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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: L1-2 of the claim should recite “wherein, when the element is in the displaced position…” in order to have correct antecedent basis.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: L6 of the claim should recite “…having a depth less than the thickness of the insulator” in order to have correct antecedent basis.
Claim 23 is objected to because of the following informalities: L3 recites “movable” but should recite “moveable” in order to have consistent spelling through the set of claims.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-9, 12-16, and 18-21 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.
The term “fully attached” in Claims 1, 14, and 21 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “fully attached” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
For example, the Examiner notes that the element is defined in the insulator by a slit having a depth less than a thickness of the insulator and therefore there are portions of the element that are not directly fixed to the insulator (i.e. at the location of the slit).
Therefore, it is unclear if the term “fully attached” means that the entirety of the element is directly attached to the insulator (which cannot exist due to the slit) or means that both edges of the element are directly attached to the insulator.
For purpose of examination, the Examiner will interpret the term “fully attached” in Claims 1, 14 and 21 to mean that, when in the insulating position, the element is directly attached to the insulator at both edges (e.g. see Fig. 3B, [0017] of the instant specification, wherein element 20b is directly attached to the insulator 162 at both edges 30b, 32b).
Claims 2-3, 5-9, 12-13, 15-16, and 18-20 are dependent on Claims 1 and 14 and therefore are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for the reasons set forth above.
Claim 21 recites “the element integral with the member” in L2.
However, Claim 14 sets forth an element and Claim 21 sets forth another element and therefore it is unclear if the limitation is directed towards the element set forth in Claim 14 (which already require the element being integral with the member) or if it is directed to the another element set forth in Claim 21.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "the insulator" in L4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "the another piece" in L5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For purpose of examination, the Examiner will interpret Claim 21 to recite “further comprising another element having a hinge, the another element integral with the member and configured to align with the cell vent of the second one of the plurality of battery cells, wherein the member at least partially defines another slit having a depth less than the thickness of the member, and wherein, in an insulating position, the another element is fully attached to the member to thereby provide insulation for the second one of the plurality of battery cells from the flames venting from the cell vent of the first one of the plurality of battery cells”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9, 12-16, and 18-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kullberg et al. (US PGPub 2023/0268613 A1, cited on the IDS dated January 29, 2025).
Regarding Claim 1, Kullberg discloses in Fig. 3 a battery system (100) ([0082], [0091]) comprising:
a plurality of battery cells (118) each having a cell vent (136) configured to vent flames originating from the corresponding battery cell in the event of a thermal runaway condition of the corresponding battery cell ([0098]-[0099]); and
an insulator (120) disposed adjacent a first one of the plurality of battery cells (e.g. 118a), wherein the insulator (120) comprises an integral element (132) having a hinge, the element (132) configured to align with the cell vent (e.g. 136a) of the first one of the plurality of battery cells (e.g. 118a) ([0092], [0099]).
Kullberg further discloses in the exemplary embodiment of Fig. 3 wherein the insulator (120) at least partially defines a slit (124) having a depth that is a thickness of the insulator (120) ([0097], e.g. wherein the slit 124 extends fully through the insulator 120).
Consequently, Kullberg does not disclose wherein the insulator at least partially defines a slit having a depth that is less than the thickness of the insulator.
Though, Kullberg discloses wherein the slit (124) may be formed partially or all the way through the insulator (120) in order to form an element that may open due to an increase in pressure resulting from the event of a thermal runaway condition of the corresponding battery cell ([0025]-[0026]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the slit to be partially through the insulator, such that the slit has a depth less than the thickness of the insulator, as disclosed by Kullberg, wherein the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation that such would successfully form an element that may open due to an increase in pressure resulting from the event of a thermal runaway condition of the corresponding battery cell, as desired by Kullberg.
Modified Kullberg further discloses wherein, in an insulating position (e.g. 132), the element (132) is fully attached to the insulator (120) to thereby provide insulation for the first one of the plurality of battery cells (118a) ([0026], [0099]-[0101]), and, in a displaced position (e.g. 132a), the element (132) is displaced from the insulating position at the slit (124) and attached to the insulator (120) only at the hinge to thereby provide a vent in the insulator (120) to enable flames venting from the cell vent (132a) of the first one of the plurality of battery cells (118a) to escape from between the insulator (120) and the first one of the plurality of battery cells (118a) and inhibit the flames venting from the cell vent (132a) of the first one of the plurality of battery cells (118a) from reaching a second one of the plurality of battery cells (118) (Fig. 3, [0099]-[0101]).
Regarding Claim 2, modified Kullberg discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the insulator (120) comprises a sheet of an insulating material ([0100], e.g. ceramic or mica).
Regarding Claim 3, modified Kullberg discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the insulator (120) may be a mica plate ([0100], e.g. ceramic or mica).
Specifically, modified Kullberg discloses wherein the insulator (120) comprises a heat- and fire-resistant material ([0092]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a mica plate as the insulator, as disclosed by modified Kullberg, wherein the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation that such would successfully form an insulator comprising a heat- and fire-resistant material, as desired by modified Kullberg.
Regarding Claim 5, modified Kullberg discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the element (132) has an edge at least partially defined by the slit (124) and, when the element (132) is in the insulating position (e.g. 132), the edge of the element (132) has a location adjacent to an edge of a portion of the insulator (120) (Fig. 3, [0097], [0099]).
Regarding Claim 6, modified Kullberg discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein, when the element (132) is in the displaced position (e.g. 132a), the edge of the element (132) is displaced from the location adjacent to the edge of the portion of the insulator (120) (Fig. 3, [0097], [0099]).
Regarding Claim 7, modified Kullberg discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the element (132) at least partially defines the slit (124) (Fig. 3, [0097], [0099]).
Regarding Claim 9, modified Kullberg discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the edge of the element (132) has a C-shape (Fig. 2, [0097], [0099]).
Regarding Claim 12, modified Kullberg discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the second one of the plurality of battery cells (118) is located adjacent to the first one of the plurality of battery cells (118a) (Fig. 3).
Regarding Claim 13, modified Kullberg discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the insulator (120) extends over the second one of the plurality of battery cells (118), wherein the insulator (120) comprises another integral element (132) having a hinge, the another element (132) configured to align with the cell vent (136) of the second one of the plurality of battery cells (118), and wherein the insulator (120) at least partially defines another slit (124), and wherein, in an insulating position (e.g. 132), the another element (132) provides insulation for the second one of the plurality of battery cells (118) from the flames venting from the cell vent (136a) of the first one of the plurality of battery cells (118a) (Fig. 3, [0098]-[0101]).
Modified Kullberg further discloses in the exemplary embodiment of Fig. 3 the another slit (124) having a depth that is the thickness of the insulator (120) ([0097], e.g. wherein the slit 124 extends fully through the insulator 120).
Consequently, modified Kullberg does not disclose wherein the insulator at least partially defines another slit having a depth that is less than the thickness of the insulator.
Though, modified Kullberg discloses wherein the another slit (124) may be formed partially or all the way through the insulator (120) in order to form an element that may open due to an increase in pressure resulting from the event of a thermal runaway condition of the corresponding battery cell ([0026], [0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the another slit to be partially through the insulator, such that the another slit has a depth less than the thickness of the insulator, as disclosed by modified Kullberg, wherein the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation that such would successfully form another element that may open due to an increase in pressure resulting from the event of a thermal runaway condition of the corresponding battery cell, as desired by modified Kullberg.
Regarding Claim 14, Kullberg discloses in Fig. 3 an insulator (120) for a battery system (100) including a plurality of battery cells (118), each of the plurality of battery cells (118) having a cell vent (136) configured to vent flames originating from the corresponding battery cell in the event of a thermal runaway condition of the corresponding battery cell ([0082], [0091]-[0092], [0098]-[0099]), the insulator (120) comprising:
a member (120) configured for placement adjacent a first one of the plurality of battery cells (e.g. 118a) ([0092]); and
an element (132) having a hinge, the element (132) integral with the member (120) and configured to align with the cell vent (e.g. 136a) of the first one of the plurality of battery cells (118a) ([0092], [0099]).
