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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 202211061894.6, filed on 11/11/2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/29/2024 was filed after the mailing date of the non-provisional application on 09/01/2023. The submission 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 § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Independent claims 1, 8, and 11 and dependent claims 7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
In accordance with MPEP 2106.04, each of independent claims 1, 8, and 11 and dependent claims 7 and 10 has been analyzed to determine whether it is directed to any judicial exceptions.
Step 2A, Prong 1 per MPEP 2106.04(a)
Each of independent claims 1, 8, and 11 recite at least one step or instruction for observing the position of the wires in the wire net and making evaluations based on the position of the wires, which are grouped as mental processes in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III). Each of the recited limitations involve tasks which amount to mental processes or concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion); an individual could visually observe the wire-wafering system to capture position data and mentally process abnormalities (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)).
Accordingly, each of independent claims 1, 8, and 11 recite an abstract idea. Claim 1 recites an intelligent monitoring system for wire net wafering, comprising:
a monitoring unit, equipped with a monitor (additional element) for capturing position data (observation, which is grouped as a mental process in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)) of cutting wires in a wire net (additional element); and
a control unit, provided with a controller for receiving the data captured by the monitor (additional element), processing the data (judgement or evaluation, which is grouped as a mental process in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)) and notifying a wafering machine based on results of the processing to perform optimization and adjustment (additional element).
Claim 7 recites the system of claim 1, further comprising a display unit, provided with a display, wherein the controller displays the results of the processing on the display in a form of curves (additional element).
Claim 8 recites an intelligent monitoring method for wire net wafering, comprising the steps of:
controlling a monitor (additional element) to capture position data (observation, which is grouped as a mental process in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)) of cutting wires in a wire net (additional element);
receiving the data captured by the monitor (additional element), processing the data (judgement or evaluation, which is grouped as a mental process in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)) and notifying a wafering machine based on results of the processing to perform optimization and adjustment (additional element).
Claim 10 recites the method of claim 8, wherein the receiving the data captured by the monitor, processing the data and notifying the wafering machine based on results of the processing to perform optimization and adjustment comprises:
denoising, by the controller, the converted digital signals by (additional element) using moving average, Gaussian algorithm and median filtering (mathematical formula or equation, which is grouped as a mathematical concept in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(I)), to obtain height position (observation, which is grouped as a mental process in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)) of each cutting wire in each area of the wire net, and based on the obtained height position of each cutting wire in each area and the height position of a contact surface of a workpiece and the wire net in an area (additional element), obtaining a vertical distance (observation, which is grouped as a mental process in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)) between each cutting wire in the area and the contact surface of the workpiece and the wire net in the area, which is a curvature value and a jump value corresponding to each cutting wire in the area;
based on the curvature values and the jump values of all the cutting wires in each area during a cutting process (additional element), forming an independent curvature curve and jump curve (judgement or evaluation, which is grouped as a mental process in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)) corresponding to each area;
based on the curvature value of each cutting wire in each area obtained when an amount of cutting steps reaches a preset threshold (additional element), forming an overall curvature curve (judgement or evaluation, which is grouped as a mental process in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)) of all areas;
based on the independent curvature curve and jump curve corresponding to each area as well as the overall curvature curve of all areas (additional element), identifying which area is abnormal (judgement or evaluation, which is grouped as a mental process in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)), and performing a parameter adjustment (additional element).
Claim 11 recites an intelligent monitoring system for wire net wafering, comprising:
a monitoring unit, equipped with a monitor (additional element) for capturing position data (observation, which is grouped as a mental process in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)) of cutting wires in a wire net (additional element); and
a power unit, for driving the monitor to move from a first position to a second position along a lengthwise direction of the wire net such that the monitor continuously transmits signals toward the cutting wires and captures returned signals (additional element);
a control unit, provided with a controller for receiving the data captured by the monitor (additional element), processing the data (judgement or evaluation, which is grouped as a mental process in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)) and notifying a wafering machine based on results of the processing to perform optimization and adjustment (additional element); and
a display unit, provided with a display, wherein the controller displays the results of the processing on the display in a form of curves (additional element).
Further, dependent claims 7 and 10 merely include limitations that either further define the abstract idea (and thus fail to make the abstract idea any less abstract) or amount to no more than generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use because they’re merely incidental or token additions to the claims that do not alter or affect how the claimed functions/steps are performed.
Accordingly, as indicated above, each of the above-identified claims recites an abstract idea as in MPEP 2106.04(a).
Step 2A, Prong 2 per MPEP 2106.04(d)
The above-identified abstract ideas in independent claims 1, 8, and 11 (and their respective dependent claims 7 and 10) are not integrated into a practical application under MPEP 2106.04(d) because the additional elements (identified above in independent claims 1, 8, and 11), either alone or in combination, generally link the use of the above-identified abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use according to MPEP 2106.05(h), and represent insignificant extra-solution activity according to MPEP 2106.05(g). More specifically, the additional elements of: a monitoring unit, equipped with a monitor (additional element) and a control unit, provided with a controller for receiving the data captured by the monitor (additional element) and notifying a wafering machine based on results of the processing to perform optimization and adjustment (additional element) as recited in independent claim 1 and 11; controlling a monitor (additional element); receiving the data captured by the monitor (additional element) and notifying a wafering machine based on results of the processing to perform optimization and adjustment (additional element) as recited in claim 8; and a power unit, for driving the monitor to move from a first position to a second position along a lengthwise direction of the wire net such that the monitor continuously transmits signals toward the cutting wires and captures returned signals (additional element) and a display unit, provided with a display, wherein the controller displays the results of the processing on the display in a form of curves (additional element) as recited in independent claim 11 are generically recited elements which do not improve the functioning of a computer, or any other technology or technical field according to MPEP 2106.04(d)(1) and 2106.05(a). Nor do these above-identified additional elements serve to apply the above-identified abstract idea with, or by use of, a particular machine according to MPEP 2106.05(b), effect a transformation according to MPEP 2106.05(c), provide a particular treatment or prophylaxis according to MPEP 2106.04(d)(2) or apply or use the above-identified abstract idea in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use thereof to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception according to MPEP 2106.04(d)(2) and 2106.05(e).
The above-identified abstract ideas are not integrated into a practical application in accordance with MPEP 2106.04(d). In reciting “a monitoring unit, equipped with a monitor (for capturing position) data of cutting wires in a wire net”, “a control unit, provided with a controller for receiving the data captured by the monitor (processing the data) and notifying a wafering machine based on results of the processing”, “controlling a monitor (to capture position) data of cutting wires in a wire net”, “receiving the data captured by the monitor (processing the data) and notifying a wafering machine based on results of the processing”, “(to obtain height position) of each cutting wire in each area of the wire net, and based on the obtained height position of each cutting wire in each area and the height position of a contact surface of a workpiece and the wire net in an area”, “(obtaining a vertical distance) between each cutting wire in the area and the contact surface of the workpiece and the wire net in the area, which is a curvature value and a jump value corresponding to each cutting wire in the area”, “based on the curvature values and the jump values of all the cutting wires in each area during a cutting process (forming an independent curvature curve and jump curve) corresponding to each area”, “based on the curvature value of each cutting wire in each area obtained when an amount of cutting steps reaches a preset threshold (forming an overall curvature curve) of all areas”, and “based on the independent curvature curve and jump curve corresponding to each area as well as the overall curvature curve of all areas (identifying which area is abnormal)” the additional elements of the claimed system and method merely generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. According to MPEP 2106.05(h), limitations that amount to merely indicating a field of use or technological environment (e.g. cutting wires in a wire net, wafering machine, workpiece) in which to apply a judicial exception (e.g. abstract idea) do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
In reference to the recited additional elements above linked to field of use and in reciting “denoising, by the controller, the converted digital signals by”, a data gathering step that is limited to a particular data source (e.g. monitoring unit, monitor) or a particular type of data (e.g. converted digital signals could be considered to be both insignificant extra-solution activity and a field of use limitation according to MPEP 2106.05(h). Furthermore, according to MPEP 2106.05(g), it is explained that “for example, an examiner could explain that adding a final step of storing data to a process that only recites computing the area of a space (a mathematical relationship) does not add a meaningful limitation to the process of computing the area”. In the instant, the applicant merely computes a number of areas (a mathematical relationship) by obtaining a number of measurements (observation, a mental process), additional elements, which separately and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
In Flook, the Court reasoned that "[t]he notion that post-solution activity, no matter how conventional or obvious in itself, can transform an unpatentable principle into a patentable process exalts form over substance. A competent draftsman could attach some form of post-solution activity to almost any mathematical formula". 437 U.S. at 590; 198 USPQ at 197; Id. (holding that step of adjusting an alarm limit variable to a figure computed according to a mathematical formula was "post-solution activity"), see MPEP 2106.05(g). Similarly, the applicant compares the aforementioned, computed areas and curves to an alarm limit variable (e.g. preset threshold) to apply the post-solution activity of “performing a parameter adjustment”, as later described.
In reciting “a control unit, provided with a controller for receiving the data …, (processing the data) and notifying … based on results of the processing (to perform optimization and adjustment)” and “receiving the data captured …, (processing the data) and notifying … based on results of the processing (to perform optimization and adjustment)”, the claimed system and method merely uses a computer (e.g. control unit, controller) as a tool to perform an abstract idea (e.g. mental process). According to MPEP 2106.05(f)(2), use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general-purpose computer or computer components after the fact to the abstract idea does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. Further, in reciting “to perform optimization and adjustment” and “performing a parameter adjustment”, the claims attempts to cover any solution to an identified problem with no restriction on how the result is accomplished and no description of the mechanism for accomplishing the result, which does not integrate a judicial exception (e.g. abstract idea) into a practical application or provide significantly more because this type of recitation is equivalent to the words "apply it", see MPEP 2106.05(f)(1).
In reciting “a display unit, provided with a display, wherein the controller displays the results of the processing on the display in a form of curves” and “a power unit, for driving the monitor to move from a first position to a second position along a lengthwise direction of the wire net such that the monitor continuously transmits signals toward the cutting wires and captures returned signals”, the additional elements claimed system are merely activities incidental to the primary process or product that are merely a nominal or tangential addition to the claim. According to 2106.05(g), the addition of insignificant extra-solution activity does not amount to an inventive concept, particularly when the activity is well-understood or conventional. Both limitations recite additional elements related to data-gathering: a display provides visualization and interaction with the data, and a power unit for moving the monitor serves to extend the data the monitor collects. As previously described, a data gathering step that is limited to a particular data source (e.g. monitoring unit, monitor) or a particular type of data could be considered to be both insignificant extra-solution activity and a field of use limitation according to MPEP 2106.05(h).
Particularly, in Affinity Labs of Tex. v. DirecTV, LLC, the claim recited a broadcast system in which a cellular telephone located outside the range of a regional broadcaster (1) requests and receives network-based content from the broadcaster via a streaming signal, (2) is configured to wirelessly download an application for performing those functions, and (3) contains a display that allows the user to select particular content. 838 F.3d at 1255-56, 120 USPQ2d at 1202. Although the additional elements did limit the use of the abstract idea, the court explained that this type of limitation merely confines the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment (cellular telephones; e.g. display and power unit for wafering machine) and thus fails to add an inventive concept to the claims. See Affinity Labs of Texas v. DirecTV, LLC, 838 F.3d 1253, 120 USPQ2d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 2016).
In reciting
Thus, for these additional reasons, the abstract idea identified above in independent claims 1, 8, and 11 and dependent claims 7 and 10 is not integrated into a practical application under MPEP 2106.04(d).
Step 2B per MPEP 2106.05
None of the independent claims 1, 8, and 11 and dependent claims 7 and 10 include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea in accordance with MPEP 2106.05 for at least the following reasons.
These claims require the additional elements of: a monitoring unit, equipped with a monitor (additional element) and a control unit, provided with a controller for receiving the data captured by the monitor (additional element) and notifying a wafering machine based on results of the processing to perform optimization and adjustment (additional element) as recited in independent claim 1 and 11; controlling a monitor (additional element); receiving the data captured by the monitor (additional element) and notifying a wafering machine based on results of the processing to perform optimization and adjustment (additional element) as recited in claim 8; and a power unit, for driving the monitor to move from a first position to a second position along a lengthwise direction of the wire net such that the monitor continuously transmits signals toward the cutting wires and captures returned signals (additional element) and a display unit, provided with a display, wherein the controller displays the results of the processing on the display in a form of curves (additional element) as recited in independent claim 11
As previously described, the claim limitations of “a monitoring unit, equipped with a monitor (for capturing position) data of cutting wires in a wire net”, “controlling a monitor (to capture position) data of cutting wires in a wire net”, “(to obtain height position) of each cutting wire in each area of the wire net, and based on the obtained height position of each cutting wire in each area and the height position of a contact surface of a workpiece and the wire net in an area”, “(obtaining a vertical distance) between each cutting wire in the area and the contact surface of the workpiece and the wire net in the area, which is a curvature value and a jump value corresponding to each cutting wire in the area”, “based on the curvature values and the jump values of all the cutting wires in each area during a cutting process (forming an independent curvature curve and jump curve) corresponding to each area”, “based on the curvature value of each cutting wire in each area obtained when an amount of cutting steps reaches a preset threshold (forming an overall curvature curve) of all areas”, and “based on the independent curvature curve and jump curve corresponding to each area as well as the overall curvature curve of all areas (identifying which area is abnormal)” fail to integrate the above-identified abstract ideas into a practical application in accordance with MPEP 2106.04(d). These additional elements of the claimed system merely generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, see MPEP 2106.05(h). Further, the use of a monitoring unit and control unit is conventional practice in wire-net wafering monitoring systems. Specifically, Zingg (WO 2014167392 A1) describes, in the background of the invention, having a “system sensor that can monitor all wires of the wire web” is known in the art (para. [0013]). Moreover, that it is known that “a camera with a high enough resolution” is required because “the bow (of the wires) may locally vary due to inclusions”. Further, Zingg describes in the background of the invention, that it is generally known to determine the cutting load of the wires and control the movement of the feed table. Additionally, this measurement of load and control of the feed table are determined by measuring the displacement or bow of the wires of the wire web. Given the disclosure of Zingg, the additional elements (e.g. monitoring unit, monitor) would have been well understood, routine and conventional in field of wire-net wafering monitoring systems before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
As previously described, the claim limitation of “a control unit, provided with a controller for receiving the data …, (processing the data) and notifying … based on results of the processing (to perform optimization and adjustment)” and “receiving the data captured …, (processing the data) and notifying … based on results of the processing (to perform optimization and adjustment)”, merely uses a computer (e.g. control unit, controller) as a tool to perform an abstract idea (e.g. mental processes). Certain of the above-identified additional elements (e.g. control unit, controller) are generically claimed computer components which enable the above-identified abstract idea(s) to be conducted by performing the basic functions of automating mental tasks. The courts have recognized such computer functions as well understood, routine, and conventional functions when claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity. See, MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) along with Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); and OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93.
Per applicant’s specification: “This embodiment proposes an intelligent monitoring system for wire net wafering. As shown in FIGs. 1 and 2, the system includes a monitoring unit 30 for monitoring a wire net 20 used when a workpiece 10 is cut, a cleaning unit 40 for cleaning a housing 32 of the monitoring unit 30, and a power unit 50 for controlling a movement of the monitoring unit 30, and also includes a control unit communicatively connected with the monitoring unit 30 and a display unit communicatively connected with the control unit. The monitoring unit 30 is equipped with a monitor 31 for capturing position data of cutting wires in different areas of the wire net 20. The control unit is provided with a controller 60 for receiving the data captured by the monitor 31, processing the data and notifying a wafering machine based on results of the processing to perform optimization and adjustment. The display unit is provided with a display 70. The controller 60 displays the results of the processing on the display 70 in a form of curves. A worker can judge a condition of the wire net 20 based on a trend of the curves on the display 70. The controller 60 can determine a status of the wire net 20 based on the results of the processing so as to adjust cutting parameters of the wafering machine in real time or notify a personnel for manual intervention operations without a need for the personnel to observe and monitor the status of the wire net 20.” (para. [0033]). The recited control unit and controller are not modified with any further structure.
Accordingly, in light of Applicant’s specification, the claimed term “control unit and controller” are reasonably construed as a generic computing device. Like SAP America vs Investpic, LLC (Federal Circuit 2018), it is clear, from the claims themselves and the specification, that these limitations require no improved computer resources, just already available technology, with their already available basic functions, to use as tools in executing the claimed process. See MPEP 2106.05(f).
As previously described, in reciting “to perform optimization and adjustment” and “performing a parameter adjustment”, the claims attempts to cover any solution to an identified problem with no restriction on how the result is accomplished and no description of the mechanism for accomplishing the result, which does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more because this type of recitation is equivalent to the words "apply it", see MPEP 2106.05(f)(1).
Further, applicant specification discloses that, “at present, most wire net monitoring is carried out manually by observing the wire net in use via an observation window of the equipment. In the production process, a shutdown is not always needed for all abnormalities of the wire net” (para. [0004]). Applicant is effectively applying the manual process to a generic computer, as described in Para. [0033]. Adding hardware that performs “well understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry” will not make claims patent-eligible (TLI Communications along with MPEP 2106.05(d)(I)).
The recitation of the above-identified additional limitations in independent claims 1, 8, and 11 and dependent claims 7 and 10 amounts to mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer. Simply using a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general-purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not provide significantly more. See MPEP 2106.05(f) along with Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); and TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit). Moreover, implementing an abstract idea on a generic computer, does not add significantly more, similar to how the recitation of the computer in the claim in Alice amounted to mere instructions to apply the abstract idea of intermediated settlement on a generic computer.
For at least the above reasons, the systems and methods of independent claims 1, 8, and 11 and dependent claims 7 and 10 are directed to applying an abstract idea as identified above on a general purpose computer without (i) improving the performance of the computer itself or providing a technical solution to a problem in a technical field according to MPEP 2106.05(a), or (ii) providing meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that these claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself according to MPEP 2106.04(d)(2) and 2106.05(e).
Taking the additional elements individually and in combination, the additional elements do not provide significantly more. Specifically, when viewed individually, the above-identified additional elements in independent claims 1, 8, and 11 and dependent claims 7 and 10 do not add significantly more because they are simply an attempt to limit the abstract idea to a particular technological environment according to MPEP 2106.05(h). When viewed as a combination, these above-identified additional elements simply instruct the practitioner to implement the claimed functions with well-understood, routine and conventional activity specified at a high level of generality in a particular technological environment according to MPEP 2106.05(h). When viewed as whole, the above-identified additional elements do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself according to MPEP 2106.04(d)(2) and 2106.05(e). Moreover, neither the general computer elements nor any other additional element adds meaningful limitations to the abstract idea because these additional elements represent insignificant extra-solution activity according to MPEP 2106.05(g). As such, there is no inventive concept sufficient to transform the claimed subject matter into a patent-eligible application as required by MPEP 2106.05.
Therefore, for at least the above reasons, none of the independent claims 1, 8, and 11 and dependent claims 7 and 10 amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Accordingly, independent claims 1, 8, and 11 and dependent claims 7 and 10 are not patent eligible and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
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, 2 & 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zingg (WO 2014167392 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Zingg discloses an intelligent monitoring system (element 13, fig. 5; para. [0073]) for wire net wafering, comprising:
a monitoring unit, equipped with a monitor (element 8, fig. 5; para. [0081]; note, deflection sensor equivalent to monitoring unit, including monitor, may be any kind of distance, presence or displacement sensor) for capturing position data of cutting wires (element 3, fig. 5; para. [0082]; note, deflection sensor 8 may be used to make an “image” of the wire web 3) in a wire net (para. [0081 & 82]; see aforementioned notes); and
a control unit, provided with a controller (element 12, fig. 5; para. [0084]; note, “the sensor 8 may be connected to a controller unit 12”) for receiving the data captured by the monitor (para. [0084]; note, “the controller unit 12 may have a memory 17 associated with it for storing the measurement data, preferably together with the position the measurement was made”), processing the data (para. [0083]; note, “a controller unit 12 connected to the sensor through connection 15 may be used to take multiple such measurements and from them, probably using the position of the sensor 8 at the time the measurement was made, deduce the position of single wire 3a”) and notifying a wafering machine based on results of the processing to perform optimization and adjustment (step 204; para. [0092]; note, “changing the wire web speed to the normal cutting speed and/or controlling the cutting recipe based on the measured features/shape of the wire web”).
PNG
media_image1.png
324
557
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Zingg discloses the limitations of claim 1, wherein an aperture (para. [0034]; note, sensor housing has a transparent window to permit detection of the wires) of the monitor is arranged in a same direction as a rotation direction of the wire net (element 3, 13; para. [0089]; note, “preferably the sensor is inclined thus that it measures perpendicularly to the wire segments when they are in their cutting operation”, monitor arranged to face length of wire);
the monitor moves from a first position to a second position along a lengthwise direction of the wire net (element 3, 13; para. [0027 & 79]; note, in fig. 5, sensor moves along track 9 either right to left or left to right; further, “it is beneficial if the movement of the sensor extends mainly parallel to the axes of the wire guide rollers”, sensor moves along width of wire net to cover all wires), and continuously transmits signals toward the cutting wires and captures returned signals to identify the position of the cutting wires (para. [0032 – 35 & 41]; note, measuring means may be moved in continuous fashion over the (wire) web);
the captured signals are converted into digital signals, which are then transmitted to the controller (para. [0022 & 33]; note, sensor monitors cutting wires, sensor is part of housing, housing has connection for power and signals, controller receives and stores signals captured by monitor).
Regarding claim 8, Zingg discloses an intelligent monitoring method for wire net wafering, comprising the steps of:
controlling a monitor to capture position data of cutting wires in a wire net (step 104; para. [0090]; note, “monitoring the wire web by moving the sensor over the wire web and measuring the deflection of the wires”);
receiving the data captured by the monitor (step 305 & 307; para. [0095]), processing the data (step 105 & 305; para. [0093 & 97]) and notifying a wafering machine based on results of the processing to perform optimization and adjustment (step 204 & 405; para. [0093 & 97]).
Regarding claim 9, Zingg discloses the limitations of claim 8,
wherein the controlling the monitor to capture the position data of the cutting wires in the wire net comprises:
controlling an aperture (para. [0034]; note, sensor housing has a transparent window to permit detection of the wires) of the monitor to be arranged in a same direction as a rotation direction of the wire net (element 3, 13; para. [0089]; note, “preferably the sensor is inclined thus that it measures perpendicularly to the wire segments when they are in their cutting operation”, “the sensor 8 may also be rotatable to be adjusted to the average (over all wires at a given moment or over time) deflection of the wire or to the purpose it is serving at any given time”, monitor arranged to face length of wire);
controlling the monitor to move from a first position to a second position along a lengthwise direction of the wire net (step 304; para. [0095]), and continuously transmit signals toward the cutting wires and capture returned signals to identify the position of the cutting wires (step 305; para. [0095]);
converting the captured signals into digital signals, which are then transmitted to the controller (step 204; para. [0092 & 93]).
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.
Claims 3 & 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zingg in view of Hardaway (CN 203204380 U).
Regarding claim 3, Zingg discloses the limitations of claim 2, but fails to disclose: wherein the controller is placed at each of two sides of a workpiece, and the controllers placed at both sides of the workpiece are disposed opposite to each other;
when the controllers placed at both sides of the workpiece are switched alternately between a first rotation direction and a second rotation direction of the wire net, the controllers perform the monitoring of the wire net in the first rotation direction and the wire net in the second rotation direction alternately.
Hardaway teaches an intelligent monitoring system (element 10, fig. 9; para. [0082-84]; note, “line bend monitoring system of wire saw device. sensor arrangement comprises a movement rod 40, movement rod 40 is mounted to the movement bar 40 of sensor 22. the sensor may be a contact sensor, an inductive sensor or a capacitive sensor”) for wire net wafering,
wherein the controller is placed at each of two sides of a workpiece (element 22, fig. 9), and the controllers placed at both sides of the workpiece are disposed opposite to each other (element 22, fig. 9);
when the controllers placed at both sides of the workpiece are switched alternately between a first rotation direction and a second rotation direction of the wire net, the controllers perform the monitoring of the wire net in the first rotation direction and the wire net in the second rotation direction alternately.
Hardaway teaches movable sensor arrangements disposed below the wire net on each side of the work piece (fig. 6 & 7). These sensors arrangements are configured to provide coverage of the entire area of the wire net and move vertically with the wire net as it is displaced during the sawing process.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the teachings of Hardaway into the wire net wafering monitoring system of Zingg to provide two controllers opposite to each other, which drive sensors to alternatively measure the wire net in a first and second direction. Zingg teaches a single movable sensor driven by a controller to provide coverage of the entire wire net with the single sensor. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the improvement in functionality in having a second, movable sensor, opposite the first, to provide measurements of wire deviation on both sides of the workpiece, as suggested by Hardaway. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand the benefit of having the sensors offset (in an offset or alternating phase) in offering simultaneous coverage of a larger area of the wire net, as suggested by Hardaway.
Regarding claim 4, Zingg, as modified by Hardaway, teaches the limitations of claim 3 and further teaches:
wherein the monitoring unit further comprises:
a housing, for protecting the monitor; and
a position adjusting rod, connecting to the housing for adjusting a direction of the housing such that the monitor is tilted to transmit signals toward a face of the wire net in contact with the workpiece.
Hardaway teaches a position adjustment mechanism to follow wires as they deflect as the wire net contacts the workpiece (fig. 7; para. [0082]). Hardaway further teaches that the sensor arrangement (element 22) can be tilted around a position adjustment rod (element 40) corresponding to an increase in bend of the wire (para. [0091]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the teachings of Hardaway into the wire net wafering monitoring system of Zingg to provide a monitoring unit comprising a housing and a position adjusting rod. Zingg discloses housing for protecting monitor (para. [0033 – 35]). One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the improvement in functionality of incorporating a position adjustment mechanism to the movable monitoring unit of Zingg, to provide greater accuracy in the measurement of wire deflection.
Claims 6 & 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zingg.
Regarding claim 6, Zingg discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further teaches:
further comprising a power unit, which comprises a long track and a connecting block arranged along a lengthwise direction of the wire net, wherein the monitoring unit is connected to the connecting block, and the connecting block drives the monitoring unit to move on the long track.
Zingg discloses the use of separate motors for driving the monitoring unit along the track, and that the drive may be electrically connected to the controller and monitoring unit (para. [0087]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated a power unit comprising a track and connecting block to drive the monitoring unit along the track into the wire net wafering monitoring system of Zingg. Zingg discloses a monitoring unit with a housing and connection for electrical supply, where the monitoring unit is movable along a track. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that there would need to be a power unit to power the drive mechanism to drive the housing along the track.
Regarding claim 10, Zingg teaches the method of claim 8, wherein the receiving the data captured by the monitor, processing the data and notifying the wafering machine based on results of the processing to perform optimization and adjustment comprises:
denoising, by the controller, the converted digital signals by using moving average, Gaussian algorithm and median filtering, to obtain height position of each cutting wire in each area of the wire net, and based on the obtained height position of each cutting wire in each area and the height position of a contact surface of a workpiece and the wire net in an area, obtaining a vertical distance between each cutting wire in the area and the contact surface of the workpiece and the wire net in the area, which is a curvature value and a jump value corresponding to each cutting wire in the area;
based on the curvature values and the jump values of all the cutting wires in each area during a cutting process, forming an independent curvature curve and jump curve corresponding to each area;
based on the curvature value of each cutting wire in each area obtained when an amount of cutting steps reaches a preset threshold, forming an overall curvature curve of all areas;
based on the independent curvature curve and jump curve corresponding to each area as well as the overall curvature curve of all areas, identifying which area is abnormal, and performing a parameter adjustment.
Zingg teaches using multiple filtering algorithms to detect the movement and displacement of single wires in the wire net and for refining the raw data captured by the monitor before it is processed by the controller (para. [0036 - 37]). Further, Zingg teaches detecting abnormalities by comparing the height or location of the wires in the wire net to a reference point and determining deviation from the preferred cutting path (para. [0038]). These measurements are further processed and compared to predetermined values, and when a deviation is detected, adjustments are performed (para. [0095]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated a filter to denoise the data gathered by the monitoring unit to compute the deviation of the wire height to perform adjustments in the wire net wafering monitoring system of Zingg. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand the improvement in functionality in utilizing a single sensor per side of the workpiece to monitor the wire net. One of ordinary skill in the art would also understand the benefit in filtering the data captured to facilitate improved control of the system. Further, the method of analyzing the captured wire height compared to wire height during standard operating condition, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, as taught by Zingg.
Claim 7, 11-13 & 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zingg in view of Nasch.
Regarding claim 7, Zingg discloses the limitations of claim 2, but fails to disclose:
further comprising a display unit, provided with a display, wherein the controller displays the results of the processing on the display in a form of curves.
Nasch teaches an intelligent monitoring system (element 1, fig. 2) for wire net wafering, comprising:
further comprising a display unit, provided with a display (para. [0080 & 89]), wherein the controller displays the results of the processing on the display in a form of curves.
Nasch teaches that the controller can have an external device to display the output of its computations and operations. Further, Nasch teaches that the measurements, distribution, and positions of the lines experiencing a disturbance can be graphically displayed (para. [0080]). Additionally, where Nasch is concerned with measuring temperature distributions across the wire net, Nasch teaches the use of special software to display such parameters and for the automatic mechanical adjustment of the wire net wafering device (para. [0089]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the teachings of Nasch into the wire net wafering monitoring system of Zingg to provide a display to allow the operator to observe the progression and quality of the operation. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand and appreciate the benefit in having a display to see the output of the raw monitoring data and the output of the controllers computations during operations to validate the automatic adjustments being performed, or to observe the data and perform manual adjustments.
Regarding claim 11, as previously described, Zingg teaches:
An intelligent monitoring system for wire net wafering, comprising:
a monitoring unit, equipped with a monitor for capturing position data of cutting wires in a wire net;
a power unit, for driving the monitor to move from a first position to a second position along a lengthwise direction of the wire net such that the monitor continuously transmits signals toward the cutting wires and captures returned signals;
a control unit, provided with a controller for receiving the data captured by the monitor, processing the data and notifying a wafering machine based on results of the processing to perform optimization and adjustment; and
Zingg fails, however, to teach:
a display unit, provided with a display, wherein the controller displays the results of the processing on the display in a form of curves.
Nasch teaches an intelligent monitoring system (element 1, fig. 2) for wire net wafering, comprising:
a display unit, provided with a display (para. [0080 & 89]), wherein the controller displays the results of the processing on the display in a form of curves.
Nasch teaches that the controller can have an external device to display the output of its computations and operations. Further, Nasch teaches that the measurements, distribution, and positions of the lines experiencing a disturbance can be graphically displayed (para. [0080]). Additionally, where Nasch is concerned with measuring temperature distributions across the wire net, Nasch teaches the use of special software to display such parameters and for the automatic mechanical adjustment of the wire net wafering device (para. [0089]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the teachings of Nasch into the wire net wafering monitoring system of Zingg to provide a display to allow the operator to observe the progression and quality of the operation. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand and appreciate the benefit in having a display to see the output of the raw monitoring data and the output of the controllers computations during operations to validate the automatic adjustments being performed, or to observe the data and perform manual adjustments.
Regarding claim 12, Zingg, as modified by Nasch, teaches the limitations of claim 11, and further teaches
wherein an aperture (Zingg; para. [0034]; examiner notes, sensor housing has a transparent window to permit detection of the wires) of the monitor is arranged in a same direction as a rotation direction of the wire net (Zingg; (element 3, 13; para. [0089]; note, “preferably the sensor is inclined thus that it measures perpendicularly to the wire segments when they are in their cutting operation”, “the sensor 8 may also be rotatable to be adjusted to the average (over all wires at a given moment or over time) deflection of the wire or to the purpose it is serving at any given time”, monitor arranged to face length of wire).
Zingg discloses an aperture so as not to impair the detection capabilities of the monitoring unit (para. [0034])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided Zingg modified with an aperture arranged in the same direction as the rotation direction of the wire net. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the disclosure of Zingg in providing the aperture and providing the movement of the monitor as perpendicular to the direction of the rotation of the wires, so as to capture the position of all wires in the net with a single monitor.
Regarding claim 13, Zingg, as modified by Nasch, teaches the limitations of claim 11, and further teaches
wherein the captured signals are converted into digital signals, which are then transmitted to the controller (Zingg; para. [0022 & 33]; note, sensor monitors cutting wires, sensor is part of housing, housing has connection for power and signals, controller receives and stores signals captured by monitor).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have converted the captured signals of the monitor of Zingg modified into digital signals, which are then transmitted to the controller. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the disclosure of Zingg in providing a monitor which captures signals and then digitally transmits those signals to a controller to perform optimization and adjustments.
Regarding claim 18, Zingg, as modified by Nasch, teaches the limitations of claim 11, and further teaches
wherein the power unit comprises a long track and a connecting block arranged along a lengthwise direction of the wire net, wherein the monitoring unit is connected to the connecting block, and the connecting block drives the monitoring unit to move on the long track.
Zingg discloses the use of separate motors for driving the monitoring unit along the track, and that the drive may be electrically connected to the controller and monitoring unit (para. [0087]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated a power unit comprising a track and connecting block to drive the monitoring unit along the track into the wire net wafering monitoring system of Zingg modified. Zingg discloses a monitoring unit with a housing and connection for electrical supply, where the monitoring unit is movable along a track. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that there would need to be a power unit to power the drive mechanism to drive the housing along the track.
Claims 14 - 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zingg, as modified by Nasch, in view of Hardaway.
Regarding claim 14, Zingg, as modified by Nasch, teaches the limitations of claim 11, but fails to teach:
wherein the controller is placed at each of two sides of a workpiece, and the controllers placed at both sides of the workpiece are disposed opposite to each other.
Hardaway teaches an intelligent monitoring system (element 10, fig. 9) for wire net wafering,
wherein the controller is placed at each of two sides of a workpiece (element 22, fig. 9), and the controllers placed at both sides of the workpiece are disposed opposite to each other (element 22, fig. 9).
Hardaway teaches movable sensor arrangements disposed below the wire net on each side of the work piece (fig. 6 & 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the teachings of Hardaway into the wire net wafering monitoring system of Zingg modified to provide two controllers opposite to each other, which are movable to alternatively measure the wire net in a first and second direction. Zingg teaches a single movable sensor to provide coverage of the entire wire net with a single sensor. Zingg further teaches controller unit (element 12) connected to the sensor and disposed on the same side of the workpiece as the sensor. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the improvement in functionality in having a second, movable sensor, opposite the first, to provide measurements of wire deviation on both sides of the workpiece, as suggested by Hardaway.
Regarding claim 15, Zingg, as modified by Nasch and Hardaway, teaches the limitations of claim 14, and further teaches
when the controllers placed at both sides of the workpiece are switched alternately between a first rotation direction and a second rotation direction of the wire net, the controllers perform the monitoring of the wire net in the first rotation direction and the wire net in the second rotation direction alternately (Zingg; para. [0041] (Zingg; element 3, 13; para. [0032 – 35 & 41]; note, measuring means may be moved in continuous fashion over the (wire) web; further, para. [0027 & 79]; note, in fig. 5, sensor moves along track 9 either right to left or left to right; further, “it is beneficial if the movement of the sensor extends mainly parallel to the axes of the wire guide rollers”, sensor moves along width of wire net to cover all wires)).
Hardaway teaches movable sensor arrangements disposed below the wire net on each side of the work piece (fig. 6 & 7). These sensors arrangements are configured to provide coverage of the entire area of the wire net and move vertically with the wire net as it is displaced during the sawing process.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the teachings of Hardaway into the wire net wafering monitoring system of Zingg to provide two controllers opposite to each other, which drive sensors to alternatively measure the wire net in a first and second direction. Zingg teaches a single movable sensor driven by a controller to provide coverage of the entire wire net with the single sensor. One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the improvement in functionality in having a second, movable sensor, opposite the first, to provide measurements of wire deviation on both sides of the workpiece, as suggested by Hardaway. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand the benefit of having the sensors offset (in an offset or alternating phase) in offering simultaneous coverage of a larger area of the wire net, as suggested by Hardaway.
Regarding claim 16, Zingg, as modified by Nasch and Hardaway, teaches the limitations of claim 15, and further teaches
wherein the monitoring unit further comprises: a housing, for protecting the monitor; and a position adjusting rod, connecting to the housing for adjusting a direction of the housing such that the monitor is tilted to transmit signals toward a face of the wire net in contact with the workpiece.
Hardaway teaches a position adjustment mechanism to follow wires as they deflect as the wire net contacts the workpiece (fig. 7; para. [0082]). Hardaway further teaches that the sensor arrangement (element 22) can be tilted around a position adjustment rod (element 40) corresponding to an increase in bend of the wire (para. [0091]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the teachings of Hardaway into the wire net wafering monitoring system of Zingg to provide a monitoring unit comprising a housing and a position adjusting rod. Zingg discloses housing for protecting monitor (para. [0033 – 35]). One of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate the improvement in functionality of incorporating a position adjustment mechanism to the movable monitoring unit of Zingg, to provide greater accuracy in the measurement of wire deflection.
Claims 5 & 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zingg, as modified by Hardaway, in view of Nasch (CN 202685115 U).
Regarding claim 5, Zingg, as modified by Hardaway, teaches the limitations of claim 4, but fails to teach:
further comprising a cleaning unit, provided at a position directly facing the monitoring unit, wherein the cleaning unit comprises a cleaning member and an enclosing unit that is placed around the cleaning member, and the enclosing unit is provided with an accommodation area for accommodating an end surface corresponding to the aperture of the monitor in the housing; wherein the cleaning member cleans in the accommodation area to clean the housing when the monitor moves to the first position.
Nasch teaches an intelligent monitoring system (element 1, fig. 2) for wire net wafering,
further comprising a cleaning unit (element 1, fig. 2), provided at a position directly facing the monitoring unit (element 1, fig. 2), wherein the cleaning unit comprises a cleaning member and an enclosing unit that is placed around the cleaning member, and the enclosing unit is provided with an accommodation area for accommodating an end surface corresponding to the aperture of the monitor in the housing; wherein the cleaning member cleans in the accommodation area to clean the housing when the monitor moves to the first position.
Nasch teaches in one embodiment, one or more temperature or infrared sensors equipped with a device to clean the monitoring area (para. [0069]). Specifically, Nasch teaches blowing air to clean the light passage of the sensor. Further, Nasch teaches that implementing such a cleaning unit would reduce maintenance requirements.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the teachings of Nasch into the wire net wafering monitoring system of Zingg modified to provide a cleaning unit as a part of the housing for cleaning the monitoring unit. Zingg modified teaches a waterproof housing for protection of the monitoring unit and controller from the cutting fluid and from possible broken wires. Zingg modified further teaches having a transparent window in the housing so as not to affect detection of the wires by the monitor. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand the improvement in functionality in having a cleaning member and enclosing unit with an accommodation area for cleaning the housing and aperture of the monitoring unit. Zingg modified teaches benefits in cleaning and protection of the monitor and controller in reduced maintenance and improved detection.
Regarding claim 17, Zingg, as modified by Hardaway and Nasch, teaches the limitations of claim 16, and further teaches:
further comprising a cleaning unit, provided at a position directly facing the monitoring unit, wherein the cleaning unit comprises a cleaning member and an enclosing unit that is placed around the cleaning member, and the enclosing unit is provided with an accommodation area for accommodating an end surface corresponding to the aperture of the monitor in the housing; wherein the cleaning member cleans in the accommodation area to clean the housing when the monitor moves to the first position.
Nasch teaches in one embodiment, one or more temperature or infrared sensors equipped with a device to clean the monitoring area (para. [0069]). Specifically, Nasch teaches blowing air to clean the light passage of the sensor. Further, Nasch teaches that implementing such a cleaning unit would reduce maintenance requirements.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have incorporated the teachings of Nasch into the wire net wafering monitoring system of Zingg modified to provide a cleaning unit as a part of the housing for cleaning the monitoring unit. Zingg modified teaches a waterproof housing for protection of the monitoring unit and controller from the cutting fluid and from possible broken wires. Zingg modified further teaches having a transparent window in the housing so as not to affect detection of the wires by the monitor. One of ordinary skill in the art would understand the improvement in functionality in having a cleaning member and enclosing unit with an accommodation area for cleaning the housing and aperture of the monitoring unit. Zingg modified teaches benefits in cleaning and protection of the monitor and controller in reduced maintenance and improved detection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Nagatsuka (US 6178961 B1) teaches a system and method for wire saw control according to a sensor detecting changes in cutting wire deflection. The sensor is movable over the area of the wire net and is adjustable in its position. When deflection is observed, adjustments are made.
JP 5373502 B2 teaches a system for the detection of wire breaks in a wire saw machine using a vision sensor and a back-lighting array. When an abnormal condition is detected, the section is identified and conveyed to the process control unit.
Sueldia (EP 3015238 A1) teaches a wire monitoring system for a wire saw device. The system uses a tracked, movable sensor to observe the area of the wire net for wire jumps or breaks. When an error is detected, the system will notify the operator, whereupon the issue can be corrected.
Cao (CN 114714525 A) teaches a wire saw monitoring method, device, and system for detecting abnormalities in the saw wires during operation. Similar to JP 5373502 B2, the system uses a back-lighting array and a vision sensor to identify wire jumps or breaks.
Hugo (DE 10232768 A1) teaches a process and device for monitoring deflection of cutting wires in a wire saw machine. The system also includes provisions for feedback control depending on predetermined wire bend thresholds.
Zomini (CN 204955158 U) teaches a cutting wire monitoring system for detecting the relative distance between two adjacent cutting wires.
Zomini (CN 204036679 U) teaches a cutting wire monitoring system having a movable sensor capable of observing for abnormalities across the area of the wire net.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEEGAN T MARTIN whose telephone number is (571) 272-7452. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 am - 5:00 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, Brian Keller can be reached at (571) 272-8548. 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.
/KEEGAN T MARTIN/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/BRIAN D KELLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723