DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 6-8 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 6, the elements for the equation m=K*(P12- P22) are not defined so the metes and bounds of the equation are unclear. For example, are P1 and P2 the pressures at the first and second cavities, respectively? Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 7, the elements for the equation m=K*P1 are not defined so the metes and bounds of the equation are unclear. For example, is P1 the pressure at the first cavity? Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 8, the elements for the equation m=K*(P1-P2)/(P1=P2)/2) are not defined so the metes and bounds of the equation are unclear. For example, is P1 and P2 the pressure at the first and second cavities, respectively? Also, the equation includes two = signs and the second = seems to be a typographical error. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2 and 6-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0235533 (Lull) (cited by Applicant) in view of
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0174898 (Lowery).
Claim 1:
The cited prior art describes a mass flow meter comprising: (Lull: see the mass flow controller 5 as illustrated in figure 1; see the mass flow “The present invention relates generally to methods and systems for controlling the mass flow rate of a fluid, and more particularly to the operation of mass flow controllers and mass flow meters for gases and other compressible fluids.” Paragraph 0002)
a flow pathway through the mass flow meter, wherein the flow pathway comprises a first cavity and a second cavity, (Lull: see the flow pathway 15 with a first cavity referred to as the feed volume 41 and a second cavity referred to as the inventory volume 42 as illustrated in figure 1 and as described in paragraph 0036)
a laminar flow element adjacent to the first cavity and the second cavity, wherein the first cavity is upstream of the laminar flow element and the second cavity is downstream of the laminar flow element, (Lull: see the laminar flow element 40 between the feed volume 41 and the inventory volume 42 as illustrated in figure 1 and as described in paragraph 0036)
a pressure transducer positioned in at least one of the first cavity or the second cavity, (Lull: see the pressure transducer assembly 25 as illustrated in figure 1 and as described in paragraph 0029)
wherein the pressure transducer includes at least one diaphragm and (Lull: see the membranes 115, 120, 135 in the pressure transducer assembly 25 as illustrated in figure 3; “The absolute pressure membrane 115, upstream differential pressure membrane 120, and downstream differential pressure membrane 135 may comprise a flexible corrugated metal diaphragm.” Paragraph 0039)
Lull does not explicitly describe linear and non-linear responses as described below. However, Lowery teaches the linear and non-linear responses as described below.
wherein the pressure transducer measures linear and non-linear responses of the at least one diaphragm to a first pressure to determine a voltage signal indicative of a pressure; and (Lowery: see the linear responses as illustrated in figure 7 and the non-linear responses as illustrated in figure 8; “The pressure and temperature sensors 40 and 42 are preferably electro-mechanical transducers that convert pressure and temperature values into an electrical signal. These sensors 40 and 42 are operatively connected to the mechanical system 22 to generate electrical signals indicative of the pressure and temperature, respectively, of the fluid flowing through the mechanical system 22.” Paragraph 0026; “If the pressure/mass flow rate relationship is non-linear, the filtered pressure signal will be passed through one or both of the arithmetic logic unit 332 and linearization amplifier 334. The arithmetic logic unit 332 and linearization amplifier 334 implement a function that compensates for the non-linearity of the pressure/mass flow rate relationship.” Paragraph 0084)
convert the pressure reading obtained from the pressure transducer into a signal indicative of a mass flow rate through the laminar flow element. (Lull: “The PID controller may be configured to convert the absolute pressure, the differential pressure, and knowledge of fluid properties and laminar flow element characteristics into a signal indicative of mass flow rate through the laminar flow element” paragraph 0007)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Lull, namely, a mass flow controller, with the known techniques of Lowery, namely, a mass flow meter system, would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. Accordingly, applying the teachings of Lull to measure the mass flow of a system with the teachings of Lowery to measure the mass flow of a system would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art as resulting in an improved mass flow meter (i.e., the combination of the references provides for a mass flow meter to measure linear and non-linear data based on the teachings of a mass flow meter in Lull and the teachings of a mas flow meter to meter linear and non-linear data in Lowery).
Claim 2:
The cited prior art describes the mass flow meter of Claim 1,
wherein the mass flow meter communicates with a controller, the controller operable to: (Lull: see the controller 45 as illustrated in figure 1 and as described in paragraph 0037; “For instance, in one embodiment the PID controller 45 receives the absolute pressure and the differential pressure from the combination absolute and differential pressure transducer assembly 25 and a setpoint signal indicative of a desired flow rate through the laminar flow element 40.” Paragraph 0037)
receive a setpoint signal indicative of a desired flow rate through the laminar flow element; and (Lull: “For instance, in one embodiment the PID controller 45 receives the absolute pressure and the differential pressure from the combination absolute and differential pressure transducer assembly 25 and a setpoint signal indicative of a desired flow rate through the laminar flow element 40.” Paragraph 0037)
control a valve drive signal such that the signal indicative of mass flow rate through the laminar flow element substantially matches the received setpoint signal. (Lull: “The PID controller 45 may then generate a valve drive signal for controlling the flow control valve assembly 20 such that the signal indicative of mass flow rate through the laminar flow element 40 substantially matches the received setpoint signal.” Paragraph 0037)
Claim 6:
The cited prior art describes the mass flow meter of Claim 2, wherein a control valve is positioned upstream of the first cavity and the mass flow meter uses equations predominantly based on m=K*(P12- P22) to calculate compressible laminar flow, and wherein the control valve drive signal is used to position the control valve. (Lull: “Qs=K*(Pi.sup.2-Po.sup.2) (Eq. 1)” paragraph 0019; “The PID controller 45 may then generate a valve drive signal for controlling the flow control valve assembly 20 such that the signal indicative of mass flow rate through the laminar flow element 40 substantially matches the received setpoint signal.” Paragraph 0037; see the flow control valve assembly 20 as illustrated in figure 1)
Claim 7:
The cited prior art describes the mass flow meter of Claim 2, wherein a control valve is positioned upstream of the first cavity and the mass flow meter uses equations predominantly based on m=K*P1 to calculate sonic flow, and wherein the control valve drive signal is used to position the control valve. (Lull: “Qs=K*(Pi.sup.2-Po.sup.2) (Eq. 1)” paragraph 0019; “Equation 1 may now be rewritten as below: Qs=K*(2Pi×ΔP)ΔP (Eq. 2) Qs=K*(2Po+ΔP)ΔP (Eq. 3) Where: ΔP=Pi−Po Equation 2 may be used in embodiments where the absolute pressure transducer is located upstream of the laminar flow element. Equation 3 may be used in embodiments where the absolute pressure transducer is downstream of the laminar flow element.” paragraph 0026; “The PID controller 45 may then generate a valve drive signal for controlling the flow control valve assembly 20 such that the signal indicative of mass flow rate through the laminar flow element 40 substantially matches the received setpoint signal.” Paragraph 0037; see the flow control valve assembly 20 as illustrated in figure 1)
Claim 8:
The cited prior art describes the mass flow meter of Claim 2, wherein a control valve is positioned downstream of the second cavity and the mass flow meter uses equations predominantly based on m=K*(P1-P2)/(P1=P2)/2) to calculate laminar flow, and wherein the control valve drive signal is used to position the control valve. (Lull: “Equation 1 may now be rewritten as below: Qs=K*(2Pi×ΔP)ΔP (Eq. 2) Qs=K*(2Po+ΔP)ΔP (Eq. 3) Where: ΔP=Pi−Po Equation 2 may be used in embodiments where the absolute pressure transducer is located upstream of the laminar flow element. Equation 3 may be used in embodiments where the absolute pressure transducer is downstream of the laminar flow element.” paragraph 0026; “The PID controller 45 may then generate a valve drive signal for controlling the flow control valve assembly 20 such that the signal indicative of mass flow rate through the laminar flow element 40 substantially matches the received setpoint signal.” Paragraph 0037; see the flow control valve assembly 20 as illustrated in figure 1)
Claim 9:
The cited prior art describes the mass flow meter of Claim 1,
wherein the pressure transducer is an absolute pressure sensor and (Lull: “at least one embodiment of a combination absolute and differential pressure transducer assembly 25” paragraph 0029; see the pressure transducer assembly 25 as illustrated in figure 1 and as described in paragraph 0029)
wherein the mass flow meter further comprises a differential pressure sensor, and (Lull: “at least one embodiment of a combination absolute and differential pressure transducer assembly 25” paragraph 0029; see the pressure transducer assembly 25 as illustrated in figure 1 and as described in paragraph 0029)
wherein the differential pressure sensor includes at least one diaphragm and (Lull: see the membranes 115, 120, 135 in the pressure transducer assembly 25 as illustrated in figure 3; “The absolute pressure membrane 115, upstream differential pressure membrane 120, and downstream differential pressure membrane 135 may comprise a flexible corrugated metal diaphragm.” Paragraph 0039)
Lull does not explicitly describe linear and non-linear responses as described below. However, Lowery teaches the linear and non-linear responses as described below.
wherein the differential pressure sensor measures linear and non-linear responses to a difference between a second pressure and a third pressure on each side of the at least one diaphragm to determine a voltage signal indicative of the pressure difference. (Lull: “a second differential pressure membrane and exposed to differential pressure between the third cavity and the second cavity” paragraph 0006) (Lowery: see the linear responses as illustrated in figure 7 and the non-linear responses as illustrated in figure 8; “The pressure and temperature sensors 40 and 42 are preferably electro-mechanical transducers that convert pressure and temperature values into an electrical signal. These sensors 40 and 42 are operatively connected to the mechanical system 22 to generate electrical signals indicative of the pressure and temperature, respectively, of the fluid flowing through the mechanical system 22.” Paragraph 0026; “If the pressure/mass flow rate relationship is non-linear, the filtered pressure signal will be passed through one or both of the arithmetic logic unit 332 and linearization amplifier 334. The arithmetic logic unit 332 and linearization amplifier 334 implement a function that compensates for the non-linearity of the pressure/mass flow rate relationship.” Paragraph 0084)
Lull and Lowery are combinable for the same rationale as set forth above with respect to claim 1.
Claim 10:
The cited prior art describes the mass flow meter of Claim 1,
wherein the pressure transducer comprises a first differential pressure sensor and a second absolute pressure sensor, (Lull: “at least one embodiment of a combination absolute and differential pressure transducer assembly 25” paragraph 0029; see the pressure transducer assembly 25 as illustrated in figure 1 and as described in paragraph 0029)
Lull does not explicitly describe linear and non-linear responses as described below. However, Lowery teaches the linear and non-linear responses as described below.
wherein the first differential pressure sensor and the second absolute pressure sensor measure linear and non-linear responses of the at least one diaphragm to determine a voltage signal indicative of the first pressure. (Lull: “a second differential pressure membrane and exposed to differential pressure between the third cavity and the second cavity” paragraph 0006) (Lowery: see the linear responses as illustrated in figure 7 and the non-linear responses as illustrated in figure 8; “The pressure and temperature sensors 40 and 42 are preferably electro-mechanical transducers that convert pressure and temperature values into an electrical signal. These sensors 40 and 42 are operatively connected to the mechanical system 22 to generate electrical signals indicative of the pressure and temperature, respectively, of the fluid flowing through the mechanical system 22.” Paragraph 0026; “If the pressure/mass flow rate relationship is non-linear, the filtered pressure signal will be passed through one or both of the arithmetic logic unit 332 and linearization amplifier 334. The arithmetic logic unit 332 and linearization amplifier 334 implement a function that compensates for the non-linearity of the pressure/mass flow rate relationship.” Paragraph 0084)
Lull and Lowery are combinable for the same rationale as set forth above with respect to claim 1.
Claim 11:
The cited prior art describes the mass flow meter of Claim 1,
wherein the pressure transducer is an first pressure sensor and (Lull: “at least one embodiment of a combination absolute and differential pressure transducer assembly 25” paragraph 0029; see the pressure transducer assembly 25 as illustrated in figure 1 and as described in paragraph 0029)
wherein the mass flow meter further comprises a second absolute pressure sensor, and (Lull: “at least one embodiment of a combination absolute and differential pressure transducer assembly 25” paragraph 0029; see the pressure transducer assembly 25 as illustrated in figure 1 and as described in paragraph 0029)
wherein the absolute pressure sensors each include at least one diaphragm and (Lull: see the membranes 115, 120, 135 in the pressure transducer assembly 25 as illustrated in figure 3; “The absolute pressure membrane 115, upstream differential pressure membrane 120, and downstream differential pressure membrane 135 may comprise a flexible corrugated metal diaphragm.” Paragraph 0039)
Lull does not explicitly describe linear and non-linear responses as described below. However, Lowery teaches the linear and non-linear responses as described below.
wherein each absolute pressure sensor measures linear and non-linear responses of the respective at least one diaphragm to the pressure and a second pressure, respectively, to determine a voltage signal indicative of the pressure and the second pressure. (Lull: “a second differential pressure membrane and exposed to differential pressure between the third cavity and the second cavity” paragraph 0006) (Lowery: see the linear responses as illustrated in figure 7 and the non-linear responses as illustrated in figure 8; “The pressure and temperature sensors 40 and 42 are preferably electro-mechanical transducers that convert pressure and temperature values into an electrical signal. These sensors 40 and 42 are operatively connected to the mechanical system 22 to generate electrical signals indicative of the pressure and temperature, respectively, of the fluid flowing through the mechanical system 22.” Paragraph 0026; “If the pressure/mass flow rate relationship is non-linear, the filtered pressure signal will be passed through one or both of the arithmetic logic unit 332 and linearization amplifier 334. The arithmetic logic unit 332 and linearization amplifier 334 implement a function that compensates for the non-linearity of the pressure/mass flow rate relationship.” Paragraph 0084)
Lull and Lowery are combinable for the same rationale as set forth above with respect to claim 1.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0235533 (Lull) (cited by Applicant) in view of
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0174898 (Lowery) and further in view of
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0118265 (Besling) (cited by Applicant).
Claim 3:
Lull and Lowery do not explicitly describe a pressure range as described below. However, Besling teaches the pressure range as described below.
The cited prior art describes the mass flow meter of Claim 1, wherein the diaphragm is rated for a pressure range of 0 to 50 psi. (Besling: see pressure range of 0.5 to 5 bar (7.25 to 72 psi) as described in paragraph 0143; “Typically the membrane thickness is chosen to be between 1.5 um and 2.5 um for membrane diameters between 50-75 um which yield a sufficient broad dynamic pressure range between 0.5 and 5 bar.” Paragraph 0143)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Lull, namely, a mass flow controller, with the known techniques of Lowery, namely, a mass flow meter system, and the known techniques of Besling, namely, a pressure sensor, would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. Accordingly, applying the teachings of Lull to measure the mass flow of a system with the teachings of Lowery to measure the mass flow of a system and the teaching of Besling to use a particular pressure sensor would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art as resulting in an improved mass flow meter (i.e., the combination of the references provides for a mass flow meter with a particular pressure sensor to measure linear and non-linear data based on the teachings of a mass flow meter in Lull and the teachings of a mass flow meter to meter linear and non-linear data in Lowery and the teachings of a particular pressure sensor in Besling).
Claim 4:
Lull and Lowery do not explicitly describe a diaphragm as described below. However, Besling teaches the diaphragm as described below.
The cited prior art describes the mass flow meter of Claim 1, wherein the diaphragm is rated for a linear region of performance at pressures of less than 5 psi and for a predominantly non-linear region of performance at pressures of more than 5 psi. (Besling: see the pressure range as illustrated in figures 8, 9; “The invention provides an approach by which the dynamic range is increased by combining the non-linear capacitance to pressure ("C-P") response with the linear C-P response after collapse of the membrane.” Paragraph 0094; “This then enables the sensor to be switched to a different measuring range. The two measuring ranges comprise a linear variation of capacitance with pressure and a highly sensitive, but non-linear change in capacitance with pressure. The sensor can also be deliberately pulled into collapse to create a linear pressure-capacitance read-out.” Paragraph 0162)
Lull, Lowery, and Besling are combinable for the same rationale as set forth above with respect to claim 3.
Claims 5 and 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0235533 (Lull) (cited by Applicant) in view of
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0174898 (Lowery) and further in view of
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0202248 (Tojo) (cited by Applicant).
Claim 5:
Lull and Lowery do not explicitly describe a pressure transducer as described below. However, Tojo teaches the pressure transducer as described below.
The cited prior art describes the mass flow meter of Claim 1, wherein the pressure transducer is rated for pressures of a non-linear performance region of the pressure transducer exceeding twenty times the pressures of a linear performance region. (Tojo: see the linear and non-linear regions as illustrated in figure 4; “By using the pressure sensor 1 configured as described above, a pressure sensor can be realized having high sensitivity with a span voltage of 5.0 KPa (60 mV) and having high pressure resistance of 350 kPa. This is the result of the advantageous utilization of the non-linear region of the diaphragm 11 stress-strain characteristic shown in FIG. 4, and of forming the semiconductor chip from monocrystalline silicon and providing the diaphragm 11 with the above-described dimensions and shape.” Paragraph 0028)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Lull, namely, a mass flow controller, with the known techniques of Lowery, namely, a mass flow meter system, and the known techniques of Tojo, namely, a pressure sensor, would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. Accordingly, applying the teachings of Lull to measure the mass flow of a system with the teachings of Lowery to measure the mass flow of a system and the teaching of Tojo to use a particular pressure sensor would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art as resulting in an improved mass flow meter (i.e., the combination of the references provides for a mass flow meter with a particular pressure sensor to measure linear and non-linear data based on the teachings of a mass flow meter in Lull and the teachings of a mass flow meter to meter linear and non-linear data in Lowery and the teachings of a particular pressure sensor in Tojo).
Claim 12:
Lull and Lowery do not explicitly describe a diaphragm as described below. However, Tojo teaches the diaphragm as described below.
The cited prior art describes the mass flow meter of Claim 1, wherein the deflection of the diaphragm at a maximum rated use pressure of the pressure transducer is greater than 50% of the thickness of the diaphragm. (Tojo: see the diaphragm thickness – 13 um, 23 um, 30 um – and the corresponding break down pressures as illustrated in figure 3 and as described in paragraphs 0036, 0037, 0038)
Lull, Lowery, and Tojo are combinable for the same rationale as set forth above with respect to claim 5.
Claim 13:
Lull and Lowery do not explicitly describe a diaphragm as described below. However, Tojo teaches the diaphragm as described below.
The cited prior art describes the mass flow meter of Claim 1, wherein the deflection of the diaphragm at a maximum rated pressure of the pressure transducer is greater than 100% of the thickness of the diaphragm. (Tojo: see the diaphragm thickness – 13 um, 23 um, 30 um – and the corresponding break down pressures as illustrated in figure 3 and as described in paragraphs 0036, 0037, 0038)
Lull, Lowery, and Tojo are combinable for the same rationale as set forth above with respect to claim 5.
Claim 14:
Lull and Lowery do not explicitly describe a diaphragm as described below. However, Tojo teaches the diaphragm as described below.
The cited prior art describes the mass flow meter of Claim 1, wherein the deflection of the diaphragm at a maximum rated pressure of the pressure transducer is greater than 200% of the thickness of the diaphragm. (Tojo: see the diaphragm thickness – 13 um, 23 um, 30 um – and the corresponding break down pressures as illustrated in figure 3 and as described in paragraphs 0036, 0037, 0038)
Lull, Lowery, and Tojo are combinable for the same rationale as set forth above with respect to claim 5.
Claim 15:
Lull and Lowery do not explicitly describe measuring particular pressures as described below. However, Tojo teaches the measuring particular pressures as described below.
The cited prior art describes the mass flow meter of Claim 1, wherein the mass flow meter is configured to measure pressures in non-linear regions of the pressure transducer wherein non-linearity performance is three times the 1% best fit straight line model. (Tojo: see the linear and non-linear regions as illustrated in figure 4; “By using the pressure sensor 1 configured as described above, a pressure sensor can be realized having high sensitivity with a span voltage of 5.0 KPa (60 mV) and having high pressure resistance of 350 kPa. This is the result of the advantageous utilization of the non-linear region of the diaphragm 11 stress-strain characteristic shown in FIG. 4, and of forming the semiconductor chip from monocrystalline silicon and providing the diaphragm 11 with the above-described dimensions and shape.” Paragraph 0028)
Lull, Lowery, and Tojo are combinable for the same rationale as set forth above with respect to claim 5.
Claim 16:
Lull and Lowery do not explicitly describe measuring particular pressures as described below. However, Tojo teaches the measuring particular pressures as described below.
The cited prior art describes the mass flow meter of Claim 1, wherein the mass flow meter is configured to measure pressures in non-linear regions of the pressure transducer wherein non-linearity performance is eight times the 1% best fit straight line model. (Tojo: see the linear and non-linear regions as illustrated in figure 4; “By using the pressure sensor 1 configured as described above, a pressure sensor can be realized having high sensitivity with a span voltage of 5.0 KPa (60 mV) and having high pressure resistance of 350 kPa. This is the result of the advantageous utilization of the non-linear region of the diaphragm 11 stress-strain characteristic shown in FIG. 4, and of forming the semiconductor chip from monocrystalline silicon and providing the diaphragm 11 with the above-described dimensions and shape.” Paragraph 0028)
Lull, Lowery, and Tojo are combinable for the same rationale as set forth above with respect to claim 5.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent No. 5,868,159 describes a pressure based mass flow controller.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0082783 describes a pressure based mass flow controller system.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0204128 describes a self correcting pressure based mass flow controller.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER E EVERETT whose telephone number is (571)272-2851. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 am to 5:00 pm (Pacific).
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, Robert Fennema can be reached at 571-272-2748. 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.
/Christopher E. Everett/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2117