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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. KR10-2023-0090421, filed on July 12th, 2023.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings were received on February 4, 2026. These drawings are acceptable.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1 the limitation “in the plan view” in line 15 of the amended claim lacks antecedent basis. The amended claim should be further amended to conform with the claim as shown in the applicant’s arguments filed on February 4, 2026, at page 11, which further includes the limitation “in a plain view”.
Regarding claim 11 the limitation “in the plan view” in line 17 of the amended claim lacks antecedent basis. The amended claim should be further amended to conform with the claim as shown in the applicant’s arguments filed on February 4, 2026, at page 11, which further includes the limitation “in a plain view”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed February 4 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
At pages 10-15 of the arguments, the applicant traverses the rejection of claims 1, 9, 11 and 19 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) over Inoue et al., US 20230264476 A1, (hereinafter Inoue ‘476). Particularly the applicant argues that Inoue ‘476 does not teach “wherein the first angle is changed by rotation of at least one of the pressurizer, the head, or the state in the plan view.” The examiner finds these arguments to be persuasive. However, during the interview of January 28, 2026 the examiner noted that the features of the now-amended independent claims 1 and 11 were taught by Inoue, US 20100245466 A1, (hereinafter Inoue ‘466). Therefore, the applicant’s arguments on page 16 of their remarks that a 103 rejection of the claims in light of Inoue ‘466 are not persuasive. The applicant argues that Inoue ‘466 does not teach the rotation of the pressurizer by rotation of the stage as the angle is a pre-existing static angle. The examiner brings to attention Figure 19E, as well as Paragraph 0334 (“Firstly, the respective direction of travel switching motors 1124 are driven to rotate and, as shown in FIG. 19E, the direction of travel of the wiping webs 110 is thereby switched to the second direction”) of Inoue ‘466, which discloses the rotation of the stage, and thereby the pressurizer.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-9 and 11-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue et al., US 20230264476 A1 (hereinafter Inoue ‘476), further in view of Inoue, US 20100245466 A1 (hereinafter Inoue ‘466).
Regarding claim 1, Inoue ‘476 teaches:
a head cleaning method (US 20230264476 A1, Abstract, “The method includes performing first wiping in which, to wipe the nozzle surface…”) comprising:
contacting a nozzle surface of a head in which a plurality of nozzle holes is defined (US 20230264476 A1, Paragraph 0022; Figs. 1 and 4, Items 19 and 21);
with an absorbent (US 20230264476 A1, Paragraph 0052, “The band-like member 50 is able to absorb…”; Figure 4, Item 50);
disposed on a pressurizer (US 20230264476 A1, Paragraph 0054; Figure 4, Item 56);
starting a wiping operation at a first edge portion of the head closest to the pressurizer at a first position (The first position of the pressurizer 56 being to the far left of the nozzle surface 20, and the first edge being the leftmost edge of said nozzle surface 20, as illustrated in US 20230264476 A1, Figure 4);
and ending the wiping operation at a second edge portion of the head furthest away from the pressurizer at the first position (Moving the pressurizer 56 in the direction D1 until reaching the second edge portion, which is the rightmost edge of the nozzle head 20, as illustrated in US 20230264476 A1, Figure 4);
positioning the pressurizer at a second position different from the first position to define a first angle between a first imaginary line parallel to a longitudinal direction of the head and a second imaginary line parallel to a longitudinal direction of the pressurizer (It is implicit that by wiping from a first edge portion beginning at a first position to a second edge portion, the pressurizer is in a second position different from its first position (See Figure 4, Items D1 and D2). By the nature of this position, an angle between the first and second imaginary lines, which are the orientations of the printer head and pressurizer, is implicitly defined.); and,
starting the wiping operation at a third edge portion of the head closest to the pressurizer at the second position (The second position of the pressurizer 56 being to the far right of the nozzle surface 20, and the third edge being the rightmost edge of said nozzle surface 20, as illustrated in US 20230264476 A1, Figure 4);
and ending the wiping operation at a fourth edge portion of the head furthest away from the pressurizer at the second position (Moving the pressurizer 56 in the direction D2 until reaching the fourth edge portion, which is the leftmost edge of the nozzle head 20, as illustrated in US 20230264476 A1, Figure 4).
Inoue ‘476 does not disclose that the first angle is generated by a rotation of at least one of the pressurizer, the head, or a stage in the plan view.
However, Inoue ‘466 teaches a cleaning method in which the cleaning unit is rotated to define an angle relative to the nozzle surface, which results in a lower liquid absorption capability (US 20100245466 A1, Paragraph 0308, “…the lengthwise direction of the wiping head 110 is inclined at a prescribed angle with respect to the lengthwise direction of the wiping head 16 (in the present embodiment, a direction inclined at 45 degrees)”, Paragraph 0312; Figures 18B, 19E, and 19F). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue ‘476 such that the first angle is defined by a rotation of at least one of the pressurizer, the head, or a stage in the plan view, as taught by Inoue ‘466. This would have been done to vary the liquid absorption between wiping operations, as taught by Inoue ‘466 in paragraphs 0308 to 0312.
Regarding claim 2, Inoue ‘476 teaches:
positioning the pressurizer at a third position different from the second position to define a second angle between a third imaginary line parallel to the longitudinal direction of the head and a fourth imaginary line parallel to the longitudinal direction of the pressurizer (It is implicit that by wiping from a third edge portion beginning at a second position to a fourth edge portion, the pressurizer is in a third position different from its second position (See Inoue ‘476, Figure 4, Items D1 and D2). By the nature of this position, an angle between the third and fourth imaginary lines, which are the orientations of the printer head and pressurizer, is implicitly defined.)
Inoue ’476. does not disclose:
Starting the wiping operation at a fifth edge portion of the head closest to the pressurizer at the third position, and ending the wiping operation at a sixth edge portion of the head furthest away from the pressurizer at the third position.
However, Inoue ’476 teaches wiping a second time as to remove dried material that may be left behind after a first wiping (US 20230264476 A1, Paragraph 0091). Therefore, it would then be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue ‘476 to wipe a third time starting at a third position from a fifth edge portion to a sixth edge portion in order to further clean the nozzle head if there was material left behind on the nozzle head.
Regarding claim 3, Inoue ‘476 teaches that the first angle and the second angle are equal to each other (US 20230264476 A1, Paragraph 0050, “In the present embodiment, the first direction D1 and the second direction D2 are directions parallel to the Y-axis.”; Figure 4, Items D1 and D2).
Regarding claim 4, Inoue ’476 does not disclose that the first angle and the second angle are different from each other.
However, Inoue ‘466 teaches a cleaning method in which the cleaning unit is disposed at an angle relative to the nozzle surface, which results in a lower liquid absorption capability (US 20100245466 A1, Paragraph 0308, “…the lengthwise direction of the wiping head 110 is inclined at a prescribed angle with respect to the lengthwise direction of the wiping head 16 (in the present embodiment, a direction inclined at 45 degrees)”, Paragraph 0312; Figures 18B, 19E, and 19F). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue ‘476 to wipe such that the first angle and second angle are different from each other to vary the liquid absorption between wiping operations, as taught by Inoue ‘466 in paragraphs 0308 to 0312.
Regarding claim 5, Inoue ’476 does not disclose that the first angle and the second angle are acute angles.
However, Inoue ‘466 teaches a cleaning method in which the cleaning unit is disposed at a 45-degree angle relative to the nozzle surface, which results in a lower liquid absorption capability (US 20100245466 A1, Paragraph 0308, “…the lengthwise direction of the wiping head 110 is inclined at a prescribed angle with respect to the lengthwise direction of the wiping head 16 (in the present embodiment, a direction inclined at 45 degrees)”, Paragraph 0312; Figures 18B, 19E, and 19F). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue ’476 to wipe such that the first angle and second angle are acute angles to decrease the liquid absorption of the wiping operations, as taught by Inoue ‘466 in paragraph 0312.
Regarding claim 6, Inoue ‘476 does not disclose replacing the absorbent each time the wiping operation ends.
However, Inoue ‘466 teaches using an unused portion of the absorbent for each cleaning process (US 20100245466 A1, Paragraph 0622, “…the head cleaners… carry out location of an unused region for the next cleaning process…”) so that absorption is maximized (US 20100245466 A1, Paragraph 0197, “…this first wiping action is carried out using a wiping web in a normal state of high absorption capability. In other words, this wiping action is carried out using an unused region of the wiping web 110…”). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue ‘476 to replace the absorbent each time the wiping operation ends to ensure maximum absorption with each subsequent wiping operation.
Regarding claim 7, Inoue ‘476 teaches that replacing the absorbent includes:
rotating a winder disposed at opposite ends of the absorbent (US 20230264476 A1, Paragraph 57, “The feeding unit 55… and the winding unit 57 may rotate with power transmitted from a drive source that is not illustrated.”; Figure 4, Items 55 and 57); and
winding the absorbent which wiped the nozzle surface on the winder (US 20230264476 A1, Paragraph 55, “The winding unit 57 winds, in a roll form, the band-like member 50 transferred through the pressing unit 56”).
Regarding claim 8, Inoue ‘476 discloses that the pressurizer is fixed to a stage (US 20230264476 A1, Figure 4, Items 51 and 56).
Inoue ‘476 does not disclose:
a position of the pressurizer moves by rotation of the stage.
However, Inoue ‘466 teaches a travel direction switching motor, connected to the stage, which rotates the wiping web travel drive unit, changing the position of the pressurizer and allowing the angle at which the pressurizer contacts the nozzle surface to be varied (US 20100245466 A1, Paragraph 0281, “…the travel direction switching motor 1124 that rotates the wiping web travel drive unit 123…”, Figure 17A, Item 1124). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue ‘476 to include a travel direction switching motor to allow changing the position at which the pressurizer contacts the nozzle surface by rotating the stage.
Regarding claim 9, Inoue ‘476 does not disclose:
a position of the pressurizer moves by rotation of the pressurizer.
However, Inoue ‘466 teaches a travel direction switching motor, connected to the stage, which rotates the wiping web travel drive unit, changing the position of the pressurizer. By rotating the stage, in a case where the pressurizer is fixed to the stage, the pressurizer is also rotated. Rotating the pressurizer allows the angle at which the pressurizer contacts the nozzle surface to be varied (US 20100245466 A1, Paragraph 0281, “…the travel direction switching motor 1124 that rotates the wiping web travel drive unit 123…”, Figure 17A, Item 1124). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue ‘476 to include a travel direction switching motor to allow changing the position at which the pressurizer contacts the nozzle surface by rotating the pressurizer.
Regarding claim 11, Inoue ‘476 teaches:
a head cleaner (US 20230264476 A1, Abstract, “The liquid ejecting device includes… a wiper unit…”; Figure 4, Item 45) comprising:
an absorbent (US 20230264476 A1, Paragraph 0052, “The band-like member 50 is able to absorb…”; Figure 4, Item 50);
contacting with a head including a nozzle surface in which a plurality of nozzle holes is defined (US 20230264476 A1, Paragraph 0022; Figure 4, Item 19);
a pressurizer disposed under the absorbent (US 20230264476 A1, Paragraph 0054; Figure 4, Item 56);
a controller (US 20230264476 A1, Figure 5, Item 59) which:
starts a wiping operation at a first edge portion of the head closest to the pressurizer at a first position (The first position of the pressurizer 56 being to the far left of the nozzle surface 20, and the first edge being the leftmost edge of said nozzle surface 20, as illustrated in US 20230264476 A1, Figure 4);
and ends the wiping operation at a second edge portion of the head furthest away from the pressurizer at the first position (Moving the pressurizer 56 in the direction D1 until reaching the second edge portion, which is the rightmost edge of the nozzle head 20, as illustrated in US 20230264476 A1, Figure 4);
positions the pressurizer at a second position different from the first position to define a first angle between a first imaginary line parallel to a longitudinal direction of the head and a second imaginary line parallel to a longitudinal direction of the pressurizer (It is implicit that by wiping from a first edge portion beginning at a first position to a second edge portion, the pressurizer is in a second position different from its first position (See Figure 4, Items D1 and D2). By the nature of this position, an angle between the first and second imaginary lines, which are the orientations of the printer head and pressurizer, is implicitly defined.), and
starts the wiping operation at a third edge portion of the head closest to the pressurizer at the second position (The second position of the pressurizer 56 being to the far right of the nozzle surface 20, and the third edge being the rightmost edge of said nozzle surface 20, as illustrated in US 20230264476 A1, Figure 4);
and ends the wiping operation at a fourth edge portion of the head furthest away from the pressurizer at the second position (Moving the pressurizer 56 in the direction D2 until reaching the fourth edge portion, which is the leftmost edge of the nozzle head 20, as illustrated in US 20230264476 A1, Figure 4).
Inoue ‘476 does not disclose that the first angle is generated by a rotation of at least one of the pressurizer, the head, or a stage in the plan view.
However, Inoue ‘466 teaches a cleaning method in which the cleaning unit is rotated to define an angle relative to the nozzle surface, which results in a lower liquid absorption capability (US 20100245466 A1, Paragraph 0308, “…the lengthwise direction of the wiping head 110 is inclined at a prescribed angle with respect to the lengthwise direction of the wiping head 16 (in the present embodiment, a direction inclined at 45 degrees)”, Paragraph 0312; Figures 18B, 19E, and 19F). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue ‘476 to wipe such that the first angle is defined by a rotation of at least one of the pressurize, the head, or a stage in the plan view to vary the liquid absorption between wiping operations, as taught by Inoue ‘466 in paragraphs 0308 to 0312.
Regarding claim 12, Inoue ‘476 discloses:
positioning the pressurizer at a third position different from the second position to define a second angle between a third imaginary line parallel to the longitudinal direction of the head and a fourth imaginary line parallel to the longitudinal direction of the pressurizer (It is implicit that by wiping from a third edge portion beginning at a second position to a fourth edge portion, the pressurizer is in a third position different from its second position (See Inoue ‘476, Figure 4, Items D1 and D2). By the nature of this position, an angle between the third and fourth imaginary lines, which are the orientations of the printer head and pressurizer, is implicitly defined.)
Inoue ‘476 does not disclose:
starting the wiping operation at a fifth edge portion of the head closest to the pressurizer at the third position, and ending the wiping operation at a sixth edge portion of the head furthest away from the pressurizer at the third position.
However, Inoue ‘476 teaches wiping a second time as to remove dried material that may be left behind after a first wiping (US 20230264476 A1, Paragraph 0091). Therefore, it would then be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue ‘476 to wipe a third time starting at a third position from a fifth edge portion to a sixth edge portion in order to further clean the nozzle head if there was material left behind on the nozzle head.
Regarding claim 13, Inoue ‘476 teaches that the first angle and the second angle are equal to each other (US 20230264476 A1, Paragraph 0050; Figure 4, Items D1 and D2).
Regarding claim 14, Inoue ‘476 does not disclose that the first angle and the second angle are different from each other.
However, Inoue ‘466 teaches a head cleaner in which the cleaning unit is disposed at an angle relative to the nozzle surface, which results in a lower liquid absorption capability (US 20100245466 A1, Paragraph 0308, “…the lengthwise direction of the wiping head 110 is inclined at a prescribed angle with respect to the lengthwise direction of the wiping head 16 (in the present embodiment, a direction inclined at 45 degrees)”, Paragraph 0312; Figures 18B, 19E, and 19F). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue ‘476 to wipe such that the first angle and second angle are different from each other to vary the liquid absorption between wiping operations, as taught by Inoue ‘466 in paragraphs 0308 to 0312.
Regarding claim 15, Inoue ‘476 does not disclose that the first angle and the second angle are acute angles.
However, Inoue ‘466 teaches a head cleaner in which the cleaning unit is disposed at a 45-degree angle relative to the nozzle surface, which results in a lower liquid absorption capability (US 20100245466 A1, Paragraph 0308, “…the lengthwise direction of the wiping head 110 is inclined at a prescribed angle with respect to the lengthwise direction of the wiping head 16 (in the present embodiment, a direction inclined at 45 degrees)”, Paragraph 0312; Figures 18B, 19E, and 19F). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention date to modify Inoue ‘476 to wipe such that the first angle and second angle are acute angles to decrease the liquid absorption of the wiping operations, as taught by Inoue ‘466 in paragraph 0312.
Regarding claim 16, Inoue ‘476 does not disclose that the controller further replaces the absorbent each time the wiping operation ends.
However, Inoue ‘466 teaches using an unused portion of the absorbent for each cleaning process (US 20100245466 A1, Paragraph 0622, “…the head cleaners… carry out location of an unused region for the next cleaning process…”) so that absorption is maximized (US 20100245466 A1, Paragraph 0197, “…this first wiping action is carried out using a wiping web in a normal state of high absorption capability. In other words, this wiping action is carried out using an unused region of the wiping web 110…”). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue ‘476 to replace the absorbent each time the wiping operation ends to ensure maximum absorption with each subsequent wiping operation.
Regarding claim 17, Inoue ‘476 discloses:
a winder disposed at opposite ends of the absorbent (US 20230264476 A1, Paragraph 57, “The feeding unit 55… and the winding unit 57 may rotate with power transmitted from a drive source that is not illustrated.”; Figure 4, Items 55 and 57),
wherein the controller rotates the winder and winds the absorbent which wiped the nozzle surface on the winder (US 20230264476 A1, Paragraph 55, “The winding unit 57 winds, in a roll form, the band-like member 50 transferred through the pressing unit 56”).
Inoue ‘476 does not disclose:
so that the absorbent is replaced each time the wiping operation ends.
However, Inoue ‘466 teaches using an unused portion of the absorbent for each cleaning process (US 20100245466 A1, Paragraph 0622, “…the head cleaners… carry out location of an unused region for the next cleaning process…”) so that absorption is maximized (US 20100245466 A1, Paragraph 0197, “…this first wiping action is carried out using a wiping web in a normal state of high absorption capability. In other words, this wiping action is carried out using an unused region of the wiping web 110…”). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue 476’ to replace the absorbent each time the wiping operation ends to ensure maximum absorption with each subsequent wiping operation.
Regarding claim 18, Inoue ‘476 teaches that the pressurizer is fixed to the stage (US 20230264476 A1, Figure 4, Items 51 and 56).
Inoue ‘476 does not disclose:
the stage includes a first rotation driver, and
a position of the pressurizer is moved as the stage is rotated by the first rotation driver.
However, Inoue ‘466 teaches a travel direction switching motor, connected to the stage, which rotates the wiping web travel drive unit, changing the position of the pressurizer and allowing the angle at which the pressurizer contacts the nozzle surface to be varied (US 20100245466 A1, Paragraph 0281, “…the travel direction switching motor 1124 that rotates the wiping web travel drive unit 123…”, Figure 17A, Item 1124). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue ‘476 to include a travel direction switching motor as a first rotation driver to allow changing the position at which the pressurizer contacts the nozzle surface by rotating the stage.
Regarding claim 19, Inoue ‘476 teaches that the pressurizer further includes a second rotation driver, and a position of the pressurizer is moved as the pressurizer is rotated by the second rotation driver (US 20230264476 A1, Paragraph 0057, “the pressing unit 56… may rotate with the power transmitted from a drive source that is not illustrated. The pressing unit 56 according to the present embodiment rotates…”).
Claim(s) 10 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue '476 and Inoue '466 as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Nakamura et al., US 11981151 B2.
Regarding claim 10, modified Inoue ‘476 does not disclose that the position of the pressurizer moves by rotation of the head.
However, Nakamura et al. teaches a printer where the print head can be rotated around multiple axes, specifically around the axis O6 which runs orthogonal to the nozzle surface. In his preferred embodiment, the printer head is able to rotate and move autonomously relative to a wiping station (US 11981151 B2, Column 4, Lines 19 through 27, “…each of the joint portions 230_1 to 230_6 is provided with a drive mechanism for rotating one of the two adjacent members corresponding to each other to the other”; Claim 14, “the three-dimensional object printing apparatus is further configured to executes a wiping operation of causing the robot to move the head so that the nozzle surface is wiped by the wiper portion”; Figures 1 and 4, Items 4e and O6). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue et al. to change the position of the pressurizer by rotating the print head to properly position the print head for wiping.
Regarding claim 20, modified Inoue ‘476 does not disclose:
the head further includes a third rotation driver, and
a position of the pressurizer is moved as the head is rotated by the third rotation driver.
However, Nakamura et al. teaches a joint portion which couples the printer head to the control arm and includes a drive mechanism which allows rotation around the axis O6 (US 11981151 B2, Column 4, Lines 19 through 27, “…each of the joint portions 230_1 to 230_6 is provided with a drive mechanism for rotating one of the two adjacent members corresponding to each other to the other”; Figure 1, Items 230_6 and O6). This drive mechanism allows the print head to position itself relative to the stationary wiper portion for cleaning (US 11981151 B2, Column 12, Lines 14 through 15, “…the wiper portion 4e are fixed to the top surface portion 4c1 by screwing or the like”; Claim 14, “the three-dimensional object printing apparatus is further configured to executes a wiping operation of causing the robot to move the head so that the nozzle surface is wiped by the wiper portion”; Figure 1, Items 4e and 4c1). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Inoue et al. to implement a third rotation driver to change the position of the pressurizer by rotating the print head to properly position the print head for wiping.
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 Rami Alshoroogi whose telephone number is (571)272-8946. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-5pm.
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, Douglas Rodriguez can be reached at (571)431-0716. 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.
/RAMI A ALSHOROOGI//R.A.A./
Examiner, Art Unit 2853
/DOUGLAS X RODRIGUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2853