DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-26 are pending.
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 1-15, 17, 23-24 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.
Re claim 1, claim 1 recites, “the rear face” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. It appears this language is intended to recite, “the opposed rear face” and will be interpreted as such.
Re claim 2, claim 2 recites that the coupling components form a snap-fit mechanism. However, claim 1 requires that the coupling components are on a screw. Screws necessarily require helical threads and are not snap-fit. Thus, it is unclear how the screw may be included in a snap-fit mechanism. For the purposes of this examation, this language will be interpreted as requiring the snap-fit connection, but clarity is requested.
Re claim 6, claim 6 recites, “the washer” in line 2 and in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. It appears this language is intended to recite, “the outwardly extending washer” and will be interpreted as such.
Re claim 7, claim 7 recites, “the washer” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. It appears this language is intended to recite, “the outwardly extending washer” and will be interpreted as such.
Re claim 8, claim 8 recites, “the washer” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. It appears this language is intended to recite, “the outwardly extending washer” and will be interpreted as such.
Re claim 15, claim 15 recites, “tightly receive” in line 2. The term “tightly” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “tightly” 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. What is “tightly” received to one of ordinary skill may not be to another and thus, the scope of the claim is unclear. For the purposes of this examination, this language will be interpreted as “receive.”
Re claim 17, claim 17 recites that the coupling components form a snap-fit mechanism. However, claim 16 requires that the coupling components are on a screw. Screws necessarily require helical threads and are not snap-fit. Thus, it is unclear how the screw may be included in a snap-fit mechanism. For the purposes of this examation, this language will be interpreted as requiring the snap-fit connection, but clarity is requested.
Re claim 23, claim 23 recites, “the corresponding frangible section” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. It appears this language is intended to recite, “a corresponding frangible section” and will be interpreted as such.
Re claim 24, claim 24 recites, “the other rim extension” in line 4-5, “the other plate opening” in line 5, “ the other panel opening” in line 5, “the other screw” in line 5, “the other screw” in line 7, “the other rim” in line 7 and “the other screw” in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. It appears this language is intended to recite, “another” instead of “other” and will be interpreted as such.
Claims 3-5, 9-14 are rejected as being dependent on a rejected claim.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4-5, 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a2 as being anticipated by Hull et al (“Hull”) (US 2024/0035286).
Re claim 1, Hull discloses a panel mount system (190, Fig. 2) for securing a panel (220) to a wall (192), the panel mount system (190) comprising:
a backing strip (240, 260, 280) comprising:
a mounting plate (280) with a front face (right face of 280) for contact with the panel (220), an opposed rear face (left face of 280), and a plate opening (222) extending between the front face (right face of 280) and the rear face (left face of 280); and
a rim extension (244) extending from the front face (right face of 280) around the plate opening (222) for extension through (Fig. 2) the panel (220), the rim extension (244) comprising an internal coupling component ([0052]), and further dimensioned to receive a body (242) of a screw (240) through the rim extension (244); and
the screw (240) comprising:
a head (246); and
the body (242) extending from the head (246) for securement to the wall (192), the body (242) having an external coupling component ([0052]) configured to releasably couple with (Fig. 2, [0052] discloses threads which are releasable) the internal coupling component ([0052]) of the rim extension (244) when the body (242) of the screw (240) extends through (Fig. 2) the rim extension (244).
Additionally, the language “when” is language that suggests or makes optional the subsequent limitation or limitations. Language that suggests or makes optional but does not require steps to be performed or does not limit a claim to a particular structure does not limit the scope of a claim or claim limitation. See § MPEP 2103 (C).
Re claim 4, Hull discloses the panel mount system of claim 1, wherein the external coupling component ([0052]) of the body (242) of the screw (240) is positioned proximate (Fig. 2) the head (246) of the screw (240).
Re claim 5, Hull discloses the panel mount system of claim 4, wherein a height (Fig. 2) of the rim extension (244) corresponds with (as “corresponds” does not require any particular sizing or matching) a width (of 220) of the panel (220).
Re claim 15, Hull discloses the panel mount system of claim1, further comprising the panel (220) having a panel opening (222) dimensioned to tightly receive (Fig. 2) the rim extension (244) through the panel opening (222).
