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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections based on WO 2010/057231 (“Friesenbichler”) have been considered but are moot because the new grounds of rejection, applying JP H04-12821 (“Kajiyama”), do not rely on Friesenbichler for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. This change was necessitated by the applicant’s claim amendments, particularly the amendment to claim 2 related to the conditions received by the first input field.
Applicant’s substantive arguments are directed to the disclosure of Friesenbichler, specifically, that the cited portions of Friesenbichler describe the entry of assessment results rather than an input field for receiving conditions under which the filling process is completed, and that Friesenbichler does not perform a dwelling process under conditions in which the pressure applied from the injection member to the molding material is approximately zero. Because Friesenbichler is no longer applied, these arguments are moot and are not reached on their merits. The Examiner does not thereby concede Applicant’s characterization of that reference.
Applicant’s general statement that the absence of argument directed to a particular limitation does not constitute acquiescence is noted. That statement does not, however, constitute a traverse of the Examiner’s assertion in the prior Office Action that the subject matter of former claim 6 is well known in the art. An adequate traverse requires that Applicant specifically request that the Examiner provide documentary evidence in support of the asserted common knowledge. See MPEP 2144.03(C). No such request having been made, the assertion is taken to be admitted prior art and is relied upon below with respect to claims 12 and 17.
Claim Interpretation
The claims refer to first and second test moldings. The “first” and “second” modifiers are being interpreted as referring to first and second types of test moldings. That is, there can be more than one “first” test molding and/or more than one “second” test molding. Note the applicant’s Figure 6, which shows a first test molding at step S203 and a potential loop at step S104 depending on whether the mold cavity was fully filled. See also steps S206 and S108 regarding the second test molding.
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.
Claims 2, 8, 10, 13, 14, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP H04-12821 (“Kajiyama”) (cited in an IDS) in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art (“AAPA”).
Citations to Kajiyama below are to page numbers of the provided English translation.
AAPA refers to the Description of Related Art of the present application, at page 1, line 18 through page 2, line 23.
Regarding claim 13, modified Kajiyama discloses:
A controller for an injection molding machine including an injection member, the controller comprising: processing circuitry configured to execute an injection process,
Kajiyama, page 9: “30 is a microcontroller that controls the operation of the entire machine, including the control of the entire molding process such as mold opening and closing, charging, and injection, as well as good/defective product determination, and various calculation processes such as calculation and graphing of measurement data.”
Kajiyama, page 9: “The microcontroller 30 actually includes a ROM that stores various interfaces, a main control program, and various fixed data, a RAM that reads and writes various flags and measurement data, and a CPU (central processor unit) that controls the whole system.”
Kajiyama, page 10: “The molding process control unit 32, based on a pre-created molding process control program and setting condition values stored in the molding condition setting storage unit 31, controls the corresponding drive source via the driver group 41, while referring to measurement information from the sensors 20-23, 25, 26 and others, and timing information from the clock built into the microcontroller 30, to execute a series of molding processes.”
The injection member is the screw 13 of the inline screw-type injection molding machine of Kajiyama. Figure 1.
the injection process including a filling process of controlling a travel speed of the injection member,
Kajiyama, page 10: the molding condition setting storage unit 31 stores “subdivided injection speed conditions from the metering point (injection start point) to the holding pressure switching point”.
Kajiyama, page 13: “the screw 13 is moved to the temporary holding pressure switching point Pc[0] according to the set injection speed and pressure.”
a stopping process of stopping travel of the injection member,
Kajiyama does not expressly disclose a stopping process of stopping travel of the injection member, performed after the filling process and before the dwelling process.
AAPA discloses this feature. AAPA, page 1, line 33 through page 2, line 11: “The injection process sequentially includes a filling process of controlling a speed at which the injection member moves forward, a stopping process of stopping the movement of the injection member, and a dwelling process of controlling the pressure applied from the injection member to the molding material. In the stopping process, the molding material flows into the mold part by the action of the residual pressure. By utilizing the residual pressure, an excessive increase in the pressure can be suppressed, and molding failures, such as burrs and the like, can be suppressed. In addition, the mold clamping force can be reduced.”
AAPA, page 1, lines 26-32: “According to the existing injection molding machine-controlling method, once the pressure obtained by a cavity pressure sensor disposed in the mold reaches a preset pressure after the injection process starts, a screw is stopped at a screw position at that time. The screw is stopped for a preset period of time. Subsequently, a dwelling process is performed.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the processing circuitry of Kajiyama to perform a stopping process of stopping travel of the screw 13 after the filling process and before the holding pressure process, as disclosed by AAPA. Kajiyama identifies overpacking as a problem to be avoided in setting the holding pressure switching point. Kajiyama, page 2: “if this holding pressure switching position is set closer to the nozzle tip than the appropriate position, it tends to overpack, causing the pressure of the molten resin filling the cavity to rise above the appropriate value, leading to problems such as difficulty in demolding or damage to the mold, and also making it easier for flags [burrs] to form on the molded product.” AAPA discloses that the stopping process addresses this same failure mode, since the molding material flows into the mold part by the action of the residual pressure, whereby an excessive increase in the pressure can be suppressed and molding failures such as burrs can be suppressed. One of ordinary skill in the art would therefore have been motivated to incorporate the stopping process of AAPA into the molding cycle of Kajiyama in order to suppress the overpacking, and the resulting burrs and demolding difficulties, that Kajiyama identifies as problems to be avoided. This is a combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Kajiyama as modified in this manner is referred to below as “modified Kajiyama”.
and a dwelling process of controlling a pressure applied from the injection member to a molding material,
Kajiyama, page 2: “After the injection is completed, a holding pressure process is performed in which a holding pressure (secondary injection pressure) is applied to the molten resin in the cavity by the screw and maintained for a certain period of time.”
Kajiyama, page 10: the molding condition setting storage unit 31 stores “subdivided secondary injection pressure (holding pressure) conditions from the holding pressure switching point to the holding pressure end point”.
wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to display a guidance screen that assists in providing conditions for the injection process on a display, the guidance screen including a first input field configured to receive an input of conditions under which the filling process is completed in a first test molding to be performed,
Kajiyama, page 12: “In Figure 1, 44 is a display device consisting of a color CRT display or the like.”
Kajiyama, pages 12-13: “Prior to continuous molding operation for forming the product, the operator inputs approximate conditions for test shots, excluding the holding pressure switching point and metering point, using the key-operated means 40. Then, when the operator instructs the key-operated means 40 to perform a test shot to search for and set the holding pressure switching point, the microcomputer 30 receives this and, for example, displays on the display device 44 prompting the operator to input a temporary holding pressure switching point and a temporary metering point. The operator then inputs the position data (distance data) of the temporary holding pressure switching point and the temporary metering point.”
The temporary holding pressure switching point is the position of the screw 13 at which the filling process terminates and the holding pressure process begins. It is therefore a condition under which the filling process is completed, consistent with the interpretation set forth above. The approximate conditions for the test shot, which the operator likewise inputs, include the injection speed and pressure under which the screw 13 advances to that point. Kajiyama, page 13. The prompt is displayed, and the operator input is received, before the test shot is performed.
That the displayed screen assists the operator in providing the conditions is further shown at Kajiyama, page 13: “These values can be very rough, so even inexperienced operators can easily give them.”
in the first test molding, perform the filling process under the conditions input to the first input field, perform the stopping process after the filling process, and perform the dwelling process after the stopping process, and
Kajiyama, page 13: “In the first test shot (first test molding) SH[1], the screw 13 is moved back to the temporary metering point PM[0] during the charging stroke (metering stroke), and then the screw 13 is moved to the temporary holding pressure switching point Pc[0] according to the set injection speed and pressure.”
Kajiyama, page 14: “At this point, after the screw 13 has advanced to the temporary holding pressure switching point Pc[0], the set holding pressure of the screw 13 is set to zero.”
In modified Kajiyama, the stopping process is performed after the filling process and before the holding pressure process, as set forth above.
in the dwelling process, move the injection member toward the molding material in such a manner as to make the pressure applied from the injection member to the molding material approximately zero,
Kajiyama, page 14: “At this point, after the screw 13 has advanced to the temporary holding pressure switching point Pc[0], the set holding pressure of the screw 13 is set to zero. Furthermore, the requirement to set the holding pressure to zero is also applied to each of the following test shots.”
such that a position of a forward end of the molding material in a direction in which the molding material flows remains substantially unchanged after a completion of the stopping process.
Kajiyama, page 5: “By performing test shots with the holding pressure set to zero in this manner, the screw tip remains stationary at each holding pressure switching point, which is set to a variable level, for example, in 1 mm increments, for each test shot, allowing for accurate measurement of the [peak] injection pressure.”
Because the screw tip remains stationary and no holding pressure is applied to the molten resin in the cavity, the molding material does not advance further into the mold part during the holding pressure process, and the position of the forward end of the molding material in the direction in which it flows therefore remains substantially unchanged.
Regarding claim 14, modified Kajiyama discloses:
wherein the guidance screen further includes a first determination field configured to receive an input indicating that a position of the molding material at the completion of the stopping process reaches a desired position in the first test molding, the position of the molding material being a position of a forward end of the molding material in a direction in which the molding material flows.
Kajiyama, pages 14-15: “The measurement point P where the filling amount is less than the appropriate amount by a predetermined amount is, for example, when the filling amount reaches about 90%. This can be easily confirmed by the operator by visually inspecting the test molded product from the test shot, and the operator can notify the microcomputer 30 (the holding pressure switching point search operation control unit 36) of this fact by operating a key or the like.”
Because the holding pressure is set to zero and the screw tip remains stationary during the holding pressure process, as set forth above, the filling amount observed in the test molded product corresponds to the position of the forward end of the molding material at the completion of the filling and stopping processes. The operator’s confirmation that the filling amount has reached about 90%, which is the desired filling amount for the search operation, is therefore an input indicating that the position of the molding material reaches a desired position.
Kajiyama does not expressly disclose that the operator’s confirmation is received in a determination field of the guidance screen displayed on the display device 44.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the processing circuitry of modified Kajiyama to receive the operator’s confirmation in a determination field of the guidance screen displayed on the display device 44. Kajiyama already displays a screen on the display device 44 prompting the operator to input the temporary holding pressure switching point and the temporary metering point, and receives that input from the operator. Kajiyama, pages 12-13. Receiving the operator’s subsequent confirmation through that same displayed screen, rather than through a separate key operation, is the application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield the predictable result of consolidating the operator input required during the guided test shot sequence. See MPEP 2143(I)(D).
Regarding claim 18, modified Kajiyama discloses:
wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to, in the dwelling process, move the injection member toward the molding material in such a manner as to make the pressure applied from the injection member to the molding material less than or equal to 3% of a peak pressure during a full-automatic operation.
Kajiyama, page 14: “the set holding pressure of the screw 13 is set to zero”. A holding pressure of zero is less than or equal to 3% of any peak pressure obtained during a full-automatic operation.
Regarding claim 19, modified Kajiyama discloses:
wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to, in the dwelling process, move the injection member toward the molding material in such a manner as to make the pressure applied from the injection member to the molding material 0.0 MPa to 1.5 MPa.
Kajiyama, page 14: “the set holding pressure of the screw 13 is set to zero”. A holding pressure of zero is 0.0 MPa, which falls within the recited range of 0.0 MPa to 1.5 MPa.
Regarding claim 20, modified Kajiyama discloses:
An injection molding machine, comprising: the controller according to claim 13; the display connected to the controller; and the injection member.
Kajiyama, Figure 1, discloses an inline screw-type injection molding machine including the screw 13, the microcontroller 30, and the display device 44. Kajiyama, page 12: “In Figure 1, 44 is a display device consisting of a color CRT display or the like.” The display device 44 is connected to the microcontroller 30, which displays the prompting screen thereon. Kajiyama, pages 12-13.
Regarding claim 2, modified Kajiyama discloses:
A display device for an injection molding machine, the display device comprising: a circuit configured to display a guidance screen that assists in providing conditions of an injection process,
Kajiyama, page 12: “In Figure 1, 44 is a display device consisting of a color CRT display or the like.”
Kajiyama, page 9: “30 is a microcontroller that controls the operation of the entire machine, including the control of the entire molding process such as mold opening and closing, charging, and injection, as well as good/defective product determination, and various calculation processes such as calculation and graphing of measurement data.”
Kajiyama, page 13: “These values can be very rough, so even inexperienced operators can easily give them.”
the injection process sequentially including a filling process of controlling a travel speed of an injection member, a stopping process of stopping travel of the injection member, and a dwelling process of controlling a pressure applied from the injection member to a molding material,
As set forth in the rejection of claim 13 above, Kajiyama discloses the filling process and the dwelling process, and modified Kajiyama further performs the stopping process between them in the sequence recited. AAPA expressly discloses the recited sequential order. AAPA, page 1, line 33 through page 2, line 11: “The injection process sequentially includes a filling process of controlling a speed at which the injection member moves forward, a stopping process of stopping the movement of the injection member, and a dwelling process of controlling the pressure applied from the injection member to the molding material.”
Additionally, these recitations describe the intended use of the claimed display device and are not accorded patentable weight. See MPEP 2114(II). They are nevertheless met by modified Kajiyama for the reasons given.
wherein the guidance screen includes a first input field configured to receive an input of conditions under which the filling process is completed in a first test molding to be performed.
Kajiyama, pages 12-13: “Prior to continuous molding operation for forming the product, the operator inputs approximate conditions for test shots, excluding the holding pressure switching point and metering point, using the key-operated means 40. Then, when the operator instructs the key-operated means 40 to perform a test shot to search for and set the holding pressure switching point, the microcomputer 30 receives this and, for example, displays on the display device 44 prompting the operator to input a temporary holding pressure switching point and a temporary metering point. The operator then inputs the position data (distance data) of the temporary holding pressure switching point and the temporary metering point.”
Kajiyama, page 13: “In the first test shot (first test molding) SH[1], the screw 13 is moved back to the temporary metering point PM[0] during the charging stroke (metering stroke), and then the screw 13 is moved to the temporary holding pressure switching point Pc[0] according to the set injection speed and pressure.”
The temporary holding pressure switching point is the position of the screw 13 at which the filling process terminates, and is therefore a condition under which the filling process is completed. The prompt is displayed on the display device 44, and the operator input is received, before the first test shot SH[1] is performed. The limitation is therefore met.
Regarding claim 8, please see the rejection of claim 14 above.
Regarding claim 10, please see the rejection of claim 20 above.
Claims 9, 11, 12, and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP H04-12821 (“Kajiyama”) (cited in an IDS) in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art (“AAPA”), as applied to claim 2 or 13 above, and further in view of US 2017/0050362 (“Yamamoto”).
Regarding claim 15, modified Kajiyama discloses:
the guidance screen further includes a second input field configured to receive an input of conditions for the dwelling process in a second test molding to be performed after the first test molding, and the processing circuitry is further configured to, in the second test molding, perform the filling process under the conditions input to the first input field, perform the stopping process after the filling process, and perform the dwelling process under the conditions input to the second input field.
Kajiyama, page 10: the molding condition setting storage unit 31 “stores various molding condition values that have been input by the key manual means 40”, including “subdivided secondary injection pressure (holding pressure) conditions from the holding pressure switching point to the holding pressure end point”.
Kajiyama, page 20: “After this, the operator will perform test shots to determine other conditions as needed, and after confirming all automated molding operating conditions, fully automated molding will begin.”
Kajiyama therefore discloses that the operator inputs the conditions of the holding pressure process, and that further test shots are performed after the first series of test shots in order to determine remaining conditions. Kajiyama does not expressly disclose that the input of the conditions for the holding pressure process is received in a second input field of the displayed guidance screen, or that the processing circuitry is configured to perform, in a second test molding after the first test molding, the filling process under the conditions input to the first input field followed by the holding pressure process under the separately input holding pressure conditions.
Yamamoto is directed to an injection molding machine having a display device 47 that displays a sequence of navigation screens guiding an operator through the setting of molding conditions and the performance of successive molding cycles. Yamamoto, [0065]-[0067].
Yamamoto, [0079]: “Holding pressure is, e.g., a small pressure of 0.1 MPa or less, and is preferably preset to a fixed value of 0.” The first molding cycle is executed under the conditions so calculated. Yamamoto, [0101].
Yamamoto, [0103]: “After the operator has inputted the information about the molding defect, a screen is displayed requesting the operator to perform a manipulation for improving the inputted molding defect. The operator changes the molding conditions in accordance with the guidance on the display screen.”
Yamamoto, [0103]: “The display screen displays, e.g., a message saying ‘Set 1/3 of the V-P change pressure as the holding pressure’ (S24) when no short shot exists and no flash occurs (S22 NO), as shown in the flowchart in FIG. 19, and again displays a screen that requests the operator to mold the molded article.”
Yamamoto, [0103]: “a message saying ‘Set 2/3 of the V-P change pressure as the holding pressure’ (S27) when no flash occurs (S25 NO), as shown in the flowcharts in FIG. 19 and FIG. 20, and displays again the screen that requests the operator to mold the molded article.”
Yamamoto therefore discloses a guidance screen sequence in which a first molding cycle is performed with the holding pressure preset to zero in order to establish the filling-side conditions, and subsequent molding cycles are then performed under holding pressure conditions that the operator sets in accordance with the guidance displayed on the screen. Yamamoto further discloses that its guidance screens themselves receive operator input of molding conditions. Yamamoto, [0074]: “On the display screen shown in FIG. 11A, the operator may also directly input a numerical value as the temperature condition of the heater 69.” See also Yamamoto, [0086], [0099], and [0100].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the processing circuitry of modified Kajiyama to display a second input field for receiving the conditions of the holding pressure process, and to perform a second test molding under the conditions input to the first input field followed by the holding pressure process under the conditions input to the second input field, as disclosed by Yamamoto. Kajiyama and Yamamoto are both directed to guiding an operator who lacks experience with the injection molding machine through the setting of molding conditions by means of successive test moldings. Kajiyama, page 13 (“These values can be very rough, so even inexperienced operators can easily give them”); Yamamoto, [0009] (“The disclosure shortens a time required from automatic setting of the initial molding conditions in the injection molding machine until an actual molding of a molded article by the injection molding machine, even for an operator unfamiliar with manipulation of the injection molding machine”). Kajiyama expressly contemplates that the operator will perform further test shots to determine the remaining conditions after the holding pressure switching point has been set, and Yamamoto discloses how a guidance screen sequence walks the operator through precisely that step for the holding pressure. One of ordinary skill in the art would therefore have been motivated to extend the guidance provided on the display device 44 of modified Kajiyama to the setting of the holding pressure conditions in a subsequent test molding, in order to obtain the predictable benefit of guiding an inexperienced operator through the remaining conditions rather than leaving those conditions to be determined without guidance. This is a combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Modified Kajiyama as further modified in this manner is referred to below as “further modified Kajiyama”.
Regarding claim 16, further modified Kajiyama discloses:
wherein the guidance screen further includes a second determination field configured to receive an input indicating that a molded product having a desired quality is produced in the second test molding.
Yamamoto, [0102]: after one molding cycle is completed, a screen is displayed requesting the operator to input information about a molding defect in the order shown in the flowchart of Figure 19, and allows the operator to input “YES” or “NO”.
Yamamoto, [0103]: the display screen again displays the message “Does flash occur in the molded article?” (S25) and the message “Does a short shot exist in the molded article?” (S28) after the further molding cycles, and proceeds to the next step of the guidance when the operator indicates that the defect is not present.
Yamamoto, [0104]: “After confirming that the molded article is well finished, the operator performs a predetermined manipulation to switch to automatic operation that performs the molding cycle repeatedly.”
Yamamoto discloses a determination field of the guidance screen that receives the operator’s input regarding the quality of the molded article produced in the subsequent molding cycle, expressed as the absence of the enumerated molding defects. To the extent that Applicant contends that an input indicating the absence of molding defects is not an input indicating that a molded product having a desired quality is produced, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the guidance screen of further modified Kajiyama to receive the operator’s determination in either form. An operator assessing a test molded product for the purpose of deciding whether to proceed to the next step of the guidance is making a single determination, and expressing that determination as the presence of a defect or as the attainment of the desired quality is a matter of obvious design choice between a small number of readily apparent alternatives, each of which yields the same predictable result of advancing the guided sequence only when the molded product is acceptable. The desire to avoid producing defective molded articles is well established in the art, as evidenced by Kajiyama, page 2, and Yamamoto, [0102]-[0104].
Regarding claim 17, further modified Kajiyama discloses:
wherein the guidance screen further includes a display field configured to collectively display the conditions input to the first input field and the conditions input to the second input field, apart from the first input field and the second input field.
In the Office Action mailed 29 December 2025, the Examiner asserted that this subject matter, then recited in claim 6, is well known in the art. Applicant did not traverse that assertion in the reply filed 27 March 2026. The assertion is therefore taken to be admitted prior art. See MPEP 2144.03(C).
The collective display of entered molding conditions apart from the fields in which they are entered is further evidenced by Yamamoto, [0067]: “The normal screen displays a list of data of molding conditions. The normal screen is capable of accepting the data of molding conditions inputted from the input sections 47A and 48A by the operator.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have configured the guidance screen of further modified Kajiyama to include a display field collectively displaying the conditions input to the first and second input fields, apart from those fields. Providing the operator with a consolidated view of the conditions that have been entered during the guided sequence would have yielded the predictable benefit of allowing the operator to confirm those conditions before proceeding, which Kajiyama identifies as a step preceding fully automated molding. Kajiyama, page 20 (“after confirming all automated molding operating conditions, fully automated molding will begin”). This is a combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Regarding claim 9, please see the rejection of claim 15 above. Claim 9 does not recite the performance of the filling, stopping, and dwelling processes in the second test molding, and is therefore met by the second input field of further modified Kajiyama without further modification.
Regarding claim 11, please see the rejection of claim 16 above.
Regarding claim 12, please see the rejection of claim 17 above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Specifically, JP H04-316821 (“Sakai”) is directed to an automatic setting support system for injection molding conditions in which individual data for each molded product, including a maximum injection holding pressure value, is entered in an interactive format through an individual data input means 30 and displayed by a display means 90, and in which molding is thereafter performed on a trial basis using the resulting operating data. See [0001] and [0009]-[0013] of the provided translation.
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 John DeRusso whose telephone number is (571)270-1287. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10:00 AM-6:00 PM ET.
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, Sam Zhao, can be reached at (571) 270-5343. 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.
/John J DeRusso/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights