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 .
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 “rigid beam steering axle of claim 10, and “shaft coupled to an electric powertrain” of claims 11 and 19, 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 Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 2 recites ”to inhibits” which is grammatically incorrect. Examiner suggests the recitation be changed to “to inhibit”, for greater clarity. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10, is objected to because of the following informalities: line 1 recites “rigid beam steering axle”, which is grammatically incorrect. Examiner suggests the recitation be changed to “a rigid beam steering axle”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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, 11, 13-15 and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US-2018002254-A1 to Coletta (“Coletta”).
Regarding Claim 1, Coletta discloses a wheel hub system (10 “axle assembly”), comprising: an outer bearing assembly (122 “first [outer] wheel bearing assembly having a plurality of rolling elements/balls, Para 47 lines 12-15) with an inner race (Para 47 line 14, Fig 4) coupled to a hub body (120); a wheel flange (148 “mounting flange”) configured to removably coupled to (via 174 “mounting stud” in 172 “hole”) the hub body; and an inner bearing (124 “second [inner] wheel bearing assembly having a plurality of rolling elements/balls, Para 48 lines 6-9) including an outer race (Para 48 line 8, Fig 4) that is coupled to (Fig 4) the hub body and an inner race (Para 48, line 9, Fig 4) that is coupled to (Fig 4) a shaft (30 “spindle” [i.e. shaft], Para 47 line 5); wherein the hub body includes interior splines (146 “hub spline”, Para 38, ) which circumferentially surround (Fig 4) exterior splines (68 “axle shaft spline” of 50 “shaft” para 25, Fig 4) on the shaft.
Regarding Claim 2, Coletta discloses the wheel hub system of claim 1, wherein the interior splines are configured to removably couple to: in a first configuration, a hub lock device (including 50 “shaft” with 68 “axle shaft spline”, 120 “hub”, 52 “adapter ring” having 84 external splines and 82 internal splines; the external splines sliding upon internal splines in 120 hub, and internal splines upon external splines on shaft) configured to inhibittherethrough when unlocked (Para 37, 38, 42, 43, “inhibits rotation of 120 hub with respect to the 52”; 52 being engaged with 50 shaft to rotate, thus 120 hub and 30 wheel do not rotate, but 52 adapter and 50 shaft thus inhibit); and in a second configuration, a torque coupling (52 “adapter ring” simultaneously engaged [i.e. locked] to 50 “shaft” and 120 “hub”) that during axle operation continuously transfers mechanical power between the shaft and a wheel (Para 25, 29, 30, 31 “inhibits rotation of 52 adapter ring with respect to the 50 shaft” [i.e. 52 rotates with 50; 52 being engaged with 120/30 to transfers mechanical power/torque between shaft and wheel).
Regarding Claim 3, Coletta discloses the wheel hub system of claim 2, wherein the exterior splines (68) on the shaft (50)are configured to mate with interior splines in both the hub lock device (82 internal splines of 52 adapter ring, [first configuration] Para 25 lines 2-3, Fig 4) and the torque coupling (the 82 of 52, and 68 of 50 mate (just described) combined with the 146 interior splines of 120 hub, mate with 84 exterior splines of 52 adapter ring [second configuration]) in the first configuration and the second configuration, respectively.
Regarding Claim 4, Coletta discloses the wheel hub system of claim 2, wherein the hub body includes a fastener joint (Para 50, 51, 52, Fig 1, 2, 4) that is configured to receive multiple fasteners (192 “cover fastener”) that extend through the hub lock device (120 hub with holes [no ref number] receive 192 that also attach, 130 seal with holes [no ref number], 128 cover with 190 openings to hub, Fig 2) in the first configuration, and through the torque coupling (120 hub with internals splines is part of torque coupling) in the second configuration (192 fasteners attaching 190 cover to 120 hub are installed to inhibit contaminants from entering axle assembly 10, thus in both configurations, Para 50).
Regarding Claim 11. Coletta discloses the wheel hub system of claim 1, wherein the shaft is coupled to an electric powertrain (Para 11 “drive axle can receive torque from the power source ..such as …electric motor”).
