DETAILED ACTION
1. This office action is a response to applicant's arguments filed on 08/11/2026 with respect to claims which have been considered but they are not persuasive.
See response to applicants’ arguments at the end of the action.
2. Claims 12-23 are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 102
3. 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.
4. Claims 12-14 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipate by ANGST et al. (CN 1247432 C).
In regards to claims 12 and its corresponding method claim 21, ANGST shows (Figs. 1-9) and discloses (see Description and claims 1-13) an elevator system and method for controlling a car door and a shaft door of said elevator system comprising:
a car (3) traveling in an elevator shaft (2);
a car door (4/5/8) arranged on the car (3);
a shaft door (7) arranged on a door opening of the elevator shaft (2);
a shaft door locking device (i.e. 22/22.2) including a shaft door drive (i.e. driving unit 6) adapted to at least one of unlock, close and open the shaft door (i.e. the elevator car in a corresponding floor, moving the shaft door 7 to open and close, wherein the horizontal movement of the driving force transmitted to the shaft door leaf 8 by the car door leaf 5 the door operating mechanism through the shaft door leaf 8 level. a shaft door leaf 8 the closed state shaft door lock (not shown in the figure) is locked on the fixing part of the shaft door, see Description);
a shaft door sensor (i.e. shaft door monitoring sensor 10/10.1/10.2) arranged on the shaft door and a car door signal transmitter arranged on the car door (see Description, i.e. receiving the beam 10.3. emitter 10.1 and receiver 10.2 constitute the shaft door monitoring sensor 10. the configuration is called transmitter/receiver principle); and
a shaft door control unit (not shown but disclosed) operatively connected to the shaft door sensor (10), the shaft door control unit directly actuating the shaft door locking device when a car door signal generated by the car door signal transmitter is received by the shaft door sensor (see Description, i.e. when the detection stage beam 10.3 is interrupted, the shaft door monitoring sensor to be delivered is not completely closed or a shaft door lock is not in the locking state to a shaft door leaf 8 the information to the elevator control unit. the detecting stage according to the operation order of the program, all shaft door must be closed and locked periods, see also claims 1 and 7).
In regards to claim 13, ANGST shows (Figs. 1-9) and discloses (see Description and claims 1-13) wherein the car door signal generated by the car door signal transmitter is received by the shaft door sensor only when the car door is positioned in a door opening zone of the shaft door (i.e. wherein when the elevator car stops at least one shaft door leaf shaft door respectively opposite with the elevator car at one floor of the corresponding car door leaf to open and close, wherein the elevator device comprises an elevator control unit. moving said elevator control unit for the elevator car and the car door leaf and the corresponding shaft door leaf to move control, and wherein the at least one transmitted electromagnetic wave non-contact action of the shaft door monitoring sensor of the shaft door leaf closed position for monitoring wherein at least the special detection stage by the shaft door monitoring emitter sensor emits a beam of electromagnetic wave form, the beam in the elevator shaft into straight propagation, receiver freely by the shaft door monitoring sensor to detect the beam… when the working state of all shaft door should be completely closed and locked shaft door sensor transmitting one associated shaft door is not fully closed and/or a shaft door lock is not in the locking position information, emit optical and/or acoustic alarm signal on at least one floor of one elevator car in an operating state by the elevator control unit., see Disclosure).
In regards to claim 14, ANGST shows (Figs. 1-9) and discloses (see Description and claims 1-13) wherein the car door signal transmitter is a magnet (see Disclosure, i.e. wherein the at least one transmitted electromagnetic wave non-contact action of the shaft door monitoring sensor of the shaft door leaf closed position for monitoring wherein at least the special detection stage by the shaft door monitoring emitter sensor emits a beam of electromagnetic wave form, the beam in the elevator shaft into straight propagation, receiver freely by the shaft door monitoring sensor to detect the beam).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
6. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ANGST et al. (CN 1247432 C) in view of CHEN et al. (CN 109665429 A).
In regards to claim 15, ANGST although discloses wherein the car door signal transmitter is a magnet does not explicitly disclose is a permanent magnet.
However, CHEN discloses a safe loop detection based on car door and landing door system, wherein the door set on the car side walls and can through with the car lift, car door drive mechanism to open and close, door set on the building floor and further disclose that the locking mechanism comprises a permanent magnet (14), (See Description and claim 8, i.e. locking device comprises a swinging rod and can rotate in an angle of lock rod, lock the permanent magnet fixedly on the lock rod, a flat layer fixed to the flat layer position on the building and connected with the lock rod electromagnet, electromagnet lock rod direction of the direction lock rod permanent magnet acting locking rod are opposite. flat layer interaction to lock the permanent magnet direction just pushes the lock rod to swing, is separate to finish unlocking, permanent magnet of swing with the swing rod swinging back can be attraction or repulsion according to the unlocking direction position and the lock rod is set).
Thus, given the teaching of CHEN it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the circuit/system of ANGST as to employ a permanent magnet as part of the locking mechanisms as the reliability is high, and under the powerdown situation of the elevator car leveling layer can realize the door unlocking, thereby facilitating rescue, consequently improving the system security.
7. Claims 16-18 and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ANGST et al. (CN 1247432 C) in view of MOSTEL et al. (EP 3398899 B1).
In regards to claim 16, ANGST does not explicitly discloses a car door drive adapted to at least one of close, open and unlock the car door, a car door sensor (10) arranged on the car door, a shaft door signal transmitter arranged on the shaft door, and a car door control unit operatively connected to the car door sensor and adapted to directly actuate the car door drive to at least one of close, open and unlock the car door when the car door sensor receives a shaft door signal generated by the shaft door signal transmitter.
However, MOSTEL discloses and shows (Figs. 1-3) an elevator system comprising a cabin that can be moved between holding stations and has a cabin door opening and a cabin door (21/22) that is adjustable for opening and closing the cabin door opening and further discloses a car door drive (23) adapted to at least one of close, open and unlock the car door (21-22), a car door sensor (i.e. 14r/24r is a receiver sensor) arranged on the car door, a shaft door signal transmitter (i.e. 14t.24t) arranged on the shaft door, and a car door control unit (5/26) operatively connected to the car door sensor and adapted to directly actuate the car door drive to at least one of close, open and unlock the car door when the car door sensor receives a shaft door signal generated by the shaft door signal transmitter (see Description, claims and Figs. 1-3).
Thus, given the teaching of MOSTEL it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the circuit/system of ANGST as to employ both of: door and shaft sensors, door and shaft drivers and transmitters as to send communication signals of the door operations status to the main controller by employing both on the cabin-side communication unit 24 and on the station-side communication unit 14, consequently improving the system reliability.
In regards to claim 17, MOSTEL further discloses (see Description and claims) and shows (Figs. 1-3) wherein the car door control unit (5/26) is operatively connected to the shaft door control unit (i.e. landing-side control apparatus 16) , and the shaft door locking device is directly actuated by the shaft door control unit to at least one of unlock, close and open the shaft door when the car door sensor receives the shaft door signal triggered by the shaft door signal transmitter (i.e. For safety reasons, an electrically actuated additional lock, which can also be released manually in an emergency, can be provided on the car door 22 and on the holding station door 12, but is not shown in the figures. It can be provided that the additional locking of the holding station door 12 or the car door 22 is configured such that it can only be unlocked by the control device 16 or control device 26 on the holding station side when the car 20 is at the same height as the holding station 10. Otherwise, only manual emergency unlocking is possible… control device 5 having a cabin-side control apparatus 26 which is connected or can be connected to the cabin-side communication unit 24 for data transmission and which is designed to control the cabin door drive 23 in an open-loop and/or closed-loop manner, and having a landing-side control apparatus 16 which is connected or can be connected to the landing-side communication unit 14 for data transmission and which is designed to control the landing door drive 13 in an open-loop and/or closed-loop manner, the cabin-side communication unit 24 and the landing-side communication unit 14 being designed for bidirectional communication with one another, an electrically actuatable and manually unlockable additional locking mechanism being provided on the landing door 12, which locking mechanism is configured such that it can only be unlocked by the landing-side control apparatus 16 when the cabin 20 is at the same height as the landing 10, characterised in that the landing-side control apparatus 16 is designed, in the case of a manual unlocking of the additional locking mechanism).
In regards to claim 18, MOSTEL further discloses (see Description and claims) wherein the shaft door control unit and the car door control unit are wirelessly connected (i.e. a controllable holding station door drive which is designed to adjust the holding station door, a cabin-side communication unit and a holding station-side communication unit which are set up for wireless communication… The transmitter 24t and the receiver 24r of the cabin-side communication unit 24 can be connected to the cabin-side control unit 26 via data lines 29, but a wireless connection is also conceivable).
In regards to claims 22-23, claims 22-23 do not set further limitations other than the one presented in claims 1-21.
For example, ANGST, i.e. he shaft door leaf is opened and closed corresponding to the car door leaf (5). the elevator device (1) comprises an elevator control unit, said elevator control unit of the elevator car and the car door leaf movement and movement of the shaft door leaf corresponding to the control. and wherein the at least one transmitted electromagnetic wave non-contact action of the shaft door monitoring sensor of the shaft door leaf closed position is monitored, wherein the monitoring emitter of at least sensor (10) (10.1) by the shaft door in the special detection stage emitting a beam of electromagnetic wave form. the beam in the elevator shaft into linear freely propagating, by the shaft door monitoring receiver sensors (10) (10.2) to detect the beam. wherein the set of beam (10.3) should make the affected beam when a shaft door leaf is not closed completely and/or a shaft door lock (22) is in the locking state, the receiver of the shaft door monitoring sensor (10) (10.2) identifies a shaft door (7) is not completely closed and/or locked, wherein shaft door sensor (10) transmits the information to the elevator control unit).
While MOSTEL further discloses a cabin-side communication unit (24) and a landing-side communication unit (14) which are designed for wireless communication with one another, a control device (5) which is designed to coordinate a shifting movement of the cabin door (22) and a shifting movement of the landing door (12) with one another, the control device (5) having a cabin-side control apparatus (26) which is connected or can be connected to the cabin-side communication unit (24) for data transmission and which is designed to control the cabin door drive (23) in an open-loop and/or closed-loop manner, and having a landing-side control apparatus (16) which is connected or can be connected to the landing-side communication unit (14) for data transmission and which is designed to control the landing door drive (13) in an open-loop and/or closed-loop manner, the cabin-side communication unit (24) and the landing-side communication unit (14) being designed for bidirectional communication with one another, an electrically actuatable and manually unlockable additional locking mechanism being provided on the landing door (12), which locking mechanism is configured such that it can only be unlocked by the landing-side control apparatus (16) when the cabin (20) is at the same height as the landing (10).
8. Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ANGST et al. (CN 1247432 C) in view of MOSTEL et al. (EP 3398899 B1) and further in view of LUSTENBERGER et al. (EP 3257798 A1).
In regards to claim 19, ANGST as modified by MOSTEL does not explicitly disclose including an absolute position system generating a position signal representing a position of the car in the elevator shaft and transmitting the position signal to the shaft door control unit, and further including a brake system adapted to arrest the car in the elevator shaft, the brake system transmitting an arrest signal to the car door control unit when the car is arrested.
However, LUSTENBERGER discloses an elevator system (Fig. 1) including an absolute position system generating a position signal representing a position of the car (12) in the elevator shaft and transmitting the position signal to the shaft door control unit, and further including a brake system (28/38) adapted to arrest the car in the elevator shaft (11), the brake system (28/38) transmitting an arrest signal to the car door control unit when the car is arrested (see Description, i.e. a position sensor 29 is arranged on the elevator car 12 which, by means of a magnetic belt 30 extending from the bottom upwards in the elevator shaft 11, is an absolute position of the elevator car 12 within the elevator shaft 11 can determine… On the drive machine 13, a known drive brake 38 is arranged, which acts at least on a component of the drive machine 13 and the drive machine 13 can decelerate and stop. In addition, the prime mover 13 may also be regarded as an actuator because the prime mover 13 can be driven so that the elevator car 12 can be braked and stopped… The car door switch 37 transmits as measurement data the information as to whether the car door 27 is securely closed. The second evaluation module 33 sends to the actuator control device 44 of the safety brake 28 control data in the form of a desired state of the safety brake 28, which is adjusted accordingly. The actuator control device 44 of the catch brake 28 monitors analogous to the actuator control device 41 of the drive brake 38, the reception of the control data and activated in the absence of control data, the safety brake 28th).
Thus, given the teaching of LUSTENBERGER it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the circuit/system of ANGST as modified by MOSTEL as to employ position sensor to detect position or location of the elevator car and a braking safety system to stop the elevator car in a desired position or in case of an emergency , consequently improving the system security and reliability.
In regards to claim 20, ANGST shows (Figs. 1-9) and discloses (see Description and claims 1-13) wherein the shaft door control unit simultaneously evaluates at least two of the arrest signal, the position signal, the car door signal, and the shaft door signal (see claim 1. i.e. the elevator device (1) comprises an elevator control unit, said elevator control unit of the elevator car and the car door leaf movement and movement of the shaft door leaf corresponding to the control. and wherein the at least one transmitted electromagnetic wave non-contact action of the shaft door monitoring sensor of the shaft door leaf closed position is monitored, wherein the monitoring emitter of at least sensor (10) (10.1) by the shaft door in the special detection stage emitting a beam of electromagnetic wave form. the beam in the elevator shaft into linear freely propagating, by the shaft door monitoring receiver sensors (10) (10.2) to detect the beam. wherein the set of beam (10.3) should make the affected beam when a shaft door leaf is not closed completely and/or a shaft door lock (22) is in the locking state, the receiver of the shaft door monitoring sensor (10) (10.2) identifies a shaft door (7) is not completely closed and/or locked, wherein shaft door sensor (10) transmits the information to the elevator control unit).
Moreover, MOSTEL also discloses claim 20, i.e. a cabin-side communication unit (24) and a stand-station-side communication unit (14) arranged for wireless communication with each other, a control device (5) which is designed to match an adjusting movement of the car door (22) and an adjusting movement of the holding station door (12), wherein the control device (5) has a cabin-side control device (26) connected or connectable to the cabin-side communication unit (24) for data transmission and configured for controlling or controlling the car door drive (23), and a communication unit (14) communicating with the station-side communication unit (14) comprising connected to the data transmission or connectable stop-station-side control unit (16), which is adapted to control and / or regulation of the holding station door drive (13), characterized in that the cabin-side communication unit (24) and the hold station-side communication unit (14) for bidirectional communication are arranged together.
Response to Arguments
9. Applicant's arguments filed on 08/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The examiner believes that the prior arts made of record still read on the added limitations.
In response to applicant’s argument regarding that Angst discloses or suggests a shaft door drive that is part of the shaft door locking device and that is directly actuated by a shaft door control unit in response to receiving a car door signal from a car door signal transmitter and Angst fails to disclose the claimed "shaft door sensor arranged on the shaft door" and the "car door signal transmitter arranged on the car door" that generates a signal received by such shaft door sensor, the examiner respectfully disagrees.
The examiner respectfully reminds the applicant that the claims and only the claims form the metes and bounds of the invention. “Office personnel are to give the claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the supporting disclosure. In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054-55, 44USPQ2d 1023, 1027-28 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Moreover, limitations appearing in the specification but not recited in the claim are not read into the claim. In re Prater, 415 F.2d, 1393, 1404-05, 162 USPQ 541, 550-551 (CCPA 1969)”. (Refer to Manual of Patent Examining Procedure, Eighth Edition Revision 8: July 2010).
The Examiner still considers the prior-art of ANGST or ANGST as modified by MOSTEL, each clearly having all structures and components as claimed. Thus all the limitations of the claims will be considered met so long as the device of the prior art meets all structural limitations. The prior art apparatus as identified in the rejected claims are also capable of performing all the claimed intended use and/or desired functional language. Therefore, all the limitations as claimed are still met or anticipated by ANGST as pointed out in the previous office actions and in this final office action. It is well settled that anticipation law requires distinction be made between invention described or taught and invention claimed. It does not require that the reference "teach" what subject patent application teaches, it is only necessary that the claim under attack, as construed by the Court, "read on" something disclosed in the reference, i.e., all limitations of the claim are found in reference, or are "fully met" by it. Kalman v. Kimberly Clark Corp., 218 USPQ 781,789 (CAFC 1983). Moreover, the Claims8-19 and 37 are drawn to an apparatus must distinguish from prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In re Danlv, 120 USPQ 528 (CCPA 1959) and MPEP 2114.
Angst clearly discloses a shaft door drive that is part of the shaft door locking device and that is directly actuated by a shaft door control unit in response to receiving a car door signal from a car door signal transmitter. For example, Angst shows the car door leaf is mounted on the elevator car 3 when opening and closing of the door driving unit 6 horizontal displacement. 2 comprises three shaft door 7 of the elevator shaft, each shaft door has two shaft door leaf 8. the elevator car in a corresponding floor, moving the shaft door 7 to open and close, wherein the horizontal movement of the driving force transmitted to the shaft door leaf 8 by the car door leaf 5 the door operating mechanism through the shaft door leaf 8 level, a shaft door leaf 8 the closed state shaft door lock (not shown in the figure) is locked on the fixing part of the shaft door. the bottom of the shaft has a shaft door near the vertical wall is equipped with a transmitter 10.1. said emitter at least emits electromagnetic wave in the form of a bundle of beams 10.3, preferably emitting a laser beam in the detection stage. emitter 10.1 emitting beam 10.3 at receiver 10.2, the receiver is fixed in the top of the section of the shaft, and if the beam is not the shaft door leaf is not closed completely and/or a shaft door lock is not in the locking state is interrupted, that is, capable of receiving the beam 10.3. emitter 10.1 and receiver 10.2 constitute the shaft door monitoring sensor 10. the configuration is called transmitter/receiver principle. when the detection stage beam 10.3 is interrupted, the shaft door monitoring sensor to be delivered is not completely closed or a shaft door lock is not in the locking state to a shaft door leaf 8 the information to the elevator control unit. the detecting stage according to the operation order of the program, all shaft door must be closed and locked periods…. the locked state the influence of shaft door lock the shaft door monitoring receiver identification sensor of the shaft door is not closed completely and/or is not locked, wherein the information from monitoring sensor is transmitted to the elevator control unit. Hence, the elevator control unit is totally capable and to actuate action as said shaft door control unit in response to receiving a car door signal from a car door signal transmitter.
Moreover, Angst shows and discloses a shaft door sensor arranged on the shaft door" and the "car door signal transmitter arranged on the car door" that generates a signal received by such shaft door sensor. For example, elevator car 3 when opening and closing of the door driving unit 6 horizontal displacement. 2 comprises three shaft door 7 of the elevator shaft, each shaft door has two shaft door leaf 8. the elevator car in a corresponding floor, moving the shaft door 7 to open and close, wherein the horizontal movement of the driving force transmitted to the shaft door leaf 8 by the car door leaf 5 the door operating mechanism through the shaft door leaf 8 level. a shaft door leaf 8 the closed state shaft door lock (not shown in the figure) is locked on the fixing part of the shaft door. the bottom of the shaft has a shaft door near the vertical wall is equipped with a transmitter 10.1. said emitter at least emits electromagnetic wave in the form of a bundle of beams 10.3, preferably emitting a laser beam in the detection stage. emitter 10.1 emitting beam 10.3 at receiver 10.2, the receiver is fixed in the top of the section of the shaft, and if the beam is not the shaft door leaf is not closed completely and/or a shaft door lock is not in the locking state is interrupted, that is, capable of receiving the beam 10.3. emitter 10.1 and receiver 10.2 constitute the shaft door monitoring sensor 10. the configuration is called transmitter/receiver principle. when the detection stage beam 10.3 is interrupted, the shaft door monitoring sensor to be delivered is not completely closed or a shaft door lock is not in the locking state to a shaft door leaf 8 the information to the elevator control unit. the detecting stage according to the operation order of the program, all shaft door must be closed and locked periods. Thus, besides to be a very well-known and obvious arrangement in the elevator control field Angst clearly shows and discloses these limitations are broadly presented in the claims where a shaft door sensor at least electrically/operatively arranged on the shaft door" and the "car door signal transmitter at least electrically/operatively arranged on the car door.
In addition, the examiner also brought MOSTEL which discloses and shows (Figs. 1-3) an elevator system comprising a cabin that can be moved between holding stations and has a cabin door opening and a cabin door (21/22) that is adjustable for opening and closing the cabin door opening and further discloses a car door drive (23) adapted to at least one of close, open and unlock the car door (21-22), a car door sensor (i.e. 14r/24r is a receiver sensor) arranged on the car door, a shaft door signal transmitter (i.e. 14t.24t) arranged on the shaft door, and a car door control unit (5/26) operatively connected to the car door sensor and adapted to directly actuate the car door drive to at least one of close, open and unlock the car door when the car door sensor receives a shaft door signal generated by the shaft door signal transmitter (see Description, claims and Figs. 1-3).
Finally, the examiner respectfully reminds the applicant that the Examiner has full latitude to interpret each claim in the broadest reasonable sense. The Examiner will reference prior art using terminology familiar to one of ordinary skill in the art. Such an approach is broad in concept and can be either explicit or implicit in meaning.
Examiner’s Notes are/if provided with the cited references to prior art to assist the applicant to better understand the nature of the prior art, application of such prior art and, as appropriate, to further indicate other prior art that maybe applied in other office actions. Such comments are entirely consistent with the intent and spirit of compact prosecution. However, and unless otherwise stated, the citations are self-explanatory to one skilled in the art and do not need any further explanation. Moreover, the Examiner’s Notes are not prior art but a link to prior art that one of ordinary skill in the art would find inherently or obviously appropriate.
Unless otherwise annotated, as aforementioned, Examiner’s statements are to be interpreted in reference to that of one of ordinary skill in the art. Statements made in reference to the condition of the disclosure constitute, on the face of it, the basis and such would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, establishing thereby an inherent or obviousness prima facie case or statement(s).
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in its entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner and the additional related prior arts made of record that are considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure to further show the general state of the art.
Conclusion
10. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORGE CARRASQUILLO whose telephone number is (571)270-7879. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday, 8:30am - 5:00pm, Alternate Fridays off.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Eduardo Colon-Santana can be reached on (571) 272-2060. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JORGE L CARRASQUILLO/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2846
