The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means”, “step”, or a generic placeholder but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “surface cleaning apparatus” in Claims 1 and 20, “unit” in Claim 5.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 14-16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Huang CN 115486755 A (hereafter Huang).
Regarding Claim 1, Huang anticipates:
1. A floor cleaning nozzle (cleaning base 1) for a surface cleaning apparatus (ground cleaning device 100) comprising:
at least one fluid dispenser (nozzles 17 and 18) in fluid communication with a source of cleaning fluid (solution box 23) and configured to dispense cleaning fluid to a surface to be cleaned (ground 500);
a nozzle housing (base shell 10) having a first side (first side part 103), a second side (second side part 104), a bottom (not shown), a brushroll compartment therein (brush cavity 105 and cavity surrounding side brush 12, Figure 2), an elongated suction inlet opening (lower opening 107) to the brushroll compartment, and an edge cleaning aperture (aperture below side brush 12, Figure 2) in the first side extending upward from the bottom;
a main brushroll (main brush roller 11) rotatably mounted in the brushroll compartment about an axis (axis X1), the main brushroll having a first end (end nearest side brush 12 shown in Figure 2) corresponding to the first side of the nozzle housing and a second end (end opposite side brush 12 shown in Figure 2) corresponding to the second side of the nozzle housing, the main brushroll comprising a main agitation material (brush) extending through the suction inlet opening (Figure 2); and
an edge brushroll (side brush 12) in the brushroll compartment, the edge brushroll connected to the first end of the main brushroll (best shown in Figure 3) and rotatable therewith about the axis, the edge brushroll comprising an edge agitation material (brush) extending through the edge cleaning aperture (Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 2, Huang anticipates:
2. The floor cleaning nozzle of claim 1, wherein the second side (second side part 104) of the nozzle housing (base shell 10) extends upward from the bottom of the nozzle housing and the nozzle housing is closed to airflow through the second side (shown in Figure 2 and 4).
Regarding Claim 14, Huang anticipates:
14. The floor cleaning nozzle of claim 1, wherein the at least one fluid dispenser (nozzles 17 and 18) comprises a main fluid dispenser (nozzle 17) configured to deliver cleaning fluid to at least the main brushroll (main brush roller 11) and an edge fluid dispenser (nozzle 18) configured to deliver cleaning fluid to at least the edge brushroll (side brush 12)(Figure 3).
Regarding Claim 15, Huang anticipates:
15. The floor cleaning nozzle of claim 14, wherein the edge fluid dispenser (nozzle 18) comprises a spray tip (shown in Figure 3) having at least one outlet and disposed at a rear surface (shown in Figure 4) of the brushroll compartment (brush cavity 105 and cavity surrounding side brush 12, Figure 12), inwardly of the first side (first side part 103) of the nozzle housing (base shell 10).
Regarding Claim 16, Huang anticipates:
16. The floor cleaning nozzle of claim 14, wherein the main fluid dispenser (nozzle 17) comprises a spray manifold having a plurality of outlets (four shown in Figure 3), wherein the plurality of outlets are axially spaced (shown in Figure 3) to dispense cleaning fluid along the main brushroll (main brush roller 11), and wherein the edge fluid dispenser (nozzle 18) is separate from the spray manifold (separate fluid path through valve shown in Figure 3).
Regarding Claim 20, Huang anticipates:
20. A surface cleaning apparatus (ground cleaning device 100) comprising:
an upright body (vertical machine body 2) comprising a handle (handle assembly 22) and a frame (shell 21);
a floor cleaning nozzle (cleaning base 1) operably coupled to the upright body (Figure 1);
a supply tank (solution box 23) adapted to hold a supply of cleaning fluid;
a recovery tank (waste liquid recycling box 24); and
a suction source (suction motor 25);
wherein the floor cleaning nozzle comprises:
a nozzle housing (base shell 10) having a first side (first side part 103), a second side (second side part 104), a bottom (not shown), a brushroll compartment therein (brush cavity 105 and cavity surrounding side brush 12, Figure 12), an elongated suction inlet opening (lower opening 107) to the brushroll compartment, wherein the suction inlet opening is in fluid communication with the suction source, and an edge cleaning aperture (aperture below side brush 12, Figure 2) in the first side extending upward from the bottom;
at least one fluid dispenser (nozzles 17 and 18) in fluid communication with the supply tank (Figure 3);
a main brushroll (main brush roller 11) rotatably mounted in the brushroll compartment about an axis (axis X1), the main brushroll having a first end (end nearest side brush 12 shown in Figure 2) corresponding to the first side of the nozzle housing and a second end (end opposite side brush 12 shown in Figure 2) corresponding to the second side of the nozzle housing, the main brushroll comprising a main agitation material (brush) extending through the suction inlet opening (Figure 2); and
an edge brushroll (side brush 12) in the brushroll compartment, the edge brushroll connected to the first end of the main brushroll (best shown in Figure 3) and rotatable therewith about the axis, the edge brushroll comprising an edge agitation material (brush) extending through the edge cleaning aperture (Figure 2).
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang CN 115486755 A (hereafter Huang) in view of design choice.
Regarding Claim 17, Huang teaches:
17. The floor cleaning nozzle of claim 1, wherein the main brushroll (main brush roller 11) comprises a main brushroll length (Figure 3) along the axis (axis X1), the edge brushroll (side brush 12) comprises an edge brushroll length (Figure 3) along the axis, and wherein a ratio of the main brushroll length to edge brushroll length is 5:1 to 10:1 (shown in Figure 3).
Huang discloses substantially all the limitations of the claim(s) including drawings that show the relative lengths for the main brush roller 11 and side brush 12. Huang does not provide specific values for the ratio of the length as claimed. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the different portions of the main brush roller and side brush roller of whatever relative sizes were desired, with the motivation to get a desired overall width and desired side brush roller width, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the proportions of components. A change in proportion is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Reese, 129 USPQ 402.
Regarding Claim 18, Huang teaches:
18. The floor cleaning nozzle of claim 1, wherein the main agitation material (brush material of main brush roller 11) comprises microfiber having a first nap length, and the edge agitation material (brush material of side brush 12) comprises microfiber having a second nap length that is less than the first nap length (see discussion below).
Huang discloses substantially all the limitations of the claim(s) except for identifying the brush material comprising microfiber. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select a material based on the cleaning operation, that being said, if intended to operate on a softer surface, such as wood floor, it would be obvious to use a softer material that would not scratch the surface. Microfiber would have been an obvious soft material option since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. See also Ballas Liquidating Co. v. Allied industries of Kansas, Inc. (DC Kans) 205 USPQ 331.
Regarding Claim 19, Huang teaches:
19. The floor cleaning nozzle of claim 1, comprising: a brushroll motor (“In this example, the main brush roller 11 and side brush 12 can be driven to rotate by the same motor (not shown in the figure)”); a drive transmission connecting the brushroll motor with the second end of the main brushroll and configured to transmit rotational motion of the brushroll motor to the main brushroll (main brush roller 11); and a drive coupling (shaft coupling shown in Figure 3) connecting the edge brushroll (side brush 12) with the main brushroll (Figure 3), wherein the drive coupling comprises: a shaft fixed with the main brushroll (shaft shown in Figure 3), the shaft comprising an externally-threaded head; and an internally-threaded neck on the edge brushroll, wherein the edge brushroll is attached to the shaft by screwing the externally-threaded head into the internally-threaded neck (see discussion below)
Huang discloses substantially all the limitations of the claim(s) including Figure 3 that shows the side brushroll coupled to the main brushroll through a shaft coupling. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ a drive coupling configured as an external thread connected to an internal thread allowing the side brushroll to connect to the main brushroll through a threaded connection with the motivation to employ a common knowledge solution to attaching shaft shaped parts together.
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang CN 115486755 A (hereafter Huang) in view of Li et al. CN 219846350 U (hereafter Li et al.).
Regarding Claim 19, Huang teaches:
3. The floor cleaning nozzle of claim 1, comprising a squeegee on the bottom of the nozzle housing (base shell 10), wherein the squeegee is rearward of the main brushroll (main brush roller 11).
Huang discloses substantially all the limitations of the claim(s), however, Huang does not disclose the inclusion of a squeegee or scraper behind the main brushroll. The reference Li et al. discloses a cleaning head with fluid delivery. Li et al. discloses a rear scraping strip 5 mounted rearward of the first and second rolling brushes 2 and 3 (main brushroll) across most of the width of the cleaning head as shown in Figure 1 with the motivation improve fluid collection during operation. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Huang device to include a squeegee, in the form taught by Li et al. as a scraper extending across most of the width of the cleaning head.
Regarding Claim 4, Huang teaches:
4. The floor cleaning nozzle of claim 3, wherein the squeegee (added by the combination with the Li et al. reference, see Claim 3 discussion) is laterally elongated and extends into the edge cleaning aperture (aperture below side brush 12, Figure 2) in the first side of the nozzle housing (first side part 103), wherein the squeegee is rearward of the edge brushroll (side brush 12).
As presented in Claim 3, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention that Huang design be modified to include a scraper, as taught by Li et al., that extends across most of the width of the cleaning head. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the squeegee/scraper extend into and behind both the main brushroll and side brushroll suction intakes with the motivation to minimize wet streaks left behind the device during operation.
Claims 5-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang CN 115486755 A (hereafter Huang) in view of Xu et al. US 9,655,486 (hereafter Xu et al.).
Regarding Claim 5, Huang teaches:
5. The floor cleaning nozzle of claim 1, comprising a brushroll assembly (assembly comprising main brush roller 11 and side brush 12 connected by shaft as shown in Figure 3) comprising the main brushroll (main brush roller 11) and the edge brushroll (side brush 12), wherein the brushroll assembly is removable as a unit from the nozzle housing (base shell 10)(see discussion below).
Huang discloses substantially all the limitations of the claim(s), however, although it would be obvious to allow the brushroll assembly to be removable for cleaning or replacement, Huang does not specifically disclose that the brushroll assembly is removable. The reference Xu et al. discloses a surface cleaning head with a removable brushroll assembly 730. Xu et al. discloses, as shown in Figure 18, securing the non-driven end 732 of the brushroll to a bushing 792 which is mounted to an end cap 790 that is removably mounted to mounting rails 727a and 727b inside the brushroll chamber 720 as shown in Figures 21 and 22. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Huang device to allow the brushroll assembly, including both the main brush roller 11 and side brush 12, to be removable by mounting a bushing on the shaft between the two brushes as shown in Figure 3 and employing a removable “end cap” that holds the bushing. The described modification would support the non-driven end of the brushroll assembly during normal operation as shown in Figure 2, however, allows the supporting “end cap” to be removed with the motivation to allow the brushroll assembly to be cleaned or replaced with a new brushroll assembly.
Regarding Claim 6, Huang in view of Xu et al. teaches:
6. The floor cleaning nozzle of claim 5, wherein the brushroll assembly (assembly comprising main brush roller 11 and side brush 12 connected by shaft as shown in Figure 3, modified as discussed in Claim 5 to include a shaft mounted bushing 792 and bushing supporting removeable end cap 790 as taught by Xu et al.) comprises a carrier (bushing – as taught by Xu et al.) supporting the brushroll assembly (specifically the shaft) within the brushroll compartment (brush cavity 105 and cavity surrounding side brush 12, Figure 12); and wherein the nozzle housing (base shell 10) comprises a carrier mount (end cap – as taught by Xu et al.) within the brushroll compartment that mounts the carrier (removably mounts – as taught by Xu et al.), where the carrier mount is disposed between a first end (end nearest side brush 12 shown in Figure 2) and a second end (end opposite side brush 12 shown in Figure 2) of the brushroll compartment such that the brushroll assembly is supported by the carrier at a location intermediate the first and second ends of the brushroll compartment (when shaft shown in Figure 3 includes a bushing and end cap as taught by Xu et al.).
Regarding Claim 7, Huang in view of Xu et al. teaches:
7. The floor cleaning nozzle of claim 6, wherein the carrier (bushing – as taught by Xu et al.) is axially offset (when mounted on shaft as shown in Figure 3) along a length of the brushroll assembly (assembly comprising main brush roller 11 and side brush 12 connected by shaft as shown in Figure 3, modified as discussed in Claim 5 to include a shaft mounted bushing 792 and bushing supporting removeable end cap 790 as taught by Xu et al.) and is disposed between the main brushroll (main brush roller 11) and the edge brushroll (side brush 12).
Regarding Claim 8, Huang in view of Xu et al. teaches:
8. The floor cleaning nozzle of claim 6, comprising a drive coupling (shaft shown in Figure 3) connecting the edge brushroll (side brush 12) with the main brushroll (main brush roller 11), wherein the drive coupling extends through the carrier (bushing – as taught by Xu et al.).
Regarding Claim 9, Huang in view of Xu et al. teaches:
9. The floor cleaning nozzle of claim 1, wherein the nozzle housing (base shell 10) comprises a removeable brushroll cover (labeled in attached Figure 2 below) having an underside that is adjacent to the main brushroll (main brush roller 11) and the edge brushroll (side brush 12), the brushroll cover defining at least a portion of the brushroll compartment (brush cavity 105 and cavity surrounding side brush 12, Figure 2), wherein the brushroll cover defines at least one edge (shown in attached Figure 2 below) of the edge cleaning aperture (aperture below side brush 12, Figure 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
662
1157
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Huang discloses substantially all the limitations of the claim(s), including a brushroll cover, labeled in attached Figure 2 above, that has an underside that is adjacent the main brushroll that at least partially covers a portion of the main brushroll cavity 105 and at least one edge of the edge cleaning aperture surrounding the side brush 12 as shown in Figure 2 above. Huang does not disclose that the identified brushroll cover is removable. The reference Xu et al. discloses a cleaning head 700 that includes an external brushroll cover 722 that allows it to be opened by the user to allow the brushes to be removed vertically from the top of the device as shown in Figures 7A and 7B. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Huang device to make the brushroll cover, as shaded in Figure 2 above, be pivotably removable by adding a pivotally hinged joint with the motivation taught by Xu et al. to allow for quick and easy removal of the brush for cleaning or replacement.
Regarding Claim 10, Huang in view of Xu et al. teaches:
10. The floor cleaning nozzle of claim 9, wherein the brushroll cover (labeled in attached Figure 2 below) comprises at least one of an upper wall (labeled in attached Figure 2 below) and a front wall (labeled in attached Figure 2 below) extending from the first side (side nearest side brush 12 shown in Figure 2) of the nozzle housing (base shell 10) to cover at least one of an upper portion (shown in attached Figure 2 below) and a front portion (shown in attached Figure 2 below) of the edge brushroll (side brush 12).
PNG
media_image2.png
662
1157
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 11, Huang in view of Xu et al. teaches:
11. The floor cleaning nozzle of claim 9, comprising a carrier (bushing – as taught by Xu et al.) coupled with a non-rotatable portion of the main brushroll (portion of end cap – as taught by Xu et al.), wherein the carrier is removably mounted (through bushing connection to end cap – as taught by Xu et al.) to the nozzle housing (base shell 10), the brushroll cover (labeled in attached Figure 2 above) is removably mounted (as discussed in Claim 9) to the carrier (bushing and end cap – as taught by Xu et al. is removable from cover and housing of suction nozzle), and the carrier is disposed between (when bushing is mounted on shaft as shown in Figure 3) the main brushroll (main brush roller 11) and the edge brushroll (side brush 12).
Regarding Claim 12, Huang in view of Xu et al. teaches:
12. The floor cleaning nozzle of claim 9, wherein the brushroll cover (labeled in attached Figure 2 below) comprises a sidewall (labeled in attached Figure 2 below) extending downwardly along a portion of the edge brushroll (side brush 12) to cover an upper portion (labeled in attached Figure 2 below) of the edge brushroll and leave a lower portion of the edge brushroll exposed (shown in attached Figure 2 below), wherein the sidewall defines the at least one edge of the edge cleaning aperture (shown in attached Figure 2 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
668
1157
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 13, Huang in view of Xu et al. teaches:
13. The floor cleaning nozzle of claim 12, wherein the edge brushroll (side brush 12) comprises a first end face (end face of bristle bundle labeled in attached Figure 2 below) corresponding to the sidewall of the brushroll cover (labeled in attached Figure 2 below – during rotation end face is nearly adjacent the inside surface of sidewall) and a second end face (labeled in attached Figure 2 below) corresponding to the first end (end nearest side brush 12 shown in Figure 2) of the main brushroll (main brush roller 11), wherein 50% or less of the first end face is covered by the sidewall of the brushroll cover (0% of selected first end face shown in attached Figure 2 below) and 50% or more of the first end face is exposed via the edge cleaning aperture (100% of selected first end face shown in attached Figure 2 below).
PNG
media_image4.png
662
1157
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found in form PTO-892 Notice of References Cited. Specifically, the prior art references include pertinent disclosures of floor cleaners with side brushes.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARC CARLSON whose telephone number is (571)272-9963. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:30am-3:30pm.
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, BRIAN KELLER can be reached on (571) 272-8548. 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.
/MARC CARLSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723
Prosecution Insights