DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 8-9, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gilmore (US 20110061956).
In regards to claim 1, Gilmore discloses a wheel assembly (see 20 fig. 2) for a vehicle (10, see fig. 1), the wheel assembly (20 see fig.2) comprising: a rim (62) on which a tire (98) is mountable (see para. 16); and an electric motor assembly (18) operably coupled to the rim (62), the electric motor assembly (18) comprising a rotor (30), a stator (32) and power electronics (14, 16), wherein the electric motor assembly (18) is operably coupled to a battery (24) of the vehicle to provide motive force to the rim (62)(see fig. 1) to rotate the tire (98) with the rim (62) responsive to application of a rotating electric field in the stator (32)(see para. 13) that causes corresponding rotation of the rotor (30) under control of the power electronics (controller 16 and power electronics 14), and wherein the rim (62) and the rotor (30) are integrally formed as a combined assembly without any fastening means therebetween (see fig. 2, rotor 30 embedded in the rim, here embedded is understood as being integral with, see para. 18).
In regards to claim 2, Gilmore discloses wherein the rim (62) and rotor (30) are cast together to form the combined assembly (see para. 18, the rotor is cast into the rim 62).
In regards to claim 4, Gilmore discloses, wherein a hub (60) and axle (see axle fig. 1, 2) are operably coupled to the rim (62) via a plurality of lugs (80), and no fasteners attach to the rim other than the lugs.
In regards to claim 5, Gilmore discloses wherein the stator (32) is operably coupled to a mounting plate (76)disposed opposite the rim (62) with respect to the hub (60) (See fig. 2, para. 15).
In regards to claim 8, Gilmore discloses wherein the stator (32) is inserted inside the rim (62) to operably couple the stator (32) to the rotor (30)(see fig.2).
In regards to claim 9, Gilmore discloses wherein the rim (62) comprises a hub interface portion (lower flange 90, with hub 60) and a tire interface portion (upper flange 90 including 92, 94, 100, 102, 104), and wherein the rotor (30) is integrated into the tire interface portion (see embedded rotor portion 30 in the rim 62 at the flange portion 90 where the tire rests in the rim, fig.2).
In regards to claim 17, Gilmore discloses an electric motor assembly (18, see fig. 1 and 2) for a vehicle (10, fig. 1), the electric motor assembly (18) comprising: a battery (24, see para. 12); a rotor (30, see para. 13); a stator (32, see para. 13); and power electronics (14, 16, see para. 12, fig. 1) operably coupled to the battery (24) to receive power for controlling application of current to the stator (32) to generate a rotating electric field in the stator (32, see para. 13, magnetic field) that causes corresponding rotation of the rotor (30) under control of the power electronics (power electronics 14, and controller 16)(see par. 12-13), wherein the electric motor (18) assembly is operably coupled to a wheel rim (62, see para. 14, 16, and 18) on which a tire (98) is mountable (see para. 16), and wherein the rim (92) and the rotor (30) are integrally formed (see para. 18) as a combined assembly without any fastening means therebetween (examiner notes it has been held that the term "integral" is sufficiently broad to embrace constructions united by such means as fastening and welding. In re Hotte, 177 USPQ 326, 328 (CCPA 1973), here where the rotor 30 is embedded in the rim 62 this is understood as being integral with the rim 62).
In regards to claim 18, Gilmore discloses, see fig. 2, wherein the rim (62) comprises a hub interface portion (lower portion 90 with hub 60) and a tire interface portion (90, 92), and wherein the rotor (30) is integrated into the tire interface portion (see the rotor embedded in the tire interface portion 90, see para. 16-18).
In regards to claim 19, Gilmore discloses wherein a hub (60) and axle (not labeled but shown in fig. 1 and 2) are operably coupled to the rim (62) via a plurality of lugs (80), and no fasteners attach to the rim (62) other than the lugs (80), wherein the stator (32) is operably coupled to a mounting plate (76) disposed opposite the rim (62) with respect to the hub (60)(see fig. 2).
Claims 1, 4, 8-9, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by James (US 20080066980).
In regards to claim 1, James discloses wheel assembly for a vehicle (a vehicle 10 having wheels 12 and direct drive electric traction motor 50 mounted thereto), the wheel assembly (12) comprising: a rim (rim) on which a tire (tire of the wheel assembly) is mountable (James discloses rim in embodiment of fig. 5-7, wheel 210 with rim portion 212 to which the tire is fitted, examiner notes, combination of one strategy in one related paper with another strategy from which it was derived is “predictable variation” that does not “require a leap of inventiveness.” in this case the rim in which a tire is mountable; Boston Sci. Scimed. Fed. Cir. 01/15/09). Furthermore, James discloses an electric motor assembly (direct drive electric motor) operably coupled to the rim (rim of the wheel 212), the electric motor assembly (electric motor) comprising a rotor (60), a stator (80) and power electronics (an electric drive circuit 50 electrically coupled to the stator, see fig. 3, 21, 22, abstract, claims 1, 16, and 27), wherein the electric motor assembly (see fig. ) is operably coupled to a battery on the vehicle (see claim 11, electric drive circuit receives power from a vehicle battery) to provide motive force to the rim to rotate the tire with the rim responsive to application of a rotating electric field in the stator (80) that causes corresponding rotation of the rotor (60) under control of the power electronics (see abstract, claims 1, 11, 27, 32, electric drive circuit electrically coupled to the stator to excite the stator and impart rotational force on the vehicle wheel through the rotor). Additionally, James teaches wherein the rim and the rotor are integrally formed as a combined assembly without any fastening means therebetween. Examiner notes it has been held that the term "integral" is sufficiently broad to embrace constructions united by such means as fastening and welding. In re Hotte, 177 USPQ 326, 328 (CCPA 1973). James discloses wherein the rim and rotor art thereby integrally formed as a combined assembly, see para. 0031 wherein "the wheel [12 or wheel rim 212] may be configured to provide or carry a rotor structure 60" without any fastening means between the rim and the rotor.
In regards to claim 4, James discloses wherein a hub (14) and axle (vehicle axle associated with the axle hub 14 in fig. 2, see para. 0031) are operably coupled to the rim (rim of the wheel assembly) via a plurality of lugs (16), and no fasteners attach to the rim other than the lugs (integral construction of the rim and the hub thereby having no other fasteners attached to the rim other than the lugs, para. 0031). In regards to claim 5, James discloses wherein the stator (80) is operably coupled to a mounting plate (62) disposed opposite the rim with respect to the hub (14) (see fig.2, para. 0031, the flat portion 62 may be a separate structure from the rotor).
In regards to claim 8, James discloses the stator is inserted inside the rim (rim of the wheel assembly 12) to operably couple the stator (80) to the rotor (60)(see fig. 2, and 3 the stator is inserted into the rotor that is integral with the rim and thereby inside of the rim).
In regards to claim 9, James discloses the wheel assembly that arranges the rotor and stator within the wheel and thereby the wheels rim. See fig. 2a-2c, where the rotor 60 is engaged on a tire interface of the rim but James fails to explicitly disclose the details of the rim. However, Geisler teaches, see fig. 1 and 2) a similar wheel assembly (see fig. 1, and 2) with a rim (10) wherein the rim (10) comprises a hub interface portion (14) and a tire interface portion (top of the rim 12) and wherein the rotor is integrated into the tire interface portion of a rim (see para. 0028-0029, at least part of the rotor housing forms at least part of the rim). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have looked to Geisler for the details of the rim and apply it to James' wheel assembly with a reasonable expectation of success, integrating the rotor into the tire interface portion of the rim so as to create additional free space or construction space for useful components and the use of wheel hub motors having greater power can be easily used (see Geisler, para. 0008).
In regards to claim 17, James discloses an electric motor assembly (direct drive electric motor) for a vehicle (10), the electric motor assembly (electric motor) comprising: a battery (see claim 11, powered by a battery); a rotor (60); a stator (80); and power electronics (50) operably coupled to the battery (see claim 11) to receive power for controlling application of current to the stator (80) to generate a rotating electric field in the stator (80) that causes corresponding rotation of the rotor (60) under control of the power electronics (50)(see abstract, claims 1, 11, 27, and 32), wherein the electric motor assembly (electric motor) is operably coupled to a wheel rim on which a tire is mountable (tire of the rim assembly, see also fig. 5-7, wheel 210 comparable to wheel 12, with rim 212, thereby in the first embodiment 12 is understood to be the rim of the wheel), and wherein the rim (rim of the wheel 12) and the rotor (60) are integrally formed as a combined assembly without any fastening means therebetween (see para. 0031, the wheel [12 or rim 212] may be configured to provide or carry a rotor structure 60). Examiner notes it has been held that the term "integral" is sufficiently broad to embrace constructions united by such means as fastening and welding. In re Hotte, 177 USPQ 326, 328 (CCPA 1973). James discloses wherein the rim and rotor art thereby integrally formed as a combined assembly without other fasteners.
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gilmore (US 20110061956) as applied to claims above, and further in view of Geisler (US 20180065468).
In regards to claim 3, Gilmore fails to explicitly disclose wherein the rim and rotor are forged together to form the combined assembly. However, Geisler teaches a rim and rotor forged together to form a combined assembly (see para. 0018-0022, "it can be advantageous if the rotor housing, particularly as an at least partially integral component of the wheel rim, is cast or forged in one piece with the wheel rim", see also para. 0030). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified James in view of the improvement technique Geisler teaches for the rim and rotor to form the combined assembly because Geisler teaches direct and more efficient transfer of force from the rotor housing to the tires takes place with this technique (see para. 0017).
Claims 6-7 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gilmore (US 20110061956) as applied to claims above, and further in view of Kim (US 20250055401, filed 11/8/2023).
In regards to claim 6, Gilmore fails to disclose wherein the electric motor assembly further comprises a capacitor ring disposed between the power electronics and the stator. However, Kim teaches a similar wheel assembly with an electric motor assembly (see fig. 1, 100) further comprises a capacitor ring (140) disposed between the power electronics (150) and the stator (120) in order to support the operation of the stator 120. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to have modified Gilmore in view of Kim with a reasonable expectation of success including the capacitor ring 140 for additional currented needed when the in wheel motor starts to provide additional support to the stator as Kim teaches (see para. 50).
In regards to claim 7, Gilmore fails to teach wherein a protective cover operably couples to the mounting plate to enclose the capacitor ring and the power electronics between the protective cover and the mounting plate. Kim teaches a protective cover (see fig. 1, 160) operably coupled to a mounting plate (130) of a wheel assembly (100) to enclose the capacitor ring (140) and the power electronics (150) between the protective cover (160) and the mounting plate (130) so as to protect from dust, water, or stones (see par. 53). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to further modify Gilmore in view of Kim before the effective filing date with a reasonable expectation of success to include the protective cover in order to protect the internal components from being damaged, reducing need for repair or replacement.
In regards to claim 20, Gilmore fails to teach further comprising a capacitor ring disposed between the power electronics and the stator, wherein a protective cover operably couples to the mounting plate to enclose the capacitor ring and the power electronics between the protective cover and the mounting plate.
However, Kim teaches a similar electric motor assembly (100, fig.1) further comprising a capacitor ring (140) disposed between power electronics (150) and the stator (120) wherein a protective cover (160) operably couples to the mounting plate (130) to enclose the capacitor ring (140) and the power electronics (150) between the protective cover (160) and the mounting plate (130). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to have modified Gilmore in view of Kim with a reasonable expectation of success including the capacitor ring 140 for additional currented needed when the in wheel motor starts to provide additional support to the stator as Kim teaches (see para. 50). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to further modify Gilmore in view of Kim before the effective filing date with a reasonable expectation of success so as to include the protective cover in order to protect the internal components from being damaged, reducing need for repair or replacement (see para 53, fig. 1).
Claims 2-3, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over James (US 20080066980) as applied to claims above, and further in view of Geisler (US 20180065468).
In regards to claim 2, James fails to disclose wherein the rim and rotor are cast together to form the combined assembly. However, Geisler teaches a rim for a motor vehicle and wheel assembly with an electric motor assembly similar to James' wherein the rim (rim 12 of wheel) and rotor (rotor) are cast together to form the combined assembly (see para. 0018-0022, "it can be advantageous if the rotor housing, particularly as an at least partially integral component of the wheel rim, is cast or forged in one piece with the wheel rim", see also para. 0030). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified James in view of the improvement technique Geisler teaches for the rim and rotor to form the combined assembly because Geisler teaches direct and more efficient transfer of force from the rotor housing to the tires takes place with this technique (see para. 0017).
In regards to claim 3, James fails to disclose wherein the rim and rotor are forged together to form the combined assembly. However, Geisler teaches a rim and rotor forged together to form a combined assembly (see para. 0018-0022, "it can be advantageous if the rotor housing, particularly as an at least partially integral component of the wheel rim, is cast or forged in one piece with the wheel rim", see also para. 0030). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified James in view of the improvement technique Geisler teaches for the rim and rotor to form the combined assembly because Geisler teaches direct and more efficient transfer of force from the rotor housing to the tires takes place with this technique (see para. 0017).
In regards to claim 18, James discloses the wheel assembly that arranges the rotor and stator within the wheel and thereby the wheels rim. See fig. 2a-2c, where the rotor 60 is engaged on a tire interface of the rim but James fails to explicitly disclose the details of the rim. However, Geisler teaches, see fig. 1 and 2) a similar wheel assembly (see fig. 1, and 2) with a rim (10) wherein the rim (10) comprises a hub interface portion (14) and a tire interface portion (top of the rim 12) and wherein the rotor is integrated into the tire interface portion of a rim (see para. 0028-0029, at least part of the rotor housing forms at least part of the rim). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have looked to Geisler for the details of the rim and apply it to James' wheel assembly with a reasonable expectation of success, integrating the rotor into the tire interface portion of the rim so as to create additional free space or construction space for useful components and the use of wheel hub motors having greater power can be easily used (see Geisler, para. 0008).
In regards to claim 19, James discloses wherein a hub (14) and axle (vehicle axle associated with the axle hub 14 in fig. 2, see para. 0031) are operably coupled to the rim (rim of the wheel assembly) via a plurality of lugs (16), and no fasteners attach to the rim other than the lugs (integral construction of the rim and the hub thereby having no other fasteners attached to the rim other than the lugs, para. 0031).
Claims 6-7 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over James (US 20080066980) as applied to claims above, and further in view of Kim (US 20250055401, filed 11/8/2023).
In regards to claim 6, James fails to disclose wherein the electric motor assembly further comprises a capacitor ring disposed between the power electronics and the stator. However, Kim teaches a similar wheel assembly with an electric motor assembly (100) further comprises a capacitor ring (140) disposed between the power electronics (150) and the stator (120) in order to support the operation of the stator 120. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to have modified James in view of Kim with a reasonable expectation of success including the capacitor ring 140 for additional currented needed when the in wheel motor starts to provide additional support to the stator as Kim teaches (see para. 50).
In regards to claim 7, James and Kim in combination teach, a protective cover (see James 300) operably coupled to the mounting plate (62) (at least through attachment with the stator assembly) to enclose the capacitor ring (as Kim teaches in combination) and the power electronics (an electric drive circuit, wiring harness and connector) between the protective cover (50) and the mounting plate (62)(cover attached to provide protection from elements).
In regards to claim 20, James teaches a protective cover (300) operatively coupled to the mounting plate (62, at least indirectly), but fails to explicitly teach further comprising a capacitor ring disposed between the power electronics and the stator, wherein the protective cover encloses the capacitor ring and the power electronics between the protective cover and the mounting plate. However, Kim teaches a similar wheel assembly with an electric motor assembly (100) further comprises a capacitor ring (140) disposed between the power electronics (150) and the stator (120) in order to support the operation of the stator 120. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date to have modified James in view of Kim with a reasonable expectation of success including the capacitor ring 140 for additional currented needed when the in wheel motor starts to provide additional support to the stator as Kim teaches (see para. 50). Therefore, James and Kim in combination teach, a protective cover (see James 300) operably coupled to the mounting plate (62) (at least through attachment with the stator assembly) to enclose the capacitor ring (as Kim teaches in combination) and the power electronics (an electric drive circuit, wiring harness and connector) between the protective cover (50) and the mounting plate (62)(cover attached to provide protection from elements).
Claim 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over James (US 20080066980) as applied to claims above, and further in view of Arrowsmith (GB 2540631 A).
In regards to claim 10, James and Geisler teach wherein the hub interface portion (Geisler fig. 2, hub interface portion 14) includes an annular plate (28) disposed in a plane substantially perpendicular to a rotational axis of the rim (around hole 26). However, James and Geisler fail to teach wherein the annular plate has a plurality of aerodynamic vanes operably coupled thereto.
Arrowsmith teaches a wheel assembly including a braking system including plate (15 on a mount 12 understood as a hub interface portion, see fig. 3a-3d) disposed in a plane substantially perpendicular to a rotational axis of the rim (around the center of the plate 15 see. Fig. 3a), and wherein a plurality of aerodynamic vanes (328a, b) are operably coupled to the annular plate (15)(see para. 0028-31). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified James and Geisler wherein the hub interface portion includes a plate with the improvement technique of aerodynamic vanes as Arrowsmith teaches for the weight reduction and cooling benefits to the wheel system.
In regards to claim 11, James, Geisler, and Arrowsmith teach wherein the aerodynamic vanes (see para. 0028-32, vanes 328a,b) extend radially outwardly with respect to the rotational axis (around the center of the disc see fig.3a) toward the tire interface portion ( see the tire and interface on its rim, fig. 2e, 6e and in combination, see the top surface of the rim engaging with tire on rim 12 of James and Geisler) and direct airflow from an outer side of the rim (see rim, 12) toward a brake assembly (Arrowsmith, vanes directing air to the caliper 4) of the vehicle disposed on an inner side of the rim (see fig. 2e, 6e).
Claim 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over James (US 20080066980) as applied to claims above, and further in view of Sagawa (JP 2016030526 A), English translation provided.
In regards to claim 12, James and Geisler teach wherein the hub interface portion (Geisler fig. 2, hub interface portion 14) includes an annular plate (28) disposed in a plane substantially perpendicular to a rotational axis of the rim (around hole 26). However, James and Geisler fail to teach wherein the annular plate has a plurality of aerodynamic ducts disposed on an inner side of the rim.
Sagawa teaches a vehicle wheel assembly similar to James in view of Geisler wherein the assembly further includes a hub interface portion with an annular plate (see plate 230, fig.4, engaged with hub 210) having a plurality of aerodynamic ducts (231) disposed on an inner side of the rim (see fig. 1, inner side of the rim of wheel assembly). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified James, and Geisler, and further in view of Sagawa's improved cooling technique of the aerodynamic ducts disposed on an inner side of the rim with a reasonable expectation of success.
In regards to claim 13, James, Geisler, and Sagawa in combination teach wherein the aerodynamic ducts (231) extend tangentially (see fig. 4) with respect to the rotational axis (the center of the wheel assembly which the wheel rotates around) toward the tire interface portion (on the exterior of the rim) and direct airflow from an outer side of the rim toward a brake assembly of the vehicle disposed on an inner side of the rim (when the vehicle travels the plate draws air towards the brake disc, therefore cooling the brakes and the motor without using any dedicated power for cooling).
In regards to claim 14, James and Geisler in view of Sagawa teach wherein the aerodynamic ducts (Sagawa, 231) comprise a scoop portion ( the open portion of the scoop 231 where the airflow path enters) disposed on the outer side of the rim (on the outside of the plate 231) and a duct portion (the closed portion of the scoop in contact with the plate, see fig. 4) extending through the annular plate to direct the airflow toward the brake assembly (introducing airflow to the path of 221a of the brake disc 220).
In regards to claim 15, James and Geisler in view of Sagawa teaches wherein the scoop portion (the open, extended portion of 231) has a cross sectional area larger than a cross sectional area of the duct portion (the portion flat with the plate, see fig. 4, Sagawa).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over James (US 20080066980) as applied to claims above, and further in view of Woolmer (US 20130187492).
In regards to claim 16, James fails to explicitly teach wherein a plurality of airflow generation elements are disposed on hub interface portion to generate and direct airflow from an outer side of the rim toward the stator disposed on an inner side of the rim to cool the stator such that the airflow is in direct proportion to a current draw of the stator. However, Woolmer teaches a similar wheel assembly with a rim of a wheel where the tire is mounted, wherein a plurality of airflow generation elements (apertures 91) are disposed on hub interface portion (90, see fig. 3) to generate and direct airflow from an outer side of the rim toward the stator (12) disposed on an inner side of the rim (see fig.3, rim hub interface portion 90) to cool the stator such that the airflow is in direct proportion to a current draw of the stator (see para. 0024, 0044, the vehicle motion creates its own flow of air and the vehicle can be designed to funnel air towards and over the stator housing fins, its rotation causes a flow of air to draw it over the stator 12 with the provided scalloped apertures 91). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified James with the improvement technique Woolmer teaches with a reasonable expectation of success including a plurality of airflow generation elements to direct airflow toward the stator, so as to cool the stator without any additional cooling means.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 for a list of relevant prior art that teach wheel assemblies, and electric motor assemblies similar to that claimed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAITLIN ANNE MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4356. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00am-5:00pm (est).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jason Shanske can be reached at (571) 270-5985. 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.
/C.A.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3614
/JASON D SHANSKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3614
Prosecution Insights