DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
The Office Action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed on 6/29/2026. Claims 1-7, 9 and 14 are canceled. Claims 17-22 are new. The objections to the Specification have been withdrawn in light of the amendments filed. Accordingly, claims 8, 10-13 and 15-22 and 16 are pending for consideration on the merits in this Office Action.
Claim Objections
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding Claim 18, the recitation of “wherein said coolant heated a by cooling of the electric drive device” should be - - wherein said coolant heated by cooling of the electric drive device - - for clarity.
. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 17, the recitation of “fan” and “external heat exchanger” lack proper antecedent basis in the claims.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
For examination purposes, the limitations have been interpreted as - - the fan - - and - - the external heat exchanger - - for clarity.
Regarding Claims 18-20, the recitation of “the evaporator of the chiller” lacks proper antecedent basis in the claims.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
For examination purposes, the limitations have been interpreted as - - an evaporator of the chiller - - for clarity.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 8, 10,12,13,15, 16, 18, 19, 21 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katoh et al. (US20130081419A1) in view of Bray et al. (US20210283978A1).
Claim 8, Katoh teaches a vehicle for passenger transport [a hybrid vehicle; 0086], the vehicle having an electric drive device [a hybrid car including an electric motor MG; 0086] and a passenger interior [where conditioned air blows toward the passenger in the vehicle interior; 0115], the vehicle comprising:
an air-conditioning unit [air conditioner 1, Figure 1] for air conditioning the passenger interior of the vehicle [0088];
said air-conditioning unit having an external heat exchanger [outdoor heat exchanger 16, Figure 1] configured to take heat from a surrounding of the vehicle during a heat pump operation of the air-conditioning unit [where the outdoor heat exchanger 16 exhibits a heat absorption effect in the heating operation; 0098], wherein an ambient air flow generated by a fan [blower fan 17, Figure 1] is guided past said external heat exchanger [where outdoor heat exchanger is to exchange heat with outside air blown from blower fan 17; 0098];
a cooling circuit [coolant circulation circuit 40, Figure 1] for cooling the electric drive device during an operation of the vehicle [where radiator 43 is for exchanging heat between the coolant for cooling the electric motor MG for traveling; 0099; where when bypassing the radiator 43, a heat storage case may be disposed in the coolant circulation circuit; 0303]; and
a waste-heat heat exchanger [radiator 43, Figure 1] connected upstream of said external heat exchanger of said air-conditioning unit, relative to the ambient air flow generated by said fan, [where the radiator 43 is integral with the outdoor heat exchanger 16 on the windward side in the flow direction X of the outside air blown by the blower fan 17, Figure 1] said waste-heat heat exchanger being impinged by the coolant flowing back from the electric drive device [electric motor MG, Figure 1;0099];
and valves [valves 42, 15a and 15b, Figure 1] disposed to enable said cooling circuit for the electric drive device to be flow-separated from said air-conditioning unit [where the valves enable a normal heating operation, where the air conditioning controller closes the opening/closing valve 15 a, and switches the three-way valve 15 b and way valve 42 switches coolant to bypass radiator 43; 0147].
Katoh teaches a chiller [where a heat storage case may be disposed in the coolant circulation circuit; 0303] configured such that the electric drive device is uninterruptedly cooled [where uninterruptedly is described in the Specification to be by means of a chiller during operation of the vehicle; p.1, lines 6-9; where in the heating operation where the coolant bypasses the radiator 43, heat dissipated from the electric motor MG for traveling may be stored in the heat storage case; 0303] but Katoh does not teach the chiller where said waste-heat heat exchanger is impinged by coolant that flows back from the electric drive device to said chiller.
However, Bray teaches a vehicle having a cooling system for providing cooling to a cabin of the vehicle and a battery of the vehicle [0001] where a chiller [second chiller 26, Figure 2] is configured to control a temperature of a coolant of said cooling circuit [in coolant loop 12 via refrigerant-to-coolant heat exchanger, Figure 2; 0057] such that the electric drive device [battery 20, Figure 2] is uninterruptedly cooled [where uninterruptedly cooled is defined in the Applicant Specification to be by means of a chiller during operation of the vehicle; p.1, lines 6-9] and said waste-heat heat exchanger [first chiller 24, Figure 2] is impinged by coolant that flows back from the electric drive device to said chiller [via valve 22, Figure 2;0057;0058], where one of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying the substitution of known elements, a heat storage case, for another, a chiller, and yield predictable results, i.e., improving cooling capacity to prevent the overheating of the powertrain components
Claim 8 recites a functional limitation drawn toward the intended use or manner of operating the claimed apparatus. The functional limitation is: “for uninterruptedly cooling.” When the cited prior art teaches all of the positively recited structure of the claimed apparatus, it will be held that the prior art apparatus is capable of performing all of the claimed functional limitations of the claimed apparatus. MPEP § 2114.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Katoh to have a chiller configured to control a temperature of a coolant of said cooling circuit such that the electric drive device is uninterruptedly [where uninterruptedly is defined in the Specification to be by means of a chiller during operation of the vehicle; p.1, lines 6-9] cooled and said waste-heat heat exchanger is impinged by coolant that flows back from the electric drive device to said chiller in view of the teachings of Bray where the substitution of an element for another would have yielded predictable results, i.e., improving cooling to prevent the overheating of the powertrain components
Regarding Claim 10, Katoh, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 8, and further teaches where the electric drive device may be the electric Motor MG, an engine or an electric device, such as an inverter, for supplying power to the electric motor MG [Katoh;0299] but does not explicitly teach the electric drive device is a battery or a fuel cell.
However, Bray teaches a vehicle having a cooling system for providing cooling to a cabin of the vehicle and a battery of the vehicle [0001] where said electric drive device is a battery or a fuel cell [battery 20, Figure 2], where one of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying the substitution of known elements, the vehicle mounted electric motor generating heat in operation, for another, battery, and yield predictable results, i.e., preventing overheating of powertrain components like the battery [Bray; 0002]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of the combined teachings to have the electric drive device is a battery or a fuel cell in view of the teachings of Bray where the substitution of two elements for another would have yielded predictable results i.e., preventing overheating of powertrain components like the battery [Bray; 0002]
Regarding Claim 12, Katoh, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 8 and further teaches where said external heat exchanger [outdoor heat exchanger 16, Figure 1] of said air-conditioning unit [air conditioner 1, Figure 1] is equipped with a temperature sensor [outlet temperature sensor 51 for detecting refrigerant on the outlet side of outdoor heat exchanger 16, Te; 0139] for ascertaining an icing-up of said external heat exchanger [where air conditioning controller of this embodiment includes the structure (a frost formation determination portion) for determining whether or not the frost is formed at the outdoor heat exchanger 16, based on a detection signal from the sensor group for the air conditioning control including sensor of temperature Te; 0143].
Regarding Claim 13, Katoh, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 12 and further teaches where said air- conditioning unit [air conditioner 1, Figure 1] has a controller [air conditioner controller; 0138] signal-connected to said temperature sensor [where a group of various sensors for control of air conditioning is coupled to the input side of the air conditioning controller, including outlet refrigerant temperature sensor 51 for detecting a refrigerant temperature Te;0138] and said control device controller is configured to deactivate a circuit of said air-conditioning unit upon ascertaining an icing-up of said external heat exchanger [where In the defrosting operation, the air conditioning controller stops the operation of the compressor 11, and also stops the operation of the blower fan 17; 0164].
Regarding Claim 15, Katoh, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 8 and further teaches where said waste-heat heat exchanger [radiator 43, Figure 1] upstream of said external heat exchanger [where the radiator 43 is integral with the outdoor heat exchanger 16 on the windward side in the flow direction X of the outside air blown by the blower fan 17; 0137] is configured to preheat the ambient air flow [where in the defrosting operation when the fan 17 may be turned off, the heat contained in radiator 43 is transferred to the heat-absorption air passages 16b of the outdoor heat exchanger 16 via the outer fins 50, Figure 1; 0166; and in the waste heat collection operation, where the fan is on, where outdoor heat exchanger 16 absorbs both the heat contained in the outside air blown by the blower fan 17 and the heat contained in the coolant of radiator 43 to evaporate itself; 0170].
Regarding Claim 16, Katoh, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 15 and further teaches where preheating the ambient air flow [refer to the rejection of claim 15 above] at the waste-heat heat exchanger [radiator 43, Figure 1] upstream of said external heat exchanger [where the radiator 43 is integral with the outdoor heat exchanger 16 on the windward side in the flow direction X of the outside air blown by the blower fan 17; 0137] is configured for saving electrical power for a heating register or for operating a compressor with reduced electrical power, where the claim language does not require the prior art to perform an additional method step nor does it require additional structure beyond claim 15. Therefore, the claimed properties of saving electrical power are presumed to be inherent. MPEP § 2112.01.
.
Regarding Claim 18, Katoh, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 15 and further teaches where said coolant heated by cooling of the electric drive [MG in cooling circulation circuit 40, Figure 2] device is conducted from a return line of the cooling circuit [coolant circulation circuit, Figure 2] to said waste-heat heat exchanger [radiator 43, Figure 2] before reaching an evaporator of the chiller [where coolant is configured to flow from battery 20 via valve 22, bypassing second chiller 26, Figure 5 of Bray; where chiller 26 comprises a refrigerant-to-coolant heat exchanger that dissipates heat to the refrigerant loop 16 heat exchanger, Figure 2; 0057, refer to the rejection of claim 8 in view of Bray above], and a coolant cooled at said waste-heat heat exchanger is returned to a feed line of the cooling circuit [where the cooling fluid circuit is for circulation of the coolant from the coolant pump 41, the electric motor MG for traveling, the radiator 43, and the cooling pump 41 in that order; 0127].
Regarding Claim 19, Katoh, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 15 and does not teach where the input side of the waste-heat heat exchanger is flow-connected to the input side of the evaporator of the chiller and the output side of the waste-heat heat exchanger is flow-connected to the output side of the evaporator of the chiller.
However, Bray teaches a vehicle having a cooling system for providing cooling to a cabin of the vehicle and a battery of the vehicle [0001] where the input side of the waste-heat heat exchanger [first chiller 24, Figure 2] is flow-connected to the input side of the evaporator of the chiller [where the input sides of chiller 24 and second chiller 26 are flow connected via valve 22, Figure 2; where chiller 26 comprises a refrigerant-to-coolant heat exchanger to dissipate heat with refrigerant loop 16, Figure 16; 0057] and the output side of the waste-heat heat exchanger is flow-connected to the output side of the evaporator of the chiller [where the input sides of chiller 24 and second chiller 26 are flow connected via valve 22, Figure] where one of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying this known technique, dual cooling capability, to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art i.e., preventing the overheating of the powertrain components when the cooling demands of the vehicle cabin and the battery exceed the cooling capabilities of the first refrigerant loop [Bray; 0092]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of the combined teachings to have where the input side of the waste-heat heat exchanger is flow-connected to the input side of the evaporator of the chiller and the output side of the waste-heat heat exchanger is flow-connected to the output side of the evaporator of the chiller in view of the teachings of Bray where this known technique could have been applied to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable i.e., preventing the overheating of the powertrain components when the cooling demands of the vehicle cabin and the battery exceed the cooling capabilities of the first refrigerant loop [Bray; 0092].
Regarding Claim 21, Katoh, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 15 and further teaches where said ambient air is preheated at the waste-heat heat exchanger [radiator 43, Figure 3 waste heat collecting operation] by thermal interaction with heated coolant returning from the electric drive device [where the fan is on, where outdoor heat exchanger 16 absorbs both the heat contained in the outside air blown by the blower fan 17 and the heat contained in the coolant of radiator 43 to evaporate itself; 0170; where the radiator 43 is integral with the outdoor heat exchanger 16 on the windward side in the flow direction X of the outside air blown by the blower fan 17; 0137].
Regarding Claim 22, Katoh, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 21 and further teaches wherein the preheating at the waste-heat heat exchanger is configured to counteract an icing-up of the external heat exchanger [where in the defrosting operation when the fan 17 may be turned off, the heat contained in radiator 43 is transferred to the heat-absorption air passages 16b of the outdoor heat exchanger 16 via the outer fins 50, Figure 1; 0166]. The claim language “and reduces electrical power consumption of a heating register and/or of a compressor” does not require the prior art to perform an additional method step nor does it require additional structure beyond claim 22, wherein the preheating at the waste-heat heat exchanger is configured to counteract an icing-up of the external heat exchanger. Therefore, the claimed properties are presumed to be inherent. MPEP § 2112.01.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katoh et al. (US20130081419A1) in view of Bray et al. (US20210283978A1) and in further view of Salasoo et al. (US20100019718A1).
Regarding Claim 11, Katoh, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 8 and does not teach wherein the vehicle is a railborne vehicle.
However, Salasoo teaches a system for improving the performance of a vehicle energy storage device [0001] where the vehicle is a rail borne vehicle [locomotive 100; 0018] where one of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying this known technique of battery cooling to a known electric locomotive that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art, i.e., extending the operating life and improving the performance of the battery by managing parameters such as battery temperature gradient [Salasoo, 0058;0059].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of the combined teachings to have where the vehicle is a rail borne vehicle in view of the teachings of Salasoo where this known technique could have been applied to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable, i.e., extending the operating life and improving the performance of the battery by managing parameters such as battery temperature gradient [Salasoo, 0058;0059].
Claims 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katoh et al. (US20130081419A1) in view of Bray et al. (US20210283978A1) as applied to claim 15 above and in further view of Burk et al. (EP1266779A2).
Regarding Claim 17, Katoh, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 15 and does not teach where said waste-heat heat exchanger is disposed between the fan and the external heat exchanger in the ambient air flow path.
However, Burk teaches a vehicle cooling circuit [0001] where said waste-heat heat exchanger [radiator 12, Figure ] is disposed between fan [fan 24 (pressure fan), where a alternatively or in addition to the fan 24 a fan 25 designed as a section fan can also be provided, Figure 1] and external heat exchanger [condenser 20, Figure 1] in the ambient air flow path [air flow arrow 22, Figure 1; 0022] where one of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying the substitution of known elements for another and yield predictable results, i.e., generating an airflow across the heat exchangers [Burk; 0022].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of the combined teachings to have where said waste-heat heat exchanger is disposed between the fan and the external heat exchanger in the ambient air flow path in view of the teachings of Burk where the substitution of an element, a suction fan, for another, a pressure fan, would have yielded predictable results i.e. generating an airflow across the heat exchangers [Burk; 0022]
Claims 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katoh et al. (US20130081419A1) in view of Bray et al. (US20210283978A1) as applied to claim 15 above and in further view of Ulens et al. (US20180067505A1).
Regarding Claim 20, Katoh, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 15, and further teaches in a separation operating mode [a normal heating operation; 0147], the cooling circuit is separable from the air-conditioning unit by a valve [where three-way valve 42 allows coolant to bypass the radiator 43, Figure 1; 0147] such that heated coolant interacts only [where the coolant circulation circuit 40 can perform switching between the cooling fluid circuit for circulation of the coolant from the coolant pump 41, the electric motor MG for traveling, the radiator 43, and the cooling pump 41 in that order, and the cooling fluid circuit for circulation of the coolant from the coolant pump 41, the electric motor MG for traveling, the bypass passage 44, and the coolant pump 41 in that order, 0127] with the evaporator of the chiller [chiller 26 where chiller 26 comprises a refrigerant-to-coolant heat exchanger that dissipates heat to the refrigerant loop 16 heat exchanger, Figure 2; 0057, refer to the rejection of claim 8 in view of Bray] and does not teach the cooling circuit is separable from the air-conditioning unit by valves, plural.
However, Ulens teaches a flow control system for controlling a medium passing through a pipe part of a pipe system to a plurality of consumer devices [0001] where the cooling circuit [heat exchange system 7, Figure 3; 0051; where term “heat exchange” is meant provided for heating and/or cooling; 0012] is separable by valves [where two two-way control valves replace a three-way control valve forming bypass 16 in an alternative embodiment, Figure 12] where one of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying the substitution of known element, a three-way valve, for another, two two-way valves, and yield predictable results, i.e., bypassing a heat exchanger to direct fluid to a return pipe [Ulens; 0051]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of the combined teachings to have valves in view of the teachings of Ulens where the substitution of an element for two others would have yielded predictable results i.e., bypassing a heat exchanger to direct fluid to a return pipe [Ulens; 0051].
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-13, filed 06/29/2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 8 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are not persuasive.
On page 8-9 of the remarks Applicant argues that no obvious combination and/or modification of the cited prior art would have led a person of ordinary skill to the claimed invention. On pages 9-11 of the remarks, Applicant argues that none of the valves in Katoh impact coolant circulation circuit 40 relative to the flow separation of the coolant circuit from the air conditioner. Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered and are not persuasive. In particular, Katoh teaches way valve 42, Figure 1, for allowing the coolant to bypass the radiator 43 in coolant circulation circuit 40, where the coolant circulation circuit 40 can perform switching between the cooling fluid circuit for circulation of the coolant from the coolant pump 41, the electric motor MG for traveling, the radiator 43, and the cooling pump 41 in that order, and the cooling fluid circuit for circulation of the coolant from the coolant pump 41, the electric motor MG for traveling, the bypass passage 44, and the coolant pump 41 in that order, 0127. Katoh teaches flow separation of the coolant circuit from said air-conditioning unit because fluid is enabled to bypass the heat exchange structure 70 that couples the coolant circulation circuit 40 and heat pump cycle 10. Accordingly, the rejections of record are considered proper and remain.
On pages 11-12 of the remarks, Applicant argues that there is no clear explanation why a person of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to exchange a heat retention capability with a chiller. Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered and are not persuasive. The test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Katoh discusses that when the coolant of circuit 40 bypasses radiator 43, the coolant temperature increases because it is not dissipating heat with radiator 43, 0128. Katoh teaches an additional heat storage case where in the heating operation where the coolant bypasses the radiator 43, heat dissipated from the electric motor MG for traveling may be stored in the heat storage case, 0303. The heat storage case is considered a chiller because it enables coolant heat dissipation. Katoh specifically does not teach the configuration of the chiller in the coolant circuit where the waste-heat heat exchanger is impinged by coolant that flows back from the electric drive device to said chiller. Refer to the clarified rejection of claim 8 above. Bray further teaches where a waste-heat exchanger, 24 in Figure 12, is impinged by a coolant that flows back, via 22, from an electric drive device, 20, to a chiller, 26, as seen in Figure 12 and further 0058. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would have been motivated to substitute a chiller as taught in Katoh with a chiller as configured in Bray to improve cooling to prevent the overheating of the powertrain components where the two heat dissipation devices are configured to operate, as shown in Figure 12, when the combined cooling demands of the cabin and the battery exceed the cooling capabilities of the first refrigerant loop or the second refrigerant loop, 0092. Accordingly, the rejections of record are considered proper and remain.
On page 12-13, Applicant further argues Bray is directed to a cooling system having a dual independent refrigerant loops for a vehicle cabin and a vehicle battery and the present application is directed to an interaction between an upstream waste-heat heat exchanger, return coolant from the electric drive device, and the external heat exchanger of the air-conditioning unit. Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered and are not persuasive. In response to applicant's argument that Bray is nonanalogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, Bray teaches an interaction between a waste-heat heat exchanger, where first chiller cools coolant from coolant loop 12, 0057, return coolant from the electric drive device, battery 20 , and the external heat exchanger of an air-conditioning unit, where the first chiller 24 exchanges heat with refrigerant loop 14 that cools cabin 120 of vehicle 100, Figure 1 and Figure 2, 0048. Therefore, Bray is in the field of the inventor’s endeavor. Accordingly, the rejections of record are considered proper and remain.
Applicant does not separately argue the rejection of claims 10-13 and 15-22 except for their dependence upon claim 8. Accordingly, the rejections of record are considered proper and remain.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEONA LAUREN BANKS whose telephone number is (571)270-0426. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30- 5:00 EST.
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, Jerry-Daryl Fletcher can be reached at 5712705054. 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.
/KEONA LAUREN BANKS/Examiner, Art Unit 3763 /ELIZABETH J MARTIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights