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 .
Response to Amendment
In Applicant’s response dated 6/12/2026, claims 1, 4, 9, and 20 are amended. Claims 11-19 drawn to a method of operating a fuel cell are canceled. Claims 21-29 are added. Claims 1-10 and 20-29 are pending and examined.
Status of Application
Applicant amendments to the specification are accepted and overcome the objections in the Office Action dated 3/12/2026; thus, those objections are withdrawn. Applicant’s replacement drawing for Fig. 4B is accepted. Applicant’s amendment to claim 20 is sufficient to overcome the previous objection in the recited Office Action; thus, the objection is withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments to claims 4 and 9 are sufficient to overcome the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections, and those rejections are withdrawn.
In view of Applicant’s amendments to the claims, the previous obviousness rejections are withdrawn and new rejections are provided below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 5-6, and 20-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weingaertner et al. [US20200328445A1, as provided on the IDS dated 5/16/23], hereinafter ‘445.
Regarding claim 1, ‘445 discloses a power system, comprising: power module [‘445 abstract, 0119, and throughout, power modules of systems 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, 700 discussed throughout], that comprises:
a hotbox [‘445 0007, 0046 and throughout, Figs. 3-7, hotbox 302];
a stack of fuel cells located in the hot box [‘445 0007, 0046 and throughout, Figs. 3-7, hotbox 302 holding stacks 101] and configured to generate a fuel exhaust [‘445 0046-0048, 0052-0059, 0077-0090, 0094-0109, 0113-0118 and discussed throughout ] using a fuel stream comprising a fresh fuel or a mixture of the fresh fuel and a recycled fuel [‘445 0030-0040 and throughout];
and a heater located in the hotbox and configured to heat the stack [‘445 0021, 0026-0027, 0035, 0042, 0046, 0078, 0081-0082, 0089 and throughout, Figs. 3-7, Heaters 140, 121, 125, and 127 are in the hotbox and heat the stack by heating the fuel stream that enters the hotbox via heater 121 through 410 [0081-0082] and/or 140/ 127/125 heats the air that enters the stack [0028, 0081, 0089].]
a condenser configured to remove water from the fuel exhaust to generate the recycled fuel [‘445 0083-0085, 0096, and throughout, Fig. 4 condenser 460], and
a recycle blower configured to pressurize the recycled fuel output from the condenser [‘445 0083-0090, Fig. 4, recycle blower 434 receives output from fuel from condenser 460 as shown in Fig. 4. The inherent function of a blower is pressurization. See MPEP 2112, there is no requirement that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the inherent disclosure at the relevant time, but only that the subject matter is in fact inherent in the prior art reference.]
‘445 further teaches a recycling conduit 412 connecting the hotbox of the power module to the condenser, and configured to receive the fuel exhaust from the hotbox of the power module and to transfer the fuel exhaust to the condenser [‘445 0079-0083, Fig. 4] and a fuel supply manifold configured to provide the fuel stream to the power module [‘445 0078-0088, fuel supply manifold includes recycling conduit 414, recycling valve 419, mixer 422, fuel conduit 410 providing H2 from an external source]. ‘445 further teaches an embodiment with more than one hotbox 302 [‘445 0097, 0111], which reads on power modules (hot box, stack of fuel cells, and heater), which it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine for a power system generating power from multiple power modules.
‘445 does not explicitly teach
a recycling manifold fluidly connecting the hotboxes of the power modules to the condenser, and configured to receive the fuel exhaust from the hotboxes of the power modules and to transfer the fuel exhaust to the condenser, and
a fuel supply manifold configured to provide the fuel stream the power modules.
However, such modification to ‘445 would be obvious since it would merely require duplication of parts and rearrangement of parts, which are obvious per MPEP 2144.04 VI. Specifically, such modification is obvious through duplication of Fig. 4’s power module (hotbox and heater for each fuel cell stack for the claimed power modules, hotboxes) and recycling conduit lines 412 (which thus reads on a recycling manifold), and duplication of the portion of fuel conduit 410 outside of the hotbox after valve 411 or the portion of fuel conduit 410 outside of the hotbox and valve 411 of ‘445 Fig. 4 configured to provide the fuel stream to each of the modules as part of the fuel supply manifold. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify ‘445 as described for the predicted result of a power system configured to generate power from multiple power modules. See MPEP 2143 (A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Regarding Claim 5, modified ‘445 discloses the power system of claim 1, further comprising a hydrogen fuel supply [‘445 0080 and throughout] that is fluidly connected to the fuel supply manifold (as taught in claim 1 above) by a fuel supply conduit [‘445 0079 and throughout, conduit 410], wherein the fresh fuel comprises hydrogen (H2) received from the fuel supply [‘445 0079 and throughout] and the recycled fuel comprises dewatered hydrogen [‘445 0083, condenser 460 in the recycle manifold reduces the water content of the hydrogen fuel exhaust which is mixed with the fresh hydrogen fuel supply in the fuel supply manifold [‘445, claim 1 above and Fig. 4].
Regarding Claim 6, modified ‘445 discloses the power system of claim 5, wherein:
the stack comprises a solid oxide fuel cell stack [‘445 title and discussed throughout]; and
the recycle blower is configured to pressurize the recycled fuel to provide the pressurized recycled fuel to the fuel supply manifold [‘445 0040, The broadest reasonable interpretation of the blower controllably provides the desired amount of fuel exhaust into the fuel inlet conduit reads on the claim limitation.]. ‘445 does not explicitly teach a pressure ranging from about 1 pounds per square inch gauge (psig) to about 2 psig; however, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that the amount of pressure required would be a result effective variable depending on the specific operation conditions (start up, steady-state operation, shutdown) and the design of a fuel cell. If the pressure is below the range required for the specified operational conditions and design, there will not be enough hydrogen to operate the fuel cell stack properly. If the pressure is above the range required, the skilled artisan would expect that excess pressure could cause damage to fuel cell components, result in unsafe operation, or result in an imbalance in the amount of fuel and air required for the operational conditions. Determining the workable range merely requires routine experimentation in consideration of the discussed factors, which is obvious per MPEP 2144.05II, A. "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation."
Regarding Claim 20, modified ‘445 discloses the power system of claim 1, further comprising:
a system exhaust conduit configured to collect cathode exhaust output from the power modules [‘445 0089 Cathode exhaust through conduit 432, through 140, through conduit 424, to cathode recuperator 127, through optional heat exchanger 436, and to the atmosphere read on a system exhaust conduit as claimed]; and
a water drain conduit fluidly connecting the condenser to the system exhaust conduit [‘445 0084-0090, Fig. 4, Water drain marked H2O shown fluidly connected to condenser 460 through water separator 462. The water may also be provided to the CHP heat exchanger 436 [0090], which is part of the system exhaust conduit as described above.].
Regarding Claim 21 ‘445 discloses the power system of claim 1, wherein each of the power modules further comprises:
a fuel exhaust conduit located in the hotbox and configured to receive the fuel exhaust from the stack [‘445 0079, Fig. 4, conduit 412 in the hotbox 302];
a fuel inlet conduit located in the hotbox [‘445 0079, Fig. 4, conduit 410 in hotbox 302] and configured to transfer the fuel stream from a main fuel inlet [‘445 0079, The broadest reasonable interpretation of Fig. 4 is that where 410 enters hotbox 302 is the main fuel inlet] to the stack [‘445 0079, Fig. 4, stack 101]; and
a heater conduit located in the hotbox [‘445 0082, 0086-0088, Fig. 4, Bypass conduit 415 connects anode exhaust 412 with heater 140 [0082] ATO inlet conduit 420 fluidly connects recycling conduit 414 to heater 140 [0086-0088]. Further, any of the conduit lines directly contacting a heater of claim 1 reads on the limitation.].
Regarding Claim 22, ‘445 discloses the power system of claim 21, wherein each of the power modules further comprises a purge conduit fluidly connecting the fuel exhaust conduit to the heater conduit [‘445 0086, Fig. 4, Purge conduit 416 connects the exhaust conduit 412 to heater conduit 420 through recycling conduit 414.].
Regarding Claim 23, ‘445 discloses the power system of claim 1, wherein the stack of fuel cells comprises solid oxide fuel cells [‘445 0013-0015 ‘445 teaches the type of fuel cell can be a solid oxide fuel cell.].
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘445, as provided for claim 1 above, in further view of Joos et al. [US20200075974A1], hereinafter Joos.
Regarding Claim 2, modified ‘445 discloses the power system of claim 1, wherein the system lacks a mass flow controller or a mass flow control valve [‘445 0075, 0088, System 400 requires no mass flow controllers since none are taught. System 400 requires no mass flow control valves if using a proportional solenoid valve at 411.]. ‘445 does not explicitly teach controlling the pressure of the fuel and thus does not teach a pressure regulator configured to control a pressure of the fresh fuel or a pressure of the mixture of the fresh fuel and the recycled fuel provided to the power modules. Joos discloses a pressure regulator 22 for maintaining the pressure of hydrogen on the anode side of the fuel cell in the range of 0.1 psi to 5 psi [Joos 0016]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Joos teaching about a hydrogen pressure regulator to the power system of ‘445 as provided in claim 1 by adding a pressure regulator at valve 411 or by omission of valve 411 ( if additional valve control is not needed for the specific design, see MPEP 2144.04 I design changes and II A, omission)see for the predictable result of a controlled hydrogen pressure pressurizing the fuel line feeding the anode at a predetermined pressure based on the operating status of the fuel cell power system [Joos 0016-0019].
Claim(s) 3 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘445, as provided for claim 1 above, in further view of Sridhar et al. [US20160072146A1], hereinafter Sridhar.
Regarding Claim 3, modified ‘445 teaches the power system of claim 1, and teaches an embodiment where there is at least one cabinet housing power modules [‘445 0118] but does not explicitly teach wherein the condenser is disposed outside of the at least one cabinet housing the power modules. Sridhar teaches a power system [Sridhar abstract and throughout] further comprising at least one cabinet housing the power modules [Sridhar 0034-0044, Fig. 5 and throughout, The broadest reasonable interpretation of Fig 5 is cabinet 62 reads on the claimed at least one cabinet or, alternatively, with the partitions between modules 61, up to four cabinets are shown.] wherein the condenser is disposed outside of the at least one cabinet housing the power modules [Sridhar 0034-0044, 0057, 0071, 0083, and throughout, Sridhar teaches a condenser 113 throughout (0057, 0071, 0083) and teaches a fuel processing unit 63 in box 67, which would be expected to house the condenser 113 as part of Sridhar’s fuel processing unit (0034)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the ‘445 embodiment of claim 1 with the embodiment teaching cabinets as described above for the predictable result of the power modules kept separated from the condenser to facilitate maintaining the temperature in the power modules [‘445 0118].
Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Sridhar’s teaching of housing the power modules separated from the condenser with the power modules of ‘445 as described in claim 1 above (hot boxes, fuel stacks, heaters) for the predictable result of a power system which supports moving, repairing or servicing the components of the power system separately for ease of service [Sridhar 0036-0038].
Regarding Claim 4, modified ‘445 discloses the power system of claim 1 and a recycling module [‘445 0084-0088, Fig. 4, The recycling components 412, condenser 460, 414, 462, 417, 416, blower 434 , 419 mixing at 422 and controlled by valve 411 outside of the hot box 302 housing the power module read on the claimed recycling module.] and ‘445 teaches an embodiment where there is at least one cabinet housing power modules [‘445 0118] but does not explicitly teach the configuration of further comprising separate rows of cabinets and an enclosure for the recycling module. Thus, ‘445 does not meet the other limitations of claim 4.
Sridhar discloses a power system [Sridhar abstract and throughout] further comprising:
separate rows of cabinets that each house a number of the power modules [Sridhar 0031-0043 and throughout, Fig. 5, The broadest reasonable interpretation of Fig. 5 is that box 62 contains four modules 61 are in either one or two rows separated by the partitions of the frame structure, where groupings of the partitioned areas function as cabinets. This is further evidenced by Sridhar’s teaching that the number of doors may be varied by design choice [0040-0042].] It would have been within the ambit of the skilled artisan to combine Sridhar’s separate rows of cabinets as described above with the power system of ‘445 by replacing Sridhar’s power modules 61 with the power modules of modified ‘445 as described in claim 1. Specifically, as provided in claim 1, each of the power modules of ‘445 include a hot box/heater for each stack. Combining four of the power modules of ‘445 enclosed individually in hot boxes as described in claim 1 above in Sridhar’s partitioned cabinet 62 reads on one or two separate rows of cabinets housing four or two, respectively, power modules. Alternatively, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide multiple rows of Sridhar’s cabinets 62 throughout duplication of parts, which is obvious per MPEP 2144.04 VI, as a design choice, which is obvious per MPEP 2144.04 I, and/or by changing the size of the power system, which is obvious per MPEP 2144.04 VI, with the power modules of modified ‘445 to provide the capacity to meet the specific power requirements of the power system.
Sridhar further teaches a recycling module enclosure disposed outside of the rows of cabinets and housing the condenser and the recycle blower [Sridhar 0034-0047, Fig. 5, Sridhar teaches a fuel processing unit 63, which given that Sridhar’s fuel processing includes recycling of fuel from the exhaust mixed into the fuel inlet [Sridhar 0048-0049 and throughout] reads on a recycling module. Similar to the condenser and recycle blowers taught by ‘445 in claim 1 above, Sridhar teaches condenser 113 [Sridhar 0034-0044, 0057, 0071, 0083, and throughout, Sridhar teaches a condenser 113 throughout (0057, 0071, 0083) and recycle blowers 109/209 [Sridhar 0056, 0072-0082, 0090, 0100 and throughout], which would be expected to be housed within the fuel processing unit 63. Thus, it would be within the ambit of the skilled artisan to apply Sridhar’s teaching to the power system of modified ‘445 by providing an enclosure such as box 67 [Sridhar 0036, Fig. 5] around the recycling module of ‘445 (see above), which includes the condenser 460 and recycle blower 434 of claim 1. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Sridhar’s teaching of an enclosure around the recycling components in the power system of modified ‘445 in claim 1 as described above for the predictable result of an enclosed recycling module kept separate from the power modules as a matter of design, which is obvious per MPEP 2144.04 I, or to support servicing requirements [Sridhar 0036-0037 and throughout].
With such modifications as described above, the recycling manifold (of ‘445 as described in claim 1) fluidly connects the power modules (of ‘445 as described in claim 1) of each row of cabinets to the recycling module enclosure. Thus, ‘445 of claim 1 further modified by Sridhar meets the limitations of claim 4.
Claim(s) 24-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘445, as provided for claims 1 and 23 above, in further view of Darga et al. [US20130130154A1], hereinafter Darga.
Regarding Claim 24, modified ‘445 discloses the power system of claim 23 but is silent to wherein the stack of fuel cells further comprises chromium-iron alloy interconnects. Darga teaches an interconnect for a fuel cell comprising chromium-iron alloys [Darga 0027 and throughout]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Darga’s teaching with modified ‘445 as a design choice, which is obvious per MPEP 2144.04 I, for the predictable result of a solid oxide fuel cell with interconnects where the coefficient of thermal expansion is near the coefficient of thermal expansion for the electrolyte material [Darga 0027-0030 and throughout] to support operation of the fuel cell through precise regulation of the air/oxide and fuel flow [Darga 0003 and throughout]. See MPEP 2143 (A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Regarding Claim 25, modified ‘445 discloses the power system of claim 1, wherein the stack of fuel cells is part of multiple stacks of solid oxide fuel cells [‘445 0013-0015 ‘445 teaches the type of fuel cell can be a solid oxide fuel cell and further teaches there may be one or more fuel cell stacks [‘445 0078-0090 and throughout]. ‘445 does not teach wherein the solid oxide fuel cells within each stack are separated by interconnects. Darga teaches wherein the solid oxide fuel cells within each stack are separated by interconnects [Darga 0045-0046, Fig. 7, Darga teaches the gas flow separator plate 9 can be used as an interconnect between the anode and cathode. Fig. 7 shows interconnect 9 between two SOFC stacks 1]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Darga’s teaching with the power system modified ‘445 as a design, choice which is obvious per MPEP 2144.04 I, for the predictable result of a fuel cell where the gas flow separator between the anode and cathode of adjacent fuel cell stacks also provides the function of electrically connecting the anode of one cell to the cathode of the adjacent cell [Darga 0046]. See MPEP 2143 (A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Claim(s) 26-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘445 in view of Darga, as provided for claim 25 above, in further view of Edmonston et al. [US20210020967A1], hereinafter Edmonston.
Regarding Claim 26, modified ‘445 discloses the power system of claim 25 but is silent to wherein the multiple stacks of solid oxide fuel cells are arranged in the hotbox around a central column. Edmonston teaches where multiple stacks of solid oxide fuel cells are arranged in the hotbox around a central column [Edmonston 0010-0011, 0018-0019, 0040 and throughout, Fig. 2A, Fuel cell stacks 102, which are a solid oxide fuel cell, [0010-0011, 0018-0019] in hotbox 100 around central column 400.]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Edmonston’s teaching with modified ‘445 of claim 25 for the predictable result of a fuel cell system with a central column as a matter of design choice for an application where such configuration is preferred, which is obvious per MPEP 2144.04 I. See MPEP 2143 (A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Regarding Claim 27, modified ‘445 discloses the power system of claim 26, wherein the central column comprises an anode recuperator [Edmonston 0040, Fig. 2A-2D, anode recuperator 110 within central column 400]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Edmonston’s teachings of the central column comprising an anode recuperator with modified ‘445 of claim 26 as a matter of design choice for a fuel cell with the central column comprising an anode recuperator for an application where such configuration is preferred, which is obvious per MPEP 2144.04 I. See MPEP 2143 (A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Regarding Claim 28, modified ‘445 discloses the power system of claim 27, wherein the anode recuperator is disposed radially inward of the heater in the hotbox [Edmonston 0040, Figs. 2A-2D, anode recuperator 110 is radially inward of the heater ATO 130.]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Edmonston’s teachings of the central column comprising an anode recuperator radially inward of the heater with modified ‘445 of claim 27 as a matter of design choice for a fuel cell for an application where such configuration is preferred, which is obvious per MPEP 2144.04 I. See MPEP 2143 (A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Regarding Claim 29, modified ‘445 discloses the power system of claim 28, wherein the central column further comprises an anode exhaust cooler which is mounted over the anode recuperator [Edmonston 0040, Figs. 2A-2D, anode exhaust cooler 140 is mounted over recuperator 110]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Edmonston’s teachings of the central column further comprises an anode exhaust cooler which is mounted over the anode recuperator with modified ‘445 of claim 27 as a matter of design choice for a fuel cell for an application where such configuration is preferred, which is obvious per MPEP 2144.04 I. See MPEP 2143 (A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-10 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.
Regarding claim 7, modified ‘445 discloses the power system of claim 5, wherein the power system further comprises:
flow control valves disposed on the fuel supply manifold [‘445 0078 and throughout, Fig. 4, valve 411 can be a control valve] and recycling manifold [‘445 0087-0088 and throughout, Fig. 4, valve 417 and 419 can be control valves]; and
a system controller configured to control the flow control valves based on an operating mode of the power system [‘445 0087-0088, ‘445 teaches automatically controlling the operation of valves 417/419 during startup or steady-state operations, which reads on the limitation].
‘445 further teaches wherein: during a start-up mode, the system controller is configured to control the flow control valves, such that the fuel supply manifold supplies the exhaust fuel to the heaters [‘445 0082,0086-0088, 0110, Fig. 4, through automatically controlling valve 415, 417, or 419]; and
during a full power steady-state mode, the system controller is configured to control the flow control valves, such that the fuel supply manifold supplies the mixture of the fresh fuel and the recycled fuel to the stacks [‘445 0030-0040 and throughout] and that no fuel is supplied to the heaters [‘445 0082,0086-0088, 0110, Fig. 4, through automatically controlling valve 415, 417, or 419].
Nguyen teaches an electrical power generating fuel cell system [Nguyen 0003 and throughout]
wherein: during a start-up mode, flow control valve such that the fuel supply manifold supplies the fresh fuel to the heater 30 [Nguyen 0114, 0140, Fig. 6, The flow control valve 106 directs fuel flow throughout manifold line 27 to heater 30 in the fuel processing unit 15.]; and
during a full power steady-state mode, flow control valves such that the fuel supply manifold supplies the mixture of fresh fuel and recycled fuel to the stacks [Nguyen 0114, 0143, Fig. 6.]. Further, Nguyen teaches a system controller CPU for operation of fuel system components electronically [Nguyen 0160-0164], which the skilled artisan would understand can be used to operate flow control valves.
It would not be obvious to combine Nguyen with modified ‘445 since ‘445 is configured to provide exhaust fuel to the heaters during start up and not fresh fuel. Specifically, it would not be obvious to modify 445 as claimed since it would change the operation of the fuel cell of ‘445, would require significant modification, and there would be no known reason for using fresh fuel instead of exhaust fuel in the fuel cell system of ‘445.
Claims 8-10 depend on claim 7 and are considered allowable subject matter for the same reasons. Allowable subject matter was agreed upon in consultation with Brian Ohara.
Response to Arguments
Regarding Applicant arguments about the objections and the 35 U.S.C.112(b) rejections provided in the Office Action dated 3/12/2026, the Examiner agrees that the Applicant amendments to the specification, Claims 20, 4, and 9 overcome the objections and rejections and thus those objections and rejections are withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments on pgs. 10-11 with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Regarding Applicant arguments on pgs. 11-13 about claim 7, the previous rejections are withdrawn due to amendments to claim 1. Further, allowable subject matter is provided for claims 7-10 as indicated below.
Additional Prior Art of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Darren Hickey et al 2017 ECS Trans. 78 107
Hickey is considered relevant for teaching hotboxes [113-114, Figs. 1, 3, 10] with heaters configured to heat [111] a stack of fuel cells [throughout] with recycling of anode gas [112-115]. Further, Fig. 3 shows a conduit which would be expected to be a manifold for connecting the hotboxes.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to M. T. LEONARD whose telephone number is (571)270-1681. The examiner can normally be reached Monday, Wednesday, Thursday 9:00-5:00 EST.
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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at (571)270-5256. 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.
/M. T. LEONARD/Examiner, Art Unit 1724 /BRIAN R OHARA/Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Prosecution Insights