DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/08/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the Remarks dated 06/08/2026, Applicant argues that that the Office Action dated 03/06/2026 has failed to identify all of the limitations of the claimed invention including:
A first upper restraining link part and a second upper restraining link part of the plurality of upper restraining link parts are link-coupled to each other to the plurality of upper joint parts; and
A first lower restraining link part and a second lower restraining link part of the plurality of lower restraining link parts are link coupled parallel to each other to the plurality of lower joint parts.
As conceded in the previous Office Action, Examiner agrees that the primary reference of Kwon fails to explicitly disclose wherein each of the first, second, and third link parts comprise a plurality of upper link parts and lower link parts link-coupled parallel to each other to a plurality of upper/lower joint parts respectively. However, Examiner points out Kwon Fig. 10 in which each support arm 223 and 213 appears to be comprised of multiple upper/lower restraining link parts. Examiner brings in the combination of Kwon and Kurnianto to remedy this deficiency, wherein Kurnianto teaches a delta robot having a first, second, and third link part, each link part having a plurality of restraining link parts link-coupled in parallel.
Applicant argues that Kurnianto does not identify first and second upper restraining link parts link-coupled parallel to each other to a plurality of upper joint parts together with first and second lower restraining link parts link-coupled parallel to each other to a plurality of lower joint parts. As illustrated in annotated Kurnianto Fig. 1A, Examiner has identified the first and second upper restraining link parts (116) which are link-coupled in parallel to each other to a plurality of upper joint parts (108 and 120). Once again, Examiner concedes that Kurnianto teaches only an upper set of link parts and does not expressly disclose the lower set of restraining link parts link-coupled in parallel to a plurality of lower joint parts. However, Examiner maintains the argument that it would be a mere duplication of parts when modifying the double delta robot of Kwon to incorporate the parallel link-coupled restraining link parts of Kurnianto into the upper and lower joint parts of Kwon, especially in light of Kwon Fig. 10 which depicts upper and lower restraining link parts comprising a plurality of links. Both of the delta robots exhibit the same general structure wherein a first, second, and third link part are arranged in a delta structure and may move up and down support rods using a motor mechanism. The modification of the single restraining link structure of Kwon with the multiple restraining link structure of Kurnianto would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art because the use of parallelogram in the arm assemblies is one of the key features of parallel and delta robots (Kurnianto [0054]). The modification of Kwon to incorporate the parallelogram structure of Kurnianto would not have caused any unexpected change to the operation or function of the delta robot of Kwon Fig. 3 and would more closely resemble the embodiment pictured in Kwon Fig. 10.
With this in consideration, the rejection is maintained.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed 07/17/2024 has been considered by the Examiner.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-5 and 8-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon et al (WO 2020256503 A2), with reference to the published US application US 20220401168 A1 for citation purposes, in view of Kurnianto (US 20160332296 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kwon teaches a double delta structure (see Fig. 3; lower delta robot 210 and upper delta robot 220) of a surgical robot (2), the structure comprising:
a first link part (see annotated Fig. 3, first link part) link-coupled to perform pitch and yaw rotations around a reference axis in a first direction;
a second link part (see annotated Fig. 3, second link part) link-coupled to perform pitch and yaw rotations around a reference axis in a second direction; and
a third link part (see annotated Fig. 3, third link part) link-coupled to perform pitch and yaw rotations around a reference axis in a third direction (see annotated Fig. 3 below which labels the first, second, and third link parts. The pitch rotation theta 1 and yaw rotation theta 2 are illustrated with regard to the first link part, it can be appreciated that the second and third link parts are also configured to perform pitch and yaw rotations about a reference axis in the same manner about the respective axes of the second and third link parts),
PNG
media_image1.png
725
671
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein each of the first, second, and third link parts comprises:
a plurality of base link parts (see annotated Kwon Fig. 3 below; base link parts comprising movement parts 212 and 222 and grippers 241 and 242);
a plurality of upper joint parts (see annotated Kwon Fig. 3 below, first and second upper joint parts coupled to gripper 242 and movement part 222) link-coupled to rotate on upper sides of the base link parts (242 and 222)
an upper restraining link part (223) link-coupled to the upper joint parts (un-numbered rotatable connections about gripper 242 and movement part 222 labeled in annotated Fig. below) to perform pitch and yaw rotations (see Kwon [0069]; arms 213 and 223 may be rotatably connected to the corresponding movement parts 212 and 222 and the corresponding grippers 241 and 242);
PNG
media_image2.png
725
671
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a plurality of lower joint parts (see annotated Kwon Fig. 3 below, first and second lower joint parts coupled to gripper 241 and movement part 212) link-coupled to rotate on lower sides of the base link parts (241 and 212); and
a lower restraining link part (213) link-coupled to the lower joint parts to perform pitch and yaw rotations (see Kwon [0069]; arms 213 and 223 may be rotatably connected to the corresponding movement parts 212 and 222 and the corresponding grippers 241 and 242).
PNG
media_image3.png
725
671
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Examiner also points to Kwon Fig. 10 in which the upper restraining link parts 223 and the lower restraining link parts 213 are pictured as having what appears to be a plurality of upper/lower restraining link parts.
Kwon is silent regarding wherein each of the first, second, and third link parts comprise a plurality of upper restraining link parts and lower restraining link parts; and
wherein first and second upper restraining link parts are link-coupled parallel to each other to the plurality of upper joint parts; and
first and second lower restraining link parts are link- coupled parallel to each other to the plurality of lower joint parts.
Kurnianto teaches a delta robot (101) having a first, second, and third link part (arm assemblies 100), wherein each link part of composed of identical pairs of links (116) and link-coupled to form a parallelogram shape (Kurnianto [0066]),
wherein each of the first, second, and third link parts (100) comprises:
a plurality of base link parts (see annotated Kurnianto Fig. 1A below; first and second base link parts including moving member 106);
a plurality of upper joint parts (108 and 120) link-coupled to rotate on upper sides of the base link parts (see Kurnianto [0064]; an end of the arm assembly may be pivotally connected to the moving member 106 by pivotal joints, such as ball joints 108, the opposite end may be pivotable connected to end effector 128 using pivotal joints 120);
a plurality of upper restraining link parts (116) link-coupled to the upper joint parts to perform pitch and yaw rotations (see Kurnianto [0010]; providing a rotational motion to the rotating arm 116),
PNG
media_image4.png
752
658
media_image4.png
Greyscale
wherein the first and second upper restraining links (116) are link-coupled parallel to each other (see Kurnianto Fig. 1A).
Kurnianto is silent regarding first and second lower restraining link parts link-coupled parallel to each other.
However, it can be appreciated that the only difference between the prior art of Kwon and the claimed invention is the plurality of upper restraining link parts and lower restraining link parts link-coupled parallel to each other. It can also be appreciated that a plurality of upper restraining link parts link-coupled parallel to each other is taught by Kurnianto (Kurnianto Fig. 1A), and that applying the structure of the upper restraining link parts of Kurnianto to the lower restraining link parts of Kwon would not produce a new or unexpected result, which can be demonstrated by Kwon Fig. 10 which appears to have a plurality of upper and lower restraining link parts. The use of parallelogram in the arm assemblies of parallel and delta robots is a key feature of the robot design (Kurnianto [0054]). It has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B), In re Harza, 124 USPQ 378.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of each of the first, second, and third link parts taught by Kwon with a plurality of restraining arms as taught by Kurnianto. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to increase stability, precision, and strength of the system using known technology and conventional delta robot structure (Kurnianto [0054]).
Regarding claim 2, Kwon and Kurnianto teach the structure of claim 1. Kwon further teaches wherein a first delta structure (220) is formed through link connections of upper sides of the first, second, and third link parts (see Kwon Fig. 3; where the first delta structure is formed about upper gripper 242 via connections of the upper arms 223 from each of the first, second, and third link parts), and
a second delta structure (210) is formed through link connections of lower sides of the first, second, and third link parts (see Kwon Fig. 3, where the second delta structure is formed about lower gripper 241 via connections of the lower arms 213 from each of the first, second, and third link parts) so as to form a double delta structure (see Kwon Fig. 3, [0067]; robot having an upper delta robot 220 and lower delta robot 210).
Regarding claim 3, Kwon and Kurnianto teach the structure of claim 2. Kwon further teaches wherein wherein each of the first, second, and third link parts is composed of an identical pair of links (arms 223 and 213) and is link-coupled to form a parallelogram shape. See annotated Kwon Fig. 3 below showing parallelogram formed by the second link part, it can be appreciated that based on their identical structure, all of the first, second, and third link parts are coupled to form a parallelogram.
PNG
media_image5.png
638
671
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Kwon is silent regarding wherein each of the first, second, and third link parts is composed of identical pairs of links.
Kurnianto teaches a delta robot (101) having a first, second, and third link part (arm assemblies 100), wherein each link part of composed of identical pairs of links (116) and link-coupled to form a parallelogram shape (Kurnianto [0066]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first, second, and third link parts taught by Kwon with the identical pairs of links as taught by Kurnianto. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to increase stability, precision, and strength of the delta robot structure. Additionally, it can be appreciated that the only difference between the prior art of Kwon and the claimed invention is the duplication of link arms resulting in each link part comprising identical pairs of links, which is taught by Kurnianto. It has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B), In re Harza, 124 USPQ 378.
Regarding claim 4, Kwon and Kurnianto teach the structure of claim 3. Kwon is silent regarding wherein each of the first, second, and third link parts is link-coupled such that a plurality of parallelogram shapes are parallel to each other.
It can be appreciated that based on the combination as discussed above using the double delta structure taught by Kwon and the parallel, identical pairs of linking arms (116) taught by Kurnianto, that the resulting structure would necessarily produce two parallelograms which would be parallel to one another for each of the first, second, and third link parts.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first, second, and third link parts taught by Kwon with the identical pairs of links as taught by Kurnianto, therefore forming parallel parallelograms in each of the first, second, and third link parts. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to increase stability, precision, and strength of the delta robot structure.
Additionally, it can be appreciated that Kwon teaches each of the first, second, and third link parts forming a parallelogram and the only difference between the prior art of Kwon and the claimed invention is the duplication of link arms resulting in each link part comprising identical pairs of links, which is taught by Kurnianto. It has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B), In re Harza, 124 USPQ 378.
Regarding claim 5, Kwon and Kurnianto teach the structure of claim 3. Kwon further teaches wherein first, second, and third parallelograms formed on each of the first, second, and third link parts are formed to face each other while being spaced apart from each other at predetermined angles (see Kwon Fig. 3, where the parallelograms of each of the first, second, and third link parts are arranged to face one another and positioned about structures 242 and 241 at about 120 degrees apart from each other resulting in an even spacing between each of the three link parts.
Regarding claims 8 and 9, Kwon and Kurnianto teach the structure of claim 1. Kwon further teaches a first parallelogram formed by comprising the first upper restraining link part (223) and the first lower restraining link part (213, see annotated Kwon Fig. 3 below).
PNG
media_image5.png
638
671
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It can be appreciated that the only difference between the prior art of Kwon Fig. 3 and the claimed invention is a second parallelogram formed by a second upper restraining link and a second lower restraining link where the first and second parallelograms are formed parallel to each other. Kwon Fig. 10 pictures an embodiment where each of the upper and lower restraining links appear to be comprised of a first and second upper/lower restraining link. It can also be appreciated that Kurnianto teaches a second restraining link which may be either of an upper or lower restraining link where the first and second restraining links are link-coupled parallel to each other (Kurnianto Fig. 1A).
It has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B), In re Harza, 124 USPQ 378. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of each of the first, second, and third link parts having upper and lower restraining link parts taught by Kwon with a second upper and lower restraining link as taught by Kurnianto, which would necessarily form a second parallelogram where the first and second parallelograms are formed in parallel to each other. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to increase stability, precision, and strength of the system using known technology and conventional delta robot structure.
Regarding claim 10, Kwon and Kurnianto teach the structure of claim 1. Kwon further teaches a first base link part of the plurality of base link parts (see annotated Kwon Fig. 3 below, where the combined structure of upper gripper 242, lower gripper 241, and the upper and lower shafts 232 and 231 is considered as the first base link part) to which a first upper joint part of the plurality of upper joint parts (unnumbered joint element of upper gripper 242 labeled in annotated Fig. below) and a first lower joint part of the plurality of lower joint parts (unnumbered joint element of lower gripper 241 labeled in annotated Fig. below) are link-coupled to be rotatable (see annotated Kwon Fig. 3 below, [0069]; arms 213 and 223 may be rotatably connected to the corresponding movement parts 212 and 222 and the corresponding grippers 241 and 242); and
PNG
media_image6.png
725
671
media_image6.png
Greyscale
a second base link part of the plurality of base link parts (see annotated Kwon Fig. 3 below, where the combined structure of movement parts 212 and 222 and the support rod 221 is considered as the second base link part) to which a second upper joint part of the plurality of upper joint parts (unnumbered joint element of movement part 222 labeled in annotated Fig. below) and a second lower joint part of the plurality of lower joint parts (unnumbered joint element of movement part 212 labeled in annotated Fig. below) are link-coupled to be rotatable (see annotated Kwon Fig. 3 below, [0069]; arms 213 and 223 may be rotatably connected to the corresponding movement parts 212 and 222 and the corresponding grippers 241 and 242).
PNG
media_image7.png
725
671
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Kwon and Kurnianto teach the structure of claim 10. Kwon further teaches wherein opposite-side coupling links of the upper restraining link part (223) is link-coupled to the first and second upper joint parts (un-numbered joint elements of gripper 242 and movement part 222 labeled in annotated Fig. 3 below), respectively, and
opposite-side coupling links of the lower restraining link part (213) is link-coupled to the first and second lower joint parts (un-numbered joint elements of gripper 241 and movement part 212 labeled in annotated Fig. 3 below), respectively (see Kwon [0069]; arms 213 and 223 may be rotatably connected to the corresponding movement parts 212 and 222 and the corresponding grippers 241 and 242).
PNG
media_image8.png
725
671
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Kwon is silent regarding a first and second upper restraining link part and a first and second lower restraining link part link-coupled to the first and second upper joint part and first and second lower joint part, respectively.
However, it can be appreciated that the only difference between the prior art of Kwon and the claimed invention is a second upper restraining link part and a second lower restraining link part (which appear to be pictured in Fig. 10 where each upper/lower restraining link part appear to include a first and second restraining link), which are link-connected in the same manner as the upper and lower restraining link parts taught by Kwon. It can also be appreciated that Kurnianto teaches a second restraining link part which may be either of an upper or lower restraining link where the first and second restraining links are link-coupled parallel to each other to each of first and second upper or lower join part (Kurnianto Fig. 1A).
It has been held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B), In re Harza, 124 USPQ 378. Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure of each of the first, second, and third link parts having upper and lower restraining link parts taught by Kwon with a second upper and lower restraining link as taught by Kurnianto, link-coupled in the same manner as the first upper and lower restraining link parts disclosed by Kwon. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to increase stability, precision, and strength of the system using known technology and conventional delta robot structure (Kurnianto [0054])
Regarding claim 12, Kwon and Kurnianto teach the structure of claim 11. Kwon further teaches wherein the second base link part further comprises a moving shaft coupling part (222 and/or 212) that moves along a moving shaft (221 and/or 211, see Kwon [0068]; three movement parts 212 and three movement parts 222 that respectively move along longitudinal directions of the support rods 211 and 221) and
a moving frame formed by combination of the first, second, and third link parts (see Kwon Fig. 3, where the structure formed by the first base link part comprising grippers 242 and 241 and shafts 232 and 231 is considered the moving frame) is capable of performing three degrees of freedom movement by moving along the moving shaft (see Kwon [0068]; three movement parts 212 and three movement parts 222 that respectively move along longitudinal directions of the support rods 211 and 221, which establishes three degrees of freedom movement in accordance with paragraph [63] of the specification of the instant application).
Regarding claims 13 and 14, Kwon and Kurnianto teach the structure of claim 1. Kwon does not explicitly disclose wherein the first upper restraining link part and the second upper restraining link part are spaced apart from each other, and wherein the first lower restraining link part and the second lower restraining link part are spaced apart from each other. However, it can be appreciated that in Fig. 10, the upper and lower restraining link parts 223 and 213 appear to each comprise a first and second restraining link part which are spaced apart from each other.
Kurnianto teaches wherein the first upper restraining link part (116) and the second upper restraining link part (116) are spaced apart from each other (see annotated Kurnianto Fig. 1A below; where the first and second upper restraining link parts, both labeled 116, are spaced apart from each other).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kwon’s double delta robot having upper and lower restraining link parts with a first and second restraining link part as taught by Kurnianto. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to increase stability, precision, and strength of the system using known technology and conventional delta robot structure (Kurnianto [0054]).
PNG
media_image9.png
682
519
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 15 and 16, Kwon and Kurnianto teach the structure of claim 1. Kwon further teaches wherein the first upper restraining link part and the first lower restraining link part are disposed on opposite sides of at least one of the plurality of base link parts (see annotated Kwon Fig. 3 below).
PNG
media_image10.png
725
671
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Kwon does not picture in Fig. 3, wherein the second upper restraining link part and the second lower restraining link part are disposed on opposite sides of at least one of the plurality of base link parts. However, it can be appreciated that as pictured in Fig. 10, it appears that both the first upper and lower restraining link parts and the second upper and lower restraining link parts are disposed on opposite sides of at least one of the plurality of base link parts.
In addition, if the double delta robot structure of Kwon was modified to include the multi-restraining link part structure of Kurnianto as discussed throughout the Office Action, this configuration would also result in each of the plurality of upper/lower restraining link parts being disposed on opposite sides of at least one base link part, as can be seen in Kwon Fig. 3.
Regarding claim 17, Kwon and Kurnianto teach the structure of claim 1. Kwon further teaches wherein the plurality of upper joint parts and the plurality of lower joint parts (see annotated Kwon Fig. 3 below) are configured to permit rotation in different directions relative to the plurality of base link parts (see Kwon [0069]; arms 213 and 223 may be rotatably connected to the corresponding movement parts 212 and 222 and the arms 213 may be relatively rotatably connected to the corresponding grippers 241 and 242).
PNG
media_image8.png
725
671
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 18, Kwon and Kurnianto teach the structure of claim 1. Kwon further teaches wherein the plurality of upper restraining link parts (223) and the plurality of lower restraining link parts (213) are configured to permit pitch rotation and yaw rotation of the corresponding one of the first, second, and third link parts (see Kwon [0129]; a roll, a pitch, and a yaw rotation of the surgical tip 252 may be performed by the movement parts 212 and 222, which cause the movement of restraining links 223 and 213).
Regarding claim 19, Kwon and Kurnianto teach the structure of claim 1. Kwon further teaches wherein the first, second, and third link parts are coupled to a moving frame (see Kwon [0074]; the lower shaft 231 and the upper shaft 232 are relatively slidable).
Regarding claim 20, Kwon and Kurnianto teach the structure of claim 19. Kwon further teaches wherein the moving frame is configured to move with three degrees of freedom (see Kwon [0074]; the lower shaft 231 and the upper shaft 232 are slidable in one degree of freedom and the lower shaft 231 is rotatable in two degrees of freedom).
Regarding claims 21 and 22, Kwon and Kurnianto teach the structure of claim 1. Kwon further teaches wherein at least one base link part (222 and/or 212) of the plurality of base link parts includes a moving shaft coupling part (Fig. 3),
wherein the moving shaft coupling part is configured to move along a moving shaft (see Kwon Kwon [0068]; three movement parts 212 and three movement parts 222 respectively move along longitudinal directions of the support rods 211 and 221).
Conclusion
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 ALISHA J SIRCAR whose telephone number is (571)272-0450. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9-6:30, Friday 9-5:30 CT.
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, Benjamin Klein can be reached at 571-270-5213. 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.
/A.J.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3792
/ALLEN PORTER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Prosecution Insights