DETAILED ACTION
This is the first office action regarding application number 18/722,351, filed June 20, 2024. This is a Non-Final Office Action on the merits, Claims 2-4, 7, 10, 12-14, 16-17, 20, 24, and 27-28 have been amended. Claims 5-6, 8-9, 11, 15, 18-19, 21, 23, 25, and 29-34 have been cancelled. New claims 35-36 have been added. Claims 1-4, 7, 10, 12-14, 16-17, 20, 22, 24, 26-28, and 35-36 are currently pending and are addressed below.
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgement is made of applicants claim for domestic priority based on an provisional application filed on December 21, 2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed on 2/20/2026, 5/2/2025, 11/5/2024, and 6/20/2024 is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: Figure 5, item 6. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract of the disclosure does not commence on a separate sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.52(b)(4) and 1.72(b). A new abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text.
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 7, 12, 14, 16-17, and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Guibbert (US 20170016255)
Regarding claim 1, Guibbert teaches a system for triggering a functionality of a vehicle comprising (Paragraph [0020], "the detection device according to the invention can provide reliable and robust detection of the intention to unlock or lock the vehicle")
an inductive sensor (Paragraph [0050], "the invention proposes that said contact detection element 100 comprise an inductive sensor")
a vehicle interface (Paragraph [0070], "The elastically deformable area of the handle 10 is made of a flexible material, for example the same material as the first part 52 (Bayblend®, for example), and its thickness e1 is less than the thickness e0 of the second outer surface S2 of the handle 10 located around said elastically deformable area,” here the vehicle handle with a button is an interface )
a conductive target coupled to the vehicle interface and configured to move with the vehicle interface between a first position and a second position relative to the inductive sensor (Paragraph [0071], “The non-magnetic metal target 40 is adapted to move along the axis Y-Y′. Said non-magnetic metal target 40 is made, for example, of aluminum or any other non-magnetic metal," here the metal target moves along the y-y axis to a plurality of positions)
the first position having a first inductance and the second position having a second inductance different from the first inductance (Paragraph [0088-0089], "For example, if there is a force of 10 N exerted by the user on the locking area Z1′ of the handle 10, and an initial distance d0 of about 1 mm between the non-magnetic metal target 40 and the coil 20, the movement of the non-magnetic metal target 40 during pressing varies from about 20 μm to 100 μm, and the final distance d1 between the non-magnetic metal target 40 and the coil is then in the range from 0.9 mm to 0.98 mm. This movement from the initial distance d0 to the final distance d1 modifies the inductance of the coil 20. The variation in the inductance of said coil 20 is therefore representative of the user's pressure on the handle 10,” here the target moves between a plurality of positional distances which changes the inductance)
and a controller configured to receive a signal from the inductive sensor indicative of a change between the first inductance and the second inductance (Paragraph [0078], "The control means 60′ consist of a microcontroller 60′, and the comparison means M3 are, for example, integrated into the microcontroller 60′, supplied with a voltage Vcc.")
and trigger the functionality of the vehicle (Paragraph [0004], "it triggers the locking/unlocking of the door").
Regarding claim 7, Guibbert teaches the system as discussed above in claim 1, Guibbert further teaches wherein the conductive target includes Cu tape (Paragraph [0071], “The non-magnetic metal target 40 is adapted to move along the axis Y-Y′. Said non-magnetic metal target 40 is made, for example, of aluminum or any other non-magnetic metal,” here the target is made of any non-magnetic metal such as Copper).
Regarding claim 12, Guibbert teaches the system as discussed above in claim 1, Guibbert further teaches wherein the signal is indicative of at least a location of a force applied to the vehicle interface and wherein the functionality is based on the location of the force (Paragraph [0088], “For example, if there is a force of 10 N exerted by the user on the locking area Z1′ of the handle 10, and an initial distance d0 of about 1 mm between the non-magnetic metal target 40 and the coil 20, the movement of the non-magnetic metal target 40 during pressing varies from about 20 μm to 100 μm, and the final distance d1 between the non-magnetic metal target 40 and the coil is then in the range from 0.9 mm to 0.98 mm,” here the locking/unlocking signal is a result of a force applied to the vehicle interface/hand in the specific locking area Z1’).
Regarding claim 14, Guibbert teaches the system as discussed above in claim 1, Guibbert further teaches further comprising a memory configured to store values or settings related to the functionality (Paragraph [0004], “The detection device is connected to the computer of the vehicle or ECU (English abbreviation for “Electronic Control Unit”), and sends it a presence detection signal. The vehicle's computer has previously identified the user as being authorized to access the vehicle; alternatively, it proceeds to perform this identification after receiving this presence detection signal,” here the detection device is connected to a vehicle computer which stores values or settings).
Regarding claim 16, Guibbert teaches the system as discussed above in claim 1, Guibbert further teaches further comprising a buffer disposed between the inductive sensor and the conductive target (Paragraph [0051], “a compressible prestressed element 30, located between the target 40 and the coil 20”).
Regarding claim 17, Guibbert teaches the system as discussed above in claim 1, Guibbert further teaches wherein the buffer comprises a rubber buffer (Paragraph [0051], “a compressible prestressed element 30, located between the target 40 and the coil 20”) (Paragraph [0080], “The compressible prestressed element 30 is located between the non-magnetic metal target 40 and the coil 20, and is made, for example, of EPDM (ethylene propylene diene monomer),” here EPDM is a synthetic rubber).
Regarding claim 26, Guibbert teaches a method for triggering a functionality of a vehicle, the vehicle comprising (Paragraph [0020], "the detection device according to the invention can provide reliable and robust detection of the intention to unlock or lock the vehicle")
at least one target surface (Paragraph [0071], “The non-magnetic metal target 40 is adapted to move along the axis Y-Y′. Said non-magnetic metal target 40 is made, for example, of aluminum or any other non-magnetic metal," here the metal target moves along the y-y axis to a plurality of positions)
and at least one inductive sensor (Paragraph [0050], "the invention proposes that said contact detection element 100 comprise an inductive sensor")
disposed relative to the at least one target surface to sense movement of the target surface comprising (Paragraph [0088-0089], "For example, if there is a force of 10 N exerted by the user on the locking area Z1′ of the handle 10, and an initial distance d0 of about 1 mm between the non-magnetic metal target 40 and the coil 20, the movement of the non-magnetic metal target 40 during pressing varies from about 20 μm to 100 μm, and the final distance d1 between the non-magnetic metal target 40 and the coil is then in the range from 0.9 mm to 0.98 mm. This movement from the initial distance d0 to the final distance d1 modifies the inductance of the coil 20. The variation in the inductance of said coil 20 is therefore representative of the user's pressure on the handle 10,” here the target moves between a plurality of positional distances which changes the inductance)
moving the at least one target surface to change a distance between the at least one target surface and the at least one inductive sensor (Paragraph [0071], “The non-magnetic metal target 40 is adapted to move along the axis Y-Y′. Said non-magnetic metal target 40 is made, for example, of aluminum or any other non-magnetic metal," here the metal target moves along the y-y axis to a plurality of positions)
generating a signal in response to a change in a measured inductance caused by the change in the distance (Paragraph [0089], “This movement from the initial distance d0 to the final distance d1 modifies the inductance of the coil 20. The variation in the inductance of said coil 20 is therefore representative of the user's pressure on the handle 10.”)
and triggering the functionality of the vehicle based on the signal (Paragraph [0004], "it triggers the locking/unlocking of the door").
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.
Claims 2-4, 10, 13, 20, 22, 24, 27-28 and 35-36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guibbert (US-20170016255) in view of Kandler (US 20200036411).
Regarding claim 2, Guibbert teaches the system as discussed above in claim 1, however Guibbert does not explicitly teach wherein the functionality includes activating a horn.
Kandler teaches a switch to be arranged on a vehicle component as well as a method for producing a vehicle component including
an inductive sensor (Paragraph [0021], “It is also conceivable that the apparatus is designed for the inductive detection of the actuation, wherein an inductive element (in particular, a coil) of the apparatus forms the NFC antenna.”)
wherein the functionality includes activating a horn (Paragraph [0022], “In particular, it is possible that the switch is arranged in a steering wheel, wherein the switch is used to trigger a horn signal.”).
Guibbert and Kandler are analogous art as they are both generally related to systems and methods for detecting a user input to trigger a function of a vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include wherein the functionality includes activating a horn of Kandler in the system for actuating a functionality of a vehicle of Guibbert with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve the functionality of the vehicle by incorporating inconspicuous methods while still being easily accessible by a passenger for triggering functionality of the vehicle (Paragraph [0010], “which is as inconspicuous as possible, of the NFC antenna into the vehicle takes place, wherein, nevertheless, the antenna can be easily accessible for a vehicle passenger”).
Regarding claim 3, Guibbert teaches the system as discussed above in claim 1, however Guibbert does not explicitly teach wherein the vehicle interface comprises a steering wheel assembly that includes an airbag module.
Kandler further teaches wherein the vehicle interface comprises a steering wheel assembly that includes an airbag module (Paragraph [0017], “In particular, the vehicle component is a steering wheel, in particular, an airbag module of a steering wheel.”).
Guibbert and Kandler are analogous art as they are both generally related to systems and methods for detecting a user input to trigger a function of a vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include wherein the vehicle interface comprises a steering wheel assembly that includes an airbag module of Kandler in the system for actuating a functionality of a vehicle of Guibbert with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve the functionality of the vehicle by incorporating inconspicuous methods while still being easily accessible by a passenger for triggering functionality of the vehicle (Paragraph [0010], “which is as inconspicuous as possible, of the NFC antenna into the vehicle takes place, wherein, nevertheless, the antenna can be easily accessible for a vehicle passenger”).
Regarding claim 4, Guibbert teaches the system as discussed above in claim 1, however Guibbert does not explicitly teach wherein the conductive target is disposed upon a surface of the airbag module and the inductive sensor is disposed upon the steering wheel assembly.
Kandler further teaches wherein the conductive target is disposed upon a surface of the airbag module and the inductive sensor is disposed upon the steering wheel assembly (Paragraph [0017], “In particular, the vehicle component is a steering wheel, in particular, an airbag module of a steering wheel.”) (Paragraph [0022], “In particular, it is possible that the switch is arranged in a steering wheel, wherein the switch is used to trigger a horn signal.”) (See also figure 10).
Guibbert and Kandler are analogous art as they are both generally related to systems and methods for detecting a user input to trigger a function of a vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include wherein the conductive target is disposed upon a surface of the airbag module and the inductive sensor is disposed upon the steering wheel assembly of Kandler in the system for actuating a functionality of a vehicle of Guibbert with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve the functionality of the vehicle by incorporating inconspicuous methods while still being easily accessible by a passenger for triggering functionality of the vehicle (Paragraph [0010], “which is as inconspicuous as possible, of the NFC antenna into the vehicle takes place, wherein, nevertheless, the antenna can be easily accessible for a vehicle passenger”).
Regarding claim 10, Guibbert teaches the system as discussed above in claim 1, Guibbert further teaches wherein the signal indicates a measure of force applied to the vehicle interface (Paragraph [0088], “For example, if there is a force of 10 N exerted by the user on the locking area Z1′ of the handle 10, and an initial distance d0 of about 1 mm between the non-magnetic metal target 40 and the coil 20, the movement of the non-magnetic metal target 40 during pressing varies from about 20 μm to 100 μm, and the final distance d1 between the non-magnetic metal target 40 and the coil is then in the range from 0.9 mm to 0.98 mm,” here the locking/unlocking signal is a result of a force applied to the vehicle interface/hand in the specific locking area Z1’).
However Guibbert does not explicitly teach wherein the triggering the functionality comprises emitting a sound, and wherein a volume level of the sound is based on the measure of the force.
Kandler further teaches wherein the triggering the functionality comprises emitting a sound, and wherein a volume level of the sound is based on the measure of the force (Paragraph [0022], “In particular, it is possible that the switch is arranged in a steering wheel, wherein the switch is used to trigger a horn signal.”) (Paragraph [0056], “The decorative element 102 is, in particular, a manufacturer emblem plaque attached to an airbag cover. The cover 201 can be moved against the restoring force of two springs 203 relative to a base 202 of the switch 200. An apparatus comprising strain gauges 204, 205 on the cover 201 and/or on the base 202 for detecting an actuation of the probe element register the movement of the cover 201, whereby a switch signal is triggered,” here the system is detecting a force applied to the detection area and in response to the force the vehicle emits a sound, the volume level in this case is binary, a noise is emitted when the force is great enough, and no noise is emitted when the force doesn’t exceed the threshold).
Guibbert and Kandler are analogous art as they are both generally related to systems and methods for detecting a user input to trigger a function of a vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include wherein the triggering the functionality comprises emitting a sound, and wherein a volume level of the sound is based on the measure of the force of Kandler in the system for actuating a functionality of a vehicle of Guibbert with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve the functionality of the vehicle by incorporating inconspicuous methods while still being easily accessible by a passenger for triggering functionality of the vehicle (Paragraph [0010], “which is as inconspicuous as possible, of the NFC antenna into the vehicle takes place, wherein, nevertheless, the antenna can be easily accessible for a vehicle passenger”).
Regarding claim 13, Guibbert teaches the system as discussed above in claim 1, Guibbert further teaches wherein the signal is indicative of at least a location of a force applied to the vehicle interface and wherein the functionality is based on the location of the force (Paragraph [0088], “For example, if there is a force of 10 N exerted by the user on the locking area Z1′ of the handle 10, and an initial distance d0 of about 1 mm between the non-magnetic metal target 40 and the coil 20, the movement of the non-magnetic metal target 40 during pressing varies from about 20 μm to 100 μm, and the final distance d1 between the non-magnetic metal target 40 and the coil is then in the range from 0.9 mm to 0.98 mm,” here the locking/unlocking signal is a result of a force applied to the vehicle interface/hand in the specific locking area Z1’).
However Guibbert does not explicitly teach wherein the functionality includes emitting a sound that comprises a broadcast direction based on the location of the force.
Kandler further teaches wherein the functionality includes emitting a sound that comprises a broadcast direction based on the location of the force (Paragraph [0022], “In particular, it is possible that the switch is arranged in a steering wheel, wherein the switch is used to trigger a horn signal.”) (Paragraph [0056], “The decorative element 102 is, in particular, a manufacturer emblem plaque attached to an airbag cover. The cover 201 can be moved against the restoring force of two springs 203 relative to a base 202 of the switch 200. An apparatus comprising strain gauges 204, 205 on the cover 201 and/or on the base 202 for detecting an actuation of the probe element register the movement of the cover 201, whereby a switch signal is triggered,” here the system is detecting a force applied to the detection area, and in response to a force being detected in the specific location, the vehicle will emit a noise/horn, a horn has a broadcast direction that is exterior to the vehicle).
Guibbert and Kandler are analogous art as they are both generally related to systems and methods for detecting a user input to trigger a function of a vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include wherein the functionality includes emitting a sound that comprises a broadcast direction based on the location of the force of Kandler in the system for actuating a functionality of a vehicle of Guibbert with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve the functionality of the vehicle by incorporating inconspicuous methods while still being easily accessible by a passenger for triggering functionality of the vehicle (Paragraph [0010], “which is as inconspicuous as possible, of the NFC antenna into the vehicle takes place, wherein, nevertheless, the antenna can be easily accessible for a vehicle passenger”).
Regarding claim 20, Guibbert teaches the system as discussed above in claim 1, however Guibbert does not explicitly teach further comprising a steering wheel assembly having a center portion and wherein the vehicle interface is sized and shaped so that at least a portion of the vehicle interface fits within the center portion.
Kandler further teaches further comprising a steering wheel assembly having a center portion and wherein the vehicle interface is sized and shaped so that at least a portion of the vehicle interface fits within the center portion (Paragraph [0017], “In particular, the vehicle component is a steering wheel, in particular, an airbag module of a steering wheel.”) (Paragraph [0022], “In particular, it is possible that the switch is arranged in a steering wheel, wherein the switch is used to trigger a horn signal.”) (See also figure 10).
Guibbert and Kandler are analogous art as they are both generally related to systems and methods for detecting a user input to trigger a function of a vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include wherein the conductive target is disposed upon a surface of the airbag module and the inductive sensor is disposed upon the steering wheel assembly of Kandler in the system for actuating a functionality of a vehicle of Guibbert with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve the functionality of the vehicle by incorporating inconspicuous methods while still being easily accessible by a passenger for triggering functionality of the vehicle (Paragraph [0010], “which is as inconspicuous as possible, of the NFC antenna into the vehicle takes place, wherein, nevertheless, the antenna can be easily accessible for a vehicle passenger”).
Regarding claim 22, Guibbert teaches at least one inductive sensor (Paragraph [0050], "the invention proposes that said contact detection element 100 comprise an inductive sensor")
adapted to generate a signal in response to changes in a measure inductance caused by a change in distance between the at least one inductive sensor (Paragraph [0088-0089], "For example, if there is a force of 10 N exerted by the user on the locking area Z1′ of the handle 10, and an initial distance d0 of about 1 mm between the non-magnetic metal target 40 and the coil 20, the movement of the non-magnetic metal target 40 during pressing varies from about 20 μm to 100 μm, and the final distance d1 between the non-magnetic metal target 40 and the coil is then in the range from 0.9 mm to 0.98 mm. This movement from the initial distance d0 to the final distance d1 modifies the inductance of the coil 20. The variation in the inductance of said coil 20 is therefore representative of the user's pressure on the handle 10,” here the target moves between a plurality of positional distances which changes the inductance)
and the at least one target surface (Paragraph [0071], “The non-magnetic metal target 40 is adapted to move along the axis Y-Y′. Said non-magnetic metal target 40 is made, for example, of aluminum or any other non-magnetic metal," here the metal target moves along the y-y axis to a plurality of positions).
However Guibbert does not explicitly teach a steering wheel assembly for a vehicle comprising at least one target surface disposed on an airbag module.
Kandler teaches a switch to be arranged on a vehicle component as well as a method for producing a vehicle component including
an inductive sensor (Paragraph [0021], “It is also conceivable that the apparatus is designed for the inductive detection of the actuation, wherein an inductive element (in particular, a coil) of the apparatus forms the NFC antenna.”)
a steering wheel assembly for a vehicle comprising(Paragraph [0022], “In particular, it is possible that the switch is arranged in a steering wheel, wherein the switch is used to trigger a horn signal.”)
at least one target surface disposed on an airbag module (Paragraph [0017], “In particular, the vehicle component is a steering wheel, in particular, an airbag module of a steering wheel.”) (Paragraph [0022], “In particular, it is possible that the switch is arranged in a steering wheel, wherein the switch is used to trigger a horn signal.”) (See also figure 10).
Guibbert and Kandler are analogous art as they are both generally related to systems and methods for detecting a user input to trigger a function of a vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to include a steering wheel assembly for a vehicle comprising at least one target surface disposed on an airbag module of Kandler in the system for actuating a functionality of a vehicle of Guibbert with a reasonable expectation of success in order to improve the functionality of the vehicle by incorporating inconspicuous methods while still being easily accessible by a passenger for triggering functionality of the vehicle (Paragraph [0010], “which is as inconspicuous as possible, of the NFC antenna into the vehicle takes place, wherein, nevertheless, the antenna can be easily accessible for a vehicle passenger”).
Regarding claim 24, claim 24 is similar in scope to claim 16, and therefore is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 27, claim 27 is similar in scope to claim 2, and therefore is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 28, claim 28 is similar in scope to claim 4, and therefore is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 35, the combination of Guibbert and Kandler teaches the system as discussed above in claim 28, Guibbert further teaches wherein the signal indicates a measure of force, and wherein the triggering the functionality of the vehicle is based on the measure of the force (Paragraph [0088], “For example, if there is a force of 10 N exerted by the user on the locking area Z1′ of the handle 10, and an initial distance d0 of about 1 mm between the non-magnetic metal target 40 and the coil 20, the movement of the non-magnetic metal target 40 during pressing varies from about 20 μm to 100 μm, and the final distance d1 between the non-magnetic metal target 40 and the coil is then in the range from 0.9 mm to 0.98 mm,” here the locking/unlocking signal is a result of a force applied to the vehicle interface/hand in the specific locking area Z1’).
Regarding claim 36, claim 36 is similar in scope to claim 10, and therefore is rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Cash (US-9067618) teaches a touch based system for controlling and automotive steering wheel. Lisseman (US-20150097793) teaches a force-based haptic switch panel comprises a touch plate having first and second surfaces, the first surface comprising a touch surface and the second surface opposing the first surface. Bostick (US-20130263692) teaches a steering wheel is provided that may include a central member, a rim, a structural member, a switch-frame and a switch assembly.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER FEES whose telephone number is (303)297-4343. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30 - 5:30 MT.
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, Aniss Chad can be reached at (571) 270-3832. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER GEORGE FEES/Examiner, Art Unit 3662