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 March 19, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s argument that Homann describes a sheet pile wall formed by alternating U-shaped and Z-shaped sheet pile sections while claim 21 requires a modular construction in which discrete three-pile units are interconnected via a U-to-U coupling is noted but is not considered persuasive because the alternating construction of Homann (and similarly White) satisfies the claim limitations. The claimed invention does not prevent the U-to-U coupling from including a Z-shaped sheet pile. The Z-shaped sheet pile acts as a coupler between the U-shaped sheet piles thereby connecting three-pile units together. Further, Applicant appears to emphasize that the claimed modules are distinct structural units which differ from Homann’s continuous arrangement. The term “module” is a very broad term that can be considered any in a series of units for use together. Examiner notes that Applicant did not address the previous rejection in view of White (WO 99/11869) which remains below, however it appears that the arguments related to Homann would also apply to White.
Claim Objections
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: “sheet sheet” should be changed to “sheet” in line 3. Appropriate correction is required.
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 3-10, 13-19 and 21-24 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.
Regarding claim 23, it is unclear whether “the sheet pile wall” in the last line is the same as or different than, and in addition to, “A sheet wall” in line 1 because of the similar but different terminology. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “the sheet pile wall” to mean “the sheet wall”. Claims 13-19 and 24 are rejected for depending from a rejected claim.
Regarding claim 3, the wording of “The sheet pile module of claim 20” in line 1 is confusing. Claim 20 recites “A sheet pile wall” comprising “a first sheet pile module” and “a second sheet pile module”. It is unclear which of these elements is being referenced by “The sheet pile module”. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “The sheet pile module of claim 20” to mean “The sheet pile wall of claim 20”. Claims 4-6 are rejected for depending from a rejected claim.
Regarding claim 6, it is unclear whether “a ball end or a socket end” in lines 3-4 are the same as or different than, and in addition to, “a ball end or a socket end” in claim 5 because of the double positive recitation of “a ball end or a socket end”. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “a ball end or a socket end” to mean “the ball end or the socket end”.
Regarding claim 7, the wording of “The sheet pile module of claim 20” in line 1 is confusing. Claim 20 recites “A sheet pile wall” comprising “a first sheet pile module” and “a second sheet pile module”. It is unclear which of these elements is being referenced by “The sheet pile module”. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “The sheet pile module of claim 20” to mean “The sheet pile wall of claim 20”.
Regarding claim 8, the wording of “The sheet pile module of claim 20” in line 1 is confusing. Claim 20 recites “A sheet pile wall” comprising “a first sheet pile module” and “a second sheet pile module”. It is unclear which of these elements is being referenced by “The sheet pile module”. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “The sheet pile module of claim 20” to mean “The sheet pile wall of claim 20”. Further, it is unclear which first and second U-sheet piles are meant by “the first and second U-sheet piles” in line 2 because a plurality of first and second U-sheet piles are previously recited. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “the first and second U-sheet piles” to mean “the first and second U-sheet piles of the first module”.
Regarding claim 9, the wording of “The sheet pile module of claim 22” in line 1 is confusing. Claim 22 depends from claim 20 which recites “A sheet pile wall” comprising “a first sheet pile module” and “a second sheet pile module”. It is unclear which of these elements is being referenced by “The sheet pile module”. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “The sheet pile module of claim 22” to mean “The sheet pile wall of claim 22”. Further, claim 9 recites the limitations “the first and second Z-sheet piles” in line 2 and “the central sheet pile” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. Examiner notes that it appears that claim 9 should depend from claim 23 instead of claim 22.
Regarding claim 10, the wording of “The sheet pile module of claim 20” in line 1 is confusing. Claim 20 recites “A sheet pile wall” comprising “a first sheet pile module” and “a second sheet pile module”. It is unclear which of these elements is being referenced by “The sheet pile module”. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “The sheet pile module of claim 20” to mean “The sheet pile wall of claim 20”.
Regarding claim 13, the wording of “The sheet pile module of claim 23” in line 1 is confusing. Claim 23 recites “A sheet wall” comprising “a first sheet pile module” and “a second sheet pile module”. It is unclear which of these elements is being referenced by “The sheet pile module”. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “The sheet pile module of claim 23” to mean “The sheet wall of claim 23”. Claims 14-16 are rejected for depending from a rejected claim.
Regarding claim 16, it is unclear whether “a ball end or a socket end” in lines 3-4 are the same as or different than, and in addition to, “a ball end or a socket end” in claim 15 because of the double positive recitation of “a ball end or a socket end”. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “a ball end or a socket end” to mean “the ball end or the socket end”.
Regarding claim 17, the wording of “The sheet pile module of claim 23” in line 1 is confusing. Claim 23 recites “A sheet wall” comprising “a first sheet pile module” and “a second sheet pile module”. It is unclear which of these elements is being referenced by “The sheet pile module”. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “The sheet pile module of claim 23” to mean “The sheet wall of claim 23”.
Regarding claim 18, the wording of “The sheet pile module of claim 23” in line 1 is confusing. Claim 23 recites “A sheet wall” comprising “a first sheet pile module” and “a second sheet pile module”. It is unclear which of these elements is being referenced by “The sheet pile module”. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “The sheet pile module of claim 23” to mean “The sheet wall of claim 23”.
Regarding claim 19, the wording of “The sheet pile module of claim 23” in line 1 is confusing. Claim 23 recites “A sheet wall” comprising “a first sheet pile module” and “a second sheet pile module”. It is unclear which of these elements is being referenced by “The sheet pile module”. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “The sheet pile module of claim 23” to mean “The sheet wall of claim 23”. Further, the wording of “for each of the first and second Z-sheet piles, the intermediate segment is integrally formed with the first coupling segment and the second coupling segment” in lines 2-3 is confusing. The Z-sheet piles do not have intermediate segments, therefore this limitation does not make sense. For purposes of examination, the examiner interprets “for each of the first and second Z-sheet piles, the intermediate segment is integrally formed with the first coupling segment and the second coupling segment” to mean “for each of the first and second central U-sheet piles, the intermediate segment is integrally formed with the first coupling segment and the second coupling segment”.
Claim 21 recites the limitation “The sheet wall” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner notes that a sheet pile wall is previously recited, but not a sheet wall.
Claim 22 recites the limitation “The sheet wall” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner notes that a sheet pile wall is previously recited, but not a sheet wall.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 7, 9, 10 and 17-24 (as best understood) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by White et al (WO 99/11869).
Regarding claim 20, White discloses a sheet pile wall (e.g. Fig.’s 2 and 3, claim 1) comprising: a first sheet pile module (e.g. Fig. 2) including: a first central Z-sheet pile (e.g. 12, Fig.’s 2 and 4) having a first coupling segment with a first coupling feature along a first longitudinal edge (e.g. lip 15, Fig. 4), a second coupling segment with a second coupling feature along a second longitudinal edge that is opposite and parallel to the first longitudinal edge (e.g. opposite lip 15, Fig. 4), and an intermediate segment connected between the first coupling segment and the second coupling segment (e.g. 14, Fig. 4, page 7, paragraph 2), a first U-sheet pile connected to the first coupling feature (e.g. 1, Fig. 2), and a second U-sheet pile connected to the second coupling feature (e.g. 2, Fig. 2); and a second sheet pile module (e.g. identical to Fig. 2) including: a second central Z-sheet pile (e.g. 12, Fig.’s 2 and 4) having a first coupling segment with a first coupling feature along a first longitudinal edge (e.g. lip 15, Fig. 4), a second coupling segment with a second coupling feature along a second longitudinal edge that is opposite and parallel to the first longitudinal edge (e.g. opposite lip 15, Fig. 4), and an intermediate segment connected between the first coupling segment and the second coupling segment (e.g. 14, Fig. 4, page 7, paragraph 2), a first U-sheet pile connected to the first coupling feature of the second central Z-sheet pile (e.g. 1, Fig. 2), and a second U-sheet pile connected to the second coupling feature of the second Z-sheet pile (e.g. 2, Fig. 2); wherein the second U-sheet pile of the first module is coupled to the first U-sheet pile of the second module to form a segment of the sheet pile wall (e.g. Fig. 3 wherein 2 and 1 are coupled via a Z-sheet pile).
Regarding claim 23, White discloses a sheet wall (e.g. Fig.’s 2 and 3, claim 1) comprising: a first sheet pile module (e.g. Fig. 2) including: a first central U-sheet pile (e.g. 1, Fig. 2) having a first coupling segment with a first coupling feature along a first longitudinal edge (e.g. coupler along leftmost longitudinal edge of 1, Fig. 2), a second coupling segment with a second coupling feature along a second longitudinal edge that is opposite and parallel to the first longitudinal edge (e.g. coupler along rightmost longitudinal edge of 1, Fig. 2), and an intermediate segment connected between the first coupling segment and the second coupling segment (e.g. portion of 1 between the couplers, Fig. 2), a first Z-sheet pile connected to the first coupling feature (e.g. leftmost 12 (labeled 14 in Fig. 2), Fig. 2), and a second Z-sheet pile connected to the second coupling feature (e.g. rightmost 12, Fig. 2); and a second sheet pile module (e.g. identical to Fig. 2) including: a second central U-sheet pile (e.g. 1, Fig. 2) having a first coupling segment with a first coupling feature along a first longitudinal edge (e.g. coupler along leftmost longitudinal edge of 1, Fig. 2), a second coupling segment with a second coupling feature along a second longitudinal edge that is opposite and parallel to the first longitudinal edge (e.g. coupler along rightmost longitudinal edge of 1, Fig. 2), and an intermediate segment connected between the first coupling segment and the second coupling segment (e.g. portion of 1 between the couplers, Fig. 2), a first Z-sheet pile connected to the first coupling feature (e.g. leftmost 12 (labeled 14 in Fig. 2), Fig. 2), and a second Z-sheet pile connected to the second coupling feature (e.g. rightmost 12, Fig. 2); wherein the second Z-sheet pile of the first module is coupled to the first Z-sheet pile of the second module to form a segment of the sheet pile wall (e.g. Fig. 3 wherein the Z-sheet piles are coupled via 2).
Regarding claim 7, White further discloses that at least one of the first coupling feature and the second coupling feature of the first central Z-sheet pile has a Larssen-type connecting element (e.g. Fig. 2, page 8, paragraph 2).
Regarding claim 9, White further discloses that the first and second Z-sheet piles are mirror-symmetrical with respect to the central sheet pile (e.g. Fig.’s 2 and 3).
Regarding claim 10, White further discloses that the first sheet pile module is prefabricated (e.g. Fig.’s 2 and 3, claim 1).
Regarding claim 17, White further discloses that at least one of the first coupling feature and the second coupling feature of the first central U-sheet pile has a Larssen-type connecting element (e.g. Fig. 2, page 8, paragraph 2).
Regarding claim 18, White further discloses that inner sides of the first and second Z-sheet piles of the first module point in the same direction (e.g. Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 19, White further discloses that for each of the first and second Z-sheet piles, the intermediate segment is integrally formed with the first coupling segment and the second coupling segment (e.g. Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 21, White further discloses a connecting element coupling the first module to the second module (e.g. leftmost Z-sheet pile, Fig. 2, shown connecting 1 and 2 in Fig. 3), the connecting element including a first coupling feature connected to an edge of the second U-sheet pile of the first module and a second coupling feature connected to an edge of the first U-sheet pile of the second module (e.g. opposite lips 15, Fig.’s 2-4).
Regarding claim 22, White further discloses that the first module consists only of the first central Z-sheet pile, the first U-sheet pile, and the second U-sheet pile, and the second module consists only of the second central Z-sheet pile, the first U-sheet pile, and the second U- sheet pile (e.g. Fig. 2 wherein the leftmost Z-sheet pile is not considered part of the first or second module).
Regarding claim 24, White further discloses that the first module consists only of the first central U-sheet pile, the first Z-sheet pile, and the second Z-sheet pile, and the second module consists only of the second central U-sheet pile, the first Z-sheet pile, and the second Z- sheet pile (e.g. Fig. 2 wherein 2 is not considered part of the first or second module).
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.
Claims 3, 4, 13 and 14 (as best understood) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over White et al (WO 99/11869) as applied to claims 20 and 23 above, and further in view of Wunsch (WO 2017/178326).
Regarding claim 3, White discloses the invention substantially as applied above and further discloses that at least one of the first and second U-sheet piles of the first module has a coupling feature at an end thereof facing away from the first central Z-sheet pile (e.g. Fig. 2 wherein both U-sheet piles include coupling features) but White does not disclose that the coupling feature has a ball-and-socket type connecting element. Wunsch teaches a sheet pile (e.g. 2, Fig. 1) comprising: a sheet pile (e.g. 2, Fig. 1), wherein the sheet pile has a coupling feature at an end thereof having a ball-and-socket type connecting element (e.g. 4 and/or 6, Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a ball-and-socket type connecting element as taught by Wunsch for the connecting element of White because such is a known connecting element that would provide the expected benefit of higher performance in the tensile direction (e.g. Wunsch, paragraph 0055).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of White and Wendt further discloses that the connecting element of the ball-and-socket type is formed integrally with the corresponding sheet pile (e.g. Wunsch, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 13, White discloses the invention substantially as applied above and further discloses that at least one of the first and second Z-sheet piles of the first module has a coupling feature at an end thereof facing away from the central sheet pile (e.g. Fig. 2 wherein both Z-sheet piles include coupling features) but White does not disclose that the coupling feature has a ball-and-socket type connecting element. Wunsch teaches a sheet pile (e.g. 2, Fig. 1) comprising: a sheet pile (e.g. 2, Fig. 1), wherein the sheet pile has a coupling feature at an end thereof having a ball-and-socket type connecting element (e.g. 4 and/or 6, Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a ball-and-socket type connecting element as taught by Wunsch for the connecting element of White because such is a known connecting element that would provide the expected benefit of higher performance in the tensile direction (e.g. Wunsch, paragraph 0055).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of White and Wendt further discloses that the connecting element of the ball-and-socket type is formed integrally with the corresponding sheet pile (e.g. Wunsch, Fig. 1).
Claims 3, 5, 6, 13, 15 and 16 (as best understood) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over White et al (WO 99/11869) as applied to claims 20 and 23 above, and further in view of Wendt (DE 102012214965).
Regarding claim 3, White discloses the invention substantially as applied above and further discloses that at least one of the first and second U-sheet piles of the first module has a coupling feature at an end thereof facing away from the first central Z-sheet pile (e.g. Fig. 2 wherein both U-sheet piles include coupling features) but White does not disclose that the coupling feature has a ball-and-socket type connecting element. Wendt teaches a sheet pile module comprising: a sheet pile (e.g. 11, Fig. 1, paragraph 0022); wherein the sheet pile has a coupling feature at an end thereof having a ball-and-socket type connecting element (e.g. coupling feature 2 with ball 31, Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a separate ball-and-socket type connecting element as taught by Wendt for the connecting element of White because such is a known connecting element in the art that would provide the expected benefit of allowing profiles of different types to be connected and preventing the connecting element from slipping out of a sheet pile (e.g. Wendt, paragraph 0005).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of White and Wendt further discloses that the connecting element of the ball-and-socket type is provided by a separate connecting element of the ball-and-socket type (e.g. Wendt, 2, Fig. 1) having either a ball end or a socket end extending away from the sheet pile to which it is connected (e.g. Wendt, 31, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of White and Wendt further discloses that the connecting element of the ball-and-socket type is provided by the separate connecting element of the ball-and-socket type having a ball end or a socket end extending away from the sheet pile to which it is connected (e.g. as described above) and having a Larssen interlock facing the sheet pile to which it is connected (e.g. Wendt, 5, Fig. 1, claim 1).
Regarding claim 13, White discloses the invention substantially as applied above and further discloses that at least one of the first and second Z-sheet piles of the first module has a coupling feature at an end thereof facing away from the central sheet pile (e.g. Fig. 2 wherein both Z-sheet piles include coupling features) but White does not disclose that the coupling feature has a ball-and-socket type connecting element. Wendt teaches a sheet pile module comprising: a sheet pile (e.g. 11, Fig. 1, paragraph 0022); wherein the sheet pile has a coupling feature at an end thereof having a ball-and-socket type connecting element (e.g. coupling feature 2 with ball 31, Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use a separate ball-and-socket type connecting element as taught by Wendt for the connecting element of White because such is a known connecting element in the art that would provide the expected benefit of allowing profiles of different types to be connected and preventing the connecting element from slipping out of a sheet pile (e.g. Wendt, paragraph 0005).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of White and Wendt further discloses that the connecting element of the ball-and-socket type is a separate connecting element of the ball-and-socket type (e.g. Wendt, 2, Fig. 1) having either a ball end or a socket end extending away from the sheet pile to which it is connected (e.g. Wendt, 31, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of White and Wendt further discloses that the connecting element of the ball-and-socket type is provided by the separate connecting element of the ball-and-socket type having a ball end or a socket end extending away from the sheet pile to which it is connected (e.g. as described above) and having a Larssen interlock facing the sheet pile to which it is connected (e.g. Wendt, 5, Fig. 1, claim 1).
Claim 8 (as best understood) is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Homann (GB 340,853) in view of Taenak et al (US 2004/0093821).
Regarding claim 8, Homann discloses a sheet pile wall (e.g. Fig. 1, claim 1) comprising: a first sheet pile module (e.g. Fig. 1) including: a first central Z-sheet pile (e.g. b, Fig. 1) having a first coupling segment with a first coupling feature along a first longitudinal edge (e.g. ball coupler along leftmost longitudinal edge, Fig. 1), a second coupling segment with a second coupling feature along a second longitudinal edge that is opposite and parallel to the first longitudinal edge (e.g. socket coupler along rightmost longitudinal edge, Fig. 1), and an intermediate segment connected between the first coupling segment and the second coupling segment (e.g. portion of b between the ball coupler and the socket coupler, Fig. 1), a first U-sheet pile connected to the first coupling feature (e.g. leftmost a, Fig. 1), and a second U-sheet pile connected to the second coupling feature (e.g. rightmost a, Fig. 1). Homann does not explicitly disclose a second sheet pile module including a second central Z-sheet pile, a first U-sheet pile, and a second U-sheet pile, wherein the second U-sheet pile of the first module is coupled to the first U-sheet pile of the second module to form a segment of the sheet pile wall. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to connect at least two of the sheet pile modules of Homann together because it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art and connecting together any number of the sheet pile modules would provide the expected benefit of forming the sheet pile wall with the required length. Such duplication results in a second sheet pile module including a second central Z-sheet pile, a first U-sheet pile, and a second U-sheet pile (e.g. identical to the first sheet pile module as explained above) and the second U-sheet pile of the first module being coupled to the first U-sheet pile of the second module via a Z-sheet pile (e.g. similar to b, Fig. 1). Homann also does not explicitly disclose that open sides of the first and second U-sheet piles point in the same direction. Taenak teaches a sheet pile wall (e.g. 6, Fig.’s 2a and 2b) comprising: a first central sheet pile (e.g. central 1, Fig.’s 2a and 2b) having a first coupling segment with a first coupling feature along a first longitudinal edge (e.g. leftmost 5 of central 1, Fig.’s 2a and 2b), a second coupling segment with a second coupling feature along a second longitudinal edge that is opposite and parallel to the first longitudinal edge (e.g. rightmost 5 of central 1, Fig.’s 2a and 2b), and an intermediate segment connected between the first coupling segment and the second coupling segment (e.g. portion of central 1 between leftmost 5 and rightmost 5, Fig. 1), a first U-sheet pile connected to the first coupling feature (e.g. leftmost 1, Fig.’s 2a and 2b), and a second U-sheet pile connected to the second coupling feature (e.g. rightmost 1, Fig.’s 2a and 2b). Taenak further teaches that U-sheet piles can be designed with the open sides pointing in the same direction or the opposite direction to meet the needs of a particular situation (e.g. paragraph 0037). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to form the U-sheet piles of Homann such that the open sides point in the same direction as taught by Taenak for the expected benefit of reducing the width required for the module to be built (e.g. Taenak, paragraph 0037).
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 STACY N LAWSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7515. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-3pm.
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, Amber Anderson can be reached at 571-270-5281. 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.
/S.N.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3678
/AMBER R ANDERSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3678
Prosecution Insights