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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on 06/07/2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the CN 202221395058.7 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 3 and 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1:
the recitation “two standard sections of the X-axis” in line 5 of the claim should read “two X-axis standard sections ” – an objection is being made as this claim recites “the” to reference subject matter which is not previously recited/introduced, and while this recitation is not ambiguous because there is inherent basis for such subject matter, the Examiner recommends using the amended language above to ensure consistent language is used throughout the claims;
"wherein the hoisting elevator platforms (9) are slidably installed on the corresponding standard sections of column extension (1)" recited in lines 8-9 of the claim should read "wherein each of the hoisting elevator platforms (9) are slidably installed on one of the extension (1)" – one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably deduce the original recitation was intended to reference the correction made by the Examiner above and therefore does not result in ambiguous claim language and simply reflects consistent language being used throughout the claims;
"wherein the transmission installation plates (15) are slidably installed on the corresponding linear guide rails (16)" recited in lines 13-14 of the claim should read "wherein each of the transmission installation plates (15) are slidably installed on one of the " – one of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably deduce the original recitation was intended to reference the correction made by the Examiner above and therefore does not result in ambiguous claim language and simply reflects consistent language being used throughout the claims;
the recitation “the output shaft” in line 24 is objected to as this claim recites “the” to reference subject matter which is not previously recited/introduced, and while this recitation is not ambiguous because there is inherent basis for such subject matter (i.e., servo motors have a gearbox and output/drive shaft to increase the speed and torque of the motor), the Examiner recommends introducing new limitation with “a” or “an” to ensure consistent language throughout the claims is being used;
Regarding claim 3 recites “the cantilever installation plate (21). The cantilever main beam (23)” in lines 3 and should be corrected to read “the cantilever installation plate (21); [[.]] the cantilever main beam (23)” in order to be consistent with guidance provided in MPEP § 608.01(m) which states “Each claim begins with a capital letter and ends with a period. Periods may not be used elsewhere in the claims except for abbreviations. See Fressola v. Manbeck, 36 USPQ2d 1211 (D.D.C. 1995).”; and
Regarding claim 8 recites “fixedly connected to decoration suspended scaffolds (10). The bottom” in line 2 and should be corrected to read “fixedly connected to decoration suspended scaffolds (10); [[.]] the bottom” in order to be consistent with guidance provided in MPEP § 608.01(m) which states “Each claim begins with a capital letter and ends with a period. Periods may not be used elsewhere in the claims except for abbreviations. See Fressola v. Manbeck, 36 USPQ2d 1211 (D.D.C. 1995).”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
[AltContent: rect]
Claims 1-8 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.
Regarding claim 1: the recitation “truss-type 3D printer” in line 1 is considered indefinite because the addition of the word “type” to an otherwise definite expression extends the scope of the expression such that it is unclear what “type” is intending to convey and consequently renders the scope of “truss-type 3D printer” unclear. See MPEP § 2173.05(b)(III)(E). Claims 2-8, which are dependent on independent claim 1, also include the recitation “truss-type 3D printer” in line 1 of each of the claims and are therefore indefinite for the same reason discussed above.
Additionally, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the following recitations "the main beam" in line 4; “the same gantry frame” in lines 20-21; and “the gantry frame” in line 22. The claim contains no earlier recitation or limitation of a main beam, a same gantry frame, or a gantry frame making it unclear as to what element the limitation is making reference. See MPEP § 2173.05(e).
Regarding claim 2: there is insufficient antecedent basis for the recitation “the cantilever crane assembly” in line 1. Claim 2 depends from claim 1, which includes cantilever crane assemblies; however, claim 2 refers to a singular cantilever crane assembly whereas claim 1 introduces more than one cantilever crane assembly with the recitation “cantilever crane assemblies” in line 7 making the claim indefinite as it is not clear which cantilever crane assembly of the cantilever crane assemblies the claim is referring to. The claim contains no earlier recitation or limitation of a singular cantilever crane assembly making it unclear as to which specific element the limitation is making reference. See MPEP § 2173.05(e).
Similarly, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the recitation “the lifting standard section” in lines 3-4. Claim 2 depends from claim 1, which includes lifting standard sections; however, claim 2 refers to a singular lifting standard section whereas claim 1 introduces more than one lifting standard sections with the recitation “lifting standard sections” in line 19 making the claim indefinite as it is not clear which lifting standard section of the lifting standard sections the claim is referring to. The claim contains no earlier recitation or limitation of a singular lifting standard section making it unclear as to which specific element the limitation is making reference. See MPEP § 2173.05(e).
Additionally, the recitation “heavy-duty hook” in line 3 renders the claim indefinite because it is not clear what the scope of “heavy-duty” is in order to read on the claim. For the purposes of prior art rejections, the Examiner is interpreting any hook as part of a cantilever crane assembly equivalent to the claimed “heavy-duty” hook.
Claim 2 recites “…wherein the cantilever crane assembly comprises a rotary table (20), a cantilever installation plate (21), a cantilever main beam (23) …” in lines 1-2; however, claim 2 then recites “a rotary table (20)” in line 4, “a cantilever installation plate (21)” in lines 4-5, and “a cantilever main beam (23)” in line 6 – making it unclear if the recitations of a rotary table, a cantilever installation plate and a cantilever main beam in lines 4-6 are the same or in addition to the same components introduced in lines 1-2. Furthermore, lines 5-6 recite “… the rotary table (20); the cantilever installation plate (21) …” but it is not clear if these components have proper antecedent basis to their introduction in lines 1-2, the subsequent recitations in lines 4-6, or if each recitation is an attempt to refer to the same component.
Regarding claim 3: there is insufficient antecedent basis for the following recitations: "the cantilever main beam (23)" in line 1 and line 3; and “the cantilever installation plate (21)” in line 3. Claim 3 depends from 1, which does not include a cantilever main beam or a cantilever installation plate; therefore, it is not clear what structure is being referred to in the claim.
Claim 2 first introduces "… a cantilever installation plate (21), a cantilever main beam (23) …" in line 2, but claim 3 does not depend from claim 2. For the purposes of art rejections, "the cantilever main beam (23)" and “the cantilever installation plate (21)” recited in claim 3 are being interpreted to be equivalent to the cantilever installation plate (21) and cantilever main beam (23) introduced in claim 2.
Additionally, the recitation “heavy-duty hook” in line 5 renders the claim indefinite because it is not clear what the scope of “heavy-duty” is in order to read on the claim. For the purposes of prior art rejections, the Examiner is interpreting any hook as part of a cantilever crane assembly equivalent to the claimed “heavy-duty” hook.
Regarding claim 6: there is insufficient antecedent basis for the recitation "the same X-axis reinforced tension rod (5)" in line 2. Claim 6 depends from claim, which does not include a same X-axis reinforced tension rod (5) or a reinforced tension rod (5); therefore, the claim contains no earlier recitation or limitation of a same X-axis reinforced tension rod (5) making it unclear as to what element the limitation is making reference. See MPEP § 2173.05(e).
Regarding claim 8: the term “decoration” in line 2 and line 3 renders the claim indefinite. The term “decoration” 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. The difference in scope between a suspended scaffold versus a decoration suspended scaffold is not clear. For the purposes of art rejections, any reference which includes a suspended scaffold is being interpreted by the Examiner to be equivalent to the claimed “decoration” suspended scaffold.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
[AltContent: rect]4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dini (US 2010/0207288) in view of Ma (US 2018/0274250) and further in view of Godi et al. (US 2020/0040567).
As to claim 1: Dini discloses the claimed truss-type 3D printer (i.e., apparatus for automatically building conglomerate structures by depositing a layer of conglomerate material 17, and repeating the process of depositing such that a plurality of deposited layers 22 are stacked to form the structures; wherein the uprights 4, the horizontal frame 1 and the bridge 2 are formed by trusses) (Dini at [0015], [0125], [0138], [0139], [0142], FIGs. 5-9), comprising
two standard sections of reinforcement (i.e., side 41 and side 43 of frame 1) (Dini at [0125], [0138], [0139], FIGs. 5-8 – see annotated FIG. 5 from Dini below),
two standard sections of the X-axis (i.e., side 42 and side 44 frame 1) (Dini at [0125], [0138], [0139], FIGs. 5-8 – see annotated FIG. 5 from Dini below),
PNG
media_image1.png
370
652
media_image1.png
Greyscale
two standard sections of column extension (i.e., uprights 4) (Dini at [0125], [0138], [0139], FIGs. 5-9 – see annotated FIG. 7 from Din below),
a standard section of the main beam (i.e., bridge crane 2) (Dini at [0125], [0138], [0139], FIGs. 5-9 – see annotated FIG. 7 from Din below),
two hoisting elevator platforms (i.e., guides 9 couple the frame 1 to the uprights 4 and allow vertical translation of the frame 1) (Dini at [0125], [0128], [0154], FIGs. 5-9 & 16 – see annotated FIG. 7 from Din below),
wherein the hoisting elevator platforms are slidably installed on the corresponding standard sections of column extension (i.e., frame 1 slides vertically along uprights 4 via guides 9) (Dini at [0125], [0128], [0137], [0154], FIGs. 5-9 & 16 – see annotated FIG. 7 from Din below);
PNG
media_image2.png
341
628
media_image2.png
Greyscale
both hoisting elevator platforms are fixedly equipped with transmission installation plates, and both standard sections of column extension are fixedly equipped with linear guide rails (i.e., rail in FIG. 16 which has vertically predetermined pitch holes 105) (Dini at [0154]-[0157], FIG. 16 – see the annotated version provided below);
wherein the transmission installation plates are slidably installed on the corresponding linear guide rails (i.e., the plate identified in annotated FIG. 16 below, which has transmission components mounted to it so as to allow horizontal frame 1 to slide vertically along the uprights 4 and linear guide rail via lifting mechanism 100) (Dini at [0137], [0154]-[0157], FIG. 16 – see the annotated version provided below);
PNG
media_image3.png
446
547
media_image3.png
Greyscale
the standard sections of the X-axis are fixedly installed on the corresponding transmission installation plates (i.e., guides 9 couple the frame 1 to the uprights 4 and allow vertical translation of the frame 1) (Dini at [0125], [0128], [0154], FIGs. 5-9 & 16 – see annotated FIG. 5 from Din above depicting guides 9, and therefore the installation plate in annotated FIG. 16 above, fixedly installed on the uprights 4 corresponding to the standard sections of the X-axis), and
the standard sections of reinforcement are fixedly installed between the two standard sections of the X-axis (Dini at [0125], [0128], [0154], FIGs. 5-9 & 16 – see annotated FIG. 5 from Din below); and
PNG
media_image1.png
370
652
media_image1.png
Greyscale
the standard section of the main beam is fixedly installed between the two standard sections of the X-axis (Dini at [0125], [0129], FIG. 5 – see the annotated version provided below).
PNG
media_image4.png
368
480
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Dini further discloses head 3 sliding along the bridge 2 parallel to the X-axis in order to dispense build material in a prefixed way, illustrated in Fig. 9 with two circular sliding elements on the top of head 3 and two circular sliding elements on the bottom of head 3 (i.e., standard sections of reinforcement are slidably equipped with roller mounting brackets) (Dini at [0137], [0141], Fig. 9). Though, Dini fails to disclose the following claim limitations:
gantry crane assemblies and cantilever crane assemblies;
the top of both standard sections of column extension is fixedly equipped with lifting standard sections, and the cantilever crane assemblies are positioned on the lifting standard sections;
the same gantry frame is fixedly installed on both lifting standard sections, and the gantry crane assemblies are positioned on the gantry frame; and
servo motors are fixedly installed on the roller mounting brackets, the output shaft of the servo motors is fixedly connected to a rotating print head.
Regarding (i) - (iii), Ma teaches a rack assembly for an in-field 3D construction printer (Ma at [0004], [0005], [0010], FIG. 1). Ma further teaches the rack assembly of a 3D construction printer comprising two rows of vertical supporting posts 1 anchored from the ground, separated by a first predetermined distance along a lateral direction and on top of the rack assembly is a rectangular ring frame 3 formed by another set of lateral and longitudinal beams, where on both longitudinal ends of the rows of vertical supporting beams, a cantilever 4 extension end (i.e., cantilever crane assemblies) is provided, being suspended, and connected to said rectangular ring frame 3 (i.e., the top of both standard sections of column extension is fixedly equipped with lifting standard sections, and the cantilever crane assemblies are positioned on the lifting standard sections); and on the upper surface of a bottom longitudinal beam of the rectangular ring frame 3, guiding rails are provided in order for the cart carrying a bridge crane 31 (i.e., gantry crane assemblies) to move along the longitudinal direction of the rectangular ring frame 3 (i.e., the same gantry frame is fixedly installed on both lifting standard sections, and the gantry crane assemblies are positioned on the gantry frame) (Ma at [0005], [0010], [0013], FIG. 1)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the gantry crane assemblies and the cantilever crane assemblies such that the top of both standard sections of column extension is fixedly equipped with lifting standard sections, the cantilever crane assemblies are positioned on the lifting standard sections, the same gantry frame is fixedly installed on both lifting standard sections, and the gantry crane assemblies are positioned on the gantry frame as such is known in the art of rack assemblies for 3D construction printing given the discussion of Ma above presenting a reasonable expectation of success; and doing so is combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, with the added benefit of doing so enabling continuous working of the 3D construction printer when printing height increases due to relatively high construction buildings are being formed (Ma at [0007], [0013])
Dini, modified thus far, fails to disclose the claimed (iv) servo motors are fixedly installed on the roller mounting brackets, the output shaft of the servo motors is fixedly connected to a rotating print head.
However, Godi teaches a mobile three-dimensional printing device (3D) TDPD0 comprising a printing head 2 adapted to receive material, such as mortar or concrete, and depositing it; and fixing means 3 adapted to link printing head 2 to a lifting device LD (Godi at [0053], Figs. 1-2). Godi further teaches the printing head 2 being displaced along the vertical V axis via second translation system 8 (i.e., roller mounting brackets) (Godi at [0076], Figs. 1-4); such that the printing head 2 has three degrees of freedom, including a rotation about the vertical V axis is ensured by gyroscopes and a rotary motorized-actuator (i.e., servo motors are fixedly installed on the roller mounting brackets, the output shaft of the servo motors is fixedly connected to a rotating print head) (Godi at [0077], Figs. 1-4)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the servo motors fixedly installed on the roller mounting brackets, the output shaft of the servo motors is fixedly connected to a rotating print head as such is known in the art of 3D printing construction of buildings given the discussion of Godi above presenting a reasonable expectation of success; and doing so is the use of a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way, with the advantage of such a structure for rotating a printing head enables the control of the conditions of printing of the structure to be printed, specifically the position of the printing head, to reduce the labor costs and the time to install such a device on a standard crane with a hook (as recognized by Godi at [0010], Fig. 1).
As to claim 2: Dini, Ma and Godi teach the truss-type 3D printer of claim 1. Godi further teaches the claimed wherein the cantilever crane assembly (i.e., lifting device LD) comprises a rotary table (i.e., gyroscopes 5), a cantilever installation plate (i.e., fixing means 3), a cantilever main beam (i.e., see annotated Fig. 1 below), a cantilever crane transmission assembly (i.e., see annotated Fig. 1 below), and a heavy-duty hook (i.e., crane hook 4) (Godi at [0062], [0064], [0065] Fig. 1, Fig. 3); and
PNG
media_image5.png
376
612
media_image5.png
Greyscale
the top of the lifting standard section is fixedly equipped with a rotary table, and a cantilever installation plate is fixed mounted on top of the rotary table (Godi at [0062], [0064], [0065] Fig. 1, Fig. 3); the cantilever installation plate is fixedly equipped with a cantilever main beam (i.e., fixing means 3 adapted to link the printing head 2 to the lifting device LD) (Godi at [0053], [0057], [0062], [0064], [0065] Fig. 1, Fig. 3), for similar motivation discussed in the rejection of claim 1.
As to claim 3: Dini, Ma and Godi teach the truss-type 3D printer of claim 1. Godi further teaches the claimed wherein the cantilever main beam is fixedly equipped with truss tension rods, and one end of the truss tension rods is fixedly installed on the cantilever installation plate (i.e., inertial stabilization structure 9, including two rods crossing to form an “X” structure and surrounded by frame, has one end fixedly installed on the fixing means 3) (Godi at Fig. 3);
the cantilever main beam is equipped with a cantilever crane transmission assembly (i.e., see annotated Fig. 1 above) (Godi at [0057], Fig. 1), and
the cantilever crane transmission assembly is equipped with a heavy-duty hook (i.e., crane hook 4) (Godi at [0057], Fig. 1, Fig. 3), for similar motivation discussed in the rejection of claim 1.
As to claim 4: Dini, Ma and Godi teach the truss-type 3D printer of claim 1. Dini further discloses the claimed wherein a plurality of truss reinforcement ribs are fixedly installed on the standard sections of column extension (i.e., see annotated Fig. 16 below).
PNG
media_image6.png
444
450
media_image6.png
Greyscale
As to claim 5: Dini, Ma and Godi teach the truss-type 3D printer of claim 1. Ma further teaches the claimed wherein a plurality of wall-attached tension rods are fixedly installed on the standard sections of column extension (i.e., reference character 20 in FIG. 2) (Ma at FIG. 2), for similar motivation discussed in the rejection of claim 1.
As to claim 7: Dini, Ma and Godi teach the truss-type 3D printer of claim 1. Dini further discloses the claimed wherein bottom ends of both standard sections of column extension are fixedly equipped with column reinforcement ribs (Dini at [0125], Fig. 8 – see the annotated version provided below).
PNG
media_image7.png
356
522
media_image7.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: rect]
Claims 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dini, Ma and Godi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Khoshnevis (US 2005/0196484).
As to claim 6: Dini, Ma and Godi teach the truss-type 3D printer of claim 1. Dini, modified thus far, fails to disclose the claimed wherein the two standard sections of the X-axis are fixedly equipped with the same X-axis reinforced tension rod.
However, Khoshnevis teaches a construction apparatus 2100 having a lifting mechanism to build high-rise structures (Khoshnevis at [0044], [0124], FIGs. 21A-21B). Khoshnevis further teaches the construction apparatus 2100 including a movable gantry platform 2120 having a cross-member 2110 that is slidably mounted across a pair of opposite side-members 2120 and extends therebetween, the gantry platform may be supported by the cables 2170 extending from the cranes 2160 (i.e., wherein the two standard sections of the X-axis are fixedly equipped with the same X-axis reinforced tension rod) (Khoshnevis at [0124], FIGs. 21A-21B, FIG. 22).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize the cables/tension rods attached to two standard sections of the X-axis as such is known in the art of 3D printing high-rise structures given the discussion of Khoshnevis above presenting a reasonable expectation of success; and doing so is combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 8: Dini, Ma and Godi teach the truss-type 3D printer of claim 1. Dini, modified thus far, fails to disclose the claimed wherein both sides of the hoisting elevator platforms are fixedly connected to decoration suspended scaffolds; the bottom ends of both decoration suspended scaffolds are fixedly equipped with support tension rods, and one end of the support tension rods is fixedly installed on the hoisting elevator platforms.
However, Khoshnevis remains as introduced and applied in the rejection of claim 6 above. Khoshnevis further teaches the construction apparatus 2100 including a main gantry platform 2108 having an extension platform 2140 (i.e., decoration suspended scaffold) that holds the material (concrete batch, beams, plumbing modules, etc.) and can be accessed by a robotic manipulator 2150 that rides on the same main platform 2108 and that is connected to the nozzle assembly 2130 (Khoshnevis at [0126], FIGs. 21A-21B).
Additionally, Khoshnevis teaches several cranes 2160 that lift the gantry platform by means of cables 2170, and the construction apparatus 2100 may include a movable gantry platform 2120 having a cross-member 2110 that is slidably mounted across a pair of opposite side-members 2120 and extends therebetween, such that the gantry platform may be supported by the cables 2170 extending from the cranes 2160; and the cable lift mechanism, which may be performed successively after a specified number of layers are constructed, may perform coarse positioning in the vertical direction, by causing the cables to collectively hoist the gantry platform to a desired height (i.e., wherein the hoisting elevator platform is fixedly connected to decoration suspended scaffold; the bottom end of the decoration suspended scaffolds is fixedly equipped with support tension rods, and one end of the support tension rods is fixedly installed on the hoisting elevator platform) (Khoshnevis at [0124], [0126], FIGs. 21A-21B).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the decoration suspended scaffold attached to the hoisting elevator platform and support tension rods as such is known in the art of 3D printing high-rise structures given the discussion of Khoshnevis above presenting a reasonable expectation of success; and doing so is combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Dini, modified thus far, discloses the claimed invention except for the duplication of the decoration suspended scaffold such that there are two decoration suspended scaffolds arriving at the claimed both sides of the hoisting elevator platforms are fixedly connected to decoration suspended scaffolds; the bottom ends of both decoration suspended scaffolds are fixedly equipped with support tension rods, and one end of the support tension rods is fixedly installed on the hoisting elevator platforms. However, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to duplicate the decoration suspended scaffold of Khoshnevis such that there is one on both sides of the hoisting elevator platforms, since it has been held that a mere duplication of working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. One would have been motivated to duplicate the decoration suspended scaffold in order to have construction building supplies (i.e., concrete batch, beams, plumbing modules, etc.) (as recognized by Khoshnevis at [0125]) on two sides for more efficient accessibility during 3D printing of high-rise structures.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAILEIGH K. DARNELL whose telephone number is (469)295-9287. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9am-5pm, MST.
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, Galen H. Hauth can be reached at (571)270-5516. 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.
/BAILEIGH KATE DARNELL/Examiner, Art Unit 1743