CTFR 18/488,363 CTFR 96586 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Status This Office Action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed on 10/15/2025 The previous 35 USC 112 rejections have been withdrawn. Claims 1-2, 4-17, and 19-20 from which claims 16-17and 19-20 have been withdrawn remain pending for consideration. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 1-2 and 4-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Regarding claim 1, the claim recites “a first adsorption tower and a second adsorption tower … configured to dehumidify compressed air … or regenerate the adsorbent by using outside air or dehumidified compressed air ” which renders the claim indefinite. As recited, the claim is confusing because it seems to indicate that the disclosed “dehumidified compressed air” is different from the compressed air that is dehumidified by the first and second adsorption tower. More clarity is requested. For examination purposes, the phrase “regenerate the adsorbent by using outside air or dehumidified compressed air” will be interpreted as -- regenerate the adsorbent by using outside air or the dehumidified compressed air -- Claims 2 and 4-15 are also rejected due to dependency. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1 and 6-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang (KR20180003775A), in view of Lee (KR102036331B1), and in further view of Arno et al. (US 20140224125 A1, herein after referred to as Arno) . Regarding claim 1, Hwang teaches an air dryer system (hybrid type adsorption type air dryer system 1 Fig. 1) comprising: a first adsorption tower (first tower 110 Fig. 1) and a second adsorption tower (second tower 110a Fig. 1) each comprising an adsorbent (paragraph [0035]) therein and configured to dehumidify compressed air (compressed air A Fig. 2 and paragraph [0067]) flowing into an inside of the first adsorption tower and the second adsorption tower (corresponds to the inside of first tower 110 and second tower 110a Fig. 2) by using the adsorbent (paragraph [0067]) or regenerate the adsorbent by using the dehumidified compressed air (paragraph [0071] and Fig. 2); a plurality of pneumatic valves (Fig. 1) installed in a plurality of air passages (Fig. 1) connected to the first adsorption tower and the second adsorption tower (Fig. 1), the plurality of pneumatic valves being configured to be opened and closed to change a flow path of the compressed air (Figs. 2-7); a blower (blower 153 Fig. 1); and a heater (heater 143 Fig. 3) disposed at a rear end of the blower (Fig. 3); wherein the plurality of pneumatic valves comprises: a first pneumatic valve (first control valve 115a Fig. 1) and a second pneumatic valve (second control valve 115b Fig. 1) configured to be opened and closed so that the compressed air flows into the first adsorption tower (paragraph [0067]) or the second adsorption tower (Fig. 7 and paragraph [0099]); a fifth pneumatic valve (valve 117a Fig. 1) and a sixth pneumatic valve (valve 117b Fig. 1) configured to be opened and closed so that air (the air generated by blower 153 Fig. 3) flows into the first adsorption tower (Fig. 7) or the second adsorption tower (Fig. 1); a seventh pneumatic valve (valve 117c Fig. 2) and an eighth pneumatic valve (valve 117d Fig. 2) configured to be opened and closed so that the compressed air dehumidified in the first adsorption tower (Fig. 2) or the second adsorption tower (Fig. 7) is discharged outside (Figs. 2 and 7); a ninth pneumatic valve (valve 157 Fig. 2) and an eleventh pneumatic valve (valve 155 Fig. 2) configured to be opened and closed so that the air transferred from the blower passes or does not pass through the heater (paragraph [0056] and Figs. 3-4 of Hwang). Hwang teaches the invention as described above but fails to explicitly teach “the plurality of pneumatic valves being configured to be opened and closed to change a flow path of each of the compressed air and outside air; the blower configured to introduce the outside air into the first adsorption tower or the second adsorption tower; the heater configured to heat the outside air transferred from the blower; the plurality of pneumatic valves comprises: a third pneumatic valve and a fourth pneumatic valve configured to be opened and closed so that the outside air flowing from the first adsorption tower or the second adsorption tower is discharged to the atmosphere”. However, Lee teaches a plurality of pneumatic valves (Fig. 1 where the illustrated valves correspond to the plurality of pneumatic valves of Hwang) being configured to be opened and closed to change a flow path of each of a compressed air (paragraph [0018] where the path of the disclosed compressed air corresponds to the flow path of Hwang) and outside air (paragraph [0020]); a blower (blower 20 Fig. 2 corresponds to the blower of Hwang) configured to introduce the outside air into a first adsorption tower (paragraph [0020] where first dry tower 10 Fig. 1 corresponds to the first adsorption tower of Hwang) or a second adsorption tower (paragraph [0020] where second dry tower 10’ Fig. 1 corresponds to the second adsorption tower of Hwang); a heater (air heating unit 30 Fig. 2 corresponds to the heater of Hwang) configured to heat the outside air transferred from the blower (paragraph [0009]); the plurality of pneumatic valves comprises: a third pneumatic valve (left exhaust valve 40a Fig. 3) and a fourth pneumatic valve (right exhaust valve 40a Fig. 3) configured to be opened and closed so that the outside air flowing from the first adsorption tower or the second adsorption tower is discharged to the atmosphere (paragraph [0026]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of Hwang to include “the plurality of pneumatic valves being configured to be opened and closed to change a flow path of each of the compressed air and outside air; the blower configured to introduce the outside air into the first adsorption tower or the second adsorption tower; the heater configured to heat the outside air transferred from the blower; the plurality of pneumatic valves comprises: a third pneumatic valve and a fourth pneumatic valve configured to be opened and closed so that the outside air flowing from the first adsorption tower or the second adsorption tower is discharged to the atmosphere” in view of the teachings of Lee to optionally use outside air in the regeneration process. The combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “the plurality of pneumatic valves comprises: the fifth pneumatic valve and the sixth pneumatic valve configured to be opened and closed so that the outside air flows into the first adsorption tower or the second adsorption tower; a tenth pneumatic valve configured to be opened and closed so that the compressed air dehumidified in the first adsorption tower or the second adsorption tower is or is not recirculated to the first adsorption tower or the second adsorption tower”. However, Arno teaches a plurality of pneumatic valves (the valves illustrated in Figs. 4-5 correspond to the plurality of valves of Hwang) comprises: a fifth pneumatic valve (right check valve 74 Figs. 4-5 corresponds to the fifth pneumatic valve of Hwang) and a sixth pneumatic valve (left check valve 74 Figs. 4-5 corresponds to the sixth pneumatic valve of Hwang) configured to be opened and closed so that outside air (arrow 53 Fig. 4 corresponds to the outside air of Lee) flows into a first adsorption tower (Fig. 4 and paragraph [0049] where tower ‘B’ corresponds to the first adsorption tower of Hwang) or a second adsorption tower (Fig. 4 and paragraph [0049] where tower ‘A’ corresponds to the second adsorption tower of Hwang); a tenth pneumatic valve (dry purge valve 78 Fig. 5) configured to be opened and closed so that compressed air (the compressed air that circulates in dried compressed air pathways 89 and dry purge pathways 77 Fig. 5 as described in paragraph [0052] corresponds to the compressed air of Hwang) dehumidified in the first adsorption tower (Fig. 5 and paragraphs [0049] and [0052]) or the second adsorption tower (paragraphs [0049] and [0052] and Fig. 5) is or is not recirculated to the first adsorption tower or the second adsorption tower (paragraphs [0049] and [0052] and Figs. 4-5) to provide a purge regeneration configured in a dry purge phase (paragraph [0021]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “the plurality of pneumatic valves comprises: the fifth pneumatic valve and the sixth pneumatic valve configured to be opened and closed so that the outside air flows into the first adsorption tower or the second adsorption tower; a tenth pneumatic valve configured to be opened and closed so that the compressed air dehumidified in the first adsorption tower or the second adsorption tower is or is not recirculated to the first adsorption tower or the second adsorption tower” in view of the teachings of Arno to provide a purge regeneration configured in a dry purge phase. Regarding claim 6, the combined teachings teach wherein, in a state in which the first adsorption tower is used for dehumidifying the compressed air (Fig. 2 of Hwang), the first pneumatic valve and the seventh pneumatic valve are opened (Fig. 2 of Hwang) and the second pneumatic valve, the third pneumatic valve (paragraph [0027] of Lee where it is disclosed that “exhaust valve 40a is kept in a closed state while any one of the dry towers is drying the compressed air”), the fifth pneumatic valve, and the eighth pneumatic valve are closed (Fig. 2 of Hwang where second, fifth, and eighth pneumatic valves are shown closed). Regarding claim 7, the combined teachings teach wherein, in a state in which the second adsorption tower is used for dehumidifying the compressed air (Fig. 6 of Hwang), the second pneumatic valve and the eighth pneumatic valve are opened (Fig. 6 of Hwang) and the first pneumatic valve, the fourth pneumatic valve (paragraph [0027] of Lee where it is disclosed that “exhaust valve 40a is kept in a closed state while any one of the dry towers is drying the compressed air”), the sixth pneumatic valve, and the seventh pneumatic valve are closed (Fig. 6 of Hwang where first, sixth, and seventh pneumatic valves are shown closed). Regarding claim 8, the combined teachings teach wherein, in a state in which the second adsorption tower is used for regeneration of the adsorbent by the outside air (Fig. 4 of Hwang where the air generated by blower 153 corresponds to the outside air of Lee), the sixth pneumatic valve (Fig. 4 of Hwang) and the fourth pneumatic valve (referring paragraph [0027] of Lee, a person skilled in the art would recognize that exhaust valve 40a of second dry tower 10’ is kept in an opened state since the adsorbent in second dry tower 10’ is being dried) are opened and the fifth pneumatic valve, the eighth pneumatic valve, the second pneumatic valve (Fig. 4 of Hwang), and the third pneumatic valve are closed (referring paragraph [0027] of Lee, a person skilled in the art would recognize that exhaust valve 40a of first dry tower 10 is kept in a closed state since the compressed air in first dry tower 10 is being dried). Regarding claim 9, the combined teachings teach wherein, in a state in which the second adsorption tower is used for regeneration of the adsorbent by heating by the outside air (Fig. 3 of Hwang where the air generated by blower 153 corresponds to the outside air of Lee), the eleventh pneumatic valve is opened and the ninth pneumatic valve is closed (Fig. 3 of Hwang). Regarding claim 10, the combined teachings teach wherein, in a state in which the second adsorption tower is used for regeneration of the adsorbent by cooling by the outside air (Fig. 4 of Hwang where the air generated by blower 153 corresponds to the outside air of Lee), the ninth pneumatic valve is opened and the eleventh pneumatic valve is closed (Fig. 4 of Hwang). Regarding claim 11, the combined teachings teach wherein, in a state in which the first adsorption tower is used for regeneration of the adsorbent by the outside air (Fig. 7 of Hwang where the air generated by blower 153 corresponds to the outside air of Lee), the third pneumatic valve is opened (referring paragraph [0027] of Lee, a person skilled in the art would recognize that exhaust valve 40a of first dry tower 10 is kept in an opened state since the adsorbent in first dry tower 10 is being dried) and the first pneumatic valve (Fig. 7 of Hwang) and the fourth pneumatic valve are closed (referring paragraph [0027] of Lee, a person skilled in the art would recognize that exhaust valve 40a of second dry tower 10’ is kept in a closed state since the compressed air in second dry tower 10’ is being dried). Regarding claim 12, the combined teachings teach wherein, in a state in which the first adsorption tower is used for regeneration of the adsorbent by heating by the outside air (referring to paragraph [0036] of Hwang, a person skilled in the art would recognize that the scenario illustrated in Fig. 3 can be accomplished with the roles of first tower 110 and second tower 110a being reversed i.e. the compressed air being dehumidified in second tower 110a while the adsorbent being regenerated in first tower 110), the eleventh pneumatic valve is opened and the ninth pneumatic valve is closed (with the roles of first tower 110 and second tower 110a being reversed as explained previously, a person skilled in the art would then recognize that valve 155 of Hwang would be opened while valve 157 of Hwang would be closed in the process). Regarding claim 13, the combined teachings teach wherein, in a state in which the first adsorption tower is used for regeneration of the adsorbent by cooling by the outside air (Fig. 7 of Hwang where the air generated by blower 153 corresponds to the outside air of Lee), the ninth pneumatic valve is opened and the eleventh pneumatic valve is closed (Fig. 7 of Hwang). Regarding claim 14, the combined teachings teach wherein, in a state in which the second adsorption tower is used for regeneration of the adsorbent by the compressed air (Fig. 5 of Arno where tower ‘A’ corresponds to the second adsorption tower of Hwang), the tenth pneumatic valve, the sixth pneumatic valve (Fig. 5 of Arno where purge check valve 74 associated with tower ‘A’ corresponds to the sixth pneumatic valve of Hwang), and the fourth pneumatic valve (referring paragraph [0027] of Lee, a person skilled in the art would recognize that exhaust valve 40a of second dry tower 10’ is kept in an opened state since the adsorbent in second dry tower 10’ is being dried) are opened and the ninth pneumatic valve (Fig. 5 of Arno where blower check valve 70 corresponds to the ninth pneumatic valve of Hwang), the eleventh pneumatic valve (repressurization valve 79 Fig. 5 of Arno corresponds to the eleventh pneumatic valve of Hwang), the fifth pneumatic valve (Fig. 5 of Arno where purge check valve 74 associated with tower ‘B’ corresponds to the fifth pneumatic valve of Hwang), the eighth pneumatic valve (Fig. 5 of Arno where outlet check valve 76 associated with tower ‘A’ corresponds to the eighth pneumatic valve of Hwang), the second pneumatic valve (Fig. 5 of Arno where inlet valve 72 associated with tower ‘A’ corresponds to the second pneumatic valve of Hwang), and the third pneumatic valve are closed (Fig. 5 of Arno where exhaust valve 73 associated with tower ‘B’ corresponds to the third pneumatic valve of Hwang). Regarding claim 15, the combined teachings teach wherein, in a state in which the first adsorption tower is used for regeneration of the adsorbent by the compressed air (referring to paragraph [0049] of Arno, a person skilled in the art would recognize that the scenario illustrated in Fig. 5 can be accomplished with the roles of tower ‘A’ and tower ‘B’ being reversed i.e. the compressed air being dehumidified in tower ‘A’ while the adsorbent being regenerated in tower ‘B’), the tenth pneumatic valve and the third pneumatic valve are opened (with the roles of tower ‘A’ and tower ‘B’ being reversed as explained previously, a person skilled in the art would then recognize that dry purge valve 78 and exhaust valve 73 associated with tower ‘B’ of Arno would be opened) and the first pneumatic valve (with the roles of tower ‘A’ and tower ‘B’ being reversed as explained previously, a person skilled in the art would then recognize that inlet valve 72 associated with tower ‘B’ of Arno which corresponds to the first pneumatic valve of Hwang would be closed) and the fourth pneumatic valve are closed (referring paragraph [0027] of Lee, a person skilled in the art would recognize that exhaust valve 40a of second dry tower 10’ is kept in a closed state since the compressed air in second dry tower 10’ is being dried) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang, Lee, and Arno as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Murayama et al. (US 20110306288 A1, herein after referred to as Murayama) . Regarding claim 2, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “further comprising a temperature/humidity converter disposed at a front end of the blower and configured to detect a state of the outside air and transmit state data to a control program”. However, Murayama teaches further comprising a temperature/humidity converter (air temperature sensor 27 and outside air humidity sensor 28 Fig. 1) disposed at a front end of a blower (front end of fan 246 Fig. 1 where fan 246 corresponds to the blower of Hwang) and configured to detect a state of the outside air (corresponds to the outside air temperature and outside air humidity as disclosed in paragraphs [0024] and [0025]) and transmit state data (understood to be the measured outside temperature and humidity disclosed in paragraphs [0024] and [0025]) to a control program (control content setting section 293 Fig. 2 and paragraph [0026]) to include outside air data in the control process of the system. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “further comprising a temperature/humidity converter disposed at a front end of the blower and configured to detect a state of the outside air and transmit state data to a control program” in view of the teachings of Murayama to include outside air data in the control process of the system. Regarding claim 4, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “further comprising a temperature/humidity converter disposed at a front end of the blower”. However, Murayama teaches further comprising a temperature/humidity converter (air temperature sensor 27 and outside air humidity sensor 28 Fig. 1) disposed at a front end of a blower (front end of fan 246 Fig. 1 where fan 246 corresponds to the blower of Hwang) to include outside air data in the control process of the system. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “further comprising a temperature/humidity converter disposed at a front end of the blower” in view of the teachings of Murayama to include outside air data in the control process of the system . 07-22-aia AIA Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang, Lee, and Arno as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Favero (US 20140216105 A1) . Regarding claim 5, the combined teachings teach the invention as described above but fail to explicitly teach “further comprising a temperature sensor disposed in an air passage through which the outside air passes through the third pneumatic valve and the fourth pneumatic valve and is discharged to the atmosphere”. However, Favero teaches further comprising a temperature sensor (temperature sensor T3 Fig. 3) disposed in an air passage (exhaust conduit 14 Fig. 3) through which outside air (the gas flowing through exhaust conduit 14 Fig. 3 corresponds to the outside air of Lee) passes through a third pneumatic valve (shut-off valve 130d Fig. 3 corresponds to the third pneumatic valve of Lee) and a fourth pneumatic valve (shut-off valve 130c Fig. 3 corresponds to the fourth pneumatic valve of Lee) and is discharged to the atmosphere (paragraph [0133]) to monitor the temperature of the exhausted air. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art before the effectively filed date to modify the apparatus of the combined teachings to include “further comprising a temperature sensor disposed in an air passage through which the outside air passes through the third pneumatic valve and the fourth pneumatic valve and is discharged to the atmosphere” in view of the teachings of Favero to monitor the temperature of the exhausted air . Response to Arguments 07-37 AIA Applicant's arguments filed on 10/15/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding Applicant’s arguments on pages 7-9, that Arno does not teach or suggest “a tenth pneumatic valve configured to be opened and closed so that the compressed air dehumidified in the first adsorption tower or the second adsorption tower is or is not recirculated to the first adsorption tower or the second adsorption tower” as disclosed by amended claim 1, Examiner disagrees. For clarity purposes, the above rejection of amended claim 1 is repeated below: Arno teaches a tenth pneumatic valve (dry purge valve 78 Fig. 5) configured to be opened and closed so that compressed air (the compressed air that circulates in dried compressed air pathways 89 and dry purge pathways 77 Fig. 5 as described in paragraph [0052] corresponds to the compressed air of Hwang) dehumidified in a first adsorption tower (Fig. 5 and paragraphs [0049] and [0052] where tower ‘B’ corresponds to the first adsorption tower of Hwang) or a second adsorption tower (paragraphs [0049] and [0052] and Fig. 5 where tower ‘A’ corresponds to the second adsorption tower of Hwang) is or is not recirculated to the first adsorption tower or the second adsorption tower (paragraphs [0049] and [0052] and Figs. 4-5) to provide a purge regeneration configured in a dry purge phase (paragraph [0021]). Furthermore, Applicant statement in paragraph [0063] of the specification and in page 8 of the remarks that the dehumidified compressed air is “used for regeneration before being used for production and supply” is not supported by the drawings. Referring to Fig. 5 where first adsorption tower 10 is used as a dehumidifier, a portion of the dehumidified compressed air is used for production and supply while the remaining portion of the dehumidified compressed air is sent to the second adsorption tower 20 for regeneration before being discharged to the atmosphere. Stating that “the dehumidified compressed air is used for regeneration before being used for production and supply” would imply supplying air with high moisture content which would defeat the purpose of the dehumidification process. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive and the rejection are maintained. Regarding Applicant’s arguments in page 8 that in Arno “there is no disclosure of regenerating adsorbent in A tower using the dried air in B tower”, Examiner disagrees. In paragraph [0045], Arno specifically states that tower ‘A’ is illustrated as “being regenerated”. In other words, air flowing inside tower ‘A’ is used for regeneration purposes of the desiccant (see paragraphs [0047] and [0052]). Thus, in Fig. 5 the portion of dried compressed air leaving tower ‘B’ and flowing into tower ‘A’ via dry purge valve 78 is used for regeneration purposes. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive and the rejection are maintained. Regarding Applicant’s arguments in page 8 that Arno’s dry purge valve 78 only “transfers the dried air from the B tower to the A tower for regeneration”, Examiner disagrees. Arno specifically states in paragraph [0049] that “Anyone skilled in the art of compressed air dryer operation would understand that each tower becomes either the depressurized regenerating tower vessel or the pressurized drying tower vessel by manipulation of the various inlet valves 72, exhaust valve 73 associated with each tower, and, dry purge valve 78 and repressurization valve 79”. Therefore, the opening or closing of dry purge valve 78 would allow compressed dehumidified air in tower ‘A’ or tower ‘B’ to recirculate or not recirculate to first tower ‘A’ or second tower ‘B’. Therefore, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive and the rejection are maintained. Conclusion 07-40 AIA Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL . See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMBA NMN GAYE whose telephone number is (571)272-8809. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 4:30AM to 2:30PM. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jerry -Daryl Fletcher can be reached at 571-270-5054. 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. /SAMBA NMN GAYE/Examiner, Art Unit 3763 /JERRY-DARYL FLETCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/488,363 Page 2 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/488,363 Page 3 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/488,363 Page 4 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/488,363 Page 5 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/488,363 Page 6 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/488,363 Page 7 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/488,363 Page 8 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/488,363 Page 9 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/488,363 Page 10 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/488,363 Page 11 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/488,363 Page 12 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/488,363 Page 13 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/488,363 Page 14 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/488,363 Page 15 Art Unit: 3763 Application/Control Number: 18/488,363 Page 16 Art Unit: 3763
Prosecution Insights