Re claim 16, Hull discloses a method ([0071]) of mounting a panel (220) to a wall (192), the method comprising:
coupling (Fig. 2, Fig. 3A) a backing strip (280) to a back side (left side of 220) of the panel (220), the coupling (Fig. 2) comprising fitting (Fig. 2) a rim extension (244) surrounding a plate opening (through which 244 extends) in the backing strip (280) through a panel opening (222) in the panel (220), the rim extension (244) having an internal coupling component ([0052], threads);
inserting (Fig. 2) a body (242) of a screw (240), from an opposed front side (right side of 220) of the panel (220), through the rim extension (244), plate opening (through which 244 extends), and the panel opening (222), the body (242) of the screw (240) having an external coupling component ([0052], threads);
releasably coupling (via threading of [0052]) the external coupling component ([0052]) of the screw (240) with the internal coupling component ([0052]) of the rim extension (244) to hold the panel (220) between the backing strip (280) and the screw (240); and
securing (Fig. 3, as no contact is required between the wall and the body) the body (242) of the screw (240) to the wall (192), thereby securing the panel (200) to the wall (192).
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.
Claim(s) 2-3, 17, 21, 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hull et al (“Hull”) (US 2024/0035286).
Re claim 2, Hull discloses the panel mount system of claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the external coupling component of the body of the screw and the internal coupling component of the rim extension collectively form a snap-fit mechanism.
However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the panel mount system of Hull wherein the external coupling component of the body of the screw and the internal coupling component of the rim extension collectively form a snap-fit mechanism in order to provide a releasable connection which does not require tools for installation, as it has been held that choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions (releasable connections), with a reasonable expectation of success is within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2143 (E).
Re claim 3, Hull as modified discloses the panel mount system of claim 2, wherein the external coupling component ([0052]) of the body (242) of the screw (240) is a groove ([0052], threads having a groove), and the internal coupling component ([0052]) of the rim extension (244) is a ridge ([0052], threads having a ridge) dimensioned to fit within (Fig. 2) the groove ([0052]) of the screw (240).
Re claim 17, Hull discloses the method of claim 16, but fails to disclose wherein the releasably coupling comprises snap-fitting the external coupling component of the screw with the internal coupling component of the rim extension.
However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Hull wherein the releasably coupling comprises snap-fitting the external coupling component of the screw with the internal coupling component of the rim extension in order to provide a releasable connection which does not require tools for installation, as it has been held that choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions (releasable connections), with a reasonable expectation of success is within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2143 (E).
Re claim 21, Hull discloses the method of claim 16, but fails to disclose further comprising cutting the panel opening in the panel.
However, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Hull further comprising cutting the panel opening in the panel in order to form the opening using simple, readily available tools, as it has been held that choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions (forming a panel opening), with a reasonable expectation of success is within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2143 (E).
Re claim 24, Hull discloses the method of claim 16, but fails to disclose further comprising: coupling another rim extension surrounding another plate opening in the backing strip through another panel opening in the panel; inserting another screw, from the front side of the panel, through the other rim extension, the other plate opening, and the other panel opening, the body of the other screw having another external coupling component; releasably coupling the other screw with the other rim extension; and securing the other screw to the wall.
However, it would have been obvious one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Hull with further comprising: coupling another rim extension surrounding another plate opening in the backing strip through another panel opening in the panel; inserting another screw, from the front side of the panel, through the other rim extension, the other plate opening, and the other panel opening, the body of the other screw having another external coupling component; releasably coupling the other screw with the other rim extension; and securing the other screw to the wall in order to allow for an increased sized backing strip to attach to additional panels, when needed. In addition, it has been held that the duplication of parts is considered within the level of ordinary skill in the art absent production of a new or unexpected result. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669.
Claim(s) 2-3, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hull et al (“Hull”) (US 2024/0035286) in view of Bilge (US 2015/0292215).
Re claim 2, Hull discloses the panel mount system of claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the external coupling component of the body of the screw and the internal coupling component of the rim extension collectively form a snap-fit mechanism.
However, Bilge discloses wherein the external coupling component (Hull: [0052]) of the body (Hull: 242) of the screw (Hull: 240) and the internal coupling component (Hull: [0052]) of the rim extension (Hull: 244) collectively form a snap-fit mechanism (Bilge: [0096]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the panel mount system of Hull with the snap-fitting of Bilge in order to provide a releasable connection which does not require tools for installation.
Re claim 3, Hull as modified discloses the panel mount system of claim 2, wherein the external coupling component (Hull: [0052]) of the body (Hull: 242) of the screw (Hull: 240) is a groove (36), and the internal coupling component (Hull: [0052]) of the rim extension (Hull: 244) is a ridge (18) dimensioned to fit within (Fig. 3) the groove (36) of the screw (Hull: 240).
Re claim 17, Hull discloses the method of claim 16, but fails to disclose wherein the releasably coupling comprises snap-fitting the external coupling component of the screw with the internal coupling component of the rim extension.
However, Bilge discloses disclose wherein the releasably coupling ([0096]) comprises snap-fitting ([0096]) the external coupling component (Hull: [0052]) of the screw (Hull: 240) with the internal coupling component (Hull: [0052]) of the rim extension (Hull: 244).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Hull wherein the releasably coupling comprises snap-fitting the external coupling component of the screw with the internal coupling component of the rim extension as disclosed by Bilge in order to provide a releasable connection which does not require tools for installation.
Claim(s) 6-7, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hull et al (“Hull”) (US 2024/0035286) in view of Thurner (US 4,802,802).
Re claim 6, Hull discloses the panel mount system of claim 5, but fails to disclose wherein the head of the screw further comprises an outwardly extending washer, the washer having a diameter that is larger than a diameter of the rim extension; wherein in use, the panel is positioned between the washer and the front face of the backing strip.
However, Thurner discloses wherein the head (of 2) of the screw (2) further comprises an outwardly extending washer (14), the washer (14) having a diameter (Fig. 2) that is larger than a diameter (Fig. 2) of the rim extension (11); wherein in use (as modified), the panel (Hull: 220) is positioned between the washer (14) and the front face (Hull: left face of 280) of the backing strip (Hull: 280).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the panel mount system of Hull wherein the head of the screw further comprises an outwardly extending washer, the washer having a diameter that is larger than a diameter of the rim extension; wherein in use, the panel is positioned between the washer and the front face of the backing strip as disclosed by Thurner in order to distribute the load of the screw, preventing damage to material surfaces, as is the normal and logical manner of use of a washer.
Re claim 7, Hull as modified discloses the panel mount system of claim 6, Thurner discloses wherein the washer (14) is rotatably secured to (Fig. 2, the washer is capable of rotating, and as the language does not require contact) the head (of 2) of the screw (2).
Re claim 18, Hull discloses the method of claim 16, wherein the screw (240) further comprises a head (246), but fails to disclose a washer extending from the head, the washer having a greater diameter than a diameter of the rim extension, and wherein the inserting of the body of the screw through the rim extension comprises inserting the body of the screw until the washer comes into contact with the rim extension.
However, Thurner discloses a washer (14) extending from the head (of 2), the washer (14) having a greater diameter (Fig. 2) than a diameter of (Fig. 2) the rim extension (11), and wherein the inserting of the body (4) of the screw (2; Hull: 240 being a screw) through the rim extension (6) comprises inserting the body (4) of the screw (2) until the washer (14) comes into contact with (Fig. 2) the rim extension (6).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Hull with a washer extending from the head, the washer having a greater diameter than a diameter of the rim extension, and wherein the inserting of the body of the screw through the rim extension comprises inserting the body of the screw until the washer comes into contact with the rim extension as disclosed by Thurner in order to distribute the load of the screw, preventing damage to material surfaces, as is the normal and logical manner of use of a washer.
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hull et al (“Hull”) (US 2024/0035286) in view of Thurner (US 4,802,802) and Gelb et al (“Gelb”) (US 7,908,708).
Re claim 8, Hull as modified discloses the panel mount system of claim 7, but fails to disclose wherein the body of the screw further comprises a flange extending from the body, the flange positioned to hold the washer in positioned relative to the head of the screw and dimensioned to fit through the rim extension.
However, Gelb dislcsoes wherein the body (Fig. 8, of 120) of the screw (120) further comprises a flange (rim below 126) extending from the body (of 120), the flange (below 126) positioned to hold the washer (Thurner: 14, as modified) in positioned relative to the head (126) of the screw (120) and dimensioned to fit through the rim extension (Hull: 244).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the panel mount system of Hull wherein the body of the screw further comprises a flange extending from the body, the flange positioned to hold the washer in positioned relative to the head of the screw and dimensioned to fit through the rim extension as disclosed by Gelb in order to provide a stop such that the head is not inserted too far.
Re claim 9, Hull as modified discloses the panel mount system of claim 8, Gelb discloses wherein the flange (below 126) is positioned to align with the mounting plate (102) in use (Fig. 7).
Claim(s) 10-13, 22-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hull et al (“Hull”) (US 2024/0035286) in view of Jackman et al (“Jackman”) (US 8,205,394).
Re claim 10, Hull discloses the panel mount system of claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the backing strip further comprises: one or more spacer plates extending from the mounting plate, a frangible section separating the mounting plate and the one or more spacer plates from each other.
However, Jackman discloses wherein the backing strip (10) further comprises: one or more spacer plates (24, 26) extending from the mounting plate (62), a frangible section (16/18) separating the mounting plate (62) and the one or more spacer plates (24, 26) from each other (Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the panel mount system of Hull wherein the backing strip further comprises: one or more spacer plates extending from the mounting plate, a frangible section separating the mounting plate and the one or more spacer plates from each other as disclosed by Jackman in order to allow for an increased sized backing strip to attach to additional panels, when needed, while still allowing for removal of individual sections when not needed.
Re claim 11, Hull discloses the panel mount system of claim 10, Jackman discloses wherein the frangible section (16, 18) comprises one or more apertures (16, 18).
Re claim 12, Hull discloses the panel mount system of claim 10, wherein the backing strip (280) is plastic ([0047]).
Re claim 13, Hull discloses the panel mount system of claim 10, but fails to disclose wherein the backing strip further comprises another mounting plate with another plate opening and another rim extension extending from around the other plate opening for extension through the panel.
However, it would have been obvious one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the panel mount system of Hull wherein the backing strip further comprises another mounting plate with another plate opening and another rim extension extending from around the other plate opening for extension through the panel in order to allow for an increased sized backing strip to attach to additional panels, when needed. In addition, it has been held that the duplication of parts is considered within the level of ordinary skill in the art absent production of a new or unexpected result. In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669.
Re claim 22, Hull discloses the method of claim 16, wherein the backing strip (280, 240, 260) comprises a mounting plate (280) from which the rim extension (244) extends (Fig. 2), but fails to disclose the backing strip further comprising one or more spacer plates extending from the mounting plate, the method further comprising: adjusting a length of the backing strip by removing at least one of the one or more spacer plates from the mounting plate.
However, Jackman discloses the backing strip (10) further comprising one or more spacer plates (24, 26) extending from the mounting plate (62), the method further comprising: adjusting a length (via bending of 24/26) of the backing strip (10) by removing (Col 4 lines 12-15) at least one of the one or more spacer plates (24, 26) from the mounting plate (62).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Hull with the backing strip further comprising one or more spacer plates extending from the mounting plate, the method further comprising: adjusting a length of the backing strip by removing at least one of the one or more spacer plates from the mounting plate as disclosed by Jackman in order to allow for an increased sized backing strip to attach to additional panels, when needed, while still allowing for removal of individual sections when not needed.
Re claim 23, Hull discloses the method of claim 22, Jackman discloses wherein the backing strip (10) further comprises a frangible section (16/18) separating the mounting plate (62) and the one or more spacer plates (24, 26) from each other (Fig. 1), wherein removing (Col 4 lines 12-15) the at least one of the one or more spacer plates (24, 26) from the mounting plate (62) comprises manually breaking off (Col 4 lines 12-15) the at least one of the one or more spacer plates (24, 26) from the mounting plate (62) at the corresponding frangible section (24, 26).
Claim(s) 14, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hull et al (“Hull”) (US 2024/0035286) in view Hildreth (US 11,746,587).
Re claim 14, Hull discloses the panel mount system of claim 1, but fails to disclose further comprising an insert nut having: external threads to secure the insert nut to a frame component of the wall; and internal threads to securely receive the body of the screw through the insert nut.
However, Hildreth discloses further comprising an insert nut (12) having: external threads (14) to secure the insert nut (12) to a frame component (28) of the wall (28); and internal threads (16) to securely receive the body (of 26) of the screw (26) through the insert nut (12).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the panel mount system of Hull further comprising an insert nut having: external threads to secure the insert nut to a frame component of the wall; and internal threads to securely receive the body of the screw through the insert nut as disclosed by Hildreth in order to allow for adjustability of the mounting for plumbing (Abstract).
Re claim 19, Hull discloses the method of claim 16, but fails to disclose wherein the securing of the body of the screw into the wall comprises rotating the screw to thread the body of the screw into the wall.
However, Hildreth discloses wherein the securing (Fig. 1) of the body (of 34) of the screw (34) into the wall (28) comprises rotating the screw (34) to thread the body (of 34) of the screw (34) into (Fig. 1) the wall (28).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Hull wherein the securing of the body of the screw into the wall comprises rotating the screw to thread the body of the screw into the wall.as disclosed by Hildreth in order to better and more rigidly secure the panel to the wall through use of additional screwed connections.
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hull et al (“Hull”) (US 2024/0035286) in view of Stramandinoli et al (“Stramandinoli”) (US 2019/0136522).
Re claim 25, Hull discloses a panel mount system (190, Fig. 2) for securing a panel (220) to a wall (192), comprising:
a backing strip (240, 260, 280) comprising:
a mounting plate (280) with a front face (right face of 280) for contact with the panel (220), an opposed rear face (left face of 280), and a plate opening (222) extending between the front face (right face of 280) and the rear face (left face of 280); and
a rim extension (244) extending from the front face (right face of 280) around the plate opening (222) for extension through (Fig. 2) the panel (220), the rim extension (244) comprising an internal coupling component ([0052]), and further dimensioned to receive a body (242) of a screw (240) through the rim extension (244); and
the screw (240) comprising:
a head (246); and
the body (242) extending from the head (246) for securement to the wall (192), the body (242) having an external coupling component ([0052]) configured to releasably couple with (Fig. 2, [0052] discloses threads which are releasable) the internal coupling component ([0052]) of the rim extension (244) when the body (242) of the screw (240) extends through (Fig. 2) the rim extension (244),
but fails to disclose a kit.
However, Stramandinoli discloses a kit ([0012]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the panel mount system of Hull with a kit as disclosed by Stramandinoli in order to separate parts for packaging, shipping, transportation and sale.
Additionally, the language “when” is language that suggests or makes optional the subsequent limitation or limitations. Language that suggests or makes optional but does not require steps to be performed or does not limit a claim to a particular structure does not limit the scope of a claim or claim limitation. See § MPEP 2103 (C).
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hull et al (“Hull”) (US 2024/0035286) in view of Stramandinoli et al (“Stramandinoli”) (US 2019/0136522) and Hildreth (US 11,746,587).
Re claim 26, Hull as modfiied discloses the kit of claim 25, but fails to disclose further comprising an insert nut having: external threads to secure the insert nut to a frame component of the wall; and internal threads to securely receive the body of the screw through the insert nut.
However, Hildreth discloses further comprising an insert nut (12) having: external threads (14) to secure the insert nut (12) to a frame component (28) of the wall (28); and internal threads (16) to securely receive the body (of 26) of the screw (26) through the insert nut (12).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the kit of Hull further comprising an insert nut having: external threads to secure the insert nut to a frame component of the wall; and internal threads to securely receive the body of the screw through the insert nut as disclosed by Hildreth in order to allow for adjustability of the mounting for plumbing (Abstract).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 20 is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE WALRAED-SULLIVAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8838. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am - 5:00pm.
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, Brian Mattei can be reached at (571)270-3238. 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.
KYLE WALRAED-SULLIVAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3635
/KYLE J. WALRAED-SULLIVAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635