DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to applicant’s communication filed 07/07/2026.
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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-8 are cancelled.
Claims 9-16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the prior art have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on Page 7 that Demachi teaches “a system that relied on direct measurement of system variables, including flow-rate sensors (see e.g. paragraphs [0066] and [0085]), and uses modeling to evaluate energy efficiency based on these measured parameters.” Applicant assert that this is different from the instant invention, which uses simulation to determine energy flow information based on sensor data, thereby determining energy flow without direct measurement of such quantities via energy flow sensors. Applicant concludes that Demachi fails to teach the amended limitation. The examiner respectfully disagrees.
First, the argument itself is contradictory. The applicant summarizes Demachi as teaching modeling energy efficiency based on measured parameters and then states the instant invention “uses simulation to determine energy flow information based on sensor data”. So the instant invention also involves a computed (i.e. via simulation or modeling) energy flow based on other measured values (i.e. sensor data). There does not appear to be a distinction. Demachi’s “modeling energy efficiency” involves simulated energy inflow, outflow, and consumption, as will be discussed later.
Second, the measured sensor data taught by Demachi that is relevant to the “heated medium” (i.e. steam) includes quantities such as temperature, pressure, and flow rate of a fluid (i.e. the steam), not energy flow rate. Demachi does not teach using an energy flow sensor for measurement of the energy consumption or energy flow corresponding to the heated medium being input into the turbine (se Fig. 3); rather, energy flow information is determined via modeling and simulation using other sensor data that measures the properties of the heated medium. See the appropriate teachings of Demachi below:
“The field apparatuses may employ, for example, a sensor apparatus such as a flowmeter or a temperature sensor, a valve apparatus such as a flow control valve or a switch valve, an actuator apparatus such as a fan or a motor, an imaging apparatus such as a camera or a video camera imaging a situation in the plant or a target object, an acoustic apparatus such as a microphone collecting abnormal noise or a speaker generating an alarming sound, a position detection apparatus which outputs position information of each apparatus, and other apparatuses.” Paragraph 50
“There is a case where the necessary amount of supplied fuels changes depending on the heat quantity of the fuel, or there is a case where the necessary heating amount changes depending on the temperature of water. Thus, the sensor group 200 collects various information pieces as the information which is input to the thermal power generation apparatus 100A. The information regarding power output from the thermal power generation apparatus 100A includes an amount (W) of generated power. The information regarding steam causing energy consumption inside the thermal power generation apparatus 100A includes the temperature and pressure of steam, and the flow rate of steam supplied to the turbine 120.” Paragraph 66
“The information regarding performance related to energy efficiency of a constituent element of the production apparatus 100 includes, for example, information indicating a relationship between the flow rate of a fuel supplied from the fuel pump 140 and the power required to supply the flow rate, and information indicating the relationship between the amount of steam supplied to the turbine 120 and the amount of power generated thereby.” Paragraph 85
Finally, Demachi teaches the amended limitation, “and wherein the computer device is configured to determine, based on the simulation, at least one of (i) an energy inflow and (ii) energy outflow of the heated medium without use of an energy flow sensor.” See the relevant citations below:
“A modeling unit 500b shown in FIG. 9 shows an example in which a substance flow and an energy flow of the production apparatus 100 are modeled using the configuration of the modeling unit 500a shown in FIG. 6.” Paragraph 88
“For example, in a case of the thermal power generation apparatus 100A shown in FIG. 2, assuming that a specific condition (for example, the temperature of water) of the thermal power generation apparatus 100A is set to a constant value, the amount of fuel or the amount of input power required to obtain expected output power can be computed on the basis of performance characteristics of a constituent element (for example, the boiler 110 or the turbine 120) of the apparatus.” Paragraph 164
“in order to measure and monitor energy efficiency, it is necessary to understand both of a substance flow and an energy flow along with conversion therebetween. The energy management system 1 according to the present embodiment can understand the balance of energy in a wider range so as to treat a substance flow and an energy flow in a unified manner (for example, refer to the second example of a modeling unit shown in FIG. 9)” Paragraph 169
“The energy management system 1 according to the present embodiment can convert a raw material into energy using unit apparent energy delivered from an output attribute of a modeling unit in an upstream step to an input attribute of a modeling unit in a downstream step with respect to an attribute related to a substance flow (raw material)” Paragraph 171
Energy input and output values are modeled, or simulated, without use of an energy flow sensor. Demachi does not teach a hardware energy flow sensor for determining the energy inflow, outflow, and consumption values (See Fig. 9 elements 512, 522, and 532).
Since Demachi is being relied upon to teach the new amendments to the claims, applicant’s arguments regarding the other prior art are respectfully moot.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DEMACHI (US 2017/0256986 A1).
Regarding Claim 17, DEMACHI teaches a method for determining energy consumption of an installation having a heating system, the method comprising: (¶ 67, Figs. 1-2, 5, 9: Energy usage of an installation having a heating system, such as a boiler, is simulated to optimize energy efficiency.)
transmitting data from at least one of (i) at least one supply system sensor and (ii) at least one discharge system sensor to a computer device; (¶ 66, 85: Sensors located on a thermal power generation apparatus transmit temperature, pressure, and flow rate information. This includes at least one sensor that measures data related to the water input into a boiler and the steam output from the boiler and supplied to a turbine.)
performing at least one of a simulation of an energy inflow generated by an inflow of a heated medium to the device or component and a simulation of an energy outflow generated by an outflow of the medium from the device or component; (¶ 66-67, 88-89, 147, 164-165, 169, Fig. 9, 14: The installation, such as the system shown in Fig. 2, is modeled (See Figs. 5, 9, 12) in order to simulate the energy inflow, the energy outflow, and the energy consumption associated with each component and the substance, such as steam, flowing through the component.)
and ascertaining at least one of (i) energy inflow information, (ii) energy outflow information and (ii) energy consumption information. (¶ 88-89, 164,169, 176, Fig. 9, 14: Energy inflow, energy outflow, and energy consumption are ascertained by the modeling units as shown in Figs. 9 and 14 in order to determine the energy efficiency of a component or the system.)
wherein the simulation determines at least one of (i) an energy inflow and (ii) energy outflow of the heated medium without use of an energy flow sensor. (¶ 88-90, 164, 169, 171, Fig. 9: Energy inflow and outflow of a component of a system, such as the steam being provided to the turbine in the example of Fig. 3 are modeled (see Fig. 9 elements 512 and 522). An energy flow sensor is not used, rather energy flow and consumption values are computed based on other factors, such as temperature and amount of steam, as discussed in ¶ 66 and 85.)
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DEMACHI (US 2017/0256986 A1) in view of BONCOMPAGNE (US 2019/0030847 A1).
Regarding Claim 18, DEMACHI teaches all the limitations of claim 17, on which claim 18 depends.
DEMACHI further teaches wherein at least one of (i) the energy inflow information, (ii) the energy outflow information and (iii) the energy consumption information… influence the control of the installation or the heating system. (¶ 159, 176: The energy inflow, outflow, and consumption is used to determine an operation mode that would result in optimization of energy efficiency through control of the operation mode. However, it does not teach actually controlling the operation mode.)
DEMACHI does not teach that the energy information is transmitted to a control device for at least one of the installation and the heating system to actuate the control of the operation mode.
However, BONCOMPAGNE, which is directed to a tire vulcanization system with a controller that ascertains energy flow information, teaches that the energy information is transmitted to a control device for at least one of the installation and the heating system to influence the control of the installation or the heating system (¶ 12-13, 33, 40-48: Energy input and loss information (i.e. energy flow) is ascertained based on the temperature of a heated medium in a tire vulcanization process, and the energy flow information is provided to a controller to determine an adjustment of the amount of energy to deliver to the vulcanization device for heating the heated medium.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one
of ordinary skill in the art to modify the simulation of a heating system taught by DEMACHI by applying it to a tire vulcanization system including a controller for adjusting the energy output for heating the heated medium as taught by BONCOMPAGNE. Since the references are similarly directed to determining a relationship between fluid attributes and energy flow and BONCOMPAGNE at least suggests using a model or simulator for the power adjustment (¶ 48), the combination would have yielded predictable results. BONCOMPAGNE (¶ 12-13) also teaches that energy flow is evaluated in order to ensure proper thermal transfer between the heated medium and the tire mold, so a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to apply the simulation techniques taught by DEMACHI to ensure efficiency in the energy input, output, and consumption of the system.
Claims 9, 11, 13, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MIZUTA (US 2013/0062803 A1) in view of DEMACHI (US 2017/0256986 A1).
Regarding Claim 9, MIZUTA teaches a system having an installation, the installation comprising: a heating system; and a device or component; wherein the system is configured to heat the device or component via a heated medium transported within the heating system; (¶ 18-20, Fig. 1: Disclosed is an installation 1 for a tire vulcanization system having a heating system 20 including a heater 52 that heats a heated medium (i.e. a gas) that is supplied to a vulcanization device 10 of the installation for curing a tire. The heated medium is transported through the system via pipes, including an inlet pipe 12 and outlet pipe 13.)
wherein the heating system comprises a supply system within which the heated medium is supplied to the device or component; wherein the supply system comprises at least one supply system sensor; (¶ 19, 23-24, 51, 53-54, Fig. 1: The supply system includes a series of pipes and includes a plurality of sensors, including a pressure sensor near the inlet into the vulcanization device and a pressure and temperature sensor near the heater, the value measured by the temperature sensor at the heater being substantially equal to the temperature at the inlet.)
wherein the heating system further comprises a discharge system within which the medium is discharged from the device or component; wherein the discharge system comprises at least one discharge system sensor; (¶ 19, 23-24, 52, 77: The discharge system includes a series of pipes and includes at least one discharge system sensor, namely a temperature sensor near the outlet that discharges the gas from the vulcanization device.)
wherein the system further comprises a computer device which is configured… (¶ 56, 78: A controller controls the rotation speed of the heated medium circulation device based on readings from the outlet sensor.)
MIZUTA does not teach that the computer device is configured to simulate the heating system using data from at least one of the at least one supply system sensor and the at least one discharge system sensor, wherein the computer device is configured to ascertain at least one of (i) energy inflow information, (ii) energy outflow information and (iii) energy consumption information; and wherein the computer device is configured to determine, based on the simulation, at least one of (i) an energy inflow and (ii) energy outflow of the heated medium without use of an energy flow sensor.
However, DEMACHI, which is similarly directed to managing energy of a heating system, teaches a computer device which is configured to simulate the heating system using data from at least one of the at least one supply system sensor and the at least one discharge system sensor, (¶ 66, 85: Sensors located on a thermal power generation apparatus transmit temperature, pressure, and flow rate information to a computer device for simulating the system (see Figs. 5-6 “virtual production apparatus 100X” receiving data from “production apparatus 100”, ¶ 71, 76). This includes at least one sensor that measures data related to the water input into a boiler and the steam output from the boiler that is supplied to a turbine (i.e. a supply or a discharge sensor).)
wherein the computer device is configured to ascertain at least one of (i) energy inflow information, (ii) energy outflow information and (iii) energy consumption information. (¶ 66-67, 88-89, 147, 164-165,169, 176, Fig. 9, 14: Energy inflow, energy outflow, and energy consumption are ascertained by the modeling unit as shown in Figs. 9 and 14 in order to determine the energy efficiency of a component or multiple components of the system.)
and wherein the computer device is configured to determine, based on the simulation, at least one of (i) an energy inflow and (ii) energy outflow of the heated medium without use of an energy flow sensor. (¶ 88-90, 164, 169, 171, Fig. 9: Energy inflow and outflow of a component of a system, such as the steam being provided to the turbine in the example of Fig. 3, are modeled (see Fig. 9 elements 512 and 522). An energy flow sensor is not used, rather energy flow and consumption values are computed based on other factors, such as temperature and amount of steam, as discussed in ¶ 66 and 85.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one
of ordinary skill in the art to modify the installation including a heating system for a tire curing process taught by MIZUTA by including a computer simulation of the energy flow information within the installation in order to optimize energy efficiency as taught by DEMACHI. Such a combination would have amounted to creating a model of the constituent components of the tire curing process, which would have been a reasonable adjustment for a person of ordinary skill in the art as taught by DEMACHI (¶ 163, 165). As suggested by DEMACHI (¶ 7, 29), simulation of a production apparatus in this way would allow to optimize the energy usage even for complex production environments. Incorporation of a simulation for optimizing energy efficiency would also address the problem of reducing energy consumption common to tire vulcanization processes, as indicated by MIZUTA (¶ 6, 12).
Regarding Claim 11, MIZUTA in view of DEMACHI further teaches wherein the computer device at least one of (i) comprises a digital twin of the installation or the heating system and (ii) is configured to simulate the installation or the heating system. (DEMACHI, ¶ 71, 161, 164-166, Fig. 5: The “virtual production apparatus” 100X is a digital twin of “production apparatus” 100. Using the digital twin, the energy management system (i.e. a computer) simulates the installation (a production apparatus) to optimize the energy efficiency of the installation.)
The same motivation to combine discussed in the rejection of claim 9 applies to claim 11.
Regarding Claim 13, MIZUTA in view of DEMACHI further teaches wherein at least one of (i) the digital twin and (ii) the simulation of the installation or the heating system comprises a virtual energy flow sensor; and wherein at least one of the digital twin and the simulation of the installation or the heating system is configured to simulate an energy flow. (DEMACHI, ¶ 88-90, 120, 122, 128-129, 134-135, 147-148, Figs.12-14: The simulation of the heating system includes virtual models of the components of the production system. These include virtual input and output models of both the flow of the substance and the flow of energy from one component to another, which are equivalent to “virtual energy flow sensors”. For example, in Fig. 13, an “apparent energy” of an input model is equivalent to a virtual energy flow sensor. The “input attribute of energy” and the “output attribute of energy” in Fig. 12 are also virtual energy flow sensors. An energy flow of the system, including an energy consumption, is simulated based on the models of the components of the system.)
The same motivation to combine discussed in the rejection of claim 9 applies to claim 13.
Regarding Claim 15, MIZUTA in view of DEMACHI further teaches wherein the installation is configured as a tire curing press, a brewery or a brewing kettle. (MIZUTA, ¶ 18-20: The installation is a system for tire curing.)
Regarding Claim 16, MIZUTA in view of DEMACHI further teaches wherein the heated medium comprises heated water or steam. (MIZUTA, ¶ 4, 6, 93: While MIZUTA teaches using an inert gas like nitrogen as the heated medium because it is more energy efficient (see ¶ 10, 17), use of steam is conventional as taught by MIZUTA and therefore would have been an obvious substitute to a person of ordinary skill in the art. DEMACHI also teaches that the heated medium used in a production system includes heated water or steam (see Fig. 2) and is concerned with monitoring the energy efficiency as the steam flows through the installation.)
Claims 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MIZUTA (US 2013/0062803 A1) in view of DEMACHI (US 2017/0256986 A1) and further in view of FUJIWARA (US 2017/0153023 A1).
Regarding Claim 10, MIZUTA in view of DEMACHI teaches all the limitations of claim 9, on which claim 10 depends.
MIZUTA further teaches wherein the at least one supply system sensor comprises at least one of (i) a supply temperature sensor and (ii) a supply pressure sensor… (¶ 19, 23-24, 51, 53-54, Fig. 1: The supply system includes a plurality of sensors, including a pressure sensor near the inlet into the vulcanization device and a pressure and temperature sensor near the heater on the supply side.)
MIZUTA in view of DEMACHI further teaches wherein the computer device is configured to ascertain at least one of (i) the energy inflow information, (ii) the energy outflow information and (iii) the energy consumption information utilizing at least one of data of the supply temperature sensor, the supply pressure sensor and the discharge pressure sensor. (¶ 66-67, 85, 88-89, 147, 164-165,169, 176, Fig. 9, 14: Energy inflow, energy outflow, and energy consumption are ascertained by the modeling units as shown in Figs. 9 and 14 in order to determine the energy efficiency of a component or multiple components of a production apparatus, such as the boiler system for a steam turbine shown in Fig. 2. The modeling units receive data from sensors 200 located in the production apparatus (see Fig. 1), and in view of MIZUTA these would be the supply and/or discharge sensors of a heating system.)
The same motivation to combine discussed in the rejection of claim 9 applies to claim 10.
MIZUTA in view of DEMACHI due not explicitly teach and the at least one discharge system sensor comprises a discharge pressure sensor;
However, FUJIWARA, which is directed to simulating energy balance information for a steam utilization facility, teaches and the at least one discharge system sensor comprises a discharge pressure sensor; (¶ 74: Data from various detectors at different points in the facility are transmitted to a computer that runs a simulation of the energy balance for the installation. See ¶ 99, 116, 122, 165, Fig. 5: The detectors include temperature and pressure sensors at supply system and discharge system ends of components of the facility. A pressure sensor 64 is included on a steam exit path of the heating system, which is a discharge pressure sensor.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one
of ordinary skill in the art to modify the tire curing system including a heating system and a simulation of the heating system or installation taught by the combination of MIZUTA and DEMACHI by including a discharge pressure sensor as taught by FUJIWARA. Since FUJIWARA is similarly directed to simulation of a heating system based on measurements from a plurality of sensors, the combination would have yielded predictable results. FUJIWARA (¶ 176) teaches the pressure sensors would be used to determine the efficiency of the component and to determine a cause in a decrease in flow rate, which would have been advantageous to a person of ordinary skill in the art concerned with monitoring the energy usage of any type of heating system. FUJIWARA (¶ 2, 19, 24-26) also teaches such a feature would aide in monitoring components of the facility and optimization of the steam utilization facility, including balancing between required heat and electric power.
Regarding Claim 12, MIZUTA in view of DEMACHI and FUJIWARA further teaches wherein the computer device at least one of (i) comprises a digital twin of the installation or the heating system and (ii) is configured to simulate the installation or the heating system. (DEMACHI, ¶ 71, 161, 164-166, Fig. 5: The “virtual production apparatus” 100X is a digital twin of “production apparatus” 100. Using the digital twin, the energy management system (i.e. a computer) simulates the installation (a production apparatus) to optimize the energy efficiency of the installation.)
The same motivation to combine discussed in the rejection of claim 9 applies to claim 12.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MIZUTA (US 2013/0062803 A1) in view of DEMACHI (US 2017/0256986 A1) and further in view of BONCOMPAGNE (US 2019/0030847 A1).
Regarding Claim 14, MIZUTA in view of DEMACHI teaches all the limitations of claim 9, on which claim 14 depends.
MIZUTA further teaches wherein at least one of (i) the system, (ii) the installation and (iii) the heating system comprises a control device, (¶ 56, 78: A controller controls the rotation speed of the heated medium circulation device based on readings from the outlet sensor.)
While DEMACHI teaches ascertaining the energy flow information to determine an operating mode for the heating system (¶ 159, 176: The energy inflow, outflow, and consumption is used to determine an operation mode that would result in optimization of energy efficiency through control of the operation mode. However, it does not teach actually controlling the operation mode.), MIZUTA in view of DEMACHI does not explicitly teach and the computer device is configured to transmit at least one of the energy inflow information, the energy outflow information and the energy consumption information to the control device; and wherein the control device is configured to take into account at least one of (i) the energy inflow information, (ii) the energy outflow information and (iii) the energy consumption information during the control of the installation or the heating system.
However, BONCOMPAGNE, which is directed to a tire vulcanization system with a controller that ascertains energy flow information, teaches and the computer device is configured to transmit at least one of the energy inflow information, the energy outflow information and the energy consumption information to the control device; and wherein the control device is configured to take into account at least one of (i) the energy inflow information, (ii) the energy outflow information and (iii) the energy consumption information during the control of the installation or the heating system. (¶ 12-13, 33, 40-48: Energy input and loss information (i.e. energy flow) is ascertained based on the temperature of a heated medium in a tire vulcanization process, and the energy flow information is provided to a controller to determine an adjustment of the amount of energy to deliver to the vulcanization device for heating the heated medium.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one
of ordinary skill in the art to modify the simulation of a heating system taught by MIZUTA and DEMACHI by outputting the results of the simulation to a controller for adjusting the energy output for heating the heated medium as taught by BONCOMPAGNE. Since the references are similarly directed to determining a relationship between fluid attributes and energy flow and BONCOMPAGNE at least suggests using a model or simulator for the power adjustment of the vulcanization process (¶ 48), the combination would have yielded predictable results. BONCOMPAGNE (¶ 12-13) also teaches that energy flow is evaluated in order to ensure proper thermal transfer between the heated medium and the tire mold, so a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to apply the simulation techniques taught by DEMACHI to ensure efficiency in the energy input, output, and consumption of the system.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Fjalestad (US 2018/0252566 A1) teaches calculation of values related to an electric pump, such as power and flow rate, based on measured pressure and temperature values. (¶ 15, 35, claim 22)
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAMI RAFAT OKASHA whose telephone number is (571)272-0675. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6 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, SCOTT BADERMAN can be reached at (571) 272-3644. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/RAMI R OKASHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118
Prosecution Insights