Kullberg further discloses in the exemplary embodiment of Fig. 3 wherein the member (120) at least partially defines a slit (124) having a depth that is a thickness of the member (120) ([0097], e.g. wherein the slit 124 extends fully through the member 120).
Consequently, Kullberg does not disclose wherein the member at least partially defines a slit having a depth that is less than the thickness of the member.
Though, Kullberg discloses wherein the slit (124) may be formed partially or all the way through the member (120) in order to form an element that may open due to an increase in pressure resulting from the event of a thermal runaway condition of the corresponding battery cell ([0026], [0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the slit to be partially through the member, such that the slit has a depth less than the thickness of the member, as disclosed by Kullberg, wherein the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation that such would successfully form an element that may open due to an increase in pressure resulting from the event of a thermal runaway condition of the corresponding battery cell, as desired by Kullberg.
Modified Kullberg further discloses wherein, in the insulating position (e.g. 132), the element (132) is fully attached to the member (120) to provide insulation for the first one of the plurality of battery cells (118a) ([0026], [0099]-[0101]), and, in a displaced position (e.g. 132a), the element (132) is displaced from the insulating position (e.g. 132) at the slit (124) and attached to the member (120) only at the hinge to thereby provide a vent in the member (120) to enable flames venting from the cell vent (132a) of the first one of the plurality of battery cells (118a) to escape from between the insulator (120) and the first one of the plurality of battery cells (118a) and inhibit the flames venting from the cell vent (132a) of the first one of the plurality of battery cells (118a) from reaching a second one of the plurality of battery cells (118) ([0099]-[0101]).
Regarding Claim 15, modified Kullberg discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the member (120)comprises a sheet of an insulating material, wherein the insulating material may be a mica plate ([0100], e.g. ceramic or mica).
Specifically, modified Kullberg discloses wherein the member (120) comprises a heat- and fire-resistant material ([0092]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a mica plate as the insulating material of the member, as disclosed by modified Kullberg, wherein the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation that such would successfully form a member comprising a heat- and fire-resistant material, as desired by modified Kullberg.
Regarding Claim 16, modified Kullberg discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further disclose wherein the element (132) is moveable from the insulating position (e.g. 132) to the displaced position (e.g. 132a) by the flames venting from the cell vent (136a) of the first one of the plurality of battery cells (118a) (Fig. 3, [0099]).
Regarding Claim 18, modified Kullberg discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the element (132) has an edge at least partially defined by the slit (124) and, when the element (132) is in the insulating position (e.g. 132), the edge of the element (132) has a location adjacent to an edge of a portion of the member (120), and when the element (132) is in the displaced position (e.g. 132a), the edge of the element (132) is displaced from the location adjacent to the edge of the portion of the member (120) (Fig. 3, [0099]).
Regarding Claim 19, modified Kullberg discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the element (132) at least partially defines the slit (124) (Fig. 3, [0097], [0099]).
Regarding Claim 20, modified Kullberg discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the edge of the element (132) has a C-shape (Fig. 2, [0097], [0099]).
Regarding Claim 21, modified Kullberg discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses another element (132) having a hinge, the another element (132) integral with the member (120) and configured to align with the cell vent (136) of the second one of the plurality of battery cells (118), and wherein the member (120) at least partially defines another slit (124).
Modified Kullberg further discloses in the exemplary embodiment of Fig. 3 the another slit (124) having a depth that is the thickness of the member (120) ([0097], e.g. wherein the slit 124 extends fully through the member 120).
Consequently, modified Kullberg does not disclose member the insulator at least partially defines another slit having a depth that is less than the thickness of the member.
Though, modified Kullberg discloses wherein the slit (124) may be formed partially or all the way through the member (120) in order to form an element that may open due to an increase in pressure resulting from the event of a thermal runaway condition of the corresponding battery cell ([0026], [0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the another slit to be partially through the member, such that the another slit has a depth less than the thickness of the member, as disclosed by modified Kullberg, wherein the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation that such would successfully form another element that may open due to an increase in pressure resulting from the event of a thermal runaway condition of the corresponding battery cell, as desired by modified Kullberg.
Thus, modified Kullberg discloses wherein, in an insulating position (e.g. 132), the another element (132) is fully attached to the member (120) to thereby provide insulation for the second one of the plurality of battery cells (118) from the flames venting from the cell vent (136a) of the first one of the plurality of battery cells (118a) (Fig. 3, [0026], [0098]-[0101]).
Regarding Claim 22, Kullberg discloses in Fig. 3 a battery system (100) ([0082], [0091]) comprising:
a plurality of battery cells (118) each having a cell vent (136) configured to vent flames originating from the corresponding battery cell in the event of a thermal runaway condition of the corresponding battery cell ([0098]-[0099]); and
an insulator (120) disposed adjacent a first one of the plurality of battery cells (e.g. 118a) ([0092]), wherein the insulator (120) comprises an integral piece (132) configured to align with the cell vent (e.g. 136a) of the first one of the plurality of battery cells (118a), wherein the insulator (120) at least partially defines a slit (124), the slit (124) at least partially defining an edge of the piece (132) ([0092], [0099]);
wherein, in an insulating position (e.g. 132), the piece (132) is attached to the insulator (120) to thereby provide insulation for the first one of the plurality of battery cells (118a) ([0027], [0099]-[0101]), and, in a displaced position (e.g. 132a), the piece (132) is displaced from the insulating position at the slit (124) to thereby provide a vent in the insulator (120) to enable flames venting from the cell vent (132a) of the first one of the plurality of battery cells (118a) to escape from between the insulator (120) and the first one of the plurality of battery cells (118a) and inhibit the flames venting from the cell vent (132a) of the first one of the plurality of battery cells (118a) from reaching a second one of the plurality of battery cells (118) (Fig. 3, [0099]-[0101]).
Kullberg further discloses in the exemplary embodiment of Fig. 3 wherein the piece (132) is partially detached from the insulator (120) at the slit to thereby provide the vent in the insulator (120) (Fig. 3).
Consequently, Kullberg does not disclose wherein the piece is completely detached from the insulator.
Though, Kullberg discloses wherein, in the displaced position (e.g. 132a), the piece (132) may be completely detached from the insulator (120) or may be partially detached from the insulator (120) in order to form the vent in the insulator (120) ([0025], [0029]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the piece such that, in the displaced position, the piece is displaced from the insulating position at the slit and completely detached from the insulator, as disclosed by Kullberg, wherein the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation that such would successfully provide the vent in the insulator, as desired by Kullberg.
Regarding Claim 23, modified Kullberg discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the insulator (120) comprises a sheet of an insulating material, wherein the insulating material may be a mica plate ([0100], e.g. ceramic or mica), and wherein the piece (132) is moveable from the insulating position (e.g. 132) to the displaced position (e.g. 132a) by the flames venting from the cell vent (132a) of the first one of the plurality of battery cells (118a) (Fig. 3, [0099]-[0101], [0025], [0029]).
Specifically, modified Kullberg discloses wherein the insulator (120) comprises a heat- and fire-resistant material ([0092]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize a mica plate as the insulating material of the insulator, as disclosed by modified Kullberg, wherein the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation that such would successfully form an insulator comprising a heat- and fire-resistant material, as desired by modified Kullberg.
Regarding Claim 24, modified Kullberg discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the piece (132) at least partially defines the slit (124), and when the piece (132) is in the insulating position (e.g. 132), the edge of the piece (132) has a location adjacent to an edge of a portion of the insulator (120), and when the piece (132) is in the displaced position (e.g. 132a), the edge of the piece (132) is displaced from the location adjacent to the edge of the portion of the insulator (120) (Fig. 3, [0029], [0099]-[0101]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kullberg et al. (US PGPub 2023/0268613 A1, cited on the IDS dated January 29, 2025), as applied to Claim 7 above, and further in view of Benker et al. (US PGPub 2023/0187767 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, modified Kullberg discloses all of the limitations as set forth above and further discloses wherein the slit (124) is a cut slit in order to form an element that may open due to an increase in pressure resulting from the event of a thermal runaway condition of the corresponding battery cell ([0025]-[0028], [0097], e.g. weakened portion).
However, modified Kullberg remains silent regarding the method of forming the cut slit and consequently does not disclose wherein the slit is a laser cut slit.
Benker teaches methods of forming a material weakening in order to form an element that may may open due to an increase in pressure resulting from an event of a thermal runaway condition of a battery cell ([0006]-[0007], [0023]).
For example, Benker teaches wherein the material weakening may be formed by a laser ([0023]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the cut slit of modified Kullberg with a laser, as taught by Benker, such that the slit is a laser cut slit, as such is a known method in the art for forming an element that may may open due to an increase in pressure resulting from an event of a thermal runaway condition of a battery cell and therefore the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation that such would successfully form the element desired by modified Kullberg.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 6, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding amended Claims 1 and 14, the Applicant argues that Kullberg does not disclose wherein the insulator at least partially defines a slit having a depth less than a thickness of the insulator and wherein, in an insulating position, the element is fully attached to the insulator to thereby provide insulation for the first one of the plurality of battery cells.
The Applicant further argues that the claimed hinged element solves the problem of incomplete, inadequate, and/or insufficient insulation associated with the weakened portions or pre-cuts disclosed in Kullberg which, in contrast, appear to be through-holes in the insulating material ([0084]).
The Examiner respectfully disagrees and notes that while Kullberg discloses in the exemplary embodiment of Fig. 3 wherein the insulator (120) at least partially defines a slit (124) having a depth that is a thickness of the insulator (120) ([0097], e.g. wherein the slit 124 extends fully through the insulator 120), Kullberg further discloses wherein the slit (124) is not limited to this embodiment and may instead be formed partially through the insulator (120) in order to form an element that may open due to an increase in pressure resulting from the event of a thermal runaway condition of the corresponding battery cell ([0026], [0028]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the slit to be partially through the insulator, such that the slit has a depth less than the thickness of the insulator, as disclosed by Kullberg, wherein the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation that such would successfully form an element that may open due to an increase in pressure resulting from the event of a thermal runaway condition of the corresponding battery cell, as desired by Kullberg.
Regarding new Claim 22, the Applicant argues that Kullberg does not appear to teach or suggest an insulator having an integral piece that completely detaches therefrom.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees and notes that while Kullberg discloses in the exemplary embodiment of Fig. 3 wherein the piece (132) is partially detached from the insulator (120) at the slit to thereby provide the vent in the insulator (120) (Fig. 3), Kullberg further discloses wherein the piece (132) is not limited to this embodiment and wherein, in the displaced position (e.g. 132a), the piece (132) may be completely detached from the insulator (120) or may be partially detached from the insulator (120) in order to form the vent in the insulator (120) ([0025], [0029]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the piece such that, in the displaced position, the piece is displaced from the insulating position at the slit and completely detached from the insulator, as disclosed by Kullberg, wherein the skilled artisan would have a reasonable expectation that such would successfully provide the vent in the insulator, as desired by Kullberg.
Thus, the arguments are not considered to be persuasive.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Jang et al. (US PGPub 2025/0158219 A1) teaches a battery system comprising a hinged element (V2) to provide a vent to enable flames venting from a battery cell to escape (Figs. 7-11, [0066]).
Yun (US PGPub 2024/0072371 A1) teaches a battery system comprising a hinged element (36) to provide a vent to enable gas venting from a battery cell to escape (Figs. 3-7 [0055]-[0058]).
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 KIMBERLY WYLUDA whose telephone number is (571)272-4381. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7 AM - 3 PM EST.
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, BASIA RIDLEY can be reached at (571)272-1453. 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.
/KIMBERLY WYLUDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights