DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The non-patent literature citations no. 1-3 of the information disclosure statement filed December 29, 2025, fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but the non-patent literature citations no. 1-3 have not been considered. However, the submission of U.S. Patent citation no. 1 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the U.S. Patent citation no. 1 of the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 3, 6-7, 9-12, 16-17 and 19-20 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
4. Claims 1 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Ran (WO 2022058315 A1).
In regard to claim 1, Ran discloses a laser level system [laser tool and system 1], comprising:
a bracket [base 13] including a first circuit board [page 11 lines 1-7 describe a microprocessor 35; microprocessors including a circuit board are well known in the art]; a laser level [laser unit 10 with pivots 17, 23, and 27] mounted on the bracket [shown in Figs. 1-7] and configured to project a first laser line [laser line 4] and a second laser line [laser line 8] transverse to the first laser line [shown in Fig. 7], the laser level comprising a second circuit board [page 10 lines 14-17 describe that the pivots 17, 23, and 27 each contain an electronically commutated brushless motor - electronically commutated brushless motors having integrated electronics (microprocessors with circuit boards) are well known within the art]; a power source [power source, page 4 line 18], located within the bracket [mounted to the base 13; page 4 lines 21-13], the power source comprising an integral battery assembly [battery pack 39] configured to power the laser level [described on page 12 lines 9-22]; and wherein the first circuit board is electrically coupled to the second circuit board to enable transfer of power and exchange of electric and data signals between the first and second circuit boards [page 12 lines 12 lines 9-22 describe that the microprocessor 35, laser emitters 3, and each pivot motor 31 are all electrically coupled to be powered by the battery pack 39; page 11 line 19 - page 12 line 7 discuss that the electronically commutated motors 31 and be controlled to make adjustments to the alignment of the laser unit 10, and that the microprocessor 35 can be programmed to carry out any variety of alignment operations; thus, it is obvious that the electronically commutated motors 31 are able to exchange electric and data signals with the microprocessor 35].
In regard to claim 27, Ran discloses wherein the exchange of the electric and data signals includes signals from an accelerometer [page 11 line 21-page 12 line 7 describe an accelerometer in communication with a microprocessor].
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
5. Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ran in view of Ranieri
(US 20140352161 A1; cited in prior PTO-892).
In regard to claim 3, Ran does not teach a port in the bracket through which the power source is configured to be charged.
However, Ranieri also teaches a laser level system [laser level system 10] with a bracket [bracket 14] and a laser level [laser level 12], as well as that the power source [power source 40] is configured to be charged through a port in the bracket {described in para. [0072]}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Ranieri’s port in a bracket with Ran’s laser level system in order to better recharge a portable device with an internal battery, [such as Ran’s chargeable battery within a remote control (described on page 18 line 7)], through a common power source, a well-known engineering practice, as taught by Ranieri {para. [0072]}.
6. Claims 6-7, 9, 10, 16, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ran in view of Scott (US 20140093753 A1).
In regard to claim 6, Ran teaches a battery pack/cell [page 12 line 10], and that the battery pack is any of the type of battery packs known to power a plurality of power tools, however, Ran is not explicit that the integral battery assembly comprises a plurality of battery cells or that the plurality of battery cells comprises at least one electrical tab.
However, Scott teaches a battery pack [battery pack 100] for powering power tools {para. [0002]}, such that the integral battery assembly comprises a plurality of battery cells [battery cells 120-124 with coupler assembly 205], and wherein each of the plurality of battery cells comprises at least one electrical tab [tabs 328 of cell couplings 310A-D, shown best in Figs. 3 and 4].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Scott’s battery pack as Ran’s battery pack as Ran is configured to use any battery pack configured to power a power tool, as well as in order to better manufacture a battery pack in an inexpensive way, as taught by Scott {paras. [0002]-[0003]}.
In regard to claim 7, Ran does not teach that at least one electrical tab of each of the plurality of battery cells is connected to the first circuit board.
However, Scott teaches that at least one electrical tab of each of the plurality of battery cells is connected to the first circuit board {tabs 328 of couplings 310A-D connect to 315A-D and 325A-B (shown in Fig. 3), 315 A and 325 A-B shown connected to circuit board 135 in Fig. 4; para. [0026] describes that the cell couplings 320A and 320B connect to a power tool and power the whole unit}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Scott’s battery pack as Ran’s battery pack as Ran is configured to use any battery pack configured to power a power tool, as well as in order to better manufacture a battery pack in an inexpensive way, as taught by Scott {paras. [0002]-[0003]}.
In regard to claim 9, Ran teaches a laser level system [laser tool and system 1] comprising a bracket [base 13] including a first circuit board [page 11 lines 1-7 describe a microprocessor 35; microprocessors including a circuit board are well known in the art]; a laser level [laser unit 10 with pivots 17, 23, and 27] mounted on the bracket [shown in Figs. 1-7] and configured to project a first laser line [laser line 4] and a second laser line [laser line 8] transverse to the first laser line [shown in Fig. 7], the laser level comprising a second circuit board [page 10 lines 14-17 describe that the pivots 17, 23, and 27 each contain an electronically commutated brushless motor - electronically commutated brushless motors having integrated electronics (microprocessors with circuit boards) are well known within the art]; a power source [power source, page 4 line 18], located within the bracket [mounted to the base 13; page 4 lines 21-13], the power source comprising an integral battery assembly [battery pack 39] configured to power the laser level [described on page 12 lines 9-22]; and wherein the first circuit board is electrically coupled to the second circuit board to enable transfer of power and exchange of electric and data signals between the first and second circuit boards [page 12 lines 12 lines 9-22 describe that the microprocessor 35, laser emitters 3, and each pivot motor 31 are all electrically coupled to be powered by the battery pack 39; page 11 line 19 - page 12 line 7 discuss that the electronically commutated motors 31 and be controlled to make adjustments to the alignment of the laser unit 10, and that the microprocessor 35 can be programmed to carry out any variety of alignment operations; thus, it is obvious that the electronically commutated motors 31 are able to exchange electric and data signals with the microprocessor 35].
Although Ran teaches a battery pack/cell [page 12 line 10], and that the battery pack is any of the type of battery packs known to power a plurality of power tools, Ran is not explicit that the integral battery assembly comprises a first battery cell, wherein the first battery cell comprises a first end adjacent to the first circuit board, wherein the first battery cell comprises a first tab at the first end, or wherein the first tab is connected to the first circuit board.
However, Scott teaches battery pack [battery pack 100] for powering power tools {para. [0002]}, such that the integral battery assembly comprises a first battery cell [battery cell 120 with coupler assembly 205], wherein the first battery cell comprises a first end adjacent to the first circuit board [shown in Fig. 1, ends of cells are adjacent to circuit board 135]; wherein the first battery cell comprises a first tab at the first end [tabs 328 of cell coupling 310D]; and wherein the first tab is connected to the first circuit board {couplings 310A-D connect to 315A-D and 325A-B (shown in Fig. 3), 315 A and 325 A-B shown connected to circuit board 135 in Fig. 4; para. [0026] describes that the cell couplings 320A and 320B connect to a power tool and power the whole unit}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Scott’s battery pack as Ran’s battery pack as Ran is configured to use any battery pack configured to power a power tool, as well as in order to better manufacture a battery pack in an inexpensive way, as taught by Scott {paras. [0002]-[0003]}.
In regard to claim 10, Ran does not teach that the first battery cell comprises a second tab at the first end or that the second tab is adjacent to the first tab.
However, Scott teaches that the first battery cell comprises a second tab at the first end [Fig. 3 shows two tabs 328 of cell coupling 310D, Fig. 4 shows the tabs at the first end of battery cell 120], and wherein the second tab is adjacent to the first tab [Figs. 3 and 4].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Scott’s battery pack as Ran’s battery pack as Ran is configured to use any battery pack configured to power a power tool, as well as in order to better manufacture a battery pack in an inexpensive way, as taught by Scott {paras. [0002]-[0003]}.
In regard to claim 16, Ran further teaches that the bracket comprises a mounting portion [aperture 16, page 9 line 29] configured to mount the bracket to an object [described on par. 9 line 29].
In regard to claim 28, Ran teaches a battery pack/cell [page 12 line 10], and that the battery pack is any of the type of battery packs known to power a plurality of power tools, however, Ran is not explicit that the integral battery assembly comprises a plurality of battery cells, each battery cell from the plurality of battery cells having one or more tabs, or the one or more tabs of each battery cell being electrically connected to the first circuit board.
However, Scott teaches battery pack [battery pack 100] for powering power tools {para. [0002]}, such that the integral battery assembly comprises a plurality of battery cells [battery cells 120-124], each battery cell from the plurality of battery cells having one or more tabs [cell couplings 310A-D, shown best in Fig. 4], the one or more tabs of each battery cell being electrically connected to the first circuit board {para. [0026] describes that the cell couplings 320A and 320B connect to a power tool and power the whole unit}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Scott’s battery pack as Ran’s battery pack as Ran is configured to use any battery pack configured to power a power tool, as well as in order to better manufacture a battery pack in an inexpensive way, as taught by Scott {paras. [0002]-[0003]}.
7. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ran in view of Scott as applied to claims 6-7, 9, 10, 16, and 28 above, and further in view of Choi (US 20190001838 A1; cited in prior PTO-892).
In regard to claim 11, Ran in view of Scott does not teach that the first tab comprises a first portion and a second portion, and wherein the second portion is transverse to the first portion.
However, Choi also teaches a battery comprised of battery cells [battery modules 10], wherein the first battery cell comprises a second tab at the first end [Fig. 7 shows a plurality of electrode leads 150]; wherein the second tab is adjacent to the first tab [shown in Fig. 7].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Choi’s use of transverse tabs with Ran in view of Scott’s battery cells in order to better electrically connect battery components to a bus bar, as described by Choi {para. [0045]}.
8. Claims 12, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ran in view of Scott as applied to claims 6-7, 9, 10, 16, and 28 above, and further in view of Haldar (US 20220052542 A1).
In regard to claim 12, Ran in view of Scott do not teach that the integral battery assembly includes a thermistor connected to the first circuit board, wherein the thermistor is configured to measure temperature and provide a signal to the first circuit board, and wherein the first circuit board includes a controller configured to shut off electrical power from the power source when the temperature exceeds a threshold.
However, Haldar teaches a battery pack configured to power a tool {para. [0003]}, such that the integral battery assembly includes a thermistor connected to the first circuit board {para. [0010] describes that the temperature sensor 64 can be a NTC resistor or a PT100 element (two well-known embodiments of thermistors)}, wherein the thermistor is configured to measure temperature and provide a signal to the first circuit board [shown in Fig. 2], and wherein the first circuit board includes a controller [monitoring unit 32] configured to shut off electrical power from the power source when the temperature exceeds a threshold {para. [0014] describes interrupting power when a temperature limit is exceeded}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Haldar’s battery pack with a thermistor as Ran in view of Scott’s laser level system as Ran is configured to use any battery pack configured to power a power tool, as well as in order to better monitor internal battery temperatures to avoid further thermal damage to the electromechanical interfaces of a tool, as well as avoiding fires in a preventative manner, as taught by Haldar {para. [0014]}.
In regard to claim 17, Ran teaches a laser level system [system 1], comprising: a bracket [base 13] comprising a mounting portion [aperture 16, page 9 line 29] and a base portion transverse to the mounting portion [bottom surface 15, Fig. 3]; a laser level [laser unit 10 with pivots 17, 23, and 27] on the base portion of the bracket [shown in Figs. 1-7], rotatable relative to the bracket [pivots 17, 23, and 27 allow rotation relative to base 13] and configured to project a first laser line [laser line 4] and a second laser line [laser line 8] transverse to the first laser line [shown in Fig. 7]; a power source configured [power source, page 4 line 18] to power the laser level [described on page 12 lines 9-22] and disposed in the mounting portion of the bracket [mounted to the base 13; page 4 lines 21-13]; that the power source comprises an integral battery assembly [battery pack 39]; wherein the laser level system further comprises: a first circuit board being part of the bracket [page 11 lines 1-7 describe a microprocessor 35; microprocessors including a circuit board are well known in the art]; and a second circuit board being part of the laser level [page 10 lines 14-17 describe that the pivots 17, 23, and 27 each contain an electronically commutated brushless motor - electronically commutated brushless motors having integrated electronics (microprocessors with circuit boards) are well known within the art]; and wherein the first circuit board is electrically coupled to the second circuit board to enable transfer of power and exchange of electric and data signals between the first and second circuit boards [page 12 lines 12 lines 9-22 describe that the microprocessor 35, laser emitters 3, and each pivot motor 31 are all electrically coupled to be powered by the battery pack 39; page 11 line 19 - page 12 line 7 discuss that the electronically commutated motors 31 and be controlled to make adjustments to the alignment of the laser unit 10, and that the microprocessor 35 can be programmed to carry out any variety of alignment operations; thus, it is obvious that the electronically commutated motors 31 are able to exchange electric and data signals with the microprocessor 35].
Ran teaches a battery pack/cell [page 12 line 10], and that the battery pack is any of the type of battery packs known to power a plurality of power tools, however, Ran is not explicit that the integral battery assembly comprises a battery assembly housing, a first battery cell in the battery assembly housing and a second battery cell in the battery assembly housing; wherein the first battery cell comprises a pouch cell.
However, Haldar teaches a battery pack [battery pack 10] for powering a power tool {para. [0003]}, such the power source comprises an integral battery assembly [battery pack 10]; wherein the integral battery assembly comprises a battery assembly housing [housing 22], a first battery cell [energy storage cells 48] in the battery assembly housing and a second battery cell [battery cell 121] in the battery assembly housing [shown in Fig. 1]; wherein the first battery cell comprises a pouch cell {para. [0008] describes the energy storage cells 48 as a pouch cell}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Haldar’s battery pack as Ran’s power source as Ran is configured to use any battery pack configured to power a power tool, as well as in order to better monitor internal battery temperatures to avoid further thermal damage to the electromechanical interfaces of a tool, as well as avoiding fires in a preventative manner, as taught by Haldar {para. [0014]}.
Ran in view of Haldar is not explicit that each pouch cell has at least one extending electrical tab.
However, Scott also teaches a battery pack [battery pack 100] for powering power tools {para. [0002]}, such that the battery cells comprises at least one electrical tab [tabs 328 of cell couplings 310A-D, shown best in Figs. 3 and 4].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Scott’s method of having a tab extend from a battery cell with Ran in view of Haldar’s laser level system in order to better manufacture a battery pack in an inexpensive way, as taught by Scott {paras. [0002]-[0003]}.
In regard to claim 19, Ran further teaches a controller on at least one of the first circuit board or the second circuit board [microprocessor 35 and pivot motors 31 have controllers].
9. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ran in view of Scott and Haldar as applied to claims 12, 17, and 19 above, and further in view of Ranieri.
In regard to claim 20, Ran in view of Scott and Haldar does not teach a charging port on at least one of the first circuit board or the second circuit board.
However, Ranieri also teaches a laser level system [laser level system 10] with a bracket [bracket 14] and a laser level [laser level 12], as well as that the power source [power source 40] is configured to be charged through a port in the bracket {described in para. [0072]}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Ranieri’s port in a bracket with Ran’s laser level system in order to better recharge a portable device with an internal battery, [such as Ran’s chargeable battery within a remote control (described on page 18 line 7)], through a common power source, a well-known engineering practice, as taught by Ranieri {para. [0072]}.
10. Claims 21-24 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ran as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Burch (US 20140240125 A1).
In regard to claim 21, Ran teaches that the first circuit board has a port {“electrical conductors configured to electrically connect configured to electrically connect the battery pack 39”; page 12 lines 12-13} receive and distribute power {page 12 para. 2 describes how the battery pack 39 is configured to power the microprocessor 35 and all the other electronics in the tool – thus, the power unused by the microprocessor 35 is distributed to the rest of the tool} and that the first circuit board can receive updated data or programming for the laser level system {page 12 para. 1 describes that the microprocessor 35 can be programmed to carry out any variety of alignment operations}.
Ran is not explicit that the first circuit board’s port is configured to receive updated data or programming for the laser level system.
However, Burch also teaches a laser level system {tool 105, described as a laser level in para. [0040]}, configured with a port {wired connection interfaces, (i.e. a Universal Serial Bus (USB) interface/port); para. [0044]} for communicating data with other devices {described in paras. [0046]-[0056]}. Further, Burch also teaches a primary power source [battery 160] and a secondary battery source [energy storage device 230], both of which can be configured to not be removeable and rechargeable {paras. [0043] and [0047]}, which would necessitate being recharged through a port {such as that described for the additional fob 610 described in paras. [0106]-[0107]}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have utilized a port capable of supplying power and sending data, such as Burch’s use of a USB-type port – a well-known engineering practice, as seen on many portable electronics such as smartphones, cameras, and other rechargeable devices with data storage – as a port for recharging Ran’s battery, for the purpose of using readily available cables to communicate and power a device, as taught by Burch {paras. [0106]-[0107]}.
In regard to claim 22, Ran does not teach a port configured to download the data signals from the laser lever with the data signals including use information.
However, Burch teaches that the port {tracking unit 150 wired/USB interface, para. [0044]} is configured to download the data signals from the laser level {para. [0042] describes exporting data signals from sensors from the tool}, the data signals including use information {para. [0056] describes use information of the tool 105 (tool status, usage, position data)}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Burch’s tracking unit with Ran’s laser level system in order to better monitor the use of power tools, such as laser levels, as taught by Burch {paras. [0003]-[0006]}.
In regard to claim 23, Ran does not teach that the use information includes a time used by the laser level or a temperature of the laser level during use of the laser level.
However, Burch teaches that the use information includes a time used by the laser level {para. [0056] describes usage over time} or a temperature of the laser level during use of the laser level {para. [0041] describes the usage information comprising temperature of the tool housing during use}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Burch’s tracking unit with Ran’s laser level system in order to better monitor the use of power tools, such as laser levels, as taught by Burch {paras. [0003]-[0006]}.
In regard to claim 24, Ran does not teach that the exchange of the electric and data signals includes signals indicative of time used and temperature detected during use of the laser level.
However, Burch also teaches a laser level system {tool 105, described as a laser level in para. [0040]}, configured that the exchange of the electric and data signals includes signals indicative of time used {para. [0056] describes usage over time} and temperature detected during use of the laser level {para. [0041] describes the usage information comprising temperature of the tool housing during use}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Burch’s tracking unit with Ran’s laser level system in order to better monitor the use of power tools, such as laser levels, as taught by Burch {paras. [0003]-[0006]}.
In regard to claim 26, Ran is does not teach that the exchange of the electric and data signals includes signals for indicating a state of charge of the power source.
However, Burch also teaches that the exchange of the electric and data signals includes signals for indicating a state of charge of the power source {para. 0041} describes the battery sensor monitoring battery charge level}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Burch’s tracking unit with Ran’s laser level system in order to better monitor the use of power tools, such as laser levels, as taught by Burch {paras. [0003]-[0006]}.
11. Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ran in view of Haldar.
In regard to claim 25, Ran teaches a battery pack/cell [page 12 line 10], and that the battery pack is any of the type of battery packs known to power a plurality of power tools, however, Ran is not explicit that the integral battery assembly includes a thermistor connected to the first circuit board, that said thermistor is configured to measure temperature and provide a signal to the circuit board, or that the circuit board includes a controller configured to shut off electrical power from the power source when the temperature exceeds a threshold.
However, Haldar teaches a battery pack configured to power a tool {para. [0003]}, such that the integral battery assembly includes a thermistor connected to the first circuit board {para. [0010] describes that the temperature sensor 64 can be a NTC resistor or a PT100 element (two well-known embodiments of thermistors)}, wherein the thermistor is configured to measure temperature and provide a signal to the first circuit board [shown in Fig. 2], and wherein the first circuit board includes a controller [monitoring unit 32] configured to shut off electrical power from the power source when the temperature exceeds a threshold {para. [0014] describes interrupting power when a temperature limit is exceeded}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used Haldar’s battery pack with a thermistor as Ran in view of Scott’s laser level system as Ran is configured to use any battery pack configured to power a power tool, as well as in order to better monitor internal battery temperatures to avoid further thermal damage to the electromechanical interfaces of a tool, as well as avoiding fires in a preventative manner, as taught by Haldar {para. [0014]}.
Conclusion
12. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL QUINN whose telephone number is (571)272-2690. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:30 PST.
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, JOHN BREENE can be reached at (571)272-4107. 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.
/DANIEL M QUINN/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/JOHN E BREENE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855