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 .
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.
FINAL ACTION
This action is in response to applicant’s claim amendment(s) submitted on 07/23/2026. Claims 1 and 10 are amended. Claims 1-10, 12 and 13 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Examiner Remarks – 35 USC § 103 - Independent claims 1 and 10
The examiner notes that the applicant has amended each independent claim to include the new feature(s) of, “wherein the link information comprises information regarding currentness of data relating the digital model”. The examiner introduces the teachings of prior art reference Miller (EP3971666) to the record in view of the claim amendment(s). The examiner notes that Miller teaches link information pertaining to a digital model. See rejection below.
Examiner Remarks – 35 USC § 103 - Dependent claims 2-9, 12 and 13
Applicant's arguments do not comply with 37 CFR 1.111(c) because they do not clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Further, they do not show how the amendments avoid such references or objections.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The examiner contends that the metes and bound of applicant's claim limitation(s) elements of, "currentness", cannot be readily determined. The examiner notes that the claim language of, "currentness", creates uncertainty about what is being claimed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 2 and 4-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of Rakshit (US Patent Publication No. 2021/0149380) in view of Garvey et al. (US Patent No. 11,079,748 and Garvey hereinafter) and further in view of Scott Miller (EP3971666 and Miller hereinafter).
As to claim 1, Rakshit teaches a method of an automation system, the method comprising:
querying a physical component with a piece of link information referring to a digital model of the physical component in a digital twin of the physical component (i.e. …teaches in par. 0003 the following: “a part assembly system is provided, comprising a processor configured to receive digital twin instance part assembly information (IPAD) from a sensor scan of a physical part assembly produced by assembling a first physical part with a second physical part.” …teaches in par. 0084 the following: “The system associated with the digital twin model may identify how the six machine parts are physically assembled, and, based on that, how the remaining fourteen machine parts will be assembled. The physical machine parts may have an identifying feature, such as an RFID tag and IoT sensors. This may allow physical twins to be identified uniquely.” …teaches in par. 0093 the following: “Such a scanner may can barcode, QR, or other identifying labels that may be present on a part (although it is possible through image recognition that the part may be identified by its shape in the image)”.).
The system of Rakshit does not expressly teach:
assigning the digital model to the physical component based on the link information,
wherein the link information comprises information regarding currentness of data relating the digital model.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference Garvey.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “assigning the digital model to the physical component based on the link information”, Garvey teaches in col. 17 lines 1-10 the following: “For example, each part may be marked with a machine-readable code (e.g. a QR code) that can be scanned by a user's personal device and submitted to a website, which identifies, retrieves, and delivers the part's corresponding digital twin 324 for use by the owner. Other techniques for associating an as-built digital twin 324 with its corresponding physical part are also within the scope of one or more embodiments of this disclosure.”. Teaches in col. 17 lines 25-35 the following: “As such, each manufactured instance of Part #1, Part #2, and Part #3 has an associated as-built digital twin 324 that models the part's measured as-built dimensions and geometry, and may include other metadata for the part (e.g., manufacturing history, performance test results, etc.).”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to implement the teachings of Rakshit with the teachings of Garvey by having their system comprise an enhanced digital twinning process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide simple and effective means to model physical components, wherein the enhanced digital twinning process helps facilitate proper control and makes it easier to configure a digital model.
The system of Rakshit and Garvery does not expressly teach:
wherein the link information comprises information regarding currentness of data relating the digital model,
receiving with the digital model data relating to the industrial environment to which the physical component is exposed,
and generating with the digital model, and based in part on the data relating to the industrial environment to which the physical component is exposed, a digital representation of a workpiece manufactured by the physical component.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference Miller.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “wherein the link information comprises information regarding currentness of data relating the digital model”, teaches in par. 0158 the following: “FIG. 31 is a diagram illustrating selection and integration of an asset model 312 based on machine identity. In this example, machine 2704 includes an optical code (e.g., two-dimensional barcode such as a QR code) representing a unique machine identifier that can be scanned by a user's client device 3102. The client device 3102 can then interface with the IIH system 2402 (via user interface component 2404) and submit the scanned machine identifier 3104 together with suitable credentials 3106 identifying the user of the client device 3102 as an authorized person with permission to modify the virtualized plant 1802. In response to receipt of the machine identifier 3104 and credentials 3106, the modeling component 2406 can retrieve an asset model 312 corresponding to the machine identifier 3104 from the appropriate library (e.g., from the vendor repository 326 corresponding to the maker of the machine) and integrate the retrieved model 312 into the customer's larger virtualized plant 1802.”. The examiner notes that currentness is representative of the data in the IIH system 2402.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation(s), “receiving with the digital model data relating to the industrial environment to which the physical component is exposed”, teaches par. 0068 the following: :”This allows the control project 306 to be pre-tested prior to execution on a physical machine. FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating simulation of a control project 306 by the IDH repository system 202. In this example, the repository system's emulation component 216 acts as an industrial controller emulator to execute control programming defined as part of the control project 306 against digital twin 810 or other type of virtualization of the automation system for which the control project 306 is being developed and tested. In some embodiments, the simulation component 218, which builds and simulates the digital twin 810, can create the digital twin 810 based in part on the asset models 312 representing industrial devices or assets that make up the automation system.”.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation(s), “and generating with the digital model, and based in part on the data relating to the industrial environment to which the physical component is exposed, a digital representation of a workpiece manufactured by the physical component”, teaches par. 0068 the following: :”This allows the control project 306 to be pre-tested prior to execution on a physical machine. FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating simulation of a control project 306 by the IDH repository system 202. In this example, the repository system's emulation component 216 acts as an industrial controller emulator to execute control programming defined as part of the control project 306 against digital twin 810 or other type of virtualization of the automation system for which the control project 306 is being developed and tested. In some embodiments, the simulation component 218, which builds and simulates the digital twin 810, can create the digital twin 810 based in part on the asset models 312 representing industrial devices or assets that make up the automation system.”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to implement the teachings of Rakshit and Garvey with the teachings of Miller by having their system comprise an enhanced digital modeling process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to track the manufacturing of physical components, wherein the enhanced digital modeling process helps facilitate proper component analytics and makes it easier to digitally represent a physical manufactured component.
As to claim 2, the system of Rakshit, Garvey and Miller as applied to claim 1 above teaches generating digital twins, specifically Rakshit does not expressly teach a method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the link information includes an optically readable code.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference Garvey.
Garvey teaches in col. 17 lines 1-10 the following: “For example, each part may be marked with a machine-readable code (e.g. a QR code) that can be scanned by a user's personal device and submitted to a website, which identifies, retrieves, and delivers the part's corresponding digital twin 324 for use by the owner. Other techniques for associating an as-built digital twin 324 with its corresponding physical part are also within the scope of one or more embodiments of this disclosure.”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to implement the teachings of Rakshit with the teachings of Garvey by having their system comprise an enhanced digital twinning process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide simple and effective means to model physical components, wherein the enhanced digital twinning process helps facilitate proper control and makes it easier to configure a digital model.
As to claim 4, the system of Rakshit, Garvey and Miller as applied to claim 4 above teaches generating digital twins, specifically Rakshit does not expressly teach a method as claimed claim 4, wherein the link information comprises a contactlessly readable data carrier.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference Garvey.
Garvey teaches in col. 17 lines 1-10 the following: “For example, each part may be marked with a machine-readable code (e.g. a QR code) that can be scanned by a user's personal device and submitted to a website, which identifies, retrieves, and delivers the part's corresponding digital twin 324 for use by the owner. Other techniques for associating an as-built digital twin 324 with its corresponding physical part are also within the scope of one or more embodiments of this disclosure.”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to implement the teachings of Rakshit with the teachings of Garvey by having their system comprise an enhanced digital twinning process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide simple and effective means to model physical components, wherein the enhanced digital twinning process helps facilitate proper control and makes it easier to configure a digital model.
As to claim 5, the system of Rakshit, Garvey and Miller as applied to claim 1 above teaches generating digital twins, specifically Rakshit does not expressly teach a method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the link information comprises a URL and/or a link.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference Garvey.
Garvey teaches in col. 17 lines 1-10 the following: “For example, each part may be marked with a machine-readable code (e.g. a QR code) that can be scanned by a user's personal device and submitted to a website, which identifies, retrieves, and delivers the part's corresponding digital twin 324 for use by the owner. Other techniques for associating an as-built digital twin 324 with its corresponding physical part are also within the scope of one or more embodiments of this disclosure.”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to implement the teachings of Rakshit with the teachings of Garvey by having their system comprise an enhanced digital twinning process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide simple and effective means to model physical components, wherein the enhanced digital twinning process helps facilitate proper control and makes it easier to configure a digital model.
As to claim 6, the system of Rakshit, Garvey and Miller as applied to claim 1 above teaches generating digital twins, specifically Rakshit does not expressly teach a method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the link information comprises information about a category of data relating to the digital model and/or another property of data relating to the digital model.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference Garvey.
Garvey teaches in col. 17 lines 1-10 the following: “Teaches in col. 17 lines 25-35 the following: “As such, each manufactured instance of Part #1, Part #2, and Part #3 has an associated as-built digital twin 324 that models the part's measured as-built dimensions and geometry, and may include other metadata for the part (e.g., manufacturing history, performance test results, etc.).”. Garvey teaches in col. 17 lines 1-10 the following: “For example, each part may be marked with a machine-readable code (e.g. a QR code) that can be scanned by a user's personal device and submitted to a website, which identifies, retrieves, and delivers the part's corresponding digital twin 324 for use by the owner.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to implement the teachings of Rakshit with the teachings of Garvey by having their system comprise an enhanced digital twinning process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide simple and effective means to model physical components, wherein the enhanced digital twinning process helps facilitate proper control and makes it easier to configure a digital model.
As to claim 7, the system of Rakshit, Garvey and Miller as applied to claim 1 above teaches generating digital twins, specifically Rakshit does not expressly teach a method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the physical component checks properties of the digital model and/or of data processed by the digital model for consistency with predefined properties.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference Garvey.
Garvey teaches in col. 17 lines 1-10 the following: “Teaches in col. 17 lines 25-35 the following: “… digital twin 324 that models the part's measured as-built dimensions and geometry, and may include other metadata for the part (e.g., manufacturing history, performance test results, etc.).”. Garvey teaches in col. 10 lines 55-65 the following: “The part model 702 is then compared with the as-designed digital model 322 to determine a degree of fidelity between the simulated part model 702 and the digital model 322”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to implement the teachings of Rakshit with the teachings of Garvey by having their system comprise an enhanced digital twinning process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide simple and effective means to model physical components, wherein the enhanced digital twinning process helps facilitate proper control and makes it easier to configure a digital model.
As to claim 8, the system of Rakshit, Garvey and Miller as applied to claim 1 above teaches generating digital twins, specifically Rakshit does not expressly teach a method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the link information is valid for a limited time.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference Garvey.
Garvey teaches in col. 10 lines 55-65 the following: “…determine a degree of fidelity between the simulated part model 702 and the digital model 322”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to implement the teachings of Rakshit with the teachings of Garvey by having their system comprise an enhanced digital twinning process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide simple and effective means to model physical components, wherein the enhanced digital twinning process helps facilitate proper control and makes it easier to configure a digital model.
As to claim 9, the system of Rakshit, Garvey and Miller as applied to claim 1 above teaches generating digital twins, specifically Rakshit does not expressly teach a method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the link information refers to two digital models of the physical component.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference Garvey.
Garvey teaches in col. 17 lines 1-10 the following: “Teaches in col. 17 lines 25-35 the following: “As such, each manufactured instance of Part #1, Part #2, and Part #3 has an associated as-built digital twin …”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to implement the teachings of Rakshit with the teachings of Garvey by having their system comprise an enhanced digital twinning process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to model physical components, wherein the enhanced digital twinning process helps facilitate proper control and makes it easier to configure a digital model.
Claim(s) 3 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rakshit and Garvery in view of Miller as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of McKenzie et al. (US Patent Publication No. 2021/0248653 and McKenzie hereinafter).
As to claim 3, the system of Rakshit, Garvey and Miller as applied to claim 1 above teaches generating digital twins, specifically neither reference expressly teaches a method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the link information is cryptographically protected and is verifiable by a cryptographic device key or device certificate associated with the physical component.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference McKenzie.
McKenzie teaches in par. 0020 the following: “The product authentication system enables users to rely on product authentications via off-channel sales with the use of cryptography, blockchain, digital assets, and tagging hardware and software such as Near Field Communication (NFC) or other technologies that supports the need to define a digital twin of a physical product”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to implement the teachings of Rakshit, Garvey and Miller with the teachings of McKenzie by having their system comprise an enhanced data protection process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to ensure data security, wherein the enhanced data protection process helps facilitate proper communication integrity and makes it easier to configure data security.
Claim(s) 10, 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over in view of Garvey in view of Miller.
As to claim 10, Garvey teaches an automation system including:
a physical component and wherein the physical component including a piece of link information referring to a digital model of the physical component (i.e., …teaches in col. 17 lines 1-10 the following: “For example, each part may be marked with a machine-readable code (e.g. a QR code) that can be scanned by a user's personal device and submitted to a website, which identifies, retrieves, and delivers the part's corresponding digital twin 324 for use by the owner. Other techniques for associating an as-built digital twin 324 with its corresponding physical part are also within the scope of one or more embodiments of this disclosure.”. Teaches in col. 17 lines 25-35 the following: “As such, each manufactured instance of Part #1, Part #2, and Part #3 has an associated as-built digital twin 324 that models the part's measured as-built dimensions and geometry, and may include other metadata for the part (e.g., manufacturing history, performance test results, etc.)),
and an interface to the digital model of the physical component (i.e., …teaches in col. 17 lines 1-10 the following: “For example, each part may be marked with a machine-readable code (e.g. a QR code) that can be scanned by a user's personal device and submitted to a website, which identifies, retrieves, and delivers the part's corresponding digital twin 324 for use by the owner. Other techniques for associating an as-built digital twin 324 with its corresponding physical part are also within the scope of one or more embodiments of this disclosure.”. Teaches in col. 17 lines 25-35 the following: “As such, each manufactured instance of Part #1, Part #2, and Part #3 has an associated as-built digital twin 324 that models the part's measured as-built dimensions and geometry, and may include other metadata for the part (e.g., manufacturing history, performance test results, etc.)),
a controller configured to assign the digital model to the physical component based on the link information (i.e., …teaches in col. 17 lines 1-10 the following: “For example, each part may be marked with a machine-readable code (e.g. a QR code) that can be scanned by a user's personal device and submitted to a website, which identifies, retrieves, and delivers the part's corresponding digital twin 324 for use by the owner. Other techniques for associating an as-built digital twin 324 with its corresponding physical part are also within the scope of one or more embodiments of this disclosure.”. Teaches in col. 17 lines 25-35 the following: “As such, each manufactured instance of Part #1, Part #2, and Part #3 has an associated as-built digital twin 324 that models the part's measured as-built dimensions and geometry, and may include other metadata for the part (e.g., manufacturing history, performance test results, etc.)).
The system of Garvey does not expressly teach:
wherein the link information comprises information regarding currentness of data relating the digital model,
wherein the digital model is configured to: receive data relating to the industrial environment to which the physical component is exposed,
and generating with the digital model, and based in part on the data relating to the industrial environment to which the physical component is exposed, a digital representation of a workpiece manufactured by the physical component.
In this instance the examiner notes the teachings of prior art reference Miller.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation element of, “wherein the link information comprises information regarding currentness of data relating the digital model”, teaches in par. 0158 the following: “FIG. 31 is a diagram illustrating selection and integration of an asset model 312 based on machine identity. In this example, machine 2704 includes an optical code (e.g., two-dimensional barcode such as a QR code) representing a unique machine identifier that can be scanned by a user's client device 3102. The client device 3102 can then interface with the IIH system 2402 (via user interface component 2404) and submit the scanned machine identifier 3104 together with suitable credentials 3106 identifying the user of the client device 3102 as an authorized person with permission to modify the virtualized plant 1802. In response to receipt of the machine identifier 3104 and credentials 3106, the modeling component 2406 can retrieve an asset model 312 corresponding to the machine identifier 3104 from the appropriate library (e.g., from the vendor repository 326 corresponding to the maker of the machine) and integrate the retrieved model 312 into the customer's larger virtualized plant 1802.”. The examiner notes that currentness is representative of the data in the IIH system 2402.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation(s), “wherein the digital model is configured to: receive data relating to the industrial environment to which the physical component is exposed”, teaches par. 0068 the following: :”This allows the control project 306 to be pre-tested prior to execution on a physical machine. FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating simulation of a control project 306 by the IDH repository system 202. In this example, the repository system's emulation component 216 acts as an industrial controller emulator to execute control programming defined as part of the control project 306 against digital twin 810 or other type of virtualization of the automation system for which the control project 306 is being developed and tested. In some embodiments, the simulation component 218, which builds and simulates the digital twin 810, can create the digital twin 810 based in part on the asset models 312 representing industrial devices or assets that make up the automation system.”.
With regards to applicant’s claim limitation(s), “and generating with the digital model, and based in part on the data relating to the industrial environment to which the physical component is exposed, a digital representation of a workpiece manufactured by the physical component”, teaches par. 0068 the following: :”This allows the control project 306 to be pre-tested prior to execution on a physical machine. FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating simulation of a control project 306 by the IDH repository system 202. In this example, the repository system's emulation component 216 acts as an industrial controller emulator to execute control programming defined as part of the control project 306 against digital twin 810 or other type of virtualization of the automation system for which the control project 306 is being developed and tested. In some embodiments, the simulation component 218, which builds and simulates the digital twin 810, can create the digital twin 810 based in part on the asset models 312 representing industrial devices or assets that make up the automation system.”.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to implement the teachings of Garvey with the teachings of Miller by having their system comprise an enhanced digital modeling process. One would have been motivated to do so to provide a simple and effective means to track the manufacturing of physical components, wherein the enhanced digital modeling process helps facilitate proper component analytics and makes it easier to digitally represent a physical manufactured component.
As to claim 11, (Cancelled).
As to claim 12, the system of Garvey and Miller as applied to claim 10 above teaches generating digital twins, specifically Garvey teaches a automation system as claimed in claim 10, the system comprising two physical components each with a respective piece of link information (i.e., …teaches in col. 17 lines 1-10 the following: “For example, each part may be marked with a machine-readable code (e.g. a QR code) that can be scanned by a user's personal device and submitted to a website, which identifies, retrieves, and delivers the part's corresponding digital twin 324 for use by the owner. Other techniques for associating an as-built digital twin 324 with its corresponding physical part are also within the scope of one or more embodiments of this disclosure.”. Teaches in col. 17 lines 25-35 the following: “As such, each manufactured instance of Part #1, Part #2, and Part #3 has an associated as-built digital twin 324 that models the part's measured as-built dimensions and geometry, and may include other metadata for the part (e.g., manufacturing history, performance test results, etc.));
wherein the two pieces of link information refer to the digital model (i.e., …teaches in col. 17 lines 1-10 the following: “For example, each part may be marked with a machine-readable code (e.g. a QR code) that can be scanned by a user's personal device and submitted to a website, which identifies, retrieves, and delivers the part's corresponding digital twin 324 for use by the owner. Other techniques for associating an as-built digital twin 324 with its corresponding physical part are also within the scope of one or more embodiments of this disclosure.”. Teaches in col. 17 lines 25-35 the following: “As such, each manufactured instance of Part #1, Part #2, and Part #3 has an associated as-built digital twin 324 that models the part's measured as-built dimensions and geometry, and may include other metadata for the part (e.g., manufacturing history, performance test results, etc.)).
As to claim 13, the system of Garvey and Miller as applied to claim 10 above teaches generating digital twins, specifically Garvey teaches an automation system as claimed in claim 10, further comprising a network and/or which is part of a manufacturing facility (i.e., …teaches in col. 17 lines 25-35 the following: “As such, each manufactured instance of Part #1, Part #2, and Part #3 has an associated as-built digital twin 324 that models the part's measured as-built dimensions and geometry, and may include other metadata for the part (e.g., manufacturing history, performance test results, etc.)).
14. (canceled)
Conclusion
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRYAN F WRIGHT whose telephone number is (571)270-3826.
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, Eleni Shiferaw can be reached on (571)272-3867. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BRYAN F WRIGHT/Examiner, Art Unit 2497
