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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 13, and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
“ wall of housing” in the 7th to last line of claim 1 should read “wall of the housing”.
“wall of housing define a socket” in the last line of claim 13 should read “wall of housing to define a socket”.
“the value outlet” in the second to last line of claim 20 should read “the valve outlet”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites “the first wall and the second wall of the housing” in the 8th to last line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim and it is unclear if these are the same or different from the claimed first side wall and second side wall recited in the second line of the claim. For the purposes of this examination, these will be interpreted as referring to the first side wall and second side wall of the housing, as this appears to be applicant’s intent.
Further regarding claim 1, the claim recites the latch having a first portion that releasable engages “the surface of the depth post” in lines 23-24. However, the claim in line 21 recites the depth post having “two or more of a surface.” As a plurality of surfaces are claimed (i.e. “two or more”), it is unclear if the latch engages with one of the surfaces of the depth post, or each of the surfaces of the depth post. For the purposes of this examination, this claim will be interpreted as defining the latch engaging with one of the two or more surfaces of the depth post, as this appears to be applicant’s intent.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the hard surface" in line 26. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear if the hard surface is referring to the “hard material,” which is the desired workpiece recited in the preamble of the claim, or to a surface of the claimed saw. For the purposes of this examination, “the hard surface” will be interpreted as “the hard material,” as this appears to be applicant’s intent.
The claims include many instances of the same term being used for different elements, which makes the claims unclear when subsequent recitations are inconsistently applied. For example, claim 1 recites the shield having a top wall including “a first major surface” and “a second major surface” (lines 10-12), and later recites a mounting plate having “a first major surface and a second major surface” (line 27). Subsequently the claim refers to “the first major surface” in line 28 and “the second major surface” in line 30. If applicant intends for multiple elements to have first major surfaces, the claims should consistently spell out the exact surface being referred to. For example, each recitation intending to refer to the first major surface of the mounting plate should explicitly spell out “the first major surface of the mounting plate” in order to differentiate from the first major surface of the top wall of the shield.
Similarly as described in the paragraph above, several other claims have clarity issues stemming from using the same term for different elements. For example, “the first major surface” and “the second major surface” recited in claim 9; “the first major surface” and “the second major surface” recited in claim 12; “the first major surface” and “the second major surface” recited in claim 15; “the first side wall” and “the second side wall” in claim 12; “the longitudinal axis” in claim 2; “the top wall” in claim 9; and “the openings” in claim 9 refer to claim elements which are ambiguous due to the terms being used to refer to different elements. Each of these recitations should be clarified and the entirety of the claims should be reviewed to ensure consistency.
Claims 2-20 are rejected as indefinite due to their dependency upon rejected claim 1.
Claim 10 recites “the surface of the depth post” in lines 3-4, and is unclear for substantially the same reasons described above in the rejection of claim 1, which uses this same phrase.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the fourth edge" in the second line and “the planar surface of the hard material” in the last two lines. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. It is unclear what edge is being referred to here and what defines the fourth edge, and it is unclear if “the planar surface” is the same or different from the “hard surface” recited in claim 1. For the purposes of this examination, this claim will be interpreted as best can be understood by examiner and is explained in the rejection below.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the first major planar surface and the second major planar surface" in the second and third lines. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitation in the claim. It is unclear what constitutes the first and second major planar surfaces here. For the purposes of this examination, this claim will be interpreted as best can be understood by examiner and is explained in the rejection below.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-11, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hilsgen (US 2011/0203565, cited by applicant) in view of Matsumoto (US 2015/0174719) and Cook (US 6203112, cited by applicant).
Regarding claim 1, Hilsgen teaches a saw for cutting a hard material, the saw comprising: a housing (including elements 22, 38) having a first side wall and a second side wall (walls 52 on right and left sides as shown in fig 9); a motor (44) mounted to the first side wall of the housing (mounted through element 38; fig 9), where the motor includes a drive shaft (unlabeled shaft between motor 44 and element 51; fig 5); an arbor (42) mounted to the second side wall of the housing (fig 5), wherein the arbor includes a first end (left end in fig 5) and a second end (right end in fig 5) opposite the first end, wherein the first end can receive a saw blade (33) having a circumferential cutting edge (fig 3; note that that blade is not actively claimed as a part of the saw and the arbor must only be capable of receiving a saw blade to meet the claims), wherein the drive shaft of the motor turns the second end of the arbor to rotate the circumferential cutting edge of the saw blade ([0042]), and wherein the arbor is in a fixed position relative to the housing of the saw (fixed to element 38 as shown in fig 7); a shield (shown unlabeled in fig 2 covering the blade 33) mounted to the housing, the shield having a top wall that covers at least a portion of the first end of the arbor (as shown in fig 2, top circumferential wall covering end of arbor with blade), the top wall having a first major surface space (space defined interior surface of shield) directly across from the first end of the arbor so as to receive the saw blade (fig 3) and a second major surface opposite the first major surface (outside surface of circumferential top wall); a cut-depth guide (elements 110a, 112) on the housing (fig 9), the cut-depth guide having a depth post (112), a sleeve (110a) to receive the depth post (fig 2), wherein: the sleeve includes an interior surface that defines an opening that at least partially surrounds the depth post (as shown in fig 2; sleeve 110a has opening into interior surface which surrounds post 112) and through which the depth post can move relative the sleeve ([0035]); the depth post has a first end, a second end opposite the first end along a longitudinal axis (vertical axis between top and bottom ends in fig 2), a guide wheel (116) extending from the first end of the depth post, the guide wheel having a peripheral surface that can contact the hard surface (shown in fig 2); and a mounting plate (unlabeled plate between elements 110b and 112c shown in fig 2 and fig 4) having a first major surface (back surface visible in fig 4) and a second major surface (front surface visible in fig 2) opposite the first major surface, wherein the first major surface has a cleat (28) for releasably joining the saw to a machine (10; fig 1) that provides power to operate the motor of the saw ([0031]; note that the machine is not actively claimed as a part of the claimed saw), wherein the first side wall and the second side wall of the housing are coupled to the second major surface and extend in a common direction away from both the first major surface and the second major surface of the mounting plate (as shown in fig 3, sidewalls 52 of housing are mounted to and extend away from mounting plate) so that the circumferential cutting edge of the saw blade will not change position relative to the first major surface and the second major surface of the mounting plate (blade with circumferential edge is held on housing and remains in position unless moved by power as described [0059]), and wherein the mounting plate can transfer pressure from the machine to the guide wheel (function achieved due to their connection) extending from the first end of the depth post to maintain a cut depth of the saw blade determined by the position of the depth post relative to the sleeve ([0035]).
Hilsgen does not teach an elongate mark that aligns with the circumferential edge of the saw blade when mounted on the first end of the arbor. Matsumoto teaches a saw for cutting a hard material including a shield (11) with a top wall having a second major surface (outer surface of 11b shown in figs 4-5) having an elongate mark (21) that aligns with a circumferential edge of the saw blade (7) when the saw blade is mounted (alignment shown in fig 5). It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include an elongate mark on the second major surface of Hilsgen aligning with the circumferential cutting edge of the saw blade when mounted on the first end of the arbor, as an elongate mark allows a user to easily recognize the position of the blade allowing visual checking of the cutting position as taught by Matsumoto ([0041]).
Hilsgen does not teach the cut-depth guide including a latch mounted to the sleeve, or two or more surfaces on the depth post at a predetermined interval, the latch releasably engaging with the surface of the depth post. Cook teaches a saw for cutting a hard material including a cut-depth guide having a depth post (310), sleeve (305), and a latch (312) mounted to the sleeve (as shown in fig 1), wherein the depth post has two or more of a surface (the surfaces forming the holes shown in fig 3) that are each spaced at a predetermined interval from each other along the longitudinal axis (vertically spaced as shown in fig 3), and the latch (312) has a first portion (end portion) that releasably engages the surface of the depth post to fix the position of the depth post relative to the sleeve (as described col 4, lines 52-61). It is obvious to substitute one known element for another to obtain predictable results (MPEP 2143 I. B). It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the cut depth guide of Cook in the saw of Hilsgen, including the depth post, sleeve, and latch, with two or more spaced surfaces on the depth post for releasably engaging the latch, as this cut-depth guide arrangement achieves the predictable result of allowing a desired cut depth to be adjusted and locked in place during operation as taught Cook (col 4, lines 52-61).
Regarding claim 2, Hilsgen, as modified, teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Hilsgen further teaches the arbor (42) includes a longitudinal axis extending between the first end and the second end of the arbor (extending left to right as viewed in fig 5), wherein the longitudinal axis cannot move relative to the housing of the saw (fixed relative to element 38 of housing as shown in fig 5; also may be stationary relative to element 22 of housing as described [0059]).
Regarding claims 3-4, Hilsgen, as modified, teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Hilsgen further teaches the saw includes only one of a hydraulic motor, wherein the motor mounted to the first side wall of the housing is the hydraulic motor (motor 44 is hydraulic as described [0042]) driven by power provided by an auxiliary hydraulic power supply (auxiliary hydraulic power supplied by route 66 shown in fig 8) of the machine; all the power provided by the auxiliary hydraulic power supply of the machine is used to operate the hydraulic motor (as shown in fig 8 and described [0042]).
Regarding claim 5, Hilsgen, as modified, teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Hilsgen further teaches the saw includes an inline check-valve (48) hydraulically coupled to the hydraulic motor (fig 6; [0042]).
Regarding claim 6, Hilsgen, as modified, teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Hilsgen further teaches a universal joint (51) connects the second end of the arbor to the drive shaft of the motor (as shown in fig 5).
Regarding claim 8, Hilsgen, as modified, teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Hilsgen further teaches a bearing mount (45) attaches the arbor to the housing (as shown in fig 5 and described [0049]).
Regarding claim 9, Hilsgen, as modified, teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Hilsgen further teaches the housing further includes a top wall (top wall 52 shown in fig 9) connected to the first side wall and the second side wall (as shown in fig 9), the top wall having: a first major surface and a second major surface opposite the first major surface (top and bottom surfaces). Hilsgen does not teach the top wall having a surface extending between the first major surface and the second major surface to define an opening aligning with the opening in the sleeve of the cut-depth guide. Cook further teaches a housing having a top wall (130) having :a first major surface and a second major surface opposite the first major surface (top and bottom surfaces shown in fig 3); and a surface extending between the first major surface and the second major surface to define an opening (opening shown in fig 3 accepting sleeve 305); wherein the sleeve of the cut-depth guide extends in a common direction away from both the first major surface and the second major surface of the top wall (extending upward as shown in fig 3) and wherein the opening through the top wall aligns with the opening in the sleeve of the cut-depth guide to allow the depth post to move through the openings relative the sleeve (as shown in fig 3). It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a surface extending between the first and second major surfaces of the top wall on the housing of Hilsgen, as this allows the cut-depth guide to be fixedly held on the housing as taught by Cook (fig 3; col 4, lines 43-51).
Regarding claims 10-11, Hilsgen, as modified, teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Cook further teaches in the cut-depth guide (included in the combination as described in the rejection of claim 1 above) the latch includes a pin (312) having a first end (left end in fig 3) and a second (right end in fig 3) end spaced longitudinally from the first end, wherein the pin defines the first portion of the latch that releasably engages the surface of the depth post (as shown in fig 1); and wherein the sleeve (305) of the cut-depth guide includes a first pin guide wall having a first surface (wall defining opening which receives pin) defining a first opening to the interior surface of the sleeve (opening visible in fig 3) and a second pin guide wall having a second surface defining a second opening to the interior surface of the sleeve (not shown in figures, but described in col 4, lines 52-53 as a “set” of through holes, indicating a second opening on the side not visible in fig 3), wherein the first opening and the second opening to the interior surface of the sleeve are concentrically aligned and wherein the first pin guide wall and the second pin guide wall releasably receive at least the first portion defined by the pin (as described col 4, lines 52-56); wherein the depth post is a tube (310) having a square cross-sectional shape that includes a first wall and a second wall opposite the first wall (square shape with walls shown in fig 3), wherein the first wall includes two or more of the surfaces to define a first series of holes spaced at the predetermined interval from each other along the longitudinal axis (the holes visible on the first wall in fig 3) and the second wall (wall opposite the first wall) includes two or more of the surfaces to define a second series of holes spaced at the predetermined interval from each other along the longitudinal axis and wherein the first series of holes and the second series of holes form concentrically aligned pairs of holes that can receive the pin (described in col 4, lines 52-56; the described “plurality of sets” of holes which receive the pin indicates holes on second wall opposite the first wall).
Regarding claim 19, Hilsgen, as modified, teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Hilsgen further teaches the shield (unlabeled shield around blade 33 shown in fig 2) includes a first portion mounted to the housing (as shown in fig 2). Hilsgen does not teach the shield including a second portion joined to the first portion with a hinge and pivotable relative to the first portion. Cook further teaches a saw including a shield (175) including a first potion (176) and a second portion (178) joined to the first portion with a hinge (177; fig 4), wherein the second portion of the shield can pivot relative to the first portion of the shield and the housing around the hinge (col 3, lines 50-64). It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a second portion pivoting relative to the first portion of the shield of Hilsgen via a hinge, as a hinged second portion allows easy access to the blade as taught by Cook (col 3, lines 50-64).
Regarding claim 20, Hilsgen, as modified, teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Hilsgen further teaches the saw further includes a tank (108) mounted to the mounting plate (as shown in fig 9), the tank having a tank inlet (shown unlabeled at top) to receive a fluid (described as receiving coolant in [0069]) and a tank outlet through which the fluid can flow (tank outlets into hose as described [0069]); a pump (106) having a pump inlet fluidly coupled to the tank outlet and a pump outlet for pumping the fluid from the tank ([0069]; pump receives coolant from tank an outputs to a valve, indicating inlet and outlet); a valve having a valve inlet fluidly coupled to the pump outlet and a value outlet, wherein the value can adjust a flow rate of the fluid from the pump (described [0069] last sentence); and an outlet nozzle fluidly coupled to the valve outlet, wherein the outlet nozzle is located at a position adjacent the shield to supply the fluid to the saw blade (nozzle described in [0069] as being positioned to supply fluid to sides of blade, which is adjacent to shield as shown in fig 2).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hilsgen, Matsumoto, and Cook as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Papenmeier (US 3566932).
Regarding claim 7, Hilsgen, as modified, teaches all the limitations of claim 6 as described above. Hilsgen further teaches the universal joint is a coupler that connects the second end of the arbor to the drive shaft of the motor ([0050]; fig 5). Hilsgen is silent as to if the coupler is a jaw type coupler, but specifies that the coupler is a flex coupler ([0050]). Papenmeier teaches a saw including a jaw type coupler (10; col 3, lines 41-62) for connecting an arbor and a shaft (as shown in fig 5), stating that the coupler may be cushioned with elastic (col 5, lines 60-62). It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a jaw type coupler as the coupler in the saw of Hilsgen, as jaw type couplers are known coupling mechanisms which allow the flexing desired by Hilsgen (Hilsgen [0050]), which provides cushioning to the coupling as taught by Papenmeier (col 3, lines 60-62).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hilsgen, Matsumoto, and Cook as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Erbach (US 2004/0251646).
Regarding claim 12, Hilsgen, as modified, teaches all the limitations of claim 10 as described above. Cook further teaches the pin (included in the cut depth guide of Hilsgen as described in the rejections of claims 1 and 10 above) extends through the opening in the first pin guide wall and at least partially through the second opening in the second pin guide wall distal rom the first opening in the first pin guide wall (as described in col 4, lines 52-57 of Cook). Hilsgen and Cook do not teach the latch including a yoke having a front latch wall, first side wall, handle, or a spring. Erbach teaches a saw (described [0035]) with an adjustable locking mechanism including the latch with a yoke (56) having: a front latch wall (56b) with a first major surface and a second major surface opposite the first major surface (left and right surfaces shown in fig 7a); a first side wall and a second side wall opposite the first side wall (opposite walls 56a shown in fig 7a), wherein the front wall joins the first side wall and the second side wall (fig 7a) and wherein both the first side wall and the second side wall extend in a common direction from the sleeve (22) of the cut-depth guide (extending towards the left as viewed in fig 7a), the front latch wall further including a surface extending between the first major surface and the second major surface to define an opening (unlabeled opening accepting element 40a) that concentrically aligns with a first opening of the first pin guide wall (opening in first pin guide wall 22b), wherein the pin (40) extends through the opening in the front latch wall and the first opening in the first pin guide wall (as shown in fig 7a) to position the first end (40d) of the pin distal to the opening in the front latch wall and the first opening in the first pin guide wall (as shown in fig 7a); a handle (40c) attached to the pin, the handle positioned proximal to the first major surface of the front latch wall (shown in fig 7a); and a spring (56a) positioned between the second surface of the front latch wall and the first pin guide wall (as shown in fig 7A), wherein a first portion of the spring (right end as viewed in fig 7a) is joined to the pin such that a force applied to the handle to move the first end of the pin further away from both the first major surface and the second major surface of the front latch wall compresses the spring (compression shown in fig 7B). It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a yoke with a front latch wall having an opening defined between major surfaces thereof and concentrically aligned with the first and second openings of the first and second guide pin walls, having a handle attached to the pin and a spring between the front latch wall and first guide pin wall in the saw of Hilsgen, as such an arrangement allows the user to easily adjust the post and sleeve relative to one another while being biased into a locking position as taught by Erbach ([0020], [0033]).
Claim(s) 13-15 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hilsgen, Matsumoto, and Cook as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jedick (US 4840431).
Regarding claim 13, Hilsgen, as modified, teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Hilsgen further teaches the housing further includes a front housing wall (front of element 22 as shown in fig 9) extending between the first side wall and the second side wall of the housing (between side walls 52 as shown in fig 9). Hilsgen does not teach the front housing wall defining a socket to receive the guide wheel. Jedick teaches a saw including a housing (12) with a front housing wall (wall on left end as viewed in fig 4) extending between first and second side walls (side walls 56; fig 4) to define a socket to receive a guide wheel (42; shown in fig 5). It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to define a socket with the front housing wall to receive the guide wheel of Hilsgen, as this protects the guide wheel from debris generated by the saw during operation.
Regarding claims 14-15 and 17-18, Hilsgen, as modified, teaches all the limitations of claim 13 as described above. Cook further teaches (structure of cut depth guide of Cook included in the combination as described in the rejection of claim 1 above) the two or more of the surface of the depth post includes a terminal surface (surfaces forming bottommost holes in post 310 shown in fig 3 of Cook) to receive the first portion of the latch (312) to fix the guide wheel at least partially within the housing so that only a portion of the peripheral surface that contacts the hard material when the mounting plate transfers pressure from the machine to the guide wheel extends from the socket to place the saw blade at a full depth cutting position for the saw (when socket of Jedick is employed as described in the rejection of claim 13 above, the guide wheel only partially extends from the socket as shown in fig 5 of Jedick); the front housing wall includes a first major planar surface and a second major planar surface opposite the first major planar surface (when front housing wall of Jedick is used as described in the rejection of claim 13 above; interior and exterior walls shown in fig 5 of Jedick), wherein the first major planar surface and the second major planar surface are approximately perpendicular to a planar surface of the hard material being cut by the saw when the saw blade is at the full depth cutting position (approximately perpendicular as shown in fig 5 of Jedick; further, Hilsgen teaches the housing may be adjusted parallel to the planar surface (Hilsgen [0049]), which would result in a perpendicular front housing wall); and wherein when the saw blade is at the full depth cutting position an edge (bottom edge of each side wall 52) of each of the first side wall and the second side wall of the housing is approximately parallel with a planar surface of the hard material (Hilsgen teaches the housing, which includes a bottom edge of each of the side walls 52, may be adjusted parallel to the planar surface to be cut; [0049]); wherein only a portion of the shield mounted to the housing extends distally from both a first major planar surface and a second major planar surface of the front housing wall (as shown in fig 2, only a portion of shield extends distally below the level of the surfaces forming the front housing wall).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 16 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 16, Hilsgen appears to be the closest prior art. Hilsgen teaches many of the features of the claimed invention as detailed in the rejections above. However, the first and second side walls of the housing of Hilsgen do not each have the shape of a convex polygon having five peripheral straight edges that define five corners. The straight, rectangular shape of the side walls of Hilsgen are necessary to its operation of allowing sliding of the saw along the housing (sliding described in Hilsgen [0039]), and thus any modification of Hilsgen’s walls to include a five sided complex polygonal shape would appear to render Hilsgen unsatisfactory for its intended purpose. While there are known saws with housings having five-sided polygonal shapes (see e.g. US 2004/0129261 fig 4), there is nothing in the prior art which suggests the specifically claimed interior angles at each of the five corners as recited in claim 16, particularly in combination with the subject matter of claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Other similar saws and depth adjustment systems are cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCEL T DION whose telephone number is (571)272-9091. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9-5, F 9-3.
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.
/MARCEL T DION/Examiner, Art Unit 3723
/BRIAN D KELLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights