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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 26 December 2025 has been entered.
Status of Claims
This action is in reply to the amendment filed on 26 December 2025.
Claims 1-6 and 8-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
This action is made Non-FINAL.
Response to Arguments/Amendments
Applicant's arguments, see remarks at page(s) 9-11, filed 26 December 2025, with respect to the rejection of claim(s) 1-6 and 8-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Pak have been fully considered and are persuasive. The Applicant’s amendments overcome the previous art of record. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made over Pak (US 20060016930 A1) in view of Kang et al. (US 20200278701 A1) in view of English et al. (US 20200333805 A1) in further view of Liang (US 20210323663 A1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5, 8-11, 13, 15 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pak (US 20060016930 A1) in view of Kang et al. (US 20200278701 A1) in view of English et al. (US 20200333805 A1) in further view of Liang (US 20210323663 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 11 and 17, Pak teaches an aircraft vehicle, comprising: a body (see at least Fig. 1 and ¶[0010] regarding a vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) aircraft comprising a fuselage); at least one wing coupled to the body (see at least Fig. 1 and 2A as well as ¶[0019] and [0044] regarding wing control surfaces); a first aircraft fairing extending from a first side of the body (see at least Fig. 1, 2A and ¶[0043], [0045] and [0048] regarding structural beams); a first rotor assembly disposed at an end of the first aircraft fairing (see at least Fig. 1, 2A and ¶[0043] regarding propulsion units 131, 132, 133, 134 extend outwardly from the fuselage).
While Pak discloses a remote controlled aircraft (see abstract and at least ¶[0024]) which would have a controller, Pak does not explicitly a second rotor assembly disposed along a horizontal plane with respect to the first rotor assembly, between the body and a tail-wing, and alone a connecting structure connecting the body to the tail-wing, wherein both the tail-wing and the connecting structure are aligned with a central axis of the body; and a controller configured to actuate the first rotor assembly, comprising: a memory configured to store an airspeed threshold value; and a processor, operably coupled to the memory, configured to: transmit an instruction to rotate the first rotor assembly to an initial angle with respect to a vertical axis; receive one or more measurements associated with an airspeed of the aircraft vehicle; determine if the airspeed of the aircraft vehicle is greater than or equal to the airspeed threshold value; and in response to a determination that the airspeed of the aircraft vehicle is not greater than or equal to the airspeed threshold value: determine a subsequent angle for rotating the first rotor assembly; and transmit a subsequent instruction to rotate the first rotor assembly to the subsequent angle, wherein as the position of the first rotor assembly changes, the position of a nose of the aircraft vehicle is maintained at a certain height. However, Kang discloses a method and computer programs for controlling tilt angle of main rotors and teaches a controller configured to actuate the first rotor assembly (see at least abstract and ¶[0011] regarding a flight controller which generates a tilt angle control signal for the main rotor based on the determined tilt angle), comprising: a memory configured to store an airspeed threshold value (see Fig. 2 and at least ¶[0013], [0024], [0100] and [0140] regarding a predetermined critical speed which the flight controller generates control signals based on; also, see at least ¶[0071]-[0073] regarding a memory of a flight controller); and a processor, operably coupled to the memory (see Fig. 2 and at least ¶[0071]-[0074] regarding a processor which is part of the flight controller), configured to: transmit an instruction to rotate the first rotor assembly to an initial angle with respect to a vertical axis (see abstract and at least ¶[0012]-[0013], [0018]-[0019], [0023]-[0024], [0028]-[0029], [0044] and [0081] regarding a flight controller determining a tilt angle of the main rotor with reference to the first pitch posture angle and generates a tilt angle control signal for the main rotor based on the determined tilt angle); receive one or more measurements associated with an airspeed of the aircraft vehicle (see at least ¶[0104] and [0145] regarding checking the speed of the vertical take-off/landing aircraft); determine if the airspeed of the aircraft vehicle is greater than or equal to the airspeed threshold value (see at least ¶[0104] and [0145] regarding checking the speed of the vertical take-off/landing aircraft; see Fig. 5A-5B and at least ¶[0013], [0024], [0028]-[0029], [0100], [0102], [0140] and [0142] regarding the flight controller may generate the tilt angle control signal for the main rotor when the speed of the vertical take-off/landing aircraft is less than or equal to a predetermined critical speed as well as generating a correcting signal comprising a tilt angle correcting angle for the main rotor based on pre-set aircraft speed to maintain a desired speed (see ¶[0100] and [0140])); and in response to a determination that the airspeed of the aircraft vehicle is not greater than or equal to the airspeed threshold value: determine a subsequent angle for rotating the first rotor assembly (see Fig. 5A-5B and at least ¶[0013], [0024], [0028]-[0029], [0100], [0102], [0140] and [0142] regarding the flight controller may generate the tilt angle control signal for the main rotor when the speed of the vertical take-off/landing aircraft is less than or equal to a predetermined critical speed as well as generating a correcting signal comprising a tilt angle correcting angle for the main rotor based on pre-set aircraft speed to provide maintaining a desired speed (see ¶[0100] and [0140])); and transmit a subsequent instruction to rotate the first rotor assembly to the subsequent angle (see Fig. 5A-5B and at least ¶[0013], [0024], [0028]-[0029], [0100], [0102], [0112], [0140] and [0142] regarding the flight controller may generate the tilt angle control signal for the main rotor when the speed of the vertical take-off/landing aircraft is less than or equal to a predetermined critical speed as well as generating a correcting signal comprising a tilt angle correcting angle for the main rotor based on pre-set aircraft speed and the flight controller controlling the tilt angle of the main rotors according to the correcting signal to provide maintaining a desired speed (see ¶[0100] and [0140])).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the VTOL aircraft of Pak to provide, with a reasonable expectation of success, a controller configured to actuate the first rotor assembly, comprising: a memory configured to store an airspeed threshold value; and a processor, operably coupled to the memory, configured to: transmit an instruction to rotate the first rotor assembly to an initial angle with respect to a vertical axis; receive one or more measurements associated with an airspeed of the aircraft vehicle; determine if the airspeed of the aircraft vehicle is greater than or equal to the airspeed threshold value; and in response to a determination that the airspeed of the aircraft vehicle is not greater than or equal to the airspeed threshold value: determine a subsequent angle for rotating the first rotor assembly; and transmit a subsequent instruction to rotate the first rotor assembly to the subsequent angle, as taught by Kang, to provide maintaining a constant flight position for take-off or landing or to fly at a desired speed. (Kang at ¶[0100])
The combination of Pak and Kang does not explicitly teach a second rotor assembly disposed along a horizontal plane with respect to the first rotor assembly, between the body and a tail-wing, and alone a connecting structure connecting the body to the tail-wing, wherein both the tail-wing and the connecting structure are aligned with a central axis of the body; and wherein as the position of the first rotor assembly changes, the position of a nose of the aircraft vehicle is maintained at a certain height. However, English discloses an aircraft control system and method and teaches wherein as the position of the first rotor assembly changes, the position of a nose of the aircraft vehicle is maintained at a certain height (see ¶[0035] “adjusting the tilts (e.g., instead of pitch attitude changes), which can keep the fuselage level at a predetermined attitude”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the VTOL aircraft of Pak as modified by Kang to provide, with a reasonable expectation of success, wherein as the position of the first rotor assembly changes, the position of a nose of the aircraft vehicle is maintained at a certain height, as taught by English, to provide improved ride comfort. (English at ¶[0035])
The combination of Pak, Kang and English does not explicitly teach a second rotor assembly disposed along a horizontal plane with respect to the first rotor assembly, between the body and a tail-wing, and alone a connecting structure connecting the body to the tail-wing, wherein both the tail-wing and the connecting structure are aligned with a central axis of the body. However, Liang discloses an unmanned aerial vehicle and teaches a second rotor assembly disposed along a horizontal plane with respect to the first rotor assembly, between the body and a tail-wing, and alone a connecting structure connecting the body to the tail-wing, wherein both the tail-wing and the connecting structure are aligned with a central axis of the body (see Fig. 1-2 and 7 as well as ¶[0050]-[0052] “first rotor assembly”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the VTOL aircraft of Pak as modified by Kang as modified by English to provide, with a reasonable expectation of success, a second rotor assembly disposed along a horizontal plane with respect to the first rotor assembly, between the body and a tail-wing, and alone a connecting structure connecting the body to the tail-wing, wherein both the tail-wing and the connecting structure are aligned with a central axis of the body, as taught by Liang, to provide taking off and landing stably. (Liang at ¶[0052])
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Pak does not explicitly teach the aircraft vehicle of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to instruct the first rotor assembly to actuate in order to apply lift to the aircraft vehicle. However, Kang discloses a method and computer programs for controlling tilt angle of main rotors and teaches the aircraft vehicle of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to instruct the first rotor assembly to actuate in order to apply lift to the aircraft vehicle (see at least ¶[0005], [0011], [0044], [0054], [0094], [0096] and [0131] regarding the flight controller generating control signals and thrust in directions of the tilt angle (i.e., a force that pushes the vertical take-off/landing aircraft)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the VTOL aircraft of Pak to provide, with a reasonable expectation of success, a controller configured to actuate the first rotor assembly, wherein the processor is further configured to instruct the first rotor assembly to actuate in order to apply lift to the aircraft vehicle, as taught by Kang, to provide generating a force that pushes the vertical take-off/landing aircraft in a direction in which the vertical take-off/landing aircraft moves. (Kang at ¶[0054])
Regarding claims 5, 15 and 18, Pak does not explicitly teach the aircraft vehicle of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to: transmit an instruction to rotate the first rotor assembly to a final angle when the airspeed of the aircraft vehicle is greater than or equal to the airspeed threshold value, wherein the final angle is 90°. However, Kang discloses a method and computer programs for controlling tilt angle of main rotors and teaches the aircraft vehicle of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to: transmit an instruction to rotate the first rotor assembly to a final angle when the airspeed of the aircraft vehicle is greater than or equal to the airspeed threshold value (see at least ¶[0052], [0058], [0114] and [0155] regarding a correcting signal for the tilt angle, decreases (e.g., the tilt angle correcting angle becomes 0 degrees) based on a current speed of the vertical take-off/landing aircraft 10 and a current tilt angle of the main rotors 200R and 200L, like the aircraft speed-main rotor tilt angle mapping data (i.e., stored data which indicates speed for the tilt angle such as in Fig. 5A)), wherein the final angle is 90° (see at least ¶[0052], [0058], [0114] and [0155] regarding a correcting signal for the tilt angle, decreases (e.g., the tilt angle correcting angle becomes 0 degrees) based on a current speed of the vertical take-off/landing aircraft 10 and a current tilt angle of the main rotors 200R and 200L, like the aircraft speed-main rotor tilt angle mapping data (i.e., 0 degrees is 90 degrees from the starting position as if the VTOL would be in cruise)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the VTOL aircraft of Pak to provide, with a reasonable expectation of success, wherein the processor is further configured to: transmit an instruction to rotate the first rotor assembly to a final angle when the airspeed of the aircraft vehicle is greater than or equal to the airspeed threshold value, wherein the final angle is 90°, as taught by Kang, to provide maintaining a constant flight position to fly at a desired speed. (Kang at ¶[0100])
Regarding the further limitation of claim 18, Pak teaches wherein the rotor assembly comprises a first set of rotor blades and a second set of rotor blades (see Figs. 1 and 6, tiltrotors with top and bottom rotor blades).
Regarding claim 8, Pak teaches the aircraft vehicle of claim 7, further comprising a third rotor assembly disposed at an end of a second aircraft fairing (see at least Fig. 1, 2A and ¶[0043] regarding propulsion units 131, 132, 133, 134 extend outwardly from the fuselage (e.g., 131 and 132 are the same on opposite sides of the fuselage)), and wherein the second aircraft fairing extends from the body at an opposite side from the first aircraft fairing (see at least Fig. 1, 2A and ¶[0043] regarding propulsion units 131, 132, 133, 134 extend outwardly from the fuselage (e.g., 131 and 132 are the same on opposite sides of the fuselage and are disposed on the same horizontal axis 141)).
Regarding claim 9, Pak does not explicitly teach the aircraft vehicle of claim 8, wherein the controller is further configured to: transmit an instruction to rotate the second rotor assembly to the initial angle concurrently with the first rotor assembly; and transmit the subsequent instruction to rotate the second rotor assembly to the subsequent angle concurrently with the first rotor assembly. However, Kang discloses a method and computer programs for controlling tilt angle of main rotors and teaches the aircraft vehicle of claim 8, wherein the controller is further configured to: transmit an instruction to rotate the second rotor assembly to the initial angle concurrently with the first rotor assembly (see abstract and at least ¶[0012]-[0013], [0018]-[0019], [0023]-[0024], [0028]-[0029], [0044] and [0081] regarding a flight controller determining a tilt angle of the main rotors with reference to the first pitch posture angle and generates tilt angle control signals for the main rotors); and transmit the subsequent instruction to rotate the second rotor assembly to the subsequent angle concurrently with the first rotor assembly (see Fig. 5A-5B and at least ¶[0013], [0024], [0028]-[0029], [0100], [0102], [0112], [0140] and [0142] regarding the flight controller may generate the tilt angle control signal for the main rotors when the speed of the vertical take-off/landing aircraft is less than or equal to a predetermined critical speed as well as generating a correcting signal comprising a tilt angle correcting angle for the main rotors based on pre-set aircraft speed and the flight controller controlling the tilt angle of the main rotors according to the correcting signal to provide maintaining a desired speed (see ¶[0100] and [0140])).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the VTOL aircraft of Pak to provide, with a reasonable expectation of success, a controller configured to actuate the first rotor assembly, comprising: a memory configured to store an airspeed threshold value; and a processor, operably coupled to the memory, wherein the controller is further configured to: transmit an instruction to rotate the second rotor assembly to the initial angle concurrently with the first rotor assembly; and transmit the subsequent instruction to rotate the second rotor assembly to the subsequent angle concurrently with the first rotor assembly, as taught by Kang, to provide maintaining a constant flight position for take-off or landing or to fly at a desired speed. (Kang at ¶[0100])
Regarding claim 10, Pak teaches the aircraft vehicle of claim 7, wherein the second rotor assembly is disposed along the body and laterally offset from the first rotor assembly with respect to the body (see at least Fig. 1, 2A and ¶[0043] regarding propulsion units 131, 132, 133, 134 extend outwardly from the fuselage (e.g., 131 and 132 are laterally offset and the same on opposite sides of the fuselage and are disposed on the same horizontal axis 141)).
Claim(s) 2 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pak (US 20060016930 A1) in view of Kang et al. (US 20200278701 A1) in view of English et al. (US 20200333805 A1) in view of Liang (US 20210323663 A1), as applied to claim 1 and 11 above, and in further view of Dekel et al. (US 20150197335 A1).
Regarding claims 2 and 12, the combination of Pak, Kang, English and Liang does not explicitly teach the aircraft vehicle of claim 1, further comprising a sensor disposed at a proximal end of the body and configured to measure the airspeed of the aircraft vehicle. However, Dekel discloses systems, methods and computer program products for maneuvering of an air vehicle and teaches the aircraft vehicle of claim 1, further comprising a sensor disposed at a proximal end of the body and configured to measure the airspeed of the aircraft vehicle (see Figs. 1A-1B and at least ¶[0104], [0225] and [0376] regarding airspeed detectors 490).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the VTOL aircraft of Pak as modified by Kang as modified by English as modified by Liang to provide, with a reasonable expectation of success, further comprising a sensor disposed at a proximal end of the body and configured to measure the airspeed of the aircraft vehicle, as taught by Dekel, to provide receiving information indicative of monitored airspeed of air vehicle. (Dekel at ¶[0104])
Claim(s) 4, 14 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pak (US 20060016930 A1) in view of Kang et al. (US 20200278701 A1) in view of English et al. (US 20200333805 A1) in view of Liang (US 20210323663 A1), as applied to claim 1, 11 and 17 above, and in further view of Lindsey et al. (US 20190233099 A1).
Regarding claims 4, 14 and 20, the combination of Pak, Kang, English and Liang does not explicitly teach the aircraft vehicle of claim 1, wherein the memory is further configured to store an altitude threshold, wherein the processor is configured to transmit the instruction to rotate the first rotor assembly to the initial angle after the aircraft vehicle is at a height greater than or equal to the altitude threshold. However, Lindsey discloses methods and systems for energy-efficient take-offs and landings for VTOL aerial vehicles and teaches the aircraft vehicle of claim 1, wherein the memory is further configured to store an altitude threshold (see at least ¶[0010]-[0011] and [0083] regarding a first altitude and a minimum transition height and a processor having addressable memory, which includes one or more take-off variables for a vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) aerial vehicle), wherein the processor is configured to transmit the instruction to rotate the first rotor assembly to the initial angle after the aircraft vehicle is at a height greater than or equal to the altitude threshold (see abstract and at least ¶[0010]-[0011], [0025]-[0026] and [0083] regarding a minimum transition height and increasing an altitude of the VTOL aerial vehicle to a first altitude, where increasing the altitude comprises substantially vertical flight of the VTOL aerial vehicle; performing a first pre-rotation check of the VTOL aerial vehicle; adjusting a pitch of the VTOL aerial vehicle to a first pitch angle via motor control).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the VTOL aircraft of Pak as modified by Kang as modified by English as modified by Liang to provide, with a reasonable expectation of success, wherein the memory is further configured store an altitude threshold, wherein the processor is configured to transmit the instruction to rotate the first rotor assembly to the initial angle after the aircraft vehicle is at a height greater than or equal to the altitude threshold, as taught by Lindsey, to provide ensuring safe take-off and landing. (Lindsey at ¶[0023])
Claim(s) 6, 16 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pak (US 20060016930 A1) in view of Kang et al. (US 20200278701 A1) in view of English et al. (US 20200333805 A1) in view of Liang (US 20210323663 A1), as applied to claim 5, 15 and 18 above, in further view of Schafer (US 20240124135 A1) and in further view of Petrov (US 20230195143 A1).
Regarding claims 6, 16 and 19, Pak teaches wherein the first rotor assembly comprises a first set of rotor blades and a second set of rotor blades (see Fig. 1 and at least ¶[0010] regarding a first forward propulsion unit structurally connected to the first forward structure beam; a second forward propulsion unit structurally connected to the second forward structure beam (i.e., first set)); a first after propulsion unit structurally connected to the first forward structure beam; and a second after propulsion unit structurally connected to the second after structure beam (i.e., second set)).
The combination of Pak, Kang, English and Liang does not explicitly teach the aircraft vehicle of claim 5, wherein the processor is further configured to transmit an instruction to stop actuating the second set of rotor blades once the first rotor assembly is at the final angle and to fold the second set of rotor blades inward. However, Schafer discloses a rotor assembly for an aircraft and teaches the aircraft vehicle of claim 5, wherein the processor is further configured to transmit an instruction to stop actuating the second set of rotor blades once the first rotor assembly is at the final angle (see at least ¶[0002] and [0022] regarding when aircraft 100 is in cruise mode (i.e., final angle) aft rotor assemblies 142a, 142b, may cease rotation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the VTOL aircraft of Pak as modified by Kang as modified by English as modified by Liang to provide, with a reasonable expectation of success, wherein the processor is further configured to transmit an instruction to stop actuating the second set of rotor blades once the first rotor assembly is at the final angle, as taught by Schafer, to provide eliminating unnecessary power draw by rotors that are used only in certain flight conditions, such as Vertical Take-Off and Landing (VTOL), initial climb, and final descent. (Schafer at ¶[0002])
The combination of Pak, Kang, English, Liang and Schafer does not explicitly teach to fold the second set of rotor blades inward. However, Petrov discloses control of aircraft with VTOL capabilities and teaches to fold the second set of rotor blades inward (see Fig. 9 and ¶[0156] “two outboard propellers/motors are fixed-pitch propellers each with a folding mechanism in the hub to facilitate folding of the propellers”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the VTOL aircraft of Pak as modified by Kang as modified by English as modified by Liang as modified by Schafer to provide, with a reasonable expectation of success, folding the second set of rotor blades inward, as taught by Petrov, to provide reducing their drag profile when the motors are shut down and the propellers are stowed as well as improving overall efficiency by only running two motors at a high RPM while the other two are shut off and folded in. (Petrov at ¶[0156])
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Liu (US 20230234729 A1) is pertinent because it comprises an unmanned aerial vehicle which includes a body, a first wing, a second wing, a first rotor assembly, a third rotor assembly, and a fourth rotor assembly.
Remes (US 20250296675 A1) is pertinent because it is an aeronautical vehicle which performs horizontal flight and/or vertical flight.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Connor L Knight whose telephone number is (571)272-5817. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30AM-4:30PM 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, Anne Antonucci can be reached at (313)446-6519. 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.L.K/Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/ANNE MARIE ANTONUCCI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666