DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments in view of the specification amendment, see page 8 of the Remarks, filed 3 June 2026, with respect to the specification objection of paragraph [0051] have been fully considered and are persuasive. The specification objection of paragraph [0051] has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments in view of the claim amendments, see pages 8-9 of the Remarks, filed 3 June 2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) claim interpretations of claims 1 and 3 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 112(f) claim interpretations of claims 1 and 3 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments in view of the claim amendments, see page 9 of the Remarks, filed 3 June 2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections of claims 1 and 3 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections of claims 1 and 3 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments in view of the claim amendments, see pages 9-11 of the Remarks, filed 3 June 2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 103 claim interpretation of claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 103 claim interpretation of claim 1 has been withdrawn.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the supply receiving port of claims 1-3 and 6, the supply port of claims 1-6, and the plurality of wheels in claim 1 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a first supply device” in claims 1-3 and 6 which will be considered as a supply pipe (Paragraph [0028]), “a holding section” in claims 1-3 and 6 will be considered as a holding body with claws (Paragraph [0038]), “a second supply device” in claims 1-3 and 6 will be considered as a gas pipe (Paragraph [0039]), “a transfer device” in claim 6 will be considered as an elevation section (Paragraph [0070]), and “a remaining amount measuring instrument” in claim 7 will be considered as a flow rate control section (Paragraph [0051]).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Throughout claims 1-3 and 6, the limitation “supply receiving port” is recited. There appears to be a lack of support for the supply receiving port in both the specification and the drawings. The specification submitted 31 October 2023 does not contain the word “port”. Additionally, the drawings do not have the supply receiving port labeled. While it is understood in Paragraph [0030], that the supply receiving section is the supply receiving port that receives the supply pipe to obtain the gas from the transport vehicle, no structure is recited for this component. The Office recommends amending the claim to recite structure for the supply receiving port. For purposes of examination, the limitation will be considered as it is written.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Throughout claims 1-6, the limitation “supply port” is recited. There appears to be a lack of support for the supply port in both the specification and the drawings. The specification submitted 31 October 2023 does not contain the word “port”. Additionally, the drawings do not have the supply port labeled. While it is understood in Paragraph [0040], that the supply section is the supply port that provides the gas from the gas supply vehicle to the transport vehicle, no structure is recited for this component. The Office recommends amending the claim to recite structure for the supply port. For purposes of examination, the limitation will be considered as it is written.
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.
Claim 1 is 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "a holding section that holds a gas tank" in lines 16-17. The specification submitted 31 October 2023, Paragraphs [0005] and [0032] states that there is only one holding section. In lines 19-20 of claim 1 a “holding section” is stated again for the gas supply vehicle. The limitation is unclear if there are two holding sections within the gas supply vehicle or there is a typographical error where the “holding section” is mentioned twice. The Office recommends amending the claim to remove the holding section limitation seen in lines 16-17 and to keep the travel section. For purposes of examination, the limitation should be considered as having one holding section.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3 and 6 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 4-5 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest pieces of prior art are Takada (US 20160133492 A1) in view of Motoori (US 20220375774 A1) in further view of Hayashi (JPS 61196856 A).
Regarding Claim 1:
Takada discloses a gas supply system (4, Figure 4, the gas supplying device is the gas supply system) configured to supply an inactive gas (Paragraph [0030]) into a container (W, Figure 1), the gas supply system comprising:
a transport vehicle (3, Figure 1, the overhead transport vehicle is the transport vehicle) configured to travel on a predetermined travel path (Paragraphs [0030] and [0032], the travel path is the predetermined travel path) and transport the container (W, Figure 1); and
a gas supply (4, Figure 4) configured to supply the inactive gas (Paragraph [0030]),
wherein the transport vehicle (3, Figure 1) includes a support section (18, Figure 4) that supports the container (W, Figure 1) and a travel section (15, Figure 1);
wherein the gas supply vehicle (4, Figure 4) comprises:
a supply port (27, Figure 4, the eject nozzle is the supply section) configured to be connected to and disconnected from the supply receiving port (12, Figure 4, the intake opening is the supply receiving section); and
a second supply device (25, Figure 4) configured to supply the inactive gas (Paragraph [0049], the second supply device is the nitrogen gas passage connected to a source of nitrogen gas).
Motoori teaches a transport vehicle system, comprising:
wherein the transport vehicle (3, Figure 1) comprises:
a supply receiving port (Figure 1 and Paragraph [0031], the gas supply tube part connected to the outlet (34a) of the tank (34) receives the inactive gas) configured to receive the inactive gas supplied from the gas supply vehicle (Paragraph [0030], the transport vehicle is also the gas supply vehicle); and
a first supply device (35, Figure 1, the gas supply tube is the first supply device) configured to supply, to the container (10, Figure 1, the FOUP is the container), the inactive gas supplied to the supply receiving port (Paragraph [0031]).
Hayashi teaches a cart, comprising:
a gas supply vehicle (B, Figure 1, the transport vehicle is the gas supply vehicle) configured to supply the inactive gas to the container,
the gas supply vehicle (B, Figure 1) is further configured to travel along the travel path (T, Figure 1, the light-reflecting tape is the travel path),
wherein the gas supply vehicle (B, Figure 1) includes a holding section that holds a gas tank (10, Figure 1) and a travel section (Figure 1, the travel section is the bottom of the gas supply vehicle) that includes a plurality of wheels (2, Figure 1), and
wherein the gas supply vehicle comprises:
a holding section (See Annotated Figure 1 below) configured to detachably hold a gas tank (10, Figure 1) filled with the inactive gas (Page 4, Last Paragraph, First Sentence, the gas tank contains nitrogen gas); and
a second supply device (See Annotated Figure 1 below) configured to supply the inactive gas from the gas tank (10, Figure 1) held by the holding section to the supply port (12, Figure 1, the electromagnetic on-off valve is the supply section).
Through the combination of Takada, Motoori, and Hayashi, the gas supply system of Hayashi would be similar to the gas supply vehicle of Motoori where it is connected to a rail on the ceiling where it would provide gas to the transport vehicle of Takada.
Hayashi, Figure 1
(Annotated by Examiner)
PNG
media_image1.png
718
870
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The limitation “the gas supply vehicle is further configured to travel along the same travel path as the vehicle” seen in lines 14-15 in view of all other limitations of claim 1 is not disclosed or made obvious in the prior art of record. Additional references are needed to teach the limitation where it would lead to Hayashi potentially not functioning. The limitation in view of all other limitations of claim 1 is found to be allowable in view of the prior art.
Regarding Claim 2:
Takada discloses a gas supply system (4, Figure 4, the gas supplying device is the gas supply system) configured to supply an inactive gas (Paragraph [0030]) into a container (W, Figure 1), the gas supply system comprising:
a transport vehicle (3, Figure 1, the overhead transport vehicle is the transport vehicle) configured to travel along a predetermined travel path (Paragraphs [0030] and [0032], the travel path is the predetermined travel path) and transport the container (W, Figure 1); and
a gas supply (4, Figure 4) configured to supply the inactive gas (Paragraph [0030]),
wherein the gas supply vehicle (4, Figure 4) comprises:
a supply port (27, Figure 4, the eject nozzle is the supply section) configured to be connected to and disconnected from the supply receiving port (12, Figure 4, the intake opening is the supply receiving section); and
a second supply device (25, Figure 4) configured to supply the inactive gas (Paragraph [0049], the second supply device is the nitrogen gas passage connected to a source of nitrogen gas).
Motoori teaches a transport vehicle system, comprising:
wherein the transport vehicle (3, Figure 1) comprises:
a supply receiving port (Figure 1 and Paragraph [0031], the gas supply tube part connected to the outlet (34a) of the tank (34) receives the inactive gas) configured to receive the inactive gas supplied from the gas supply vehicle (Paragraph [0030], the transport vehicle is also the gas supply vehicle); and
a first supply device (35, Figure 1, the gas supply tube is the first supply device) configured to supply, to the container (10, Figure 1, the FOUP is the container), the inactive gas supplied to the supply receiving port (Paragraph [0031]).
Hayashi teaches a cart, comprising:
a gas supply vehicle (B, Figure 1, the transport vehicle is the gas supply vehicle) configured to supply the inactive gas to the container,
the gas supply vehicle (B, Figure 1) is further configured to travel along the travel path (T, Figure 1, the light-reflecting tape is the travel path),
wherein the gas supply vehicle (B, Figure 1) includes a holding section that holds a gas tank (10, Figure 1) and a travel section (Figure 1, the travel section is the bottom of the gas supply vehicle) that includes a plurality of wheels (2, Figure 1), and
wherein the gas supply vehicle comprises:
a holding section (See Annotated Figure 1 above) configured to detachably hold a gas tank (10, Figure 1) filled with the inactive gas (Page 4, Last Paragraph, First Sentence, the gas tank contains nitrogen gas); and
a second supply device (See Annotated Figure 1 above) configured to supply the inactive gas from the gas tank (10, Figure 1) held by the holding section to the supply port (12, Figure 1, the electromagnetic on-off valve is the supply section); and
the second supply device (See Annotated Figure 1 above) is connected to the gas tank (10, Figure 1) held by the holding section, (See Annotate Figure 1 above and Page 4, First Paragraph, last sentence, the gas tank is detachably provided).
Through the combination of Takada, Motoori, and Hayashi, the gas supply system of Hayashi would be similar to the gas supply vehicle of Motoori where it is connected to a rail on the ceiling where it would provide gas to the transport vehicle of Takada.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “wherein the second supply device is connected to the gas tank held by the holding section, in response to a change from a non-holding state, in which the holding section is not holding the gas tank, to a holding state, in which the holding section is holding the gas tank” in the last three lines of the claim. The limitation in view of all other limitations of claim 2 is not disclosed or made obvious in the prior art of record. An additional reference is required to reach the limitation where it would lead to hindsight as it would further modify both Motoori and Hayashi. The limitation in view of all other limitations of claim 2 is found to be allowable in view of the prior art.
Regarding Claim 6:
Claim 6 contains similar limitations seen in claim 2 where Takada, Motoori, and Hayashi teach the gas supply system.
Claim 6 recites the limitations “a gas tank storage configured to store the gas tank” and “wherein the gas supply vehicle further comprises a transfer device configured to transfer the gas tank between a body of the gas supply vehicle and the gas tank storage” seen in the last four lines of the claim. The limitations in view of all other limitations of claim 6 are not disclosed or made obvious in the prior art of record. An additional reference is required to reach the limitation where it would lead to hindsight as it would further modify Hayashi. The limitations in view of all other limitations of claim 6 are found to be allowable in view of the prior art.
Claims 7-8 are found to be allowable as both claims depend from claim 6.
The closest pieces of prior art are Takada (US 20160133492 A1) in view of Motoori (US 20220375774 A1) in further view of Hayashi (JPS 61196856 A) and Lee (KR 101691607 B1).
Regarding Claim 3:
Takada discloses a gas supply system (4, Figure 4, the gas supplying device is the gas supply system) configured to supply an inactive gas (Paragraph [0030]) into a container (W, Figure 1), the gas supply system comprising:
a transport vehicle (3, Figure 1, the overhead transport vehicle is the transport vehicle) configured to travel along a predetermined travel path (Paragraphs [0030] and [0032], the travel path is the predetermined travel path) and transport the container (W, Figure 1); and
a gas supply (4, Figure 4) configured to supply the inactive gas (Paragraph [0030]),
wherein the gas supply vehicle (4, Figure 4) comprises:
a supply port (27, Figure 4, the eject nozzle is the supply section) configured to be connected to and disconnected from the supply receiving port (12, Figure 4, the intake opening is the supply receiving section); and
a second supply device (25, Figure 4) configured to supply the inactive gas (Paragraph [0049], the second supply device is the nitrogen gas passage connected to a source of nitrogen gas).
Motoori teaches a transport vehicle system, comprising:
wherein the transport vehicle (3, Figure 1) comprises:
a supply receiving port (Figure 1 and Paragraph [0031], the gas supply tube part connected to the outlet (34a) of the tank (34) receives the inactive gas) configured to receive the inactive gas supplied from the gas supply vehicle (Paragraph [0030], the transport vehicle is also the gas supply vehicle); and
a first supply device (35, Figure 1, the gas supply tube is the first supply device) configured to supply, to the container (10, Figure 1, the FOUP is the container), the inactive gas supplied to the supply receiving port (Paragraph [0031]).
Hayashi teaches a cart, comprising:
a gas supply vehicle (B, Figure 1, the transport vehicle is the gas supply vehicle) configured to supply the inactive gas to the container,
the gas supply vehicle (B, Figure 1) is further configured to travel along the travel path (T, Figure 1, the light-reflecting tape is the travel path),
wherein the gas supply vehicle (B, Figure 1) includes a holding section that holds a gas tank (10, Figure 1) and a travel section (Figure 1, the travel section is the bottom of the gas supply vehicle) that includes a plurality of wheels (2, Figure 1), and
wherein the gas supply vehicle comprises:
a holding section (See Annotated Figure 1 above) configured to detachably hold a gas tank (10, Figure 1) filled with the inactive gas (Page 4, Last Paragraph, First Sentence, the gas tank contains nitrogen gas); and
a second supply device (See Annotated Figure 1 above) configured to supply the inactive gas from the gas tank (10, Figure 1) held by the holding section to the supply port (12, Figure 1, the electromagnetic on-off valve is the supply section).
Lee teaches a wafter container transferring apparatus, comprising:
the supply receiving section (410, Figure 1) protrudes from a body of the transport vehicle (100, Figure 1) toward a second side (Figure 1, the port is on the second side).
Through the combination of Takada, Motoori, Lee, and Hayashi, the gas supply system of Hayashi would be similar to the gas supply vehicle of Motoori where it is connected to a rail on the ceiling where it would provide gas to the transport vehicle of Takada.
Claim 3 recites the limitations “wherein the supply port protrudes from a body of the gas supply vehicle toward a first side in a traveling direction extending along the travel path, wherein the supply receiving port protrudes from a body of the transport vehicle toward a second side in the traveling direction, wherein at least either the supply port or the supply receiving port is provided with an electromagnet, and wherein connection and disconnection of the supply port and the supply receiving port are controlled based on whether or not the electromagnet is energized.” in the last eight lines of the claim. The limitations in view of all other limitations of claim 3 is not disclosed or made obvious in the prior art of record. Additional references are required to reach the limitations where it would lead to hindsight as it would further modify both Motoori, Takada, Lee, and Hayashi. The limitations in view of all other limitations of claim 3 are found to be allowable in view of the prior art.
Claims 4-5 are found to be allowable as they depend from claim 3.
However, a full determination of allowability for the application will be made with further search and consideration once all rejections and objections are overcome.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yoshida (US 8231324 B2) teaches an article storage facility comprising a container, a transport vehicle and a predetermined travel path.
Oguro (US 8245647 B2) teaches a switching facility comprising a container, a transport vehicle and a predetermined travel path.
Jang (US 9412631 B2) teaches a ceiling storage device comprising a supply receiving section, a supply section and containers.
Sugita (US 5332013 A) teaches an unmanned conveying device comprising a container and a transport vehicle.
Lee (US 12275309 B2) teaches an apparatus for transporting semiconductors comprising a container, wheels, and a transport vehicle.
Nishikawa (US 9573768 B2) teaches an article handling facility comprising a container, wheels, and a transport vehicle.
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 STEPHANIE A SHRIEVES whose telephone number is (571)272-5373. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday: 9:30AM to 5:30PM.
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, Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at (571) 272-4881. 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.
/STEPHANIE A SHRIEVES/Examiner, Art Unit 3753
/KENNETH RINEHART/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights