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 Amendment
This action is in response to amendments and remarks filed on 09/29/2025. Claims 1-20 are considered in this office action. Claims 1-20 are pending examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant presents the following arguments regarding the previous office action:
Devier does not disclose:
(i) measuring hydraulic pressure of the hydraulic fluid provided to the attachment.
(ii) comparing the measured hydraulic pressure with a preferred operating pressure.
(iii) monitoring the actual pressure provided to an attachment and comparing the actual pressure with the preferred pressure.
Ufheil does not disclose monitoring the actual pressure provided to an attachment and comparing the actual pressure with the preferred pressure, and Ufheil also fails to disclose providing an indication to the operator that a difference exists and an adjustment of an operating parameter of the work machine is needed.
Berg does not disclose measuring the hydraulic pressure being provided to the attachment (i.e., to the trencher), and Berg fails to disclose providing an indication to the operator that a difference exists and an adjustment of an operating parameter of the work machine is needed.
Kassen discloses providing an indication to an operator of a work machine that an adjustment of the work machine is needed. However, such an indication is not based on measuring hydraulic pressure provided to an attachment and determining that the measure hydraulic pressure deviates from a preferred operating pressure.
Regarding argument A, Examiner agrees Devier does not disclose (ii) comparing the measured hydraulic pressure with a preferred operating pressure, and (iii) monitoring the actual pressure provided to an attachment and comparing the actual pressure with the preferred pressure. However, Devier does disclose a hydraulic system that provides hydraulic fluid to the bucket to permit the bucket to function, (0027, Head and rod- end pressure sensors 40, 42 may be in fluid communication with first and second chambers 56, 58, respectively and configured to sense the pressure of the fluid within first and second chambers 56, 58. Head and rod- end pressure sensors 40, 42 may be further configured to generate a hydraulic actuator load signal indicative of the pressures within first and second chambers 56, 58).
Regarding arguments B-C, Examiner agrees Ufheil does not disclose, monitoring the actual pressure provided to an attachment and comparing the actual pressure with the preferred pressure, and Ufheil also fails to disclose providing an indication to the operator that a difference exists and an adjustment of an operating parameter of the work machine is needed. However Berg does disclose, monitoring the pressure provided to an attachment and comparing the pressure with the preferred pressure as claim 1 discloses, (0022, the calculated average pressure is compared to a lower and upper pressure limit (e.g., 1800 psi lower limit and 2300 psi upper limit). If the calculated average pressure is lower than the lower pressure limit, the controller multiplies the value by 1, thereby doing nothing to change the ground speed (via the ground drive pump 44 or ground drive motor 46). When the calculated average pressure is between the lower and upper limits, the control signal output to the pump 44 is multiplied by a number between one and zero, proportional to the distance between the two limits, with zero being the multiplier at the upper limit. If the calculated average pressure exceeds the upper limit, the control signal output to the pump 44 is multiplied by zero which signals the machine to stop). The upper and lower limits are predetermined values tied to the attachments characteristics and are used as targets for its acceptable operation.
Furthermore, Berg discloses a pressure sensor associated with the lift cylinder that supports the attachment, configured to sense the pressure of the hydraulic fluid in that cylinder. Since the lift cylinder hydraulically actuates and supports the attachment not during operation, the sensed pressure corresponds to the hydraulic fluid provided to the attachment. Accordingly Berg discloses measuring the hydraulic pressure of hydraulic fluid provided to the attachment and comparing the measured hydraulic pressure to a preferred operating pressure under the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Additionally, Examiner agrees Berg does not disclose, providing an indication to the operator that a difference exists and an adjustment of an operating parameter of the work machine is needed.
Regarding argument D, Kassen in view of Berg does disclose and render obvious providing an indication to the operator that a difference exists and an adjustment of an operating parameter of the work machine is needed, (Kassen, Claim 2, the movable machine as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one of said force feedback and said vibration feedback is altered by said controller dependent upon to at least one of a steering change, a speed of the machine, a power limit of the machine being approached). It would have been obvious to modify the Berg’s machine to further provide haptic feedback to the operator as taught by Kassen. When the controller directs that the average hydraulic pressure has deviated from the preferred operating pressure range Berg teaches the automatic adjustment of speed. This adjustment in speed would trigger Kassen’s force/vibration feedback to indicate conditions such as approaching the power limit or other critical machine states. Kassen’s disclosure would then alter the operator that an operating parameter of the work machine is needed.
Consequentially, the applicant’s arguments A-D, with respect to the independent claims has been fully considered and are not persuasive.
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.
Claims 1-11, and 18-19 are all rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Devier et al (US20060112685A1) in view of Ufheil (US20010032031A1), further in view of Berg et al (US20130091743A1), further in view of Kassen et al (US20190292751A1).
Regarding claim 1, Devier discloses, a system for monitoring hydraulic pressure provided from a work machine to an attachment, said system comprising: said work machine; and said attachment, wherein said attachment is configured to be removably coupled to said work machine, wherein said work machine is configured to provide hydraulic fluid to said attachment, (Devier, 0019, hydraulic lift cylinders which drive the lift arms with respect to the main frame of the work machine and hydraulic tilt cylinders which drive the attachment mount with respect to the lift arms are supplied with hydraulic fluid), and wherein said work machine is configured to measure the hydraulic pressure of the hydraulic fluid provided to said attachment, (Devier, 0017, hydraulic control system 24 may also include a head-end supply valve 32, a head-end drain valve 34, a rod-end supply valve 36, a rod-end drain valve 38, a head-end pressure sensor 40, a rod-end pressure sensor 42), wherein said attachment includes an identification module with a transmitter configured to transmit identification information to said work machine when said attachment is coupled to said work machine, (Devier, 0006, the control system includes a tool recognition device configured to generate a recognition signal corresponding to each of the removably attachable work tools, and at least one fluid actuator configured to move at least one of the plurality of removably attachable work tools. The control system also includes at least one fluid sensor configured to generate a load signal and at least one operator interface device configured to generate a desired velocity signal. The control system further includes a controller in communication with the tool recognition device).
Furthermore, Ufheil who is in the same field of endeavor of tool recognition for control systems discloses, wherein said work machine is configured to determine a preferred operating pressure at which hydraulic fluid is to be provided to said attachment, wherein said preferred operating pressure is determined based on the identification information transmitted from said identification module to said work machine, (Ufheil, the various parameters associated with a particular tool machine can be programmed into the appropriate ECMs in the form of a plurality of look-up tables, maps, algorithms or other programming such that when the particular tool is identified by the work machine, the appropriate ECMs will output appropriate signals to the affected hydraulic system control valves, the affected line relief valves, and other affected hydraulic circuit components to set the appropriate hydraulic pressures and flow rates for the operation of that particular work machine).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Devier’s disclosure to incorporate Ufheil’s teaching for the benefit of determining the constant operating pressure of the work machine in order to evaluate and adjust the pressure based on the tool attachments specified operational parameters.
Further justification for combining Devier and Ufheil’s disclosures come from Ufheil (Ufheil, 0046, the operating steps in control loop 50 can be incorporated into the programming of the processing means of ECM 25 by techniques well known to those of ordinary skill in the art).
Furthermore, Berg, who is in the same field of endeavor of machine attachment based speed control discloses, the work machine is configured to compare the measured hydraulic pressure with the preferred operating pressure (Berg, 0018, the pressure in the lock out portion is measured, and the pressure data is sent to a control processor 30 that determines whether the pressure is high enough to warrant slowing the ground speed of the trencher 10 and, if so, by how much should the ground speed be slowed. For example, if the measured pressure is within a predetermined range, the ground speed may be slowed proportional to the magnitude of the pressure, and if the measured pressure is high enough, the trencher may be stopped).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Devier and Ufheil’s disclosures to incorporate teachings of Berg for the benefit of adjusting the speed of the machine based on the operational pressure applied to the specific attachment. This would protect the attachment from prematurely failure due to excessive force.
Further justification for combining Devier, Ufheil, and Berg’s disclosures come from Berg (Berg, 0025, many other variations in accordance with the present disclosure are also possible).
Additionally, Kassen who is in the same field of endeavor of force/vibration feedback for machinery discloses, providing an indication to an operator of said work machine to adjust an operating parameter of said work machine if the measured hydraulic pressure deviates from the preferred operating pressure (Kassen, Claim 2, the movable machine as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one of said force feedback and said vibration feedback is altered by said controller dependent upon to at least one of a steering change, a speed of the machine, a power limit of the machine being approached).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Devier, Ufheil and Berg’s disclosures to incorporate teachings of Kassen for the benefit of a providing an operator feedback of when operational situations, such as the hydraulic pressure deviating from its specified tolerance. This would promote safe operations and increase efficiency by informing the driver of when the attachment is not applying enough force.
Further justification for combining Devier, Ufheil, Berg, and Kassen’s disclosures come from Kassen, (Kassen, 0046, this application is intended to cover such departures from the present disclosure as come within known or customary practice in the art to which this invention pertains and which fall within the limits of the appended claims).
Regarding claim 2, Berg discloses, the operating parameter is a travel speed of said work machine (Berg, 0018, the pressure in the lock out portion is measured, and the pressure data is sent to a control processor 30 that determines whether the pressure is high enough to warrant slowing the ground speed of the trencher 10 and, if so, by how much should the ground speed be slowed. For example, if the measured pressure is within a predetermined range, the ground speed may be slowed proportional to the magnitude of the pressure, and if the measured pressure is high enough, the trencher may be stopped).
Regarding claim 3, Berg discloses, when the measured hydraulic pressure is greater than the preferred operating pressure, the indication is configured to indicate to the operator to reduce the travel speed of said work machine (Berg, 0018, the pressure in the lock out portion is measured, and the pressure data is sent to a control processor 30 that determines whether the pressure is high enough to warrant slowing the ground speed of the trencher 10 and, if so, by how much should the ground speed be slowed. For example, if the measured pressure is within a predetermined range, the ground speed may be slowed proportional to the magnitude of the pressure, and if the measured pressure is high enough, the trencher may be stopped).
Regarding claim 4, Berg discloses, when the measured hydraulic pressure is lower than the preferred operating pressure, the indication is configured to indicate to the operator to increase the travel speed of said work machine (Berg, 0019, the processor determines whether and how to adjust configuration of the ground drive pump 44 to increase or decrease the speed of a ground drive motor 46, which in turn dictates the ground drive speed of the machine).
Regarding claim 5, Kassen discloses, the indication is a visual indication (Kassen, 0040, at step 702 controller 20 is alerted to an active fault code, then at step 704 that information is conveyed to the operator by a change in the force feedback and/or by using a vibration of joystick 22. This may result in the operator then being made aware of an element now being displayed on a display (not illustrated). The continuation of a serious fault continues to alert the operator until the fault is cleared (step 706), or after a predetermined amount of time).
Regarding claim 6, Kassen discloses, the visual indication is presented on a graphic display of said work machine (Kassen, 0040, at step 702 controller 20 is alerted to an active fault code, then at step 704 that information is conveyed to the operator by a change in the force feedback and/or by using a vibration of joystick 22. This may result in the operator then being made aware of an element now being displayed on a display (not illustrated). The continuation of a serious fault continues to alert the operator until the fault is cleared (step 706), or after a predetermined amount of time).
Regarding claim 7, Kassen discloses, the indication is an audible indication (Kassen, 0034, at step 102 controller 20 determines whether machine 10 is approaching a maximum productivity and if so then at step 104 the force feedback, at least in the direction joystick 22 is being moved, has an increased stiffness or a vibration applied to joystick 22 to alert the operator of the condition).
Regarding claim 8, Kassen discloses, the indication is a tactile indication (Kassen, 0034, at step 102 controller 20 determines whether machine 10 is approaching a maximum productivity and if so then at step 104 the force feedback, at least in the direction joystick 22 is being moved, has an increased stiffness or a vibration applied to joystick 22 to alert the operator of the condition).
Regarding claim 9, Kassen discloses, the tactile indication is generated on a control element of said work machine (Kassen, 0034, at step 102 controller 20 determines whether machine 10 is approaching a maximum productivity and if so then at step 104 the force feedback, at least in the direction joystick 22 is being moved, has an increased stiffness or a vibration applied to joystick 22 to alert the operator of the condition).
Regarding claim 10, Devier discloses, said work machine includes a hydraulic system configured to provide the hydraulic fluid to said attachment (Devier, Abstract, at least one fluid actuator configured to move at least one of the plurality of removably attachable work tools), wherein said hydraulic system includes a pressure sensor configured to measure the hydraulic pressure of the hydraulic fluid provided to said attachment (Devier, 0017, hydraulic control system 24 may also include a head-end supply valve 32, a head-end drain valve 34, a rod-end supply valve 36, a rod-end drain valve 38, a head-end pressure sensor 40, a rod-end pressure sensor 42),
Regarding claim 11, Devier discloses, said work machine comprises a track loader. (Devier, 0011, FIG. 1 illustrates an exemplary work machine 10. Work machine 10 may be a fixed or mobile machine that performs some type of operation associated with an industry such as mining, construction, farming, transportation, or any other industry known in the art. For example, work machine 10 may be an earth moving machine such as an excavator, a dozer, a loader, a backhoe, a motor grader, a dump truck, or any other earth moving machine).
Regarding claim 18, Devier discloses, a method of monitoring hydraulic pressure provided from a work machine to an attachment, said method comprising the steps of: coupling the attachment to the work machine, wherein the attachment includes an identification module with a transmitter; transmitting identification information from the identification module of the attachment to the work machine; determining a preferred operating pressure at which hydraulic fluid is to be provided from the work machine to the attachment, wherein the preferred operating pressure is determined based on the identification information transmitted from the identification module to the work machine; providing hydraulic fluid, under pressure, from the work machine to the attachment; measuring the hydraulic pressure of the hydraulic fluid provided to the attachment; comparing the measured hydraulic pressure with the preferred operating pressure; and providing an indication to an operator of the work machine to adjust a travel speed of the work machine if the measured hydraulic pressure deviates from the preferred operating pressure. The claim discloses similar limitation to those of claim 1. Consequentially, claim 18 is rejected for the same reasoning and justification as presented in claim 1. (Devier, 0019, hydraulic lift cylinders which drive the lift arms with respect to the main frame of the work machine and hydraulic tilt cylinders which drive the attachment mount with respect to the lift arms are supplied with hydraulic fluid). (Devier, 0017, hydraulic control system 24 may also include a head-end supply valve 32, a head-end drain valve 34, a rod-end supply valve 36, a rod-end drain valve 38, a head-end pressure sensor 40, a rod-end pressure sensor 42). (Devier, 0006, the control system includes a tool recognition device configured to generate a recognition signal corresponding to each of the removably attachable work tools, and at least one fluid actuator configured to move at least one of the plurality of removably attachable work tools. The control system also includes at least one fluid sensor configured to generate a load signal and at least one operator interface device configured to generate a desired velocity signal. The control system further includes a controller in communication with the tool recognition device). (Ufheil, the various parameters associated with a particular tool machine can be programmed into the appropriate ECMs in the form of a plurality of look-up tables, maps, algorithms or other programming such that when the particular tool is identified by the work machine, the appropriate ECMs will output appropriate signals to the affected hydraulic system control valves, the affected line relief valves, and other affected hydraulic circuit components to set the appropriate hydraulic pressures and flow rates for the operation of that particular work machine). (Berg, 0018, the pressure in the lock out portion is measured, and the pressure data is sent to a control processor 30 that determines whether the pressure is high enough to warrant slowing the ground speed of the trencher 10 and, if so, by how much should the ground speed be slowed. For example, if the measured pressure is within a predetermined range, the ground speed may be slowed proportional to the magnitude of the pressure, and if the measured pressure is high enough, the trencher may be stopped). (Kassen, Claim 2, the movable machine as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one of said force feedback and said vibration feedback is altered by said controller dependent upon to at least one of a steering change, a speed of the machine, a power limit of the machine being approached).
Regarding claim 19, Devier discloses, the indication being a visual indication presented on a graphic display of the work machine. The claim discloses similar limitation to those of claim 5. Consequentially, claim 19 is rejected for the same reasoning and justification as presented in claim 5. (Kassen, 0040, at step 702 controller 20 is alerted to an active fault code, then at step 704 that information is conveyed to the operator by a change in the force feedback and/or by using a vibration of joystick 22. This may result in the operator then being made aware of an element now being displayed on a display (not illustrated). The continuation of a serious fault continues to alert the operator until the fault is cleared (step 706), or after a predetermined amount of time).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Devier et al (US20060112685A1) in view of Ufheil (US20010032031A1), further in view of Berg et al (US20130091743A1), further in view of Kassen et al (US20190292751A1), further in view of Jessup et al (US20190061683A1)
Regarding claim 12, Jessup who is in the same field of endeavor of work vehicle attachments discloses, said attachment is a hydraulically-operated attachment selected from the following: an auger, a grinder, a jack hammer/breaker, a tiller, a roller, a trencher, a digger derrick, a cold mill, a brush/sweeper, a grapple, a tree/post puller, and a power rake (Jessup, examples of the one or more systems, devices and/or actuators 28 may include, but are not limited to, a conventional accelerator pedal or similar fueling control mechanism manually movable in a conventional manner between idle and full-throttle positions, a conventional keyed on non-keyed ignition starting switch, a conventional manually-actuated transmission shifting control lever, one or more conventional hydraulically-actuated components such as lift arms, one or more buckets, a backhoe, pallet forks, an angle broom, a sweeper, an auger, a mower, a snow blower, a stump grinder, a tree spade, a trencher, a dumping a hopper, a tiller, a ripper, a grapple, a tilt, a roller, a snow blade, a wheel saw, a cement mixer, a wood chipper, a hydraulic breaker, or the like).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Devier, Ufheil, Berg and Kassen’s disclosures to incorporate teachings of Jessup for the benefit of a providing a plurality of attachments that can be used in the system. This would promote users being able to do many types of work.
Further justification for combining Devier, Ufheil, Berg and Kassen’s disclosures to incorporate teachings of Jessup come from Devier who supports any type of earth moving machine, (Devier, 0011, FIG. 1 illustrates an exemplary work machine 10. Work machine 10 may be a fixed or mobile machine that performs some type of operation associated with an industry such as mining, construction, farming, transportation, or any other industry known in the art. For example, work machine 10 may be an earth moving machine such as an excavator, a dozer, a loader, a backhoe, a motor grader, a dump truck, or any other earth moving machine).
Claims 13-17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Devier et al (US20060112685A1) in view of Ufheil (US20010032031A1), further in view of Berg et al (US20130091743A1), further in view of Kassen et al (US20190292751A1), further in view of Reed et al (US20190112792A1).
Regarding claim 13, Reed discloses, said identification module comprises a housing secured to said attachment (Reed, 0023, the short-range wireless device 30 may also include a movement detection device 40, such as an accelerometer, measuring acceleration forces. Additionally, or alternatively, the short-range wireless device 30 may include a gyro sensor, barometer, or other device for detecting movement. All of the components of the short-range wireless device 30 may be packaged in a durable housing to protect the components when the short-range wireless device 30 is used in rugged terrain).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Devier, Ufheil, Berg and Kassen’s disclosures to incorporate teachings of Reed for the benefit of a providing a housing and accelerometer that can be used in the system for detecting movements of the attachment. This would allow the system to determine that an attachment is attached to the machine and then specify what the specific attachment is in order to load the proper hydraulic pressure specification.
Regarding claim 14, Devier discloses, said identification module comprising one or more memory elements, (Devier, 0028, it is further contemplated that other means for automatically identifying a particular work tool may be implemented such as, for example, a switch configured to receive an encoded key having magnetic information or a memory chip).
Additionally, Reed discloses, said identification module comprises one or more processing elements, and/or one or more accelerometers, and wherein the transmitter is a wireless transmitter (Reed, 0022, the short-range wireless device 30 may include a processor 32 for processing instructions that control operation of the short-range wireless device 30. The short-range wireless device 30 may include a wireless technology circuit 34, such as, for example, a Bluetooth circuit, for providing short-range wireless communications over a cellular network) … (Reed, 0023, the short-range wireless device 30 may also include a movement detection device 40, such as an accelerometer, measuring acceleration forces) … (Reed, 0023, according to some embodiments, the controller 48 may include a processing component and a data storage component).
Regarding claim 15, Devier discloses, said memory element stores the identification information, wherein said identification information is indicative of said attachment (Devier, 0034, for example, the operating hydraulic pressures and flow rates associated with a particular work tool can be stored within the memory of ECM 25 in the form of a plurality of maps or tables).
Additionally, Reed discloses, said identification module is configured to transmit the identification information to said work machine upon the accelerometers detecting motion indicative of said attachment being coupled with said work machine (Reed, 0038, at box 154, an indication is received at a first short-range wireless device 30 that a first work tool 26 is in a coupled configuration with the machine 10. For example, a movement detection device 40 may detect acceleration that occurs when the work tool 26 is picked up by the machine 10. Data is then transmitted from the first short-range wireless device 30 at a second signal strength in response to the indication, at box 156).
Regarding claim 16, Devier discloses, said work machine comprises a control system including one or more processing elements and one or more memory elements, wherein said control system is configured to store attachment characteristics for a plurality of different attachments (Devier, 0011, the various operating parameters associated with a particular work tool such as its operating hydraulic pressures and flow rates can be pre-programmed into one or more ECMs associated with the particular work machine such that once the particular tool is identified by the work machine, the ECM(s) will automatically select the stored parameters associated with the particular work tool and reconfigure the work machine based upon these parameters. More particularly, the various parameters associated with a particular tool machine can be programmed into the appropriate ECMs in the form of a plurality of look-up tables, maps, algorithms or other programming), wherein said control system is configured to determine attachment characteristics of said attachment based on the identification information received from the identification module (Devier, 0042, here again, once these operating parameters for a particular work tool have been inputted and stored within a database associated with the work machine, such parameters are accessible for future use either through the tool recognition system 10 (FIG. 1) previously discussed above wherein ECM 25 will automatically electronically reconfigure the various hydraulic and control systems associated with a particular work machine).
Regarding claim 17, Devier discloses, the attachment characteristics of said attachment include the preferred operating pressure (Devier, 0043, in addition, ECM 25 can be programmed to select and access the appropriate operating parameters for a particular work tool based upon the work tool signal 38 and thereafter output appropriate signals to accomplish certain tasks such as electronically reconfiguring the appropriate line relief valves, control valves and other system components impacted by the operating parameters of a particular work tool such as the control valves 14, 20, 42 and 48 illustrated in FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 20, Reed discloses, the identification module comprises one or more accelerometers, and wherein the identification module transmits the identification information to the work machine upon the accelerometers detecting motion indicative of the attachment being coupled with the work machine (Reed, 0024, the movement detection device 40 may detect acceleration that occurs when the work tool 26 is picked up by the machine 10. This information may be transmitted to the machine 10 and used for connected work tool identification, as described below) … (Reed, Claim 20, the first short-range wireless device includes an accelerometer for providing the indication that the first work tool is in the coupled configuration).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 SHANE E DOUGLAS whose telephone number is (703)756-1417. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30AM - 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, Christian Chace can be reached on (571) 272-4190. 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.
/S.E.D./Examiner, Art Unit 3665 /CHRISTIAN CHACE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665