from overheating to a predetermined temperature or higher ([0024]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this application to utilize a thermal protection circuit in order to prevent catastrophic events such as fire, due to heating components overheating.
Regarding claim 35, Danieau (D), as modified, discloses the vehicle heating device according to claim 23, wherein a door (D-94, Figure 5) is disposed inside the floor duct (D-32) of the air conditioning unit, and the door is configured to adjust the amount of air moving along the floor duct (D- [0054]).
Regarding claim 37, Danieau (D), as modified, discloses the vehicle heating device according to claim 23, wherein the air conditioning unit includes a heat exchanger (D-60, [0046]) disposed therein, and wherein the air supplied to the air conditioning unit and passing through the heat exchanger is moved to the air flow channel.
Claims 24-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Danieau (US 2002/0000314), Francis (US 2020/0006935), and Min et al. (US 2019/0084374).
Regarding claim 24, Danieau (D), as modified, discloses the vehicle heating device according to claim 23, wherein the heat generating unit is disposed in contact with the overheat protection means.
However, Min (M) discloses a PTC (Positive Temperature Coefficient) heating device (Abstract, 100, Figure 1), wherein the heat generating unit (100, [0041]) is disposed in contact with the overheat protection means (110, i.e. PTC element). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this application utilize the configuration of Min as the heating device because it comprises the elements of which Francis was not clear in disclosing its structure. Or, put another way, Francis discloses a PTC heater that uses the PTC element as a subset of heat generators which also function as elements in the thermal protection circuit.
Regarding claim 25, Danieau (D), as modified, discloses the vehicle heating device according to claim 23, further comprising a relay (F-22, Figure 1) electrically connected to the heat generating unit (100) and the overheat protection means (110), wherein the relay cuts off power applied to the heat generating unit in conjunction with the temperature of the overheat protection means disposed in contact with the heat generating unit (F- [0015, 0016, 0024]).
Regarding claim 26, Danieau (D), as modified, discloses the vehicle heating device according to claim 25, wherein the heat generating module further includes a frame (120, [0061], Figure 1) configured to support the heat generating unit (100) and the overheat protection means (110), wherein the heat generating unit is disposed on the frame, the overheat protection means is disposed inside the frame, and the heat from the heat generating unit is transferred to the overheat protection means via the frame ([0062]).
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Danieau (US 2002/0000314), Francis (US 2020/0006935), Min et al. (US 2019/0084374), and Kim et al. (US 10,425,995).
Regarding claim 27, Danieau (D), as modified, discloses the vehicle heating device according to claim 26, wherein the frame includes: an upper plate (Figure 6, touching the tail of the black arrow) in which a plurality of holes are formed (2211, 2231, i.e., fitting grooves, [0103]), a lower plate disposed spaced apart from the upper plate (parallel to the top plate ). Danieau, as modified, does not disclose that he upper plate and having a plurality of holes formed therein; and at least one rib disposed between the upper plate and the lower plate, and wherein the rib supports the upper plate and the lower plate while guiding air passing through the frame.
However, Kim (K) discloses a PTC heater (Abstract) with an upper plate (310, Figure 2) and lower plate (400) from the upper plate and having a plurality of holes (slots in Figure 2) formed therein; and at least one rib (In Figure 2, elongate perpendicular members terminating at the top and bottom plate, distanced from assembly in the Figure) disposed between the upper plate and the lower plate, and wherein the rib supports the upper plate and the lower plate while guiding air passing through the frame. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this application to provide hole in the top and bottom frames as well a rib structure for the purpose of providing rigidity to the frame and to allow a means to secure the elements.
Claims 28 -29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Danieau (US 2002/0000314), Francis (US 2020/0006935), and GU et al. (US 2014/0008450).
Regarding claim 28, Danieau (D), as modified, discloses the vehicle heating device according to claim 23, but not that the heat generating unit includes a planar upper heat generating unit and a planar lower heat generating unit which are disposed in the frame of the heat generating module to be spaced apart from each other so as to form a heat exchange area, and wherein the heat emitted from each of the upper heat generating unit and the lower heat generating unit is heat-exchanged with the air passing through the heat generating unit in the heat exchange area.
However, GU (G) discloses a vehicle heater (Abstract, Figure 3) wherein the heat generating unit (200) includes a planar upper heat generating unit (210,220, 230 , Figure 32, exploded view in Figure 17) and a planar lower heat generating unit (Directly below upper in Figure 17, four are shown in the figure) which are disposed in the frame (240, i.e., housing) of the heat generating module to be spaced apart from each other so as to form a heat exchange area, and wherein the heat emitted from each of the upper heat generating unit and the lower heat generating unit is heat-exchanged with the air passing through the heat generating unit in the heat exchange area ([0211-0213]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this application to incorporate an airflow path within the heat generating unit to increase thermal efficiency due to the convective flow of the heat.
Regarding claim 29, Danieau (D), as modified, discloses the vehicle heating device according to claim 28, wherein a plurality of heat exchange areas are formed, wherein the heat exchange area includes: a first heat exchange area formed in front of the upper heat generating unit based on the air flow direction (Left section of Figure 25, by numeral 231); and a second heat exchange area formed between the upper heat generating unit and the lower heat generating unit (Gap between 230 and 210, Figure 25), and wherein the air passing through the hole of the upper heat generating unit is mixed in the second heat exchange area and simultaneously heat-exchanged with radiant heat of the upper heat generating unit and the lower heat generating unit before passing through the hole of the lower heat generating unit (The heated air flows through the path of least resistance, 231 to 211).
Claims 30-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Danieau (US 2002/0000314), Francis (US 2020/0006935), GU et al. (US 2014/0008450), and Kim et al. (US 2015/0176857).
Regarding claim 30, Danieau (D), as modified, discloses the vehicle heating device according to claim 29, but not that each of the upper heat generating unit and the lower heat generating unit includes: a planar body in which a hole is formed, a heat generating part disposed on the body; and a first electrode and a second electrode disposed on the body to apply power to the heat generating part, and wherein the heat generating part of the lower heat generating unit is disposed to be overlapped with the hole of the upper heat generating unit based on the air flow direction.
However Kim (K857) discloses a hybrid heater core (Abstract) wherein each of the upper heat generating unit (201, Figure 6) and the lower heat generating unit (202) includes: a planar body in which a hole is formed, a heat generating part disposed on the body (203, [0036]); and a first electrode and a second electrode disposed on the body to apply power to the heat generating part (via 220, [0037], Figure 7), and wherein the heat generating part of the lower heat generating unit is disposed to be overlapped with the hole of the upper heat generating unit based on the air flow direction (Figure 6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this application to utilize the configuration of Kim in combination with Danieau because of its excellent heat transfer characteristics.
Regarding claim 31, Danieau (D), as modified, discloses the vehicle heating device according to claim 30, wherein the upper heat generating unit and the lower heat generating unit are selectively applied with power by a controller (F-10, Claim 1).
Claim 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Danieau (US 2002/0000314), Francis (US 2020/0006935), and Nishimura et al. (US 2019/0375267).
Regarding claim 32, Danieau (D), as modified, discloses the vehicle heating device according to claim 23, wherein the heat generation module is disposed inside the housing (D- 64, Figure 5), but does not disclose with a housing rotatably connected to a discharge duct of the air conditioning unit.
However, Nishimura (N) discloses a vehicle air conditioner (Abstract) with a housing (11, Figure 2) rotatably connected to a discharge duct (24,25) of the air conditioning unit. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this application to provide rotational freedom of the ducting to allow for customized positioning of the vents to suit individuals’ preferences.
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Danieau (US 2002/0000314), Francis (US 2020/0006935), Min et al. (US 2019/0084374), and OTA et al. (US 20160039265).
Regarding claim 34, Danieau (D), as modified, discloses the vehicle heating device according to claim 23, further comprising a sensor configured to detect that a part of the passenger's body approaches the heat generating module.
OTA (O) discloses a heating apparatus (Abstract, 10, Figure 4) that comprises a sensor (32) configured to detect that a part of the passenger's body approaches the heat generating module (25, [0026,0027). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this application to utilize a sensor to allow operation of the radiant device when an occupant is proximate thereto in order to conserve energy for when the vehicle in unoccupied.
Claim 38 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Danieau (US 2002/0000314) and Francis (US 2020/0006935) and Bohlender et al. (US 2005/0173394).
Regarding claim 38, Danieau (D), as modified, discloses the vehicle heating device according to claim 25, further comprising: a housing accommodating the heat generating module therein (D-Area surrounding 64, Figure 5, [0050]) and communicating with one side of the air conditioning unit (D- @60); and a support member configured to support the heat generating module so that the heat generating module is disposed in the housing (D- contact ends of 64 in Figure 5), but does not disclose that the heat generating module includes a frame in which the heat generating unit is disposed; and the overheat protection means is in close contact with the heat generating unit through hook coupling with the frame.
However, Bohlender (B) discloses a control unit with thermal protection for an electric heater (Abstract, [0033]) wherein the heat generating module (Figure 3, heating device, [0059) includes a frame (40) in which the heat generating unit is disposed; and the overheat protection means (2,3, Figure 3) is in close contact with the heat generating unit through hook coupling with the frame (14, Figure 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this application to locate the thermal protection device as close to the heat generating unit in order to provide a quick response due to the minimization thermal lag and to secure the device with a hook or fastener.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN E BARGERO whose telephone number is (571) 270-1770. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached at (571) 272-9059. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOHN E BARGERO/Examiner, Art Unit 3762 ***
/HELENA KOSANOVIC/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights