DETAILED ACTION
Application 18/531,997, “ELECTRIC WORK VEHICLE”, was filed with the USPTO on 12/07/2023 and has a has PRO 63/546,266 filed on 10/30/2023.
This office action is in response to communication filed on 12/7/2023.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5/2/2024 and 5/13/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: plate 104R [0133] and the third battery management unit portion 140-4 (in last sentence of [0204]) (paragraph citations are based on the specification filed on 12/7/2023). 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. 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.
The drawings are objected to because
P17, P21/P22 and P23 in Fig. 16 and P28 in Fig. 21 are not broken lines. See MPEP 608.02-V (h)-(3);
Numbers and letters in Fig. 30 are too small to read. “Numbers, letters, and reference characters must measure at least .32 cm. (1/8 inch) in height.” see MPEP 608.02-V (p)-(3).
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: (paragraph citations are based on the specification filed on 12/7/2023)
[0095]: “the third front surface 9C” is conflict with “the third front surface 9D”;
[0099]: “fifth evaporator/evaporator coil 64” is conflict with “the sixth expansion valve 64”;
[0118]: “fourth battery housing portion 30” appears to be 32;
[0128]: “first battery housing portion 28” appears to be 26;
[0131]: “in a preferred embodiments”, Examiner suggests removing “a” or changing it to “in a preferred embodiment”;
[0146] and [0147]: “fourth battery housing portion 62” appears to be 32;
[0162]: in the last sentence “second opening 302I-2” appears to be a typo of 30I-2;
[0186]: “for example, as shown in Figs. 1, 29A….”, however, there’s no Fig. 1 filed on 12/7/2023.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 and claim 15 are duplicate claims.
Applicant is advised that should claim 2 be found allowable, claim 15 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate thereof. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-4 and 15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 13-16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,691,749 (hereinafter 749’). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because
Regarding claim 1, 749’ teaches an electric work vehicle (electric work vehicle, claim 13 of 749’) comprising:
a battery housing (battery housing, claim 1 of 749’) including a plurality of battery housing portions (second battery housing section and third battery housing section, claim 1 of 749’); wherein
the plurality of battery housing portions (second battery housing section and third battery housing section, claim 1 of 749’) include a first battery housing portion (second battery housing section, claim 13 of 749’) and a second battery housing portion (third battery housing section, claim 13 of 749’);
the first battery housing portion (second battery housing section, claim 13 of 749’) includes a first stepped portion that defines a first space (see claim 13 of 749’); and
at least a portion of the second battery housing portion (third battery housing section, claim 13 of 749’) is located within the first space (see claim 13 of 749’).
Regarding claim 2, 749’ teaches wherein
the second battery housing portion (third battery housing section, claim 14 of 749’) is located below the first battery housing portion (second battery housing section, claim 14 of 749’) in an up-down direction of the electric work vehicle (see claim 14 of 749’).
Regarding claim 3, 749’ teaches wherein
a front surface of the second battery housing portion (third battery housing section, claim 15 of 749’) is located at a same or substantially same location as a front surface of the first battery housing portion (second battery housing section, claim 15 of 749’) in a front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle (see claim 15 of 749’).
Regarding claim 4, 749’ teaches wherein
a portion of the first battery housing portion (second battery housing section, claim 16 of 749’) is farther rearward than the second battery housing portion (third battery housing section, claim 16 of 749’) in the front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle (see claim 16 of 749’).
Regarding claim 15, 749’ teaches wherein
the first battery housing portion (second battery housing section, claim 14 of 749’) is located above the second battery housing portion (third battery housing section, claim 14 of 749’) in an up-down direction of the electric work vehicle (note: “third battery housing section is below second battery housing section” (see claim 14 of 749’) is equal to say “second battery housing section is above third battery housing section”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 10-13 and 16-17 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.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the up-down direction of the electric work vehicle". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the aforementioned limitation has been interpreted as “an up-down direction of the electric work vehicle".
Claims 16 and 17 recite the limitation "the frame". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the aforementioned limitation has been interpreted as “a frame".
Claims 11-13 are rejected as they depend from, and therefore incorporate the claimed subject matter from claims rejected under this statute.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-8 and 10-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Ito et al. (US 20170136864 A1, provided on IDS filed on 5/13/2025).
Regarding claim 1, Ito et al. teaches an electric work vehicle (electric work vehicle, see [0055] and Fig. 2) comprising:
a battery housing (60, Fig. 1) including a plurality of battery housing portions (S1/S2/S3/S4, Fig. 1); wherein
the plurality of battery housing portions (S1/S2/S3/S4, Fig. 1) include a first battery housing portion (first battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8; note: entire space above 63 inside battery pack case 6, see Fig. 8) and a second battery housing portion (second battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8; note: includes S2 and part of S4);
the first battery housing portion (first battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8) includes a first stepped portion (first stepped portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8; note: “stepped” see from 63a to 63b in Fig. 9) that defines a first space (S4, Fig. 8); and
at least a portion of the second battery housing portion (second battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8) is located within the first space (S4, Fig. 8).
PNG
media_image1.png
771
1418
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Ito et al. teaches wherein the second battery housing portion (second battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8) is located below the first battery housing portion (first battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8) in an up-down direction of the electric work vehicle (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 3, Ito et al. teaches wherein a front surface of the second battery housing portion (front surface of second battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8) is located at a same (front end of 61, see Fig. 3) or substantially same location as a front surface of the first battery housing portion (front surface of first battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8) in a front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 4, Ito et al. teaches wherein a portion (the upper part of G2 in first battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8) of the first battery housing portion (first battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8) is farther rearward than the second battery housing portion (second battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8) in the front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 5, Ito et al. teaches wherein the first battery housing portion (first battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8) includes a second stepped portion (second stepped portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8; note: “stepped” see from 613 to 6B in Fig. 7) that defines a second space (second space, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8); and
at least a portion of a first warm air path (S1 to S3 to G2, see Fig. 8) to exhaust warm air from the first battery housing portion (first battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8) is located within the second space (second space, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 6, Ito et al. teaches wherein the first warm air path (S1 to S3 to G2, see Fig. 8) includes a duct (formed by 63, 64, 60a and two sidewalls of 64, see Figs 1 and 8) located within the second space (second space, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 7, Ito et al. teaches wherein the second space (second space, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8) is located higher than the first space (S4, Fig. 8) in an up-down direction of the electric work vehicle (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 8, Ito et al. teaches wherein the second battery housing portion (second battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8) includes a third stepped portion (third stepped portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8) that defines a third space (third space, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8); and
at least a portion of a second warm air path (S4 to S2 to G1, see Fig. 8) to exhaust warm air from the second battery housing portion (second battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8) is located within the third space (third space, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 10, Ito et al. teaches wherein the third space (third space, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8) is located lower than the first space (S4, Fig. 8) in the up-down direction of the electric work vehicle (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 11, Ito et al. teaches wherein the third space (third space, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 11-13)) is located rearward of a front axle (front axle, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 11-13); note: front axle is a part of 20 that is in front of the rearmost part of 20) of the electric work vehicle in the front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 11-13)).
PNG
media_image2.png
752
1387
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12, Ito et al. teaches wherein the first battery housing portion (first battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 11-13)) includes a second stepped portion (second stepped portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 11-13)) that defines a second space (second space, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 11-13)); and
the third space (third space, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 11-13)) is located rearward of the second space (second space, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 11-13)) in the front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 11-13)).
Regarding claim 13, Ito et al. teaches wherein
the second space (second space, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 11-13)) is located forward of the front axle (front axle, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 11-13)) of the electric work vehicle in the front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 11-13)).
Regarding claim 14, Ito et al. teaches further comprising:
a frame (frame, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claim 14); note: frame is a part of 22b in the bracket) that supports the second battery housing portion (second battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claim 14)) and a front axle (23, Fig. 8; note: 23 is in front of the rearmost part of 20) of the electric work vehicle;
the frame (frame, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claim 14)) is mounted between the second battery housing portion (second battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claim 14)) and the front axle (23, Fig. 8) in an up-down direction of the electric work vehicle (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claim 14)); and
a second warm air path (S4 to S2 to G1, see Fig. 8) to exhaust air from the second battery housing portion (second battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claim 14)) is located between an outside surface (61, Fig. 9) of the second battery housing portion (second battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claim 14)) and an outside surface (surface of 22b in the direction from 31L to 31R, see Fig. 6) of the frame (frame, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claim 14); frame is a part of 22b) in a left-right direction (from 31L to 31R, see Fig. 6) of the electric work vehicle.
PNG
media_image3.png
753
1387
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, Ito et al. teaches wherein the first battery housing portion (first battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8) is located above the second battery housing portion (second battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8) in an up-down direction of the electric work vehicle (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 16, Ito et al. teaches wherein the frame (20 (21/22/23), Fig. 6; interpretation see 112b rejection above) extends farther rearward (most rear 23 is farther rearward than 6, see Fig. 6) than the second battery housing portion (second battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8) in the front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 17, Ito et al. teaches wherein a rearmost portion (rearmost portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claim 17)) of the frame (23, Fig. 8; interpretation see 112b rejection above) is forward of a rear surface (rear surface of G2, Fig. 8) of the first battery housing portion (first battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8) in the front-rear direction of the electric work vehicle (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8).
PNG
media_image4.png
754
1387
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 18, Ito et al. teaches further comprising:
a frame (23, Fig. 8) that supports the second battery housing portion (second battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 18-19)) and a front axle (front axle, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 18-19); note: frame is a part of 22b in the bracket and is in front of the rearmost 22b) of the electric work vehicle; wherein
the second battery housing portion (second battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 18-19)) includes a third stepped portion (third stepped portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 18-19)) that defines a third space (third space, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 18-19);
at least a portion of a second warm air path (S4 to S2 to G1, see Fig. 8) to exhaust warm air from the second battery housing portion (second battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 18-19)) is located within the third space (third space, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 18-19)); and
at least a portion of the frame (23, Fig. 8) is located within the third space (third space, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 18-19)).
PNG
media_image5.png
810
1385
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 19, Ito et al. teaches wherein the frame (23, Fig. 8) is mounted between the second battery housing portion (second battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 18-19)) and the front axle (front axle, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 18-19)) in an up-down direction (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claims 18-19)) of the electric work vehicle.
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 following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 9 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito et al. (US 20170136864 A1, provided on IDS filed on 5/13/2025) in view of Ichikawa (US 20120247846 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Ito et al. does not teach wherein the second warm air path includes a duct located within the third space.
Ichikawa teaches wherein the second warm air path (from B to 68 to 66, see Fig. 1) includes a duct (66, Fig. 1) located within the third space (B, Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the third space (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8) taught by Ito et al. by adding the air-discharge duct taught by Ichikawa to feed out air from the unit housing case to the outside of the cabin (see Ichikawa [0146]).
Regarding claim 20, Ito et al. teaches further comprising:
a frame (frame, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claim 14); note: frame is a part of 22b in the bracket) that supports the second battery housing portion (second battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claim 14)) and a front axle (23, Fig. 8; note: 23 is in front of the rearmost part of 20) of the electric work vehicle;
the frame (frame, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claim 14)) is mounted between the second battery housing portion (second battery housing portion, see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claim 14)) and the front axle (23, Fig. 8) in an up-down direction of the electric work vehicle (see Examiner’s Annotated Fig. 8 (claim 14)).
Ito et al. does not teach wherein
the frame houses one or more evaporators.
Ichikawa teaches the frame (cross frame, [0153]) houses one or more evaporators (evaporator, [0153]; note: air conditioning unit 75 has an evaporator, [0153], 75 see Fig. 8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the vehicle body frame taught by Ito et al. by adding the air conditioner having an evaporator taught by Ichikawa to cool air (see Ichikawa [0154]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NING CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1163. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 AM - 4:30 PM.
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, Tiffany Legette can be reached at (571) 270-7078. 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.
/NING CHEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1723 /TIFFANY LEGETTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1723
Prosecution Insights