DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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 Claims
2. This office action is in response to application number 18/690,316 filed on 03/08/2024,
and the amendments and arguments filed on 05/21/2026.
Claim 16, 21, 29, and 30 have been amended.
No claims have been added.
No claims have been cancelled.
Claims 16, 18-21, and 23-30 are currently pending and have been examined.
Priority
3. Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C 119
(a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No.EP21196184.2 filed on
09/10/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/08/2024 has been received
but has been considered.
Response to Amendment
5. Applicant' s amendments to the Claims have overcome each and every rejection
previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 02/03/2026.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 7-12 filed 03/19/2026, with respect to the rejections(s)
of claim(s) 16, 18-21, and 23-26 under 35 USC 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive.
Additionally with respect to the rejections(s) of claim(s) 28-30 under 35 USC 103 have also been fully considered and are persuasive.
Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
However, upon further consideration, a new grounds for rejection as necessitated by
amendment is made over 35 USC 102 as being clearly anticipated by Nanba (US 20200331353 A1). Additionally, upon further consideration a new grounds for rejection as necessitated by amendment is made over 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable by Nanba (US 20200331353 A1) in view of Jung (US 20160347298 A1) and further in view of Minarcin (US 20090118887 A1).
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.
6. Claim(s) 16, 18, 20, 23-25, and 28-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Nanba (US 20200331353 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Nanba discloses A device for controlling a deceleration system of a vehicle, comprising: an input port configured to receive a fluidic main deceleration request; and an output port configured to supply an electric deceleration demand to the deceleration system, wherein the device is operatively configured to: generate the electric deceleration demand according to the fluidic main deceleration request, generate a fluidic deceleration demand according to the fluidic main deceleration request, and supply the fluidic deceleration demand to the deceleration system via an output port of the device, wherein the electric deceleration demand is supplied to a deceleration actuator. (Nanba Paragraph 0032: “The control unit 500 is configured as a computer including a CPU, a memory, and an interface circuit connected to various units. Based on the information acquired from various sensors, the control unit 500 controls electric power generation of the fuel cell system 30, and controls the drive motor 40 in the power running mode or the regenerative mode. As shown in FIG. 1, the CPU of the control unit 500 includes a braking control unit 510”) (Nanba Paragraph 0033: “The braking control unit 510 implements a regeneration-friction cooperative brake by controlling a later-described brake actuator 2 that constitutes a friction brake system, and the drive motor 40 in the regenerative mode. The braking control unit 510 properly sets a ratio between friction braking force by the friction brake 50 and regenerative braking force by the drive motor 40 in the regenerative mode in the regeneration-friction cooperative braking force generated in response to a braking request from a driver. When the fuel cell vehicle 20 is in braking, it is desirable to obtain regenerative braking force as much as possible within the range where the regenerative electric power is allowed to be charged into the electric storage device 421, while obtaining the friction braking force to fulfill the braking request from the driver that is not fulfilled by only the regenerative braking force. Hence, it becomes possible to achieve enhanced energy efficiency of the entire vehicle by charging the regenerative electric power in the electric storage device 421, while enhancing an effect of securing the regeneration-friction cooperative braking force.”)
Regarding claim 18, Nanba discloses The device according to claim 16, wherein the device is configured to: receive an electric input signal via an input port of the device, and generate the electric deceleration demand according to the electric input signal. (Nanba Paragraph 0021: “The drive motor 40 in the regenerative mode converts kinetic energy of the fuel cell vehicle 20 into electric power so as to brake the fuel cell vehicle 20. Braking by the drive motor 40 in the regenerative mode is also called a regenerative brake.”)
Regarding claim 20, Nanba discloses The device according to claim 16, wherein the device is configured as a modular unit comprising a housing. (Nanba Paragraph 0032: “The control unit 500 is configured as a computer including a CPU, a memory, and an interface circuit connected to various units. Based on the information acquired from various sensors, the control unit 500 controls electric power generation of the fuel cell system 30”)
PNG
media_image1.png
327
454
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 23, Nanba discloses The deceleration system according to claim 21, wherein the at least one input unit is configured to generate an electric input signal according to at least one further input value, wherein the deceleration system is configured to generate the electric deceleration demand according to the electric input signal. (Nanba Paragraph 0021: “Braking by the drive motor 40 in the regenerative mode is also called a regenerative brake.”) (Nanba Paragraph 0033: “The braking control unit 510 implements a regeneration-friction cooperative brake by controlling a later-described brake actuator 2 that constitutes a friction brake system, and the drive motor 40 in the regenerative mode. The braking control unit 510 properly sets a ratio between friction braking force by the friction brake 50 and regenerative braking force by the drive motor 40 in the regenerative mode in the regeneration-friction cooperative braking force generated in response to a braking request from a driver.”)
Regarding claim 24, Nanba discloses The deceleration system according to claim 21, wherein the at least one input value comprises an input value from one or more of: a brake pedal, an accelerator pedal, a driver input device, or a control unit for autonomous driving. (Nanba Paragraph 0045: “When the driver performs depressing operation of the brake pedal 80, the master cylinder pressure Pmc that is a sum of assist force by the master cylinder pump and brake stepping force is generated in the master cylinder 13. Based on the pedal stroke Sp of the brake pedal 80 and the master cylinder pressure Pmc, the braking control unit 510 detects the braking force requested by the driver, and sets a ratio of the friction braking force to the regeneration-friction cooperative braking force such that the braking force requested by the driver is obtained as the regeneration-friction cooperative braking force.”)
Regarding claim 25, Nanba discloses The deceleration system according to claim 21, wherein the at least one first deceleration actuator comprises a brake unit, an endurance brake unit, a retarder, and/or an electric machine, and/or the at least one second deceleration actuator comprises a brake unit, a mechanical brake, or a friction brake. (Nanba Paragraph 0033: “The braking control unit 510 implements a regeneration-friction cooperative brake by controlling a later-described brake actuator 2 that constitutes a friction brake system, and the drive motor 40 in the regenerative mode. The braking control unit 510 properly sets a ratio between friction braking force by the friction brake 50 and regenerative braking force by the drive motor 40 in the regenerative mode in the regeneration-friction cooperative braking force generated in response to a braking request from a driver. When the fuel cell vehicle 20 is in braking, it is desirable to obtain regenerative braking force as much as possible within the range where the regenerative electric power is allowed to be charged into the electric storage device 421, while obtaining the friction braking force to fulfill the braking request from the driver that is not fulfilled by only the regenerative braking force. Hence, it becomes possible to achieve enhanced energy efficiency of the entire vehicle by charging the regenerative electric power in the electric storage device 421, while enhancing an effect of securing the regeneration-friction cooperative braking force.”)
Regarding claim 28, Nanba discloses A vehicle, comprising: a deceleration system according to claim 21, wherein the vehicle is configured as a commercial vehicle, a truck, a trailer, a bus and/or as a combination of a towing vehicle and a trailer, and/or the vehicle comprises a pure electric, a hybrid or a conventional powertrain, and wherein the vehicle is further configured to operate the deceleration system such that both the electric deceleration demand and the fluidic deceleration demand are generated from the same fluidic main deceleration request. (Nanba Paragraph 0006: “According to one aspect of the present disclosure, a fuel cell vehicle is provided.”) (Nanba Paragraph 0033: “The braking control unit 510 implements a regeneration-friction cooperative brake by controlling a later-described brake actuator 2 that constitutes a friction brake system, and the drive motor 40 in the regenerative mode. The braking control unit 510 properly sets a ratio between friction braking force by the friction brake 50 and regenerative braking force by the drive motor 40 in the regenerative mode in the regeneration-friction cooperative braking force generated in response to a braking request from a driver. When the fuel cell vehicle 20 is in braking, it is desirable to obtain regenerative braking force as much as possible within the range where the regenerative electric power is allowed to be charged into the electric storage device 421, while obtaining the friction braking force to fulfill the braking request from the driver that is not fulfilled by only the regenerative braking force. Hence, it becomes possible to achieve enhanced energy efficiency of the entire vehicle by charging the regenerative electric power in the electric storage device 421, while enhancing an effect of securing the regeneration-friction cooperative braking force.”) (Note: Fuel cell vehicle = electric vehicle)
Regarding claim 29, Nanba discloses A method for controlling a deceleration system, comprising the steps of: receiving a fluidic main deceleration request; generating an electric deceleration demand according to the fluidic main deceleration request; generating a fluidic deceleration demand according to the fluidic main deceleration request; controlling at least one first deceleration actuator according to the electric deceleration demand, and controlling at least one second deceleration actuator according to the fluidic deceleration demand, wherein the electric deceleration demand is supplied to a deceleration actuator. (Nanba Paragraph 0002: “The disclosure relates to a fuel cell vehicle and a control method of the fuel cell vehicle.”) (Nanba Paragraph 0033: “The braking control unit 510 implements a regeneration-friction cooperative brake by controlling a later-described brake actuator 2 that constitutes a friction brake system, and the drive motor 40 in the regenerative mode. The braking control unit 510 properly sets a ratio between friction braking force by the friction brake 50 and regenerative braking force by the drive motor 40 in the regenerative mode in the regeneration-friction cooperative braking force generated in response to a braking request from a driver. When the fuel cell vehicle 20 is in braking, it is desirable to obtain regenerative braking force as much as possible within the range where the regenerative electric power is allowed to be charged into the electric storage device 421, while obtaining the friction braking force to fulfill the braking request from the driver that is not fulfilled by only the regenerative braking force. Hence, it becomes possible to achieve enhanced energy efficiency of the entire vehicle by charging the regenerative electric power in the electric storage device 421, while enhancing an effect of securing the regeneration-friction cooperative braking force.”)
Regarding claim 30, Nanba discloses A computer product comprising a non-transitory computer-readable medium having stored thereon program code which, when executed by a data processing unit, carries out the acts of: receiving a fluidic main deceleration request; generating an electric deceleration demand according to the fluidic main deceleration request; generating a fluidic deceleration demand according to the fluidic main deceleration request; and controlling at least one first deceleration actuator according to the electric deceleration demand; and controlling at least one second deceleration actuator according to the fluidic deceleration demand, wherein the electric deceleration demand is supplied to a deceleration actuator. (Nanba Paragraph 0032: “The control unit 500 is configured as a computer including a CPU, a memory, and an interface circuit connected to various units. Based on the information acquired from various sensors, the control unit 500 controls electric power generation of the fuel cell system 30, and controls the drive motor 40 in the power running mode or the regenerative mode.”) (Nanba Paragraph 0033: “The braking control unit 510 implements a regeneration-friction cooperative brake by controlling a later-described brake actuator 2 that constitutes a friction brake system, and the drive motor 40 in the regenerative mode. The braking control unit 510 properly sets a ratio between friction braking force by the friction brake 50 and regenerative braking force by the drive motor 40 in the regenerative mode in the regeneration-friction cooperative braking force generated in response to a braking request from a driver. When the fuel cell vehicle 20 is in braking, it is desirable to obtain regenerative braking force as much as possible within the range where the regenerative electric power is allowed to be charged into the electric storage device 421, while obtaining the friction braking force to fulfill the braking request from the driver that is not fulfilled by only the regenerative braking force. Hence, it becomes possible to achieve enhanced energy efficiency of the entire vehicle by charging the regenerative electric power in the electric storage device 421, while enhancing an effect of securing the regeneration-friction cooperative braking force.”)
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.
7. Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nanba (US 20200331353 A1) and in view of (US 20090118887 A1) to Minarcin et al. (hereinafter Minarcin).
Regarding claim 19, Nanba discloses claim 16, accordingly, the rejection of claim 16 is incorporated above.
Nanba does not disclose The device according to claim 16, wherein the device is configured to: process a deceleration force distribution and/or a decelerator actuator blending and/or a one pedal driving mode.
However, Minarcin does teach The device according to claim 16, wherein the device is configured to: process a deceleration force distribution and/or a decelerator actuator blending (Minarcin Paragraph 0026: “A brake control module (hereafter `BrCM`) 22 is operatively connected to friction brakes (not shown) on each of the vehicle wheels 93. The BrCM 22 monitors the operator input to the brake pedal 112 and generates control signals to control the friction brakes and sends a control signal to the HCP 5 to operate the first and second electric machines 56 and 72 based thereon to effect vehicle braking through a process referred to as blended braking. Blended braking includes generating friction braking torque at the wheels 93 and generating output torque at the output member 64 to react with the driveline 90 to decelerate the vehicle in response to the operator input to the brake pedal 112.”) and/or a one pedal driving mode.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nanba to include The device according to claim 16, wherein the device is configured to: process a deceleration force distribution and/or a decelerator actuator blending and/or a one pedal driving mode taught by Minarcin. This would have been for the benefit to provide A more efficient method for controlling regenerative braking and friction braking includes monitoring a vehicle operating point, determining a braking torque request, determining a regenerative braking motor torque ratio based upon the vehicle operating point wherein the regenerative braking motor torque ratio is non-linearly dependent on the vehicle operating point, and actuating the friction brake based upon the regenerative braking motor torque ratio and the braking torque request. [Minarcin Paragraph 0005]
8. Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nanba (US 20200331353 A1) and in view of Jung (US 20160347298 A1).
Regarding claim 21, Nanba discloses A deceleration system for a vehicle, comprising: at least one first deceleration actuator configured to be actuated by an electric deceleration demand; (Nanba Paragraph 0021: “Braking by the drive motor 40 in the regenerative mode is also called a regenerative brake.”) at least one input unit configured to generate a fluidic main deceleration request according to at least one input value, wherein the deceleration system is configured to generate the electric deceleration demand for controlling the at least one first deceleration actuator according to the fluidic main deceleration request, the deceleration system further comprising: at least one second deceleration actuator configured to be actuated by a fluidic deceleration demand; (Nanba Paragraph 0033: “The braking control unit 510 implements a regeneration-friction cooperative brake by controlling a later-described brake actuator 2 that constitutes a friction brake system, and the drive motor 40 in the regenerative mode. The braking control unit 510 properly sets a ratio between friction braking force by the friction brake 50 and regenerative braking force by the drive motor 40 in the regenerative mode in the regeneration-friction cooperative braking force generated in response to a braking request from a driver. When the fuel cell vehicle 20 is in braking, it is desirable to obtain regenerative braking force as much as possible within the range where the regenerative electric power is allowed to be charged into the electric storage device 421, while obtaining the friction braking force to fulfill the braking request from the driver that is not fulfilled by only the regenerative braking force. Hence, it becomes possible to achieve enhanced energy efficiency of the entire vehicle by charging the regenerative electric power in the electric storage device 421, while enhancing an effect of securing the regeneration-friction cooperative braking force.”) […] and the electric deceleration demand is supplied to a deceleration actuator. (Nanba Paragraph 0033: “The braking control unit 510 implements a regeneration-friction cooperative brake by controlling a later-described brake actuator 2 that constitutes a friction brake system, and the drive motor 40 in the regenerative mode. The braking control unit 510 properly sets a ratio between friction braking force by the friction brake 50 and regenerative braking force by the drive motor 40 in the regenerative mode in the regeneration-friction cooperative braking force generated in response to a braking request from a driver. When the fuel cell vehicle 20 is in braking, it is desirable to obtain regenerative braking force as much as possible within the range where the regenerative electric power is allowed to be charged into the electric storage device 421, while obtaining the friction braking force to fulfill the braking request from the driver that is not fulfilled by only the regenerative braking force. Hence, it becomes possible to achieve enhanced energy efficiency of the entire vehicle by charging the regenerative electric power in the electric storage device 421, while enhancing an effect of securing the regeneration-friction cooperative braking force.”)
Nanba does not disclose […] wherein the deceleration system is configured to generate the fluidic deceleration demand for controlling the at least one second deceleration actuator according to the fluidic main deceleration request during a normal operating mode,
However, Jung does teach […] wherein the deceleration system is configured to generate the fluidic deceleration demand for controlling the at least one second deceleration actuator according to the fluidic main deceleration request during a normal operating mode, (Jung Paragraph 0047: “FIGS. 1 and 2 show a state that a brake hydraulic pressure is generated according to the driver request deceleration during a normal operation.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nanba to include […] wherein the deceleration system is configured to generate the fluidic deceleration demand for controlling the at least one second deceleration actuator according to the fluidic main deceleration request during a normal operating mode, taught by Jung. This would have been for the benefit to provide a more efficient electro-hydraulic brake system which may include a brake input device manipulated by a driver to brake a vehicle in order to solve the problem of when a pump is failed, for example, when the motor is out of order, since the braking force is generated only by pedaling force of a driver in emergency, that is, the hydraulic pressure of the backup master cylinder, it is difficult to secure sufficient braking power so that the brake stability is deteriorated and braking distance is increased. [Jung Paragraph 0016 and Paragraph 0019]
9. Claim(s) 26-27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nanba (US 20200331353 A1) in view of Minarcin (US 20090118887 A1) and further in view of Jung (US 20160347298 A1).
Regarding claim 26, Nanba in view of Jung teaches claim 21, accordingly, the rejection of claim 21 is incorporated above.
Nanba in view of Jung does not teach The deceleration system according to claim 21, wherein the deceleration system is configured to perform a deceleration force distribution and/or a blending operation between the at least one first deceleration actuator and the at least one second deceleration actuator, and/or a one pedal driving mode.
However, Minarcin does teach The deceleration system according to claim 21, wherein the deceleration system is configured to perform a deceleration force distribution and/or a blending operation between the at least one first deceleration actuator and the at least one second deceleration actuator, (Minarcin Paragraph 0026: “A brake control module (hereafter `BrCM`) 22 is operatively connected to friction brakes (not shown) on each of the vehicle wheels 93. The BrCM 22 monitors the operator input to the brake pedal 112 and generates control signals to control the friction brakes and sends a control signal to the HCP 5 to operate the first and second electric machines 56 and 72 based thereon to effect vehicle braking through a process referred to as blended braking. Blended braking includes generating friction braking torque at the wheels 93 and generating output torque at the output member 64 to react with the driveline 90 to decelerate the vehicle in response to the operator input to the brake pedal 112.”) and/or a one pedal driving mode.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nanba in view of Jung to include The deceleration system according to claim 21, wherein the deceleration system is configured to perform a deceleration force distribution and/or a blending operation between the at least one first deceleration actuator and the at least one second deceleration actuator, and/or a one pedal driving mode taught by Minarcin. This would have been for the benefit to provide A more efficient method for controlling regenerative braking and friction braking includes monitoring a vehicle operating point, determining a braking torque request, determining a regenerative braking motor torque ratio based upon the vehicle operating point wherein the regenerative braking motor torque ratio is non-linearly dependent on the vehicle operating point, and actuating the friction brake based upon the regenerative braking motor torque ratio and the braking torque request. [Minarcin Paragraph 0005]
Regarding claim 27, Nanba in view of Jung teaches claim 21, accordingly, the rejection of claim 21 is incorporated above.
Nanba in view of Jung does not teach The deceleration system according to claim 21, further comprising: an interface configured for connecting with at least one further deceleration system, wherein the interface is configured to generate a further deceleration system deceleration demand.
However, Minarcin does teach The deceleration system according to claim 21, further comprising: an interface configured for connecting with at least one further deceleration system, wherein the interface is configured to generate a further deceleration system deceleration demand. (Minarcin Paragraph 0030: “In response to operator input via the accelerator pedal 113 and brake pedal 112 as captured by the user interface 13, the HCP 5 and one or more of the other control modules determine torque commands to control the torque generative devices comprising the engine 14 and first and second electric machines 56 and 72 to meet the operator torque request at the output member 64 and transferred to the driveline 90. Based upon input signals from the user interface 13 and the hybrid powertrain including the ESD 74, the HCP 5 determines the operator torque request, a commanded output torque from the transmission 10 to the driveline 90, an input torque from the engine 14, clutch torques for the torque-transfer clutches C1 70, C2 62, C3 73, C4 75 of the transmission 10; and the motor torques for the first and second electric machines 56 and 72, respectively, as is described hereinbelow.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nanba in view of Jung to include The deceleration system according to claim 21, further comprising: an interface configured for connecting with at least one further deceleration system, wherein the interface is configured to generate a further deceleration system deceleration demand taught by Minarcin. This would have been for the benefit to provide A more efficient method for controlling regenerative braking and friction braking includes monitoring a vehicle operating point, determining a braking torque request, determining a regenerative braking motor torque ratio based upon the vehicle operating point wherein the regenerative braking motor torque ratio is non-linearly dependent on the vehicle operating point, and actuating the friction brake based upon the regenerative braking motor torque ratio and the braking torque request. [Minarcin Paragraph 0005]
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN J HARVEY whose telephone number is 571-272-5327. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00AM-5:00PM M-Th, 8:00AM-4:00PM F.
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, Kito Robinson can be reached at 571-270-3921. 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.
/K.J.H./Junior Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3664
/SHARDUL D PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3664
Prosecution Insights