Regarding Claim 13, Coletta discloses a wheel hub system (10 “axle assembly”), comprising: an outer bearing assembly (122 “first [outer] wheel bearing assembly having a plurality of rolling elements/balls, Para 47 lines 12-15) with an inner race (Para 47 line 14, Fig 4) coupled to a hub body (120); a wheel flange (148 “mounting flange”) configured to removably coupled to (via 174 “mounting stud” in 172 “hole”) the hub body; and an inner bearing (124 “second [inner] wheel bearing assembly having a plurality of rolling elements/balls, Para 48 lines 6-9) including an outer race (Para 48 line 8, Fig 4) that is coupled to (Fig 4) the hub body and an inner race (Para 48, line 9, Fig 4) that is coupled to (Fig 4) a shaft (30 “spindle” [i.e. shaft], Para 47 line 5); wherein the hub body includes female splines (146 “hub spline”, Para 38, ) which circumferentially surround (Fig 4) male splines (68 “axle shaft spline” of 50” axle shaft” para 25, Fig 4) on the shaft, wherein the hub body includes female splines; wherein the female splines have a larger diameter than the male splines (implicit by female splines circumferentially surrounding male splines); and wherein the female splines and the male splines are configured to attach to a hub lock device (including 50 “shaft” with 68 “axle shaft spline”, 120 “hub”, 52 “adapter ring” having 84 male/external splines and 82 female/internal splines; the male/external splines sliding upon female/internal splines in 120 hub, and female/internal splines upon male/external splines on shaft) and a torque coupling (52 “adapter ring” simultaneously engaged [i.e. locked] to 50 “shaft” and 120 “hub”) in different configurations (a first configuration wherein hub lock device is unlocked and inhibits mechanical transfer of power, Para 37, 38, 42, 43, “inhibits rotation of 120 hub with respect to the 52”; 52 being engaged with 50 shaft to rotate, thus 120 hub and 30 wheel do not rotate, but 52 adapter and 50 shaft thus inhibit); and a second configuration, when a torque coupling during axle operation continuously transfers mechanical power between the shaft and a wheel (Para 25, 29, 30, 31 “inhibits rotation of 52 adapter ring with respect to the 50 shaft” [i.e. 52 rotates with 50; 52 being engaged with 120/30 to transfers mechanical power/torque between shaft and wheel).
Regarding Claim 14, Coletta discloses the wheel hub system of claim 13, wherein the hub body a fastener joint (Para 50, 51, 52, Fig 1, 2, 4) that is configured to receive multiple fasteners (192 “cover fastener”) that extend through the hub lock device (120 hub with holes [no ref number] receive 192 that also attach, 130 seal with holes [no ref number], 128 cover with 190 openings to hub, Fig 2) in the first configuration, and through the torque coupling (120 hub with internals splines is part of torque coupling) in the second configuration (192 fasteners attaching 190 cover to 120 hub are installed to inhibit contaminants from entering axle assembly 10, thus in both configurations, Para 50).
Regarding Claim 15, Coletta discloses the wheel hub system of claim 14, wherein an inner diameter of the fastener joint is larger than the diameter of the female splines (diameter of pattern of 192 fasteners in hub is larger than female splines on inner surface of hub, Fig 2, 4).
Regarding Claim 18, Coletta discloses the wheel hub system of claim 13, wherein the shaft is a stub shaft (two separate 30 “spindle” axles, two separate 50 “axle shafts”, each between differential (Para 12) and 120 hub [thus 30 and 50 each are a stub shaft as defined in specification paragraph 20 of instant application], Coletta Para 11-21, Fig 1), configured to attach to an axle joint (fixed to 20 “axle housing” [i.e. axle joint], Para 13, line 5, Para 15 line 4, Para 20, 21, Fig 1).
Regarding Claim 19, Coletta discloses the wheel hub system of claim 18, wherein the axle joint is rotationally coupled to an electric powertrain (Para 10 “drive axle can receive torque from the power source (such as …electric motor)”).
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 9, 13, 18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US-5908080-A to Bigley (“Bigley”).
Regarding Claim 1, Bigley discloses a wheel hub system (Abstract line 1), comprising: an outer bearing assembly (42, 44 bearings in 38 bearing pack [i.e. outer race], Col 3 lines 44-55, Fig 2) with an inner race (inner race shown set in hub against shoulder 48, inner race threads engaging nut 46, Col 3 lines 53-54, Fig 2) and coupled to (at shoulder Fig 2) a hub body (36 “mounting hub”); a wheel flange (30 ”wheel” with central portion flange like portion connected to hub flange, Col 2 lines 64-65, Fig 2) configured to removably coupled (via removable fasteners, Fig 2) to the hub body; and an inner bearing (56) including an outer race (set against axially inner shoulder of 38 hub, Fig 2) that is coupled to (Fig 2) the hub body and an inner race (on 52 portion of 28 axle, Fig 2) that is coupled to a shaft (28 axle, Fig 2); wherein the hub body includes interior splines (41 splines on outer surface of 40 spindle of 36 hub, Col 62, Col 4 line 41 on 40 spindle of 36 hub, Fig 4 ) which circumferentially surround exterior splines (80a exterior splines 54 end portion of axle 28, Col 4 line 38, Fig 4 ) on the shaft.
Regarding Claim 2, Bigley discloses the wheel hub system of claim 1, wherein the interior splines (41 of 40 of 36 hub) are configured to removably couple (with 61 exterior splines on 60 housing) to: in a first configuration (Col 3 lines 62-63, Col 4 line 7, 50-54, Fig 4) a hub lock (“hub locking system: including 60 “housing” with 61 external spline, and 80 “drive gear” with 80a interior splines, and 80b, 80c “gear teeth”, and air pressure activation with ‘user controlled manual override dial” (110,112, 114), Col 3, lines 62-67, Col 4, lines 1-4, 7-27 35-58, Col 3, lines 62-67, Col 5 lines 62-67, Col 6 lines 1-13, Fig 2, 4, 6, 7, 7a) device configured to inhibitmechanical power transfer therethrough when unlocked ( “axle and hub” “uncoupled” “have independent rotation” Col 4 line 7, Fig 4); and in a second configuration (Col 4 line 5-6, 35-47, 54-58, Fig 2), a torque coupling (86 “clutch ring, 86 with 86a external spline meshing with 60a axial spline of 80, and teeth 86b, 86c meshing with teeth of 80b, 80c of 80, Col 3, lines 62-67, Col 4, lines 1-4, Col 4 lines 35-58) that during axle operation continuously transfers mechanical power “axle and hub” “rotate together” Col 4 line 6, Fig 2) between the shaft and a wheel (30).
Regarding Claim 3, Bigley discloses the wheel hub system of claim 2, wherein the exterior splines (“splines on outer surface of end 54 of axle 28”, Col 4 line 38) on the shaft are configured to mate with interior splines (61 exterior splines on 60 housing, Col 3 lines 62-63, Col 4 lines 35-39, Fig 2) in both the hub lock device and the torque coupling in the first configuration and the second configuration (position of 86 clutch ring in 80 drive ring determines the first or second configuration, but 41 and 61 are engaged in both configurations, Col 4 lines 48-58,), respectively.
Regarding Claim 5, Bigley discloses the wheel hub system of claim 2, wherein the hub lock device is configured for manual engagement and disengagement (110 112 114, “user controlled manual override dial“ Col 4 lines 6-27, Col 5 lines 62-67, Col 6 lines 1-13, Fig 2, 4, 6, 7, 7a).
Regarding Claim 9, Bigley discloses the wheel hub system of claim 1, wherein the shaft is a stub shaft (two separate 28 “axle” extending between 26 differential and two 32 Knuckles each provided with a CV joint , not shown Col 3 lines 9-13), [thus a stub shaft as defined in specification paragraph 20 of instant application], Col 3 lines 28-43, Fig 1, Fig 2 shows only a portion of axle) in a steering axle (26 “front differential” connecting via 24 “propeller shaft” to 22 “transfer case”, and 14” transmission” details of gearing not shown but implicit, [thus a steering axle as described in specification paragraphs 20, 24 and 36) configured to attach to an axle joint (CV joint , not shown Col 3 lines 9-13).
Regarding Claim 13, Bigley discloses a wheel hub system (Abstract line 1), comprising: an outer bearing assembly (42, 44 inclined bearings on inner [known in the art as a thrust bearings in a thrust bearing assembly] in 38 bearing pack [i.e. outer race], Col 3 lines 44-55, Fig 2) with an inner race (inner race shown set in hub against shoulder 48, inner race threads engaging nut 46, Col 3 lines 53-54, Fig 2) and coupled to (at shoulder Fig 2) a hub body (36); a wheel flange (Col 2 lines 64-65, Fig 2 shows 30 wheel with central portion flange like portion connected to hub flange) configured to removably coupled (via removable fasteners, Fig 2) to the hub body; and an inner bearing (56) including an outer race (set against inner radial shoulder of 38 hub, Fig 2) that is coupled to (Fig 2) the hub body and an inner race (on 52 portion of 28 axle, Fig 2) that is coupled to a shaft (28, Fig 2) which includes male splines (exterior splines 80a on 54 end portion of axle 28, Col 4 line 38, Fig 4 ); wherein the hub body includes female splines ( interior 41 splines on outer surface of 40 spindle of 36 hub, Col 62, Col 4 line 41 on 40 spindle of 36 hub, Fig 4 ); wherein the female splines have a larger diameter (diameter of 41 on 40 clearly larger than that of outer diameter of 54 of 28 as shown Fig 4) than the male splines; and wherein the female splines and the male splines are configured to attach to a hub lock device (“hub lock clutch mechanism” including 60 housing set in 40 of hub, surrounding 86 pneumatic clutch ring surrounding 100 piston assembly Fig 4) and a torque coupling (80 drive gear,) in different configurations (Fig 2 engaged to rotate, Fig 4 disengaged).
Regarding Claim 18, Bigley discloses the wheel hub system of claim 13, wherein the shaft is a stub shaft (two separate 28 “axle” extending between 26 differential and two 32 Knuckles each provided with a CV joint , not shown Col 3 lines 9-13), [thus a stub shaft as defined in specification paragraph 20 of instant application], Col 3 lines 28-43, Fig 1, Fig 2 shows only a portion of axle) configured to attach to an axle joint (CV joint not shown, Col 3 lines 9-13).
Regarding Claim 20, Bigley discloses the wheel hub system of claim 13, further comprising a steering knuckle (32,”knuckle”, Col 3 lines 44-55, Fig 1, 2) attached to (via 50 through 38 Fig 2) the outer bearing assembly (38 bearing pack, and 42, 44 bearings).
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.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bigley as applied to claims 1 above, and further in view of US-5148901 to Kurihara (“Kurihara”)
Regarding Claim 6, Bigley discloses the wheel hub system of claim 2, wherein the hub lock device is configured for pneumatic/air control (as described in paragraph 19 of this document) engagement and disengagement. Bigley further discloses (alternate actuation including electronic, but does not disclose specifics thereof, Col 5 lines 51-61).
Bigley does not disclose the pneumatic/air controlled engagement and disengagement, being electronic control.
Kurihara discloses a hub lock device (15 “hub clutch housing, 7 “drive gear” on 1 “drive shaft”, 59 “slide gear” slidably engages 7, to lock or unlock 1 and 15 Col 2, lines 10-45, Fig 2) to lock and unlock a wheel-drive shaft (1) from a hub (15 hub clutch housing, Fig 2) is configured for electronic engagement and disengagement (see electronic circuit, Fig 2, 109 “electric motor” , controlling 107” pump”, via 117 “pressure sensor”, 117 “switch” ).
The difference between the disclosure in the claimed invention and the prior art, is that the prior art does not disclose the wheel hub system and the hub lock device is configured for electronic engagement and disengagement, in a single combined apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the wheel hub system of Bigley and teaching of the hub lock device is configured for electronic engagement and disengagement of Kurihara, to modify the configuration of the wheel hub system of Bigley, such that the pneumatic/air control of engagement and disengagement, was electronically controlled (like Kurihara) with the motivation to enable a more reliable hub lock device, having improved lifetime (Abstract lines 19-20) , having an expectation of equivalent function and a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bigley as applied to claims 1 above, and further in view of US-1214968-A Steele (“Steele”).
Regarding Claim 10, Bigley discloses the wheel hub system of claim 9, including the steering axle, but does not disclose wherein the steering axle is a rigid beam steering axle.
Steele discloses a wheel hub system including a stub shaft (31 “stub axle”), a steering knuckle (12 “turn knuckle) connected to a rigid beam steering axle (BRI: a continuous rigid axle beam extending between steering knuckles; as shown Fig 4, 6, 11).
The difference between the disclosure in the claimed invention and the prior art, is that the prior art does not disclose the wheel hub system and the rigid beam steering axle in a single combined apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the wheel hub system of Bigley and the teaching of the rigid beam steering axle of Steele, to modify the wheel hub system (of Bigley) such that the steering knuckle (of Bigley) is connected to a rigid beam steering axle (like Steele), with the motivation to provide rigidly support to the connection of the wheel hub system having an expectation of equivalent function and a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim(s) 12 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bigley as applied to claims 1 or 13 above, and further in view of US20140251747-A1 to Feusse (“Feusse”).
Regarding Claim 12, Bigley discloses the wheel hub system of claim 1, wherein the inner bearing 56 (as described in paragraph 18 of this document, but does not disclose wherein the inner bearing is a ball bearing.
Feusse disclose a wheel hub system wherein the inner bearing is a ball bearing (54 “ball bearing”, Para 28, 33, Fig 1, races of 54 shown in Fig 4).
The difference between the disclosure in the claimed invention and the prior art, is that the prior art does not disclose the wheel hub system and an inner bearing being a ball bearing, in a single combined apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the wheel hub system of Bigley and the teaching of an inner bearing being a ball bearing of Feusse, to modify the bearing of the wheel hub system (of Bigley) such that it was a ball bearing in races (like Feusse), with the motivation to have the inner bearing have races to protect the inner surface of the hub and the outer surface of the axle, having an expectation of equivalent function and a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding Claim 17, Bigley discloses the wheel hub system of claim 13, including the inner bearing and the outer bearing assembly wherein the outer bearing assembly is a thrust bearing assembly (as described in paragraph 23 of this document), but does not disclose wherein the inner bearing is a ball bearing.
Feusse disclose a wheel hub system wherein the inner bearing is a ball bearing (54 “ball bearing”, Para 28, 33, Fig 1, races of 54 shown in Fig 4).
The difference between the disclosure in the claimed invention and the prior art, is that the prior art does not disclose the wheel hub system and an inner bearing being a ball bearing, in a single combined apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the wheel hub system of Bigley and the teaching of an inner bearing being a ball bearing of Feusse, to modify the bearing of the wheel hub system (of Bigley) such that it was a ball bearing in races (like Feusse), with the motivation to have the inner bearing have races to protect the inner surface of the hub and the outer surface of the axle, having an expectation of equivalent function and a reasonable expectation of success.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 8 and 16 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowable subject matter: the prior art fails to disclose, teach or make obvious the following limits of Claims 7, 8 and 16.
Regarding Claim 7 the primary references applied do not teach a structure analogous to: the wheel hub system of claim 1, further comprising a circlip removably coupled to the shaft adjacent to an outboard side of the inner bearing.
Regarding Claim 8 the primary references applied do not teach a structure analogous to: the wheel hub system of claim 7, further comprising a snap ring removably coupled to the hub body adjacent to an inboard side of the inner bearing, wherein the circlip and the snap ring axially delimit the inner bearing.
Regarding Claim 16 the primary references applied do not teach a structure analogous to: wheel hub system of claim 13, further comprising a circlip and a snap ring positioned on opposing sides of the inner bearing and axially capturing the inner bearing.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Goddard (US6319492-B1), Raszkowski (US 8747014-B2), Krude ( DE-10008182-B4), Itoh (US-5529158-A, US-5967278-A), Bigley (US-5394967-A,), Ewer (US-5520272-A, US-5597058-A), Dick (US 5562192A), Eschenburg (US-10901556-B2) and Massaccesi (EP 0553516 A1) disclose wheel hub systems having at least one of shaft, hub, snap rings, circlips, hub lock device and torque coupling having two configurations the first inhibiting mechanical power transfer between the shaft and the wheel and the second enabling it.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EVA LYNN COMINO whose telephone number is (571)270-5839. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:30.
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, Joe Morano can be reached at 571-272-6684. 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.
/EVA L COMINO/Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/S. Joseph Morano/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615