Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “a second grinding part for grinding” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a reception part for receiving” in claims 1 is being interpreted as item 115 which are per par. 94 and fig. 12 is a material holder
“a base material supply device for supplying” in claims 1 is being interpreted as item 120 which are per par. 107 is a material transfer apparatus
“a brazing filler metal supply device for supplying” in claims 1 is being interpreted as item 140 which is subject to 112(a) and 112(b) below
“a first heating device for bonding” in claims 1 is being interpreted as item 147 which are per par. 166 is a laser
“a bonding object supply device for supplying” in claims 1 is being interpreted as item 160 which per par. 173 and fig. 23 is an arm
“a first base material transfer part…moving” in claims 2 and 4 is being interpreted as item 123 which is subject to 112(a) and 112(b) below
“and a second base material transfer part for gripping” in claims 2 is being interpreted as item 127 which is subject to 112(a) and 112(b) below
“a brazing filler metal providing part for cutting” in claims 4 is being interpreted as item 143 which per fig. 19 is a robot arm
“a winding part around which the brazing filler metal base material is wound” in claims 5 is being interpreted as item 145 which are per fig. 17 is a wheel
“a first guide part for guiding” in claims 6 is being interpreted as item 142a which are per fig. 18 is a roller
“a second guide part for guiding” in claims 6 is being interpreted as item 142b which are per fig. 18 is a roller
“and a brazing filler metal driving part for providing” in claims 6 is being interpreted as item 142c which is subject to 112(a) and 112(b) below
“a cutting moving part” in claims 8 is being interpreted as item 143a which is subject to 112(a) and 112(b) below
“a brazing filler metal cutting part” in claims 8 is being interpreted as item 143c which are per par. 158 is a pair of scissors
“a brazing filler metal rotating part” in claims 9 is being interpreted as item 144a which is subject to 112(a) and 112(b) below
“a brazing filler metal grip part…gripping” in claims 9 is being interpreted as item 144b which is subject to 112(a) and 112(b) below
“a bonding object storage part that stores” in claims 10 is being interpreted as item 161 which per par. 174 is a storage space
“a bonding object reception part for accommodating” in claims 10 is being interpreted as item 162 which per par. 20 is a plate
“a bonding object transfer part for gripping” in claims 10 is being interpreted as item 163 which per par. 186 is a rotator
“an electrode grinding device for grinding the electrode” in claims 18 is being interpreted as item 180 which is subject to 112(a) and 112(b) below
“a brazing transfer part for moving” in claims 18 is being interpreted as item 185 which are per par. 228 is a guide which is subject to 112(a) and 112(b) below
“a grinding part…grinding” in claims 18 is being interpreted as item 181 which is a grinder which is subject to 112(a) and 112(b) below
“a driving part…providing driving force” in claims 20 is being interpreted as item 112 which is subject to 112(a) and 112(b) below
“a first grinding part for grinding” in claims 23 is subject to 112(a) and 112(b) below
“a second grinding part for grinding” in claims 23 is subject to 112(a) and 112(b) below
“first horizontal moving part for moving” in claims 23 is subject to 112(a) and 112(b) below
“a second horizontal moving part for moving” in claims 23 is being interpreted as item 174 which is subject to 112(a) and 112(b) below
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding the following
“a brazing filler metal supply device for supplying” in claims 1
“a first base material transfer part…moving” in claims 2 and
“and a second base material transfer part for gripping” in claims 2
“and a brazing filler metal driving part for providing” in claims 6
“a cutting moving part” in claims 8
“a brazing filler metal rotating part” in claims 9
“a brazing filler metal grip part…gripping” in claims 9
“an electrode grinding device for grinding the electrode” in claims 18
“a brazing transfer part for moving” in claims 18
“a grinding part…grinding” in claims 18
“a driving part…providing driving force” in claims 20
“a first grinding part for grinding” in claims 23
“a second grinding part for grinding” in claims 23
“first horizontal moving part for moving” in claims 23
“a second horizontal moving part for moving” in claims 23
The recitations lack written description as Applicant has not provided a description in the original disclosure which particularly points out what these recitations are considered to be because the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed functions and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function for all claimed structures and various claimed structures therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would not find evidence applicant had possession of the invention.
Claims 2, 4-6, 8-11, 13, 17-18, 20, and 22-23 are also rejected due to their dependence to one or more of the above rejected independent claims.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim limitations
“a brazing filler metal supply device for supplying” in claims 1
“a first base material transfer part…moving” in claims 2 and
“and a second base material transfer part for gripping” in claims 2
“and a brazing filler metal driving part for providing” in claims 6
“a cutting moving part” in claims 8
“a brazing filler metal rotating part” in claims 9
“a brazing filler metal grip part…gripping” in claims 9
“a bonding object transfer part for gripping” in claims 10
“an electrode grinding device for grinding the electrode” in claims 18
“a brazing transfer part for moving” in claims 18
“a grinding part…grinding” in claims 18
“a driving part…providing driving force” in claims 20
“a first grinding part for grinding” in claims 23
“a second grinding part for grinding” in claims 23
“first horizontal moving part for moving” in claims 23
“a second horizontal moving part for moving” in claims 23
Invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The disclosure is devoid of any structure that performs the function in the claim. 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.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claims 2, 4-6, 8-11, 13, 17-18, 20, and 22-23 are also rejected due to their dependence to one or more of the above rejected independent claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 8, 9, 11, 13, 17, 18, 20, 22, and 23 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non obviousness.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20190099769 A1 Holverson in view of US10464168B2 Matthews.
Regarding claim 1,
Holverson teaches, except where struck through,
A brazing system for brazing an object to be bonded to a base material, the brazing system (abstract) comprising:
a base material supply device for supplying the base material to the reception part (par. 48 teaches block 112 where work pieces 14 and 16 are fit up for the joint and it is therefore anticipated that the art of Holverson has base material supply device for supplying either workpiece 14 or 16 to the work area, aka joint);
a brazing filler metal supply device (feeder 24) for supplying a brazing filler metal to an upper side of the base material (par. 20 figs. 1 and 3);
a first heating device (additive manufacturing tool 18) for bonding the brazing filler metal to the base material (par. 19 and 20);
a bonding object supply device for supplying the object to be bonded to an upper side of the brazing filler metal bonded to the base material (par. 48 teaches block 112 where work pieces 14 and 16 are fit up for the joint and it is therefore anticipated that the art of Holverson has bonding object supply device for supplying either workpiece 14 or 16 to the work area, aka joint);
a second heating device (first and second heating devices 42 and 44 are taught as resistance heaters in par. 29 with electrodes running back to controller 30 per fig. 1) which is in contact with opposite sides of the base material to fix the base material and is provided with electrodes for supplying electric current to the base material so as to bond the object to be bonded to the base material (fig. 1 par. 29);
and a cooling device which comes into contact with the object to be bonded to cool the object to be bonded (par. 96 teaches the use of a water cooled copper block).
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Holverson does not teach: a turntable provided with a reception part for receiving the base material and rotatable clockwise or counterclockwise;
Matthews teaches an combination filler wire feeder and energy source system 100 for performing additive manufacturing where the workpiece 115 is set upon robot 115 as a turntable provided with a reception part (fig. 1, plate upon which workpiece 115 is placed onto robot 190) for receiving the base material (workpiece 115)(column 3 liens 61 to 65 teaches the connection) and rotatable clockwise or counterclockwise (column 4 lines 4 to 19);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the robot 190 of Matthews to hold the first and second workpieces 14 and 16 respectively of Holverson for the purpose that the high intensity energy source/wire may be stationary and the workpiece may be rotated under the high intensity energy source/wire (Matthews column 4 lines 6 to 8).
Claim(s) 2 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20190099769 A1 Holverson in view of US10464168B2 Matthews in view of KR-102128538-B1 Yeon.
Regarding claim 2,
Holverson as modified teaches, The brazing system according to claim 1 (as discussed above).
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Holverson as modified does not teach: wherein the base material supply device includes:
a base material supply housing for storing the base material;
a first base material transfer part provided in the base material supply housing and moving the base material in a horizontal direction;
and a second base material transfer part for gripping the base material to seat it in the reception part.
Yeon teaches wherein the base material supply device (first feeder unit 211) includes:
a base material supply housing (first feeder unit 21) for storing the base material (fig. 1, the material C1 is stored in 212 page 5 par. 3 where it is housed until ready for discharge) ;
a first base material transfer part (first member transport module 213) provided in the base material supply housing and moving the base material in a horizontal direction (fig. 1);
and a second base material transfer part (first member transfer unit 31a) for gripping the base material to seat it in the reception part (figs. 2 and 4 and page 6 par. 3-4, page 7 par. 8)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the first feeder unit 21 and first member transfer unit 31a of Yeon with the additive manufacturing system 10 of Holverson for the purpose to pick material and supply said material to a welding horizontal position (Yeon page 7 par. 7).
Regarding claim 10,
Holverson as modified teaches, The brazing system according to claim 1 (as discussed above)
Holverson further teaches,
wherein the bonding object supply device includes:
a bonding object storage part (par. 48 teaches block 112 where work pieces 14 and 16 are fit up for the joint and it is therefore anticipated that the art of Holverson has bonding object supply device for supplying either workpiece 14 or 16 to the work area, aka joint)
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Holverson does not teach: a bonding object storage part that stores a plurality of bonding objects and is provided with a bonding object moving part for moving the plurality of bonding objects in a row;
a bonding object reception part for accommodating at least one of the plurality of bonding objects moved in a row from the bonding object moving part;
and a bonding object transfer part for gripping the bonding object in the bonding object reception part to seat it on the base material.
Yeon teaches a bonding object storage part (second feeder module 221) that stores a plurality of bonding objects and is provided with a bonding object moving part (second feeder module 223) for moving the plurality of bonding objects in a row (page 5 par. 14 and page 6 par. 2 and 3 teach second members C2 being moved by second feeder module 223);
a bonding object reception part for accommodating at least one of the plurality of bonding objects moved in a row from the bonding object moving part (page 5 par. 14 and page 6 par. 2 and 3 teach second members C2 arranged in second feeder module 221);
and a bonding object transfer part (second member transport unit 30b including adsorption transport module 35) for gripping the bonding object in the bonding object reception part to seat it on the base material (see figures 2 and 6 and page 8 par. 4 to 7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the second feeder module 221 and second member transport unit 30b of Yeon the additive manufacturing system 10 of Holverson for the purpose to pick material and supply said material to a welding horizontal position (Yeon page 7 par. 7).
Claim(s) 4 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20190099769 A1 Holverson in view of US10464168B2 Matthews in view of KR101090404B1 herinafter “404”.
Regarding claim 4,
Holverson as modified teaches, The brazing system according to claim 1 (as discussed above).
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Holverson does not teach: wherein the brazing filler metal supply device includes:
a brazing filler metal supply housing;
a first brazing filler metal transfer part provided in the brazing filler metal supply housing and moving a brazing filler metal base material having a first length in a horizontal direction;
a brazing filler metal providing part for cutting the brazing filler metal base material to provide the brazing filler metal having a second length smaller than the first length;
and a second brazing filler metal transfer part for gripping the brazing filler metal to seat it on the base material
“404” teaches
wherein the brazing filler metal supply device includes:
a brazing filler metal supply housing (silver solder supply unit 400);
a first brazing filler metal transfer part (feed cylinder 430) provided in the brazing filler metal supply housing and moving a brazing filler metal base material having a first length in a horizontal direction (fig. 7b);
a brazing filler metal providing part (cutter 420) for cutting the brazing filler metal base material to provide the brazing filler metal having a second length smaller than the first length (page 12 bottom to page 13 top teaches a short length of cut);
and a second brazing filler metal transfer part (lifting/lowering cylinder 470) for gripping the brazing filler metal to seat it on the base material (claims 8-9, and figures 7a and 7b).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the silver solder supply unit 400 of “404” to the additive manufacturing system 10 of Holverson for the purpose of to handle brazing material.
Regarding claim 5,
Holverson as modified teaches, The brazing system according to claim 4 (as discussed above).
The difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is that Holverson does not teach: wherein the brazing filler metal supply device further includes a winding part around which the brazing filler metal base material is wound, wherein the winding part is rotated so that the brazing filler metal base material is moved to the first brazing filler metal transfer part.
“404” teaches wherein the brazing filler metal supply device further includes a winding part around which the brazing filler metal base material is wound (reel 410), wherein the winding part is rotated so that the brazing filler metal base material is moved to the first brazing filler metal transfer part (see claim 8 and figure 7a).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the reel 410 of “404” to the additive manufacturing system 10 of Holverson for the purpose of to handle brazing material.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM M ECKARDT whose telephone number is (313)446-6609. The examiner can normally be reached 6 a.m to 2:00 p.m EST Monday to Friday.
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, Edward Landrum can be reached at (571) 272-5567. 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.
ADAM MICHAEL. ECKARDT
Assistant Examiner
Art Unit 3761
/ADAM M ECKARDT/ Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/WOODY A LEE JR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights