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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/17/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 8 and 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.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “a permittivity that is from about 0.8 to about 1.8” which renders the claim indefinite. The term “about 0.8 to about 1.8 is a relative term wherein the specifications fail to disclose what the term “about” means. It is unclear what constitutes “about” in this case, can the number be 1%, 3%, or 5% off? For the purposes of examination, the examiner, as best understood, will interpret the claim to mean “a permittivity that is from 0.8 to 1.8”.
Claim 21 recites the limitation “the first end” which renders the claim indefinite. The term “the first end” lacks sufficient antecedent basis since a first end was never recited in the claim earlier. For the purposes of examination, the examiner, as best understood, will interpret the claim to mean “a first end”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
(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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9, 11, 13-15, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Mallegol et al. (US 20240195074 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Mallegol et al. discloses a choke plate assembly (Antenna system 100 comprise a first 113 and second 133 antenna separated by a decoupling device 15 decoupling that serves as a choke assembly that suppresses radio waves between antennas as seen in figures 1-2 of Mallegol et al.) comprising:
a number of electromagnetic resonant structures that suppresses electromagnetic waves travelling through the number of electromagnetic resonant structures (Decoupling device 15 comprises a number of cells 152 wherein each of the cells has a raised wall structure and cavities that are designed to suppress electromagnetic waves by trapping and absorbing them wherein said cells are designed with specific parameters relative to the wavelength of the minimum frequency; Paragraph 47-83 and 100-125 as well as figures 1-2 and 5-6 of Mallegol et al.); and
a dielectric material that encompasses the number of electromagnetic resonant structures (Recessed portions of the cell including cavity portion of each of the cells and the space between cells can be filled with a complementary material like thermoplastics ABS, PLA, and PA which include dielectric material; Paragraph 80 of Mallegol et al.).
Examiners Note – The examiner acknowledges the special definition of the term “a number” to mean “one or more” as taught in paragraph 39 of the specifications.
PNG
media_image1.png
616
590
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
712
600
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Mallegol et al. further discloses a skin layer covering the number of electromagnetic resonant structures and the dielectric material (Decoupling structure 15 and its cells may be covered by a radome layer 140 serving as a skin layer; Paragraph 57 and figure 1 of Mallegol et al.).
Regarding Claim 3, Mallegol et al. further discloses wherein the number of electromagnetic resonant structures is configured to suppress the electromagnetic waves travelling through the number of electromagnetic resonant structures by at least one of blocking electromagnetic waves, reflecting the electromagnetic waves away from an initial direction of travel for the electromagnetic waves, or dissipating electromagnetic energy in the electromagnetic waves (Decoupling structure 15 is designed to suppress the electromagnetic waves, like creeping waves, between antennas in array 101 and array 102 by trapping them in the recessed pattern formed by cavities in cells or space between cells wherein the waves would be reflected around in the recessed pattern and then absorbed by the structure thus dissipating them and some of the waves would also be blocked by the raised wall as well; Paragraph 47-83 and 100-125).
Regarding Claim 4, Mallegol et al. further discloses a choke plate tray, wherein the number of electromagnetic resonant structures is connected to the choke plate tray (Bottom surface of recess 107 designed for decoupling device 15 or the base plate 154 of decoupling device 15 may serve as a choke plate tray on which the cells 152 comprising resonant structures are disposed; Paragraph 47-83 and figure 1-2 of Mallegol et al.).
Regarding Claim 5, Mallegol et al. further discloses wherein the number of electromagnetic resonant structures is configured to suppress the electromagnetic waves travelling through the number of electromagnetic resonant structures from a first antenna adjacent to a first end of the choke plate assembly to a second antenna adjacent to a second end of the choke plate assembly (Decoupling structure 15 is designed to suppress the electromagnetic waves, like creeping waves, between antennas 113 and 133 in array 101 and array 102 by trapping them in the recessed pattern formed by cavities in cells or space between cells wherein the waves would be reflected around in the recessed pattern and then absorbed by the structure thus dissipating them and some of the waves would also be blocked by the raised wall as well; Paragraph 47-83 and 100-125).
Regarding Claim 6, Mallegol et al. further discloses wherein the number of electromagnetic resonant structures is selected from at least one of a post, a wall, a slat, a ring, a conical cylinder, a pyramid, a hole, a slot, a sphere, or a ribbon (Decoupling devices 15 comprises unit cells 152 with raised walls 156 and cavity slots in the wall which are designed with parameters dependent on wavelength of the lowest frequency; Paragraph 47-83 and figures 1-2 of Mallegol et al.).
Regarding Claim 7, Mallegol et al. further discloses wherein the dielectric material is selected from at least one of a foam or a solid resin (Dielectric material used to fill the decoupling device 15 may include complementary material like thermoplastics ABS, PLA, and PA wherein ABS is a solid thermoplastic resin and it is also taught that dielectric foam may be used to fill corrugations; Paragraph 17 and 80 of Mallegol et al.).
Regarding Claim 9, Mallegol et al. further discloses wherein the number of electromagnetic resonant structures is configured to suppress the electromagnetic waves having a number of frequencies (Decoupling device is designed to operate over one or more frequencies like frequency F1 and F2 which are close to the FMIN or FMAX frequencies limits; Paragraph 98-105 and figure 5 of Mallegol et al.).
Regarding Claim 11, Mallegol et al. further discloses wherein the number of electromagnetic resonant structures has a number of parameters selected to suppress the electromagnetic waves, and wherein the number of parameters is selected from at least one of a material, a size, a shape, a pitch, or a location of the number of electromagnetic resonant structures (Decoupling device 15 comprises a number of cells 152 wherein each of the cells has a raised wall structure and cavities that wherein said cells are designed with specific parameters like size relative to the wavelength of the minimum frequency and the shape of the stricture can also be changed; Paragraph 47-91 as well as figures 1-3 of Mallegol et al.).
Regarding Claim 13, Mallegol et al. discloses an antenna system (Antenna system 100 comprise a first 113 and second 133 antenna separated by a decoupling device 15 decoupling that serves as a choke assembly that suppresses radio waves between antennas as seen in figures 1-2 of Mallegol et al.) comprising:
a first antenna;
a second antenna;
a choke plate assembly having a first end and a second end, wherein the first antenna is adjacent to the first end and the second antenna is adjacent to the second end (First antenna 113 and second 133 are disposed on the first and second end of a decoupling structure 15 which serves as a choke plate assembly; Paragraph 47-83 and 100-125 as well as figures 1-2 and 5-6 of Mallegol et al. ), and wherein the choke plate assembly comprises
a number of electromagnetic resonant structures that suppresses electromagnetic waves travelling through the number of electromagnetic resonant structures (Decoupling device 15 comprises a number of cells 152 wherein each of the cells has a raised wall structure and cavities that are designed to suppress electromagnetic waves by trapping and absorbing them wherein said cells are designed with specific parameters relative to the wavelength of the minimum frequency; Paragraph 47-83 and 100-125 as well as figures 1-2 and 5-6 of Mallegol et al.); and
a dielectric material that encompasses the number of electromagnetic resonant structures (Recessed portions of the cell including cavity portion of each of the cells and the space between cells can be filled with a complementary material like thermoplastics ABS, PLA, and PA which include dielectric material; Paragraph 80 of Mallegol et al.).
Examiners Note – The examiner acknowledges the special definition of the term “a number” to mean “one or more” as taught in paragraph 39 of the specifications.
Regarding Claim 14, Mallegol et al. further discloses a choke plate tray, wherein the number of electromagnetic resonant structures is connected to the choke plate tray (Bottom surface of recess 107 designed for decoupling device 15 or the base plate 154 of decoupling device 15 may serve as a choke plate tray on which the cells 152 comprising resonant structures are disposed; Paragraph 47-83 and figure 1-2 of Mallegol et al.).
Regarding Claim 15, Mallegol et al. further discloses wherein the number of electromagnetic resonant structures is configured to suppress the electromagnetic waves travelling through the number of electromagnetic resonant structures by at least one of blocking electromagnetic waves, reflecting the electromagnetic waves away from an initial direction of travel for the electromagnetic waves, or dissipating electromagnetic energy in the electromagnetic waves (Decoupling structure 15 is designed to suppress the electromagnetic waves, like creeping waves, between antennas in array 101 and array 102 by trapping them in the recessed pattern formed by cavities in cells or space between cells wherein the waves would be reflected around in the recessed pattern and then absorbed by the structure thus dissipating them and some of the waves would also be blocked by the raised wall as well; Paragraph 47-83 and 100-125).
Regarding Claim 21 as best understood, Mallegol et al. discloses a method for suppressing electromagnetic waves, the method comprising:
receiving the electromagnetic waves from a first antenna at the first end of a choke plate assembly; and suppressing the electromagnetic waves that travel through a number of electromagnetic resonant structures in the choke plate assembly toward a second antenna at a second end of the choke plate assembly (Decoupling structure 15 is designed to suppress the electromagnetic waves, like creeping waves, between antennas 113 and 133 in array 101 and array 102 by trapping them in the recessed pattern formed by cavities in cells or space between cells wherein the waves would be reflected around in the recessed pattern and then absorbed by the structure thus dissipating them and some of the waves would also be blocked by the raised wall as well wherein the antennas 113 and 133 are at the ends of the decoupling device 15 serving as a choke plate assembly; Paragraph 47-83 and 100-125).
Examiners Note – The examiner acknowledges the special definition of the term “a number” to mean “one or more” as taught in paragraph 39 of the specifications.
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) 8 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mallegol et al. (US 20240195074 A1) in view of Piau et al. (US 20150194728 A1).
Regarding Claim 8 as best understood, Mallegol et al. fails to disclose wherein the dielectric material has a permittivity that is from about 0.8 to about 1.8.
Although, Piau et al. does not disclose a permittivity that is from about 0.8 to about 1.8. Piau et al. does disclose wherein the dielectric material has a permittivity (High-impedance decoupling device 11 comprises electromagnetic resonant structures 13 encased in a dielectric material 15, encasing the structures 13, which comprises a dielectric permittivity of 3.5 wherein dielectric material may be chosen based on its dielectric characteristics; Paragraph 44-59 and figure 1-3 of Piau et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the antenna as taught by Mallegol et al. with the teachings of Piau et al. to have wherein the dielectric material has a permittivity that is from about 0.8 to about 1.8 since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955). The motivation stems from wanting to use different dielectric material which would have different permittivity’s since the dielectric material is chosen based on its dielectric and mechanical characteristics (Paragraph 49 of Piau et al.).
PNG
media_image3.png
610
507
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 12, Mallegol et al. fails to explicitly disclose wherein the number of electromagnetic resonant structures and the dielectric material are located in a platform on aircraft and the platform is selected from a group comprising a mobile platform, a stationary platform, a land-based structure, an aquatic-based structure, a space-based structure, an aircraft, a commercial aircraft, a rotorcraft, a tilt-rotor aircraft, a tilt wing aircraft, a vertical takeoff and landing aircraft, an electrical vertical takeoff and landing vehicle a personal air vehicle, a surface ship, a tank, a personnel carrier, a train, a spacecraft, a space station, a satellite, a submarine, an automobile, a power plant, a bridge, a dam, a house, a manufacturing facility, or a building.
However, Piau et al. does disclose wherein the number of electromagnetic resonant structures and the dielectric material are located in a platform on aircraft and the platform is selected from a group comprising a mobile platform, a stationary platform, a land-based structure, an aquatic-based structure, a space-based structure, an aircraft, a commercial aircraft, a rotorcraft, a tilt-rotor aircraft, a tilt wing aircraft, a vertical takeoff and landing aircraft, an electrical vertical takeoff and landing vehicle a personal air vehicle, a surface ship, a tank, a personnel carrier, a train, a spacecraft, a space station, a satellite, a submarine, an automobile, a power plant, a bridge, a dam, a house, a manufacturing facility, or a building (High-impedance decoupling device 11 comprises electromagnetic resonant structures 13 encased in a dielectric material 15, encasing the structures 13, wherein device 15 is located between two antennas 18 and 17 wherein the device 11 and dielectric 15 is placed on the platform of an aircraft; Paragraph 44-75 and figure 1-3 of Piau et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the antenna as taught by Mallegol et al. to have wherein the number of electromagnetic resonant structures and the dielectric material are located in a platform on aircraft and the platform is selected from a group comprising a mobile platform, a stationary platform, a land-based structure, an aquatic-based structure, a space-based structure, an aircraft, a commercial aircraft, a rotorcraft, a tilt-rotor aircraft, a tilt wing aircraft, a vertical takeoff and landing aircraft, an electrical vertical takeoff and landing vehicle a personal air vehicle, a surface ship, a tank, a personnel carrier, a train, a spacecraft, a space station, a satellite, a submarine, an automobile, a power plant, a bridge, a dam, a house, a manufacturing facility, or a building as taught by Piau et al to reduce the coupling between antenna installed on an aircraft to prevent disruptions in the operation of the antenna system of an aircraft (Paragraph 2-6 and 17-18 of Piau et al.).
Claim(s) 10 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mallegol et al. (US 20240195074 A1) in view of Martel (US 20170365931 A1).
Regarding Claim 10, Mallegol et al. fails to disclose wherein the number of electromagnetic resonant structures are a number of inductive and capacitive electromagnetic resonant structures.
However, Martel does disclose wherein the number of electromagnetic resonant structures are a number of inductive and capacitive electromagnetic resonant structures (High Impedance structure 1 serves as a choke located between two antennas 17-1 and 17-2 and structure 1 comprises electromagnetic resonant structures in cavity 5 formed by inductive effect from inductive elements the form of compartment 2 and capacitive effect of pattern elements 4 wherein vertical partitions 6 also induce additional capacitive and inductive effects thus serving as an inductive and capacitive electromagnetic resonant structures; Paragraph 40-67 and figure 1-3 of Martel).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the antenna as taught by Mallegol et al. to have wherein the number of electromagnetic resonant structures are a number of inductive and capacitive electromagnetic resonant structures as taught by Martel to implement a decoupling structure that can be resonant at multiple frequencies wherein value of resonant frequencies are determined by the capacitive and indicative effect (Paragraph 64-68 of Martel).
PNG
media_image4.png
326
740
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 16, Mallegol et al. further discloses a choke plate assembly (Antenna system 100 comprise a first 113 and second 133 antenna separated by a decoupling device 15 decoupling that serves as a choke assembly that suppresses radio waves between antennas as seen in figures 1-2 of Mallegol et al.), comprising:
a number of electromagnetic resonant structures configured to suppress electromagnetic energy travelling along a propagation direction from a first end of the choke plate assembly to a second end of the choke plate assembly, thereby electromagnetically isolating the second end from the first end (Decoupling device 15 comprises a number of cells 152 wherein each of the cells has a raised wall structure and cavities that are designed to suppress electromagnetic waves by trapping and absorbing them wherein said cells are designed with specific parameters relative to the wavelength of the minimum frequency wherein the wave trapped is form an antenna 113 at one end to an antenna 133 at a second end; Paragraph 47-83 and 100-125 as well as figures 1-2 and 5-6 of Mallegol et al.); and
a dielectric material that encloses the number of electromagnetic resonant structures (Recessed portions of the cell including cavity portion of each of the cells and the space between cells can be filled with a complementary material like thermoplastics ABS, PLA, and PA which include dielectric material; Paragraph 80 of Mallegol et al.).
Mallegol et al. fails to disclose inductive and capacitive electromagnetic resonant structures.
However, Martel does disclose inductive and capacitive electromagnetic resonant structures (High Impedance structure 1 serves as a choke located between two antennas 17-1 and 17-2 and structure 1 comprises electromagnetic resonant structures in cavity 5 formed by inductive effect from inductive elements the form of compartment 2 and capacitive effect of pattern elements 4 wherein vertical partitions 6 also induce additional capacitive and inductive effects thus serving as an inductive and capacitive electromagnetic resonant structures; Paragraph 40-67 and figure 1-3 of Martel).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the antenna as taught by Mallegol et al. to have inductive and capacitive electromagnetic resonant structures as taught by Martel to implement a decoupling structure that can be resonant at multiple frequencies wherein value of resonant frequencies are determined by the capacitive and indicative effect (Paragraph 64-68 of Martel).
Examiners Note – The examiner acknowledges the special definition of the term “a number” to mean “one or more” as taught in paragraph 39 of the specifications.
Regarding Claim 17, Mallegol et al. further discloses wherein the choke plate assembly is positioned between a first antenna adjacent the first end and a second antenna adjacent the second end (Decoupling structure 15 is designed to suppress the electromagnetic waves, like creeping waves, between antennas 113 and 133 in array 101 and array 102 by trapping them in the recessed pattern formed by cavities in cells or space between cells wherein the waves would be reflected around in the recessed pattern and then absorbed by the structure thus dissipating them and some of the waves would also be blocked by the raised wall as well; Paragraph 47-83 and 100-125).
Regarding Claim 18, Mallegol et al. further disclose wherein the choke plate assembly is recessed and flush with a top surface of a support structure (Decoupling structure 15 serving as a choke plate assembly is disposed in a recess 107 in a metal plane 105 that serves as a support structure wherein decoupling structure 15 is flush with the top surface of plane 105; Paragraph 47-60 and figure 1 of Mallegol et al.).
Claim(s) 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mallegol et al. (US 20240195074 A1) in view of Martel (US 20170365931 A1) and Ng et al. (US 20150029062 A1).
Regarding Claim 19, Mallegol et al. and Martel fail to disclose a skin layer that covers the number of inductive and capacitive electromagnetic resonant structures and the dielectric material in which the skin layer is aligned flush with the top surface of an aircraft.
However, Ng et al. does disclose a skin layer that covers the number of inductive and capacitive electromagnetic resonant structures and the dielectric material in which the skin layer is aligned flush with the top surface of an aircraft (Skin layer in the form of radome 62 covers electromagnetic resonant structures 46 wherein the structure is disposed in a conductive cavity like 54/34 which may be a depression in the outer surface of an aircraft wherein radome 62 is flush to the outer surface and conductive elements 45 would have a EBG patch element 56 which would be capacitive provided by spacing between adjacent patches and a conductive connection element 50 which are vias that provide inductance from their current paths; Paragraph 52-72 and figure 1-3 of Ng et al.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the antenna as taught by Mallegol et al. and Martel to have a skin layer that covers the number of inductive and capacitive electromagnetic resonant structures and the dielectric material in which the skin layer is aligned flush with the top surface of an aircraft as taught by Ng et al. to reduce the aerodynamic impact on antenna elements while also protecting them and the decoupling assembly (Paragraph 53 and 57 of Ng et al.).
PNG
media_image5.png
523
758
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 20, Mallegol et al. further discloses wherein the number of electromagnetic resonant structures has a number of parameters selected to suppress the electromagnetic waves, and wherein the number of parameters is selected from at least one of a material, a size, a shape, a pitch, or a location of the number of inductive and capacitive electromagnetic resonant structures (Decoupling device 15 comprises a number of cells 152 wherein each of the cells has a raised wall structure and cavities that wherein said cells are designed with specific parameters like size relative to the wavelength of the minimum frequency and the shape of the stricture can also be changed ; Paragraph 47-91 as well as figures 1-3 of Mallegol et al.).
Mallegol et al. fails to disclose inductive and capacitive electromagnetic resonant structures.
However, Martel does disclose inductive and capacitive electromagnetic resonant structures (High Impedance structure 1 serves as a choke located between two antennas 17-1 and 17-2 and structure 1 comprises electromagnetic resonant structures in cavity 5 formed by inductive effect from inductive elements the form of compartment 2 and capacitive effect of pattern elements 4 wherein vertical partitions 6 also induce additional capacitive and inductive effects thus serving as an inductive and capacitive electromagnetic resonant structures wherein these inductive and capacitive elements may have their sizes be varied; Paragraph 40-67 and figure 1-3 of Martel).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the antenna as taught by Mallegol et al. to have inductive and capacitive electromagnetic resonant structures as taught by Martel to implement a decoupling structure that can be resonant at multiple frequencies wherein value of resonant frequencies are determined by the capacitive and indicative effect (Paragraph 64-68 of Martel).
Additional Comments Regarding the Claim Rejections
Examiner’s note – Regarding claims 3, 5, 9, 13, and 15-16, the recitation that an element is “configured to” perform a function, it is the position of the office that such limitations are not positive structural limitations, and thus, only require the ability to so perform. In this case the prior art applied herein is construed as at least possessing such ability.
When the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent. The Courts have held that it is well settled that where there is a reason to believe that a functional characteristic would be inherent in the prior art, the burden of proof then shifts to the applicant to provide objective evidence to the contrary. See In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1478, 44 USPQ2d at 1432 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (see MPEP § 2112.01, I.).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure
JP 2009111463 A (KODAMA KATSUHISA) discloses two antennas wherein a choke structure is disposed between the two antennas and the choke structure comprises grooves filled with a dielectric foam material.
US 20170054208 A1 (Pietila; Douglas Allan et al.) discloses an antenna assembly comprising a choke assembly disposed between two antennas wherein the entire structure is disposed on the surface of an aircraft.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GURBIR SINGH whose telephone number is (703)756-4637. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. ET.
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, Dameon E Levi can be reached at (571)272-2105. 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.
/DAMEON E LEVI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2845
/GURBIR SINGH/ Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights