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 .
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 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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I (claim 1-10)
in the reply filed on 02/10/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim(s) 11-20 was/were withdrawn by Applicant
from further consideration, and said claim(s) remain withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant is respectfully reminded that in order for a future rejoinder to occur, the process claims should be amended (withdrawn — currently amended) during prosecution to require the limitations of the product/apparatus claims. Failure to do so may result in no rejoinder. See MPEP § 804.01 & 821.04.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 03/04/2025 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the Examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.84(l) for being unsatisfactorily reproducible,
fig(s). 1 & 3
requiring correction. All drawings must be made by a process which will give them satisfactory reproduction characteristics. Every line, number, and letter must be durable, clean, black (except for color drawings), sufficiently dense and dark, and uniformly thick and well-defined. The weight of all lines and letters must be heavy enough to permit adequate reproduction. This requirement applies to all lines however fine, to shading, and to lines representing cut surfaces in sectional views. Lines and strokes of different thicknesses may be used in the same drawing where different thicknesses have a different meaning.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.84(p)(3),
fig(s). 1
(e.g., 123) requiring correction. Numbers, letters, and reference characters must measure at least 1/8 inch (0.32 cm) in height. They should not be placed in the drawing so as to interfere with its comprehension. Therefore, they should not cross or mingle with the lines. They should not be placed upon hatched or shaded surfaces. When necessary, such as indicating a surface or cross section, a reference character may be underlined and a blank space may be left in the hatching or shading where the character occurs so that it appears distinct.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because of the inclusion of the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 207 & 203 in fig. 1 and 530 & 540 in fig. 5. Related to the drawing objection pertaining to 203 in fig. 1, the Examiner further objects to “H/E” as an insufficient label; Applicant correction/clarification is respectfully requested.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “225” has been used to designate both “impeller housing” ([0030]; see correct use in fig. 2) and a line connecting the intermediate housing with unknown designation 203 in fig. 1.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.84(p)(3),
fig(s). 3
(vertical axis numbering) requiring correction. Numbers, letters, and reference characters must measure at least 1/8 inch (0.32 cm) in height. They should not be placed in the drawing so as to interfere with its comprehension. Therefore, they should not cross or mingle with the lines. They should not be placed upon hatched or shaded surfaces. When necessary, such as indicating a surface or cross section, a reference character may be underlined and a blank space may be left in the hatching or shading where the character occurs so that it appears distinct.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “420” has been used to designate all of “turbo controller” (at least [0039]) and compressor (at least [0040]) and test controller (at least [0043]).
Relatedly, the drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because of the inclusion of the same part being designated by different reference characters: "420" and "450" have both been used to designate test controller (see at least [0043]).
Relatedly, the drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because of the inclusion of the same part being designated by different reference characters: "420" (see at least [0041]) and "410" (see at least [0042]) have both been used to designate compressor.
See fig. 4, wherein turbocharger (Examiner further notes alternatives of turbo/super-charger are associated therewith and suggests better clarification thereof in either/both of drawing/specification) is shown as 410 and wherein turbo controller is shown as 420 and wherein test controller is shown as 450.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action.
The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to
because of the following informalities:
There are inconsistencies between the written specification and the drawings, see Drawing Objections for details;
[0008] for unnecessary capitalization (“A”) and excessive spacing between words.
Appropriate correction is required.
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. This may result in slightly longer titles, but the loss in brevity of title will be more than offset by the gain in its informative value in indexing, classifying, searching, etc. If a satisfactory title is not supplied by the applicant, the Examiner may, at the time of allowance, change the title by an Examiner’s amendment. See MPEP § 1302.04(a).
The following title is suggested: “LIFT OFF SPEED DETECTION FOR AIRFOIL BEARING”.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 9 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
As to claim 9,
memory is objected to as already having antecedent basis in the independent claim, the Examiner suggesting “[[a]] the memory”.
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.
Claim(s) 5 is/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 5,
there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation "that first period of time" in the claim. The Examiner looked to the disclosure for guidance, however, “first period” could not be found. Therefore, to the best understanding of the Examiner and for the purpose of examination, the Examiner interprets the limitation as “[[that]] a first period of time”. Applicant clarification as to the intended meaning for the first period of time is respectfully requested; Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over newly cited Taniguchi* et al (JP 2007270651 A; hereafter “Taniguchi”) in view of newly cited Yang* et al (CN 101226103 A; hereafter “Yang”).
*machine translations provided by Examiner with foreign documents and utilized for English citations
Regarding independent claim 1,
Taniguchi teaches an apparatus (Title “COMPRESSOR FOR FUEL CELL”; Abstract “bearing device 14 supports a rotary shaft 13 of the compressor 1” and “A control device 61 has a rotating speed determining means setting the lowest rotating speed of the rotary shaft 13 to a value larger than a floating rotating speed of the radial foil bearings 21 and 22, and the lowest rotating speed maintaining means maintaining a rotating speed of the rotary shaft 13 to the lowest rotating speed or more by detecting the rotating speed by a rotation sensor 36”) comprising:
a device (fig. 1, compressor 1) having a rotational shaft (fig. 1, rotating shaft 13) supported by a plurality of air foil bearings (fig. 1, bearings 21 & 22) (bottom of page 2 “bearing device that supports the rotating shaft”; about middle of page 5 “The bearing device (14) includes front and rear radial foil bearings (21) and (22) and an axial magnetic bearing (23)”);
a device controller (fig. 3, controller 61) configured for detecting the rotational speed of the rotational shaft (fig. 1, rotating shaft 13) (second to last paragraph of page 3 “rotational speed determination means”; second to last paragraph of page 6 “rotational speed detected by the rotation sensor (36) by the control device (61)”); and
a memory (memory of controller 61) storing a lift off speed (floating rotational speed) of the plurality of air foil bearings (fig. 1, bearings 21 & 22),
wherein the memory (memory of controller 61) is communicatively coupled to the device controller (fig. 3, controller 61) (bottom of page 7 through top of page 8 “First, when setting initial conditions, the floating rotational speed of the radial foil bearings (21) and (22) to be used is determined (step 1 (S1))”; second to last paragraph of page 3 “the rotational speed at which the clearance starts to increase suddenly is set as the floating rotational speed”),
wherein the device controller (fig. 3, controller 61) is further configured for controlling a rotational speed of the rotational shaft (fig. 1, rotating shaft 13) in response to the lift off speed (floating rotational speed) (Abstract “A control device 61 has a rotating speed determining means setting the lowest rotating speed of the rotary shaft 13 to a value larger than a floating rotating speed of the radial foil bearings 21 and 22, and the lowest rotating speed maintaining means maintaining a rotating speed of the rotary shaft 13 to the lowest rotating speed or more by detecting the rotating speed by a rotation sensor 36”; second to last paragraph of page 3 “where the rotational speed slightly higher than this is set as the minimum rotational speed is set, and in the minimum rotational speed maintaining means The non-contact state can be reliably maintained by detecting the rotation speed of the rotation shaft with the rotation sensor and maintaining the rotation speed at or above the minimum rotation speed”; last paragraph of page 4 “since the minimum rotational speed of the rotating shaft is maintained at a value larger than the floating rotational speed of the radial foil bearing, the burden on the radial foil bearing can be reduced and the bearing life can be prevented from being shortened”).
Taniguchi does not teach: a sensor for detecting a magnitude and a frequency of a signal emitted by the device during rotation of the rotational shaft, and a controller for detecting a lift off speed of the plurality of air foil bearings in response to the frequency of the signal.
Yang teaches an apparatus (fig. 2, device for testing bearing take-off rotating speed of elastic foil radial) (Title “Device For Testing Take-off Rotating Speed Of Elastic Foil Radial Bearing”; Abstract “data collecting system is composed of sensor and its amplifier and calculating machine; the data tested by sensor is collected by collecting card to input into computer to store”) comprising: a device (device comprising shaft 7 and bearings 6 & 13) having a rotational shaft (fig. 2, shaft 7) supported by a plurality of air foil bearings (fig. 2, bearings 6 & 13); a sensor (fig. 2, displacement sensor 9) for detecting a magnitude (radial displacement amplitude) and a frequency (frequency) of a signal emitted by the device (device comprising shaft 7 and bearings 6 & 13) during rotation of the rotational shaft (fig. 2, shaft 7) (see fig. 6; about middle of page 2 “FIG. 6 (a) is before takeoff of the radial displacement response spectrum graph, FIG. 6 (b) is a radial displacement response spectrum graph after takeoff, horizontal coordinate represents frequency, vertical coordinate displacement response amplitudes”), wherein the sensor (fig. 2, displacement sensor 9) is a displacement sensor (fig. 2, displacement sensor 9) (middle paragraph of page 3 “displacement sensor 9 measures displacement signal and carrying out the FFT conversion observing the spectrum change in the frequency domain to identify the takeoff rotating speed”); a speed sensor for detecting a rotational speed of the rotational shaft (fig. 2, shaft 7) and wherein the rotational speed is used to determine a lift off speed (take-off rotating speed) (first paragraph of page 3 “rotating speed sensor 15 measuring the actual working rotating speed”); a controller (data collecting system comprising computer 28) for detecting the lift off speed (take-off rotating speed) of the plurality of air foil bearings (fig. 2, bearings 6 & 13) in response to the frequency of the signal (about middle of page 3 “displacement response spectrum intercepting method, displacement sensor 9 measures displacement signal and carrying out the FFT conversion observing the spectrum change in the frequency domain to identify the takeoff rotating speed”; last actual paragraph of page 3 “taking one displacement sensor 9 measured the displacement signal for analysis, intercepting the displacement signal to FFT transform, observing the spectrum change in the frequency domain to identify a takeoff speed, this is the displacement response spectrum method”), wherein the detection of the lift off speed (take-off rotating speed) is made in response to a sudden change in the frequency of the signal emitted by the device (device comprising shaft 7 and bearings 6 & 13); and a memory (memory storage of computer 28 of data collecting system) for storing the lift off speed (take-off rotating speed) (first paragraph of page 2 “data collecting system consists of a sensor 25 and amplifier 26 and computer 28. The sensor 25 signal is amplified by the amplifier 26 through the acquisition card 27 and input into the computer 28 for storage, so as to analyze, the sensor 25 comprises a photoelectric speed sensor (15), a pressure sensor (24) and electric eddy current displacement sensor 9”; middle paragraph of page 3 “storing all sensor sampling data by computer 28 for analysis”), wherein the frequency (frequency) of a signal is stored in the memory (memory storage of computer 28 of data collecting system) with a corresponding rotational speed (measured via rotating speed sensor 15) of the rotational shaft (fig. 2, shaft 7) (middle paragraph of page 3 “storing all sensor sampling data by computer 28 for analysis”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Yang’s bearing lift-off/take-off speed determination means and associated method with Taniguchi’s apparatus that controls speed based on the lift-off/floating speed setting, thereby providing a convenient means of experimentally determining the lift-off speed and thus providing said determined lift-off speed that is tailored to the specifics of the particular device including said device’s current state/circumstances as opposed to generically associated/recommended lift-off speed values. Complimentarily, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Taniguchi’s apparatus with control means and associated method for controlling rotational speed of the rotational shaft in response to the lift off speed, thereby providing the expected and routine application of utilizing Yang’s experimentally determined lift-off speed for a marketable and utilitarian pursuit which protects the life of a device and its components—such as the bearing—by preventing said life from being shortened, as well reducing associated costs/time of replacement and/or maintenance. The Examiner additionally notes that the Courts have ruled an obviousness analysis based on the collective teachings of the references does not depend on the order in which the references are listed in the statement of the rejection. See In re Bush, 296 F.2d 491, 496 (CCPA 1961): “In a case of this type where a rejection is predicated on two references each containing pertinent disclosure which has been pointed out to the applicant, we deem it to be of no significance, but merely a matter of exposition, that the rejection is stated to be on A in view of B instead of on B in view of A, or to term one reference primary and the other secondary.”
Regarding claim 2, which depends on claim 1,
Taniguchi teaches wherein the device (fig. 1, compressor 1) is a compressor (Title; Abstract “provide a compressor”).
Regarding claim 3, which depends on claim 1,
Taniguchi teaches further including a drive motor (figs. 1 & 3, motor 20) for rotating the rotational shaft (fig. 1, rotating shaft 13) in response to a first control signal from the controller (fig. 3, controller 61) (about middle of page “motor (20) that rotates the rotating shaft (13) at a high speed on the inner periphery of the rotating shaft support (11a), and a pair of front and rear radial foil bearings (21) that support the rotating shaft (13)”; last paragraph of page 6 “controller (61) can be a motor drive circuit (62), a magnetic bearing drive circuit (63), a position sensor drive circuit (64), a rotation sensor drive circuit (65), and a software program”).
Regarding claim 4, which depends on claim 1,
Taniguchi teaches where the device (fig. 1, compressor 1) is a compressor (Title; Abstract “provide a compressor”) and wherein the device controller (fig. 3, controller 61) limits the rotational speed of the rotational shaft (fig. 1, rotating shaft 13) to a rotational speed greater than the lift off speed (floating rotational speed) (Abstract “A control device 61 has a rotating speed determining means setting the lowest rotating speed of the rotary shaft 13 to a value larger than a floating rotating speed of the radial foil bearings 21 and 22, and the lowest rotating speed maintaining means maintaining a rotating speed of the rotary shaft 13 to the lowest rotating speed or more by detecting the rotating speed by a rotation sensor 36”; second to last paragraph of page 3 “where the rotational speed slightly higher than this is set as the minimum rotational speed is set, and in the minimum rotational speed maintaining means The non-contact state can be reliably maintained by detecting the rotation speed of the rotation shaft with the rotation sensor and maintaining the rotation speed at or above the minimum rotation speed”; last paragraph of page 4 “since the minimum rotational speed of the rotating shaft is maintained at a value larger than the floating rotational speed of the radial foil bearing, the burden on the radial foil bearing can be reduced and the bearing life can be prevented from being shortened”).
Regarding claim 5, which depends on claim 1, as best understood,
Taniguchi as previously modified by Yang (see analysis of independent claim) suggests wherein the controller (fig. 3, controller 61) is further configured for generating a first control signal to control the device (fig. 1, compressor 1) to spin at a predetermined operational rotational speed (about middle of page 7 “The DSP (66) also calculates the rotation speed of the rotation shaft (13) from the rotation speed detection signal of the rotation sensor drive circuit (65), and controls the rotation speed of the motor (20) based on this. The command signal is output to the motor drive circuit (62). The motor drive circuit (62) includes an inverter and controls the rotation speed of the motor (20) based on the rotation speed command signal. As a result, the rotating shaft (13) is rotated at high speed by the motor (20) while being supported in a non-contact manner at the target floating position by the radial foil bearings (21), (22)”) and
wherein the detection (as previously modified to include Yang’s detection lift-off detection means) of the lift off speed (floating/take-off rotational speed) is made in response to a sudden change in the frequency of the signal (see Yang fig. 6(a) versus fig. 6(b)) emitted by the device (fig. 1, compressor 1) during that first period of time (period of time evaluated to determine lift-off by Yang) (Yang middle paragraph of page 3 “observing the spectrum change in the frequency domain to identify the takeoff rotating speed”).
Regarding claim 6, which depends on claim 1,
Taniguchi teaches wherein the device controller (fig. 3, controller 61) is configured to maintain the rotational speed of the rotational shaft (fig. 1, rotating shaft 13) above the lift off speed (floating rotational speed) during an operation of the device (fig. 1, compressor 1) (Abstract “A control device 61 has a rotating speed determining means setting the lowest rotating speed of the rotary shaft 13 to a value larger than a floating rotating speed of the radial foil bearings 21 and 22, and the lowest rotating speed maintaining means maintaining a rotating speed of the rotary shaft 13 to the lowest rotating speed or more by detecting the rotating speed by a rotation sensor 36”; second to last paragraph of page 3 “where the rotational speed slightly higher than this is set as the minimum rotational speed is set, and in the minimum rotational speed maintaining means The non-contact state can be reliably maintained by detecting the rotation speed of the rotation shaft with the rotation sensor and maintaining the rotation speed at or above the minimum rotation speed”; last paragraph of page 4 “since the minimum rotational speed of the rotating shaft is maintained at a value larger than the floating rotational speed of the radial foil bearing, the burden on the radial foil bearing can be reduced and the bearing life can be prevented from being shortened”).
Regarding claim 7, which depends on claim 1,
Taniguchi as previously modified by Yang (see analysis of independent claim) suggests wherein the sensor (Yang: fig. 2, displacement sensor 9) is at least one of an accelerometer and a displacement sensor (Yang: fig. 2, displacement sensor 9) (Yang: middle paragraph of page 3 “displacement sensor 9 measures displacement signal and carrying out the FFT conversion observing the spectrum change in the frequency domain to identify the takeoff rotating speed”).
Regarding claim 8, which depends on claim 1, as best understood,
Taniguchi as previously modified by Yang (see analysis of independent claim) suggests further including detecting (measured via: Taniguchi rotation sensor 36; Yang rotating speed sensor 15) a rotational speed of the rotational shaft (fig. 1, rotating shaft 13) and wherein the rotational speed is used to determine the lift off speed (floating/take-off rotational speed) (Yang: first paragraph of page 3 “rotating speed sensor 15 measuring the actual working rotating speed”; see previous citations provided for independent claim). The Examiner respectfully notes that the functional recitation (i.e., detecting a rotational speed of the rotational shaft) has not been given patentable weight because it is narrative in form. In order to be given patentable weight, a functional recitation must be expressed as a "means" for performing the specified function (alternatively, the Examiner suggests including that the apparatus comprises a speed sensor), as set forth in 35 USC § 112, 6th paragraph, and must be supported by recitation in the claim of sufficient structure to warrant the presence of the functional language. In re Fuller, 1929 C.D. 172; 388 O.G. 279.
Regarding claim 9, which depends on claim 1,
Taniguchi as previously modified by Yang (see analysis of independent claim) suggests wherein the frequency of a signal is stored in a memory (memory of controller 61) with a corresponding rotational speed of the rotational shaft (fig. 1, rotating shaft 13) (Yang; middle paragraph of page 3 “storing all sensor sampling data by computer 28 for analysis”).
Regarding claim 10, which depends on claim 1,
Taniguchi teaches wherein the device (fig. 1, compressor 1) is a compressor (Title; Abstract “provide a compressor”) equipped with an electric motor (figs. 1 & 3, motor 20) (Page 7 after middle of page “The motor drive circuit (62) includes an inverter and controls the rotation speed of the motor (20) based on the rotation speed command signal”) (at once envisaged that the motor is electrical, the Examiner emphasizing the use of an inverter) and wherein the electric motor (figs. 1 & 3, motor 20) is operative to maintain an operational rotational speed of the rotational shaft (fig. 1, rotating shaft 13) greater than the lift off speed (floating rotational speed) (Abstract “A control device 61 has a rotating speed determining means setting the lowest rotating speed of the rotary shaft 13 to a value larger than a floating rotating speed of the radial foil bearings 21 and 22, and the lowest rotating speed maintaining means maintaining a rotating speed of the rotary shaft 13 to the lowest rotating speed or more by detecting the rotating speed by a rotation sensor 36”; second to last paragraph of page 3 “where the rotational speed slightly higher than this is set as the minimum rotational speed is set, and in the minimum rotational speed maintaining means The non-contact state can be reliably maintained by detecting the rotation speed of the rotation shaft with the rotation sensor and maintaining the rotation speed at or above the minimum rotation speed”; last paragraph of page 4 “since the minimum rotational speed of the rotating shaft is maintained at a value larger than the floating rotational speed of the radial foil bearing, the burden on the radial foil bearing can be reduced and the bearing life can be prevented from being shortened”).
The Examiner acknowledges that Taniguchi does not explicitly state that the motor is an electric motor.
However, the Examiner takes Official Notice that electric motors—including for compressors—are conventional.
Therefore, either one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed would at once envisaged that Taniguchi reasonably teaches to an ordinary artisan an electric motor (see preceding citation and analysis pertaining to inverter for motor), or nevertheless, or in the alternative, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine a conventional electric motor design with Taniguchi’s motor for the expected and known benefits of efficiency, reliability, customization, and/or (especially pertinent) variable speed control.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure; Applicant is invited to review PTO-892 listing relevant Prior Art cited by the Examiner.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to DAVID L SINGER whose telephone number is 303-297-4317. The Examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 6:00pm CT, EXCEPT alternating Friday.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, John Breene can be reached on 571-272-4107. 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.
/DAVID L SINGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855 26FEB2026