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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed with respect to the drawing objections have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Figures 1a, 1b, and 6 show the features of claim 8, but Applicant’s arguments do not explain in what manner these figures depict the material claimed not shown. Figure 6, for example, does not show “wherein the supporting wall is adapted to be fastened to at least one of a component of the refrigeration system and the compressor”. Additional discussion regarding how Figures 1a, 1b, and 6 would be needed for Examiner to reconsider the rejection based on arguments.
Applicant’s arguments, filed with respect to the claim objection(s) have been fully considered and are persuasive in view of the amendment. Accordingly, the previously set forth claim objection(s) have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s remarks regarding the claim interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) are acknowledged. The claim interpretation is repeated below for convenience.
Applicant's arguments filed with respect to the prior art rejections have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Quantech fails to meet limitations “a plurality of elongated members […]” and “[…] extends along a length of the evaporator between a first end and a second end”. Regarding the latter limitation, Examiner respectfully notes that “a length” is broad, and merely requires extension along any length of the evaporator between the first/second end (see the Examiner’s mapping of the newly filed claims for additional discussion). Regarding the former limitation, Examiner believes the difficulty may lie in the size/clarity of the Figure. Examiner has attempted to provide a larger copy of annotated Fig A at the end of the Office Action. The plurality of elongated members are at minimum front/back (Quantech Figure 4) and/or left/right (see Annotated Figure 5). In the original drawing, it is apparent from Figure 4 of Quantech that there are at minimum front/back elongated members. Similarity Figure 5, shows a rear view and additionally shows left/right elongated members. Thus the rejections are maintained below. Regarding the 103 rejections, Examiner notes that the teaching references were not and are not relied upon to the subject matter of claims 1 and 13, thus Applicant’s arguments are considered moot. It is recommended that Applicant review both this action and the foreign search report filed 19 May 2025 prior to responding to this action to see if additional structural details can be incorporated into the claims to overcome both Quantech and the references applied by the foreign examiner. If Applicant would like to discuss such amendments with the Examiner, the Examiner can be available for an interview with the Applicant.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 19 May 2025 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(3)(i) because it does not include a concise explanation of the relevance, as it is presently understood by the individual designated in 37 CFR 1.56(c) most knowledgeable about the content of the information, of each reference listed that is not in the English language. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered. Specifically, the reference indicated by line-through was not submitted with an English translation, an English abstract, or a statement of relevance.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “wherein the supporting wall is adapted to be fastened to at least one of a component of the refrigeration system and the compressor” (claim 8) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “fastening member” (i.e. member [for] fastening) in claims 3 and 15-16.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
In the case of fastening member, the corresponding structure is found in par 0010 of the specification: “the term ‘fastening member’ and ‘fastener’ may be referred to any threaded fastener known in the art for joining or affixing two or more components”.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim limitations “elongated members”, “base member” are NOT being interpreted as invoking 35 U.S.C 112(f) since the generic placeholder(s) are not accompanied by functional language or they include structural modifiers prior to the generic placeholder “member(s)”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 9-12, 21, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Quantech (NPL1: Water-cooled Liquid Chillers Hermetic Scroll, Quantech).
Regarding claim 1, Quantech discloses a mounting assembly (annotated Fig A) for a refrigeration system (refrigeration system depicted in Fig 4, 5, and 8), the mounting assembly comprising: a plurality of elongated members (annotated Fig A and B) adapted to be mounted on an evaporator of the refrigeration system (see Fig 4), wherein each of the plurality of elongated members is positioned above the evaporator and extends along a length of the evaporator between a first end and a second end of the evaporator (see annotated Fig A and B), and each of the plurality of elongated members is adapted to mount at least a compressor (Fig 4 one compressor of the six compressors depicted; multiple compressors are mounted) of the refrigeration system thereon (annotated Fig A and B, compressors are supported by elongated members).
PNG
media_image1.png
996
1595
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Quantech further discloses a plurality of support brackets adapted to be coupled to the first end and the second end of the evaporator (annotated Fig A, it is understood there are support brackets on the other side of the system, see for example the embodiment in the cover photo on page 1 of Quantech), wherein each of the plurality of support brackets is coupled to one of a first tube sheet defining the first end of the evaporator and a second tube sheet defining the second end of the evaporator (annotated Fig A), and the plurality of support brackets is adapted to be coupled to the plurality of elongated members (see annotated Fig A).
PNG
media_image2.png
856
1250
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
584
864
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Quantech further discloses wherein each of the plurality of elongated members is embodied as one of a square beam, a rectangular beam, and a U-profile beam (annotated Fig B: elongated member can be considered square, rectangular, and U-profile).
Regarding claim 10, Quantech further discloses wherein the mounting assembly comprises a mounting beam adapted to be coupled to the first tube sheet and the second tube sheet (annotated Fig A and B) and positioned vertically below one of the plurality of elongated members (annotated Fig B: mounting beam positioned below elongated members), wherein the mounting beam is adapted to be fastened to at least one component of the refrigeration system (annotated Fig B, mounting beam is fastened to first and second tube sheets).
Regarding claim 11, Quantech further discloses wherein each of the plurality of elongated members (annotated Fig A) transfers vibrations from the compressor to the plurality of support brackets (annotated Fig A: labelled “support brackets”) mounted on the first tube sheet and second tube sheet of the evaporator (annotated Fig A: the disclosed structure is capable of transferring vibrations since the support brackets are physically coupled to the compressor).
Regarding claim 12, Quantech further discloses at least one base member adapted to be coupled to one of tube sheets of a condenser of the refrigeration system (see annotated Fig A: base member(s) coupled to condenser via parts labelled “first set of tube sheets”), wherein one of the tube sheets of the condenser is fastened with one of the first tube sheet and the second tube sheet of the evaporator which is disposed vertically above the condenser (annotated Fig A: see where first/second tube sheet of evaporator meet “first set of tube sheets” of condenser).
Regarding claim 21, Quantech further discloses wherein a lateral gap is defined between the plurality of elongated members when coupled to a plurality of support brackets (see annotated Fig A and see Annotated Figure 5, below: the elongated members are spaced apart laterally both in the front/back direction and in the left/right direction between first and second sets of three compressors when mounted on the support brackets noted in Fig A: note that Figure 5 is a rear view of the system of Figure 4).
Regarding claim 22, Quantech further discloses wherein each of the plurality of elongated members are configured to extend along an entire length of the evaporator between the first end and the second end of the evaporator (see at least Annotated Figure 5, below and annotated Fig A: each elongated member extends along an entire length of the evaporator defined by first or second sets of three compressors between the first end and the second end of the evaporator).
Claim(s) 13, 18 and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Quantech (NPL1: Water-cooled Liquid Chillers Hermetic Scroll, Quantech).
Regarding claim 13, Quantech discloses a refrigeration system (see Fig 4, 5, and 8) comprising: a condenser (see Fig 4) having a first set of tube sheets disposed at each end of the condenser (annotated Fig A); an evaporator (see Fig 4) in fluid communication with the condenser and positioned vertically above the condenser (see Fig 4; Fig 6 depicts schematic of refrigerant flow between condenser and evaporator), the evaporator comprising a second set of tube sheets adapted to be coupled to the first set of tube sheets (annotated Fig A, see Fig 4, 5, 8: first set and second set of tube sheets are coupled together); a compressor (see Fig 4, labelled “compressors”) in fluid communication with each of the condenser and the evaporator (see Fig 6) and, positioned vertically above the evaporator (see Fig 4); and a mounting assembly (annotated Fig B) adapted to mount the compressor vertically above the evaporator (annotated Fig B: compressor(s) mounted above evaporator by mounting assembly), the mounting assembly comprising: a plurality of elongated members adapted to be mounted on the evaporator (annotated Fig A and B, elongated members are on top of evaporator), wherein each of the plurality of elongated members is positioned above the evaporator and extend along a length of the evaporator (annotated Fig A and B) between a first end and a second end of the evaporator (annotated Fig A and B), and wherein each of the plurality of elongated members is adapted to mount at least the compressor thereon (annotated Fig A and B, compressors are supported by elongated members).
Regarding claim 18, Quantech further discloses wherein the mounting assembly comprises a mounting beam adapted to be coupled to the first set of tube sheets of the condenser (annotated Fig A and B: mounting beam is coupled to first set of tube sheets via second set of tube sheets) and positioned vertically below one of the plurality of elongated members (annotated Fig B: mounting beam positioned below elongated members), and wherein the mounting beam is adapted to be fastened to at least one component of the refrigeration system (annotated Fig B, mounting beam is fastened to second set of tube sheets).
Regarding claim 23, Quantech further discloses wherein a lateral gap is defined between the plurality of elongated members when coupled to a plurality of support brackets (see annotated Fig A and see Annotated Figure 5, below: the elongated members are spaced apart laterally both in the front/back direction and in the left/right direction between first and second sets of three compressors when mounted on the support brackets noted in Fig A: note that Figure 5 is a rear view of the system of Figure 4).
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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quantech as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Strut (NPL2: Strut Fittings).
Regarding claim 3, Quantech does not disclose wherein each of the plurality of support brackets comprises: a mounting plate adapted to be coupled to one of the first tube sheet and the second tube sheet, wherein the mounting plate is aligned parallel to one of the first tube sheet and the second tube sheet.
However, the use of brackets to connect one component to another is old and well known as evidenced by Strut. Strut teaches a bracket with a mounting plate (see annotated Fig C, Strut page 34/49).
It would, therefore, have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the system of Modified Quantech with wherein each of the plurality of support brackets comprises: a mounting plate adapted to be coupled to one of the first tube sheet and the second tube sheet, wherein the mounting plate is aligned parallel to one of the first tube sheet and the second tube sheet, since, as evidenced by Strut, such provision is old and well-known, and would provide the predictable benefit(s) of providing more support to stabilize the position of the compressor. The modification will result such that the part of the mounting plate labeled “mounting portion” in annotated Fig C is secured to the first and/or second tube sheet(s) and therefore the mounting plate will be aligned parallel to the first or second tube sheet.
Claim(s) 4-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quantech and Strut, as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Kim (KR-100836841-B1).
Regarding claim 4, Modified Quantech further discloses wherein the mounting plate comprises: a mounting portion having a first end and a second end distal to the first end (see annotated Fig C), wherein the mounting portion is adapted to be fastened to one of the first tube sheet and the second tube sheet (Quantech as modified by Strut: the mounting portion of Strut would be capable of fastening to the first and/or second tube sheets); and a pair of supporting legs extending from the first end and the second end of the mounting portion (annotated Fig C).
Modified Quantech does not disclose wherein each of the pair of supporting legs comprises a plurality of ridges adapted to receive at least one fastening member to support the mounting plate on one of the first tube sheet and the second tube sheet.
However, it is old and well-known to use a plurality of ridges adapted to receive fastening members, as evidenced by Kim. Kim teaches wherein a pair of supporting legs (annotated Fig D) comprises a plurality of ridges (Kim Fig 4 fastening grooves 110 and 120) adapted to receive at least one fastening member (Kim Fig 4 fastener(s) 300).
It would, therefore, have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the system of Modified Quantech with wherein each of the pair of supporting legs comprises a plurality of ridges adapted to receive at least one fastening member to support the mounting plate on one of the first tube sheet and the second tube sheet, since, as evidenced by Kim, such provision is old and well-known, and would provide the predictable benefit(s) of improving the physical stability of the compressor by providing more fasteners to secure it into position.
Regarding claim 5, Modified Quantech further discloses wherein each of the plurality of support brackets comprises a pair of flanges orthogonally extending from the pair of supporting legs (annotated Fig C, flanges extend orthogonal to support legs) of the mounting plate and adapted to be coupled to the plurality of elongated members (Quantech and annotated Fig C, flanges are coupled to elongated members).
Regarding claim 6, Modified Quantech further discloses wherein each of the pair of flanges is adapted to be fastened to at least one end of one of the plurality of elongated members (annotated Fig C, flange is shown fastened to end of elongated member(s)).
Regarding claim 7, Modified Quantech further discloses wherein each of the plurality of elongated members comprises a mounting wall (see annotated Fig B and C) and a supporting wall (see annotated Fig B and C) opposite to the mounting wall (opposite orientation: orthogonal vs parallel), and wherein the mounting wall is adapted to be aligned parallel to one of the pair of flanges and fastened thereof (see annotated Fig C: mounting wall fastened to flanges).
Regarding claim 8, Modified Quantech further discloses wherein the supporting wall (annotated Fig B) is adapted to be fastened to at least one of a component of the refrigeration system (Quantech, additional compressors shown in Fig 4 and 8) and the compressor (Quantech, one of six compressors depicted in Fig 4 and 8).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quantech as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Strut (NPL2: Strut Fittings).
Regarding claim 14, Quantech discloses a plurality of support brackets coupled to the second set of tube sheets (annotated Fig A, it is understood there are support brackets on the other side of the system, see for example the embodiment in the cover photo on page 1 of Quantech) defining the first end and the second end of the evaporator (annotated Fig A), wherein the plurality of support brackets is adapted to be coupled to the plurality of elongated members (see annotated Fig A).
Quantech does not disclose wherein each of the plurality of support brackets comprises: a mounting plate adapted to be coupled to one of the second set of tube sheets, wherein the mounting plate is aligned parallel to one of the second set of tube sheets.
However, the use of brackets to connect one component to another is old and well known as evidenced by Strut. Strut teaches a bracket with a mounting plate (see annotated Fig C, Strut page 34/49).
It would, therefore, have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the system of Modified Quantech with wherein each of the plurality of support brackets comprises: a mounting plate adapted to be coupled to one of the second set of tube sheets, wherein the mounting plate is aligned parallel to one of the second set of tube sheets, since, as evidenced by Strut, such provision is old and well-known, and would provide the predictable benefit(s) of providing more support to stabilize the position of the compressor. The modification will result such that the part of the mounting plate labeled “mounting portion” in annotated Fig C is secured to the second set of tube sheets and therefore the mounting plate will be aligned parallel to one of the second set of tube sheets.
Claim(s) 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quantech, as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Strut (NPL2: Strut Fittings) and Kim (KR-100836841-B1).
Regarding claim 15, Quantech does not disclose wherein the mounting plate comprises: a mounting portion having a first end and a second end distal to the first end, wherein the mounting portion is adapted to be fastened to one of the second set of tube sheets; and a pair of supporting legs extending from the first end and the second end of the mounting portion, wherein each of the pair of supporting legs comprises a plurality of ridges adapted to receive at least one fastening member to support the mounting plate on one of the second set of tube sheets.
Strut teaches wherein a mounting plate comprises: a mounting portion having a first end and a second end distal to the first end (see annotated Fig C), wherein the mounting portion is adapted to be fastened to one of the second set of tube sheets (Quantech as modified by Strut: the mounting portion of Strut would be capable of fastening to the second set of tube sheets); and a pair of supporting legs extending from the first end and the second end of the mounting portion (annotated Fig C).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the system of Quantech with wherein the mounting plate comprises: a mounting portion having a first end and a second end distal to the first end, wherein the mounting portion is adapted to be fastened to one of the second set of tube sheets; and a pair of supporting legs extending from the first end and the second end of the mounting portion: that is using the known technique of using mounting portions to mount to another surface, as taught by Strut, to provide the system of Quantech with wherein the mounting plate comprises: a mounting portion having a first end and a second end distal to the first end, wherein the mounting portion is adapted to be fastened to one of the second set of tube sheets; and a pair of supporting legs extending from the first end and the second end of the mounting portion. would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art (see KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007)) and would provide the benefit of providing a support structure to fix to another plate in order to stabilize the position of the compressor.
Furthermore, it is old and well-known to use a plurality of ridges adapted to receive fastening members, as evidenced by Kim. Kim teaches wherein a pair of supporting legs (annotated Fig D) comprises a plurality of ridges (Kim Fig 4 fastening grooves 110 and 120) adapted to receive at least one fastening member (Kim Fig 4 fastener(s) 300).
It would, therefore, have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to provide the system of Modified Quantech with wherein each of the pair of supporting legs comprises a plurality of ridges adapted to receive at least one fastening member to support the mounting plate on one of the second set of tube sheets, since, as evidenced by Kim, such provision is old and well-known, and would provide the predictable benefit(s) of improving the physical stability of the compressor by providing more fasteners to secure it into position.
Regarding claim 16, Modified Quantech further discloses wherein each of the plurality of support brackets comprises a pair of flanges orthogonally extending from the pair of supporting legs (annotated Fig C, flanges extend orthogonal to support legs) of the mounting plate and adapted to be coupled to the plurality of elongated members (Quantech and annotated Fig C, flanges are coupled to elongated members).
PNG
media_image1.png
996
1595
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
814
1107
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
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 TAVIA SULLENS whose telephone number is (571)272-3749. The examiner can normally be reached M-R 6:30-4:30 Eastern.
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, Jianying Atkisson can be reached at 571-270-7740. 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.
/TAVIA SULLENS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights