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 7/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Double Patenting rejections, these rejections have been withdrawn due to amendments.
Regarding 35 USC 101 rejections, these rejections have been withdrawn due to amendments.
Regarding 35 USC 103 rejections for claims 41-49 and 52-63, applicant argues that the newly claimed “detecting that a 3D printer has completed or is near completion of a print job and thereby has available printing bandwidth” is not met by cited Tschanz or Mok, but this is not found persuasive. As discussed below, newly claimed “available printing bandwidth” is the given broadest reasonable interpretation to include the available capacity or utilization of the printer. Examiner notes that the instant specification does not define the term or give examples. Mok teaches [0106] the global RP data processing to identify the best central control system of a RP factory to execute a particular RP fabrication. The criteria considered preferably include…the job capacity of the RP factory (e.g. the number of jobs presently undertaken thereby), [0106]. Mok teaches usage of each dedicated system will be monitored, [0130], Fig. 10. Examiner notes that the claimed “bandwidth” is given broadest reasonable interpretation to include available capacity which is met by the “capacity” and “usage” of Mok as shown in Fig. 10 based on previously assigned sub-jobs. Therefore, the newly claimed limitations are found obvious in view of Tschanz as modified by Mok.
Regarding claim 48, applicant makes similar arguments about the newly claimed “bandwidth” which have been addressed above.
Regarding claims 43 and 55, applicant makes similar arguments about the newly claimed “bandwidth” which have been addressed above.
Regarding claim 56, applicant makes similar arguments about the newly claimed “bandwidth” which have been addressed above.
Regarding claims 47 and 59, applicant makes similar arguments about the newly claimed “bandwidth” which have been addressed above.
Regarding new claims 60 and 62, Applicant argues that “Mok assigns sub- jobs to dedicated systems based on schedules and deadlines but does not disclose inserting a lower- priority print job ahead of a higher-priority print job in a queue when the higher-priority print job remains completable by its request time” but this is not found persuasive. Tschanz teaches given an order queue line and a number of configurations, a particular configuration is selected which minimizes the cost function based on queue delays, printing time and total number of figurines in a configuration [0026] Mok teaches transferring processed data to the queue of a particular RP system in a RP center, with consideration of the availability of required dedicated systems, the queuing time against a requested deadline, [0087]. Examiner notes the “cost function” of Tschanz and “requested deadline” of Mok meets the claimed “higher-priority print job”.
Regarding new claims 61 and 63, Applicant argues “neither Tschanz nor Mok, separately or together, discloses the lead time determination and ranking recited in claims 61 and 63” but this is not found persuasive. Mok teaches considering the queuing time against a requested deadline [0087] Examiner notes the queuing time meets the claimed “lead time”.
Claim Interpretation
Regarding claims 41, 52, 60, and 62, the newly claimed “available printing bandwidth” is the given broadest reasonable interpretation to include the available capacity or utilization of the printer. Examiner notes that the instant specification does not define the term or give examples.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 41, 42, 45, 46, 49, 60, and 61 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tschanz et al. (US 2013/0290220 A1) in view of Mok et al. (US 2002/0147521 A1).
Regarding claim 41, Tschanz meets the claimed three-dimensional (3D) printing system (3D printer 104, Fig. 1) comprising: and a scheduling engine, (storage 108, Fig. 1) executed by a set of processors, (Processor 106, Fig. 1) configured to: receive a plurality of print job requests, (the printer 104 is in communication with the computer system 102 and is configured to print [0034]) each print job request indicating a respective 3D print job of a respective 3D item to be performed by the fleet of 3D printers; (the computer system may receive or generate a queue of items for printing [0025]) for each print job request: determine a set of print job attributes corresponding to the respective 3D print job, a print job completion time indicating a first amount of time required to complete the respective 3D print job (printing time [0026]) the print job attributes including one or more properties of the respective 3D item (e.g., cost for printing the beds based on a height of the figurines in the print bed, [0026]) indicated by the respective print job request, determine a respective priority score of the respective print job based on the set of print job attributes; (given an order queue line and a number of configurations, a particular configuration is selected which minimizes the cost function based on queue delays, printing time and total number of figurines in a configuration [0026]) maintain a 3D print job queue based on the respective priority score of the respective print job, (scoring which minimizes the cost function, see [0026]) wherein the 3D print job queue indicates an order to process the respective print job request with respect other print job requests; (queue of times for printing [0025])
Tschanz does not teach a fleet of 3D printers and selectively assign the respective print job request to the fleet of 3D printers according to the 3D print job queue.
Mok teaches a fleet of 3D printers; Mok prototype production system, comprising: a plurality of machining apparatuses [0007] including layered manufacturing (an additive process) and material removal (a subtractive process), [0081]. and selectively assign the respective print job request to the fleet of 3D printers according to the 3D print job queue. (Each sub-job is assigned to a dedicated system and allocated a time based upon the schedule of the dedicated system, [0131], Fig. 10 depicts Extrusion System 1 and Extrusion System 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use the printing queue of Tschanz with a plurality of additive manufacturing apparatuses as taught by Mok because it allows for optimizing the utility of each dedicated system at every new job received by the particular printing system and updating the customer with the current progress, see [0087].
Tschanz does not teach determine a print job request time indicating a second amount of time until printing of the respective 3D item is to be completed, by detecting that a 3D printer of the fleet has completed or is nearing completion of a print job and thereby has available printing bandwidth; assigning, to the 3D printer having the available printing bandwidth, a print job request from a head of the 3D print job queue; recalculating, in response to the detecting, the respective priority score of each remaining print job request and re-ordering the 3D print job queue based on the recalculated priority scores; and causing the 3D printer having the available printing bandwidth to print the respective 3D item of the assigned print job request.
Mok teaches determine a print job request time indicating a second amount of time until printing of the respective 3D item is to be completed. (Mok teaches transferring processed data to the queue of a particular RP system in a RP center, with consideration of the availability of required dedicated systems, the queuing time against a requested deadline, [0087], Fig. 5-6. It may be necessary to re-select a central control system and sequentially a local RP data processing system if all RP systems in a RP factory fail to meet the delivery deadline [0159]. Examiner notes the “deadline” meets the claimed “time required to complete the job”) by detecting that a 3D printer of the fleet has completed or is nearing completion of a print job and thereby has available printing bandwidth; (Mok teaches [0106] the global RP data processing to identify the best central control system of a RP factory to execute a particular RP fabrication. The criteria considered preferably include…the job capacity of the RP factory (e.g. the number of jobs presently undertaken thereby), [0106]. Mok teaches usage of each dedicated system will be monitored, [0130], Fig. 10. Examiner notes that the claimed “bandwidth” is given broadest reasonable interpretation to include available capacity which is met by the “capacity” and “usage” of Mok as shown in Fig. 10 based on previously assigned sub-jobs) assigning, to the 3D printer having the available printing bandwidth, a print job request from a head of the 3D print job queue; (Mok teaches each sub-job is assigned to a dedicated system and allocated a time based upon the schedule of the dedicated system, [0131]) recalculating, in response to the detecting, the respective priority score of each remaining print job request and re-ordering the 3D print job queue based on the recalculated priority scores; (Mok teaches transferring processed data to the queue of a particular RP system in a RP center, with consideration of the availability of required dedicated systems, the queuing time against a requested deadline, [0087]) and causing the 3D printer having the available printing bandwidth to print the respective 3D item of the assigned print job request. (Mok teaches execute a particular RP fabrication, [0106]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to determine the first time once printing begins and second time (deadline) when determining the queue order and accounting for available printing bandwidth because it allows for optimizing the utility of each dedicated system at every new job received by the particular printing system and updating the customer with the current progress, see [0087].
Regarding claim 42, Tschanz as modified meets the claimed 3D printing system of claim 41, wherein the scheduling engine is configured to determine the respective priority score of the respective print job based on a set of hierarchical scoring rules and the print job attributes of the respective print jobs. (Tschanz teaches given an order queue line and a number of configurations, a particular configuration is selected which minimizes the cost function based on queue delays, printing time and total number of figurines in a configuration [0026]).
Regarding claim 45, Tschanz as modified meets the claimed method of claim 41, wherein the respective print job request time of the respective print job is determined based on a requested pickup time received in the respective print job request. (Tschanz teaches a customer may be provided with a time estimate for when the item will be ready, [0051]. Tschanz teaches customer information is considered when determining which items form the queue to print, see [0050], to meeting or exceeding customer's expectations as to timeliness, see [0030]. Thus, the teaching of Tschanz to measure how long a customer has been waiting renders obvious “pickup time”).
Regarding claim 46, Tschanz as modified meets the claimed method of claim 53, wherein the respective print job completion time of the respective print job request is determined by: retrieving a design record from a design library (binary representation 306 defines an outer perimeter of the figurine for the view/angle at which the image was captured, [0045], Fig. 3) corresponding to the respective 3D item to be printed; determining a print time (printing time [0026]) of the respective 3D item to be 3D printed from the design record; and determining the first amount of time based on the print time. (Tschanz teaches speed bonus for batches that include smaller items and which will take less time to print [0052], which means that the algorithm calculates the time for the whole batch).
Regarding claim 49, Tschanz as modified meets the claimed 3D printing system of claim 41, wherein the print job attributes of the requested print job include a price attribute indicating a price paid to have the item 3D printed. (Tschanz teaches scoring may take into account a cost of printing figurines using a particular print bed [0026], and “dollar value” in claim 12 of the PG PUB).
Regarding claim 60, Tschanz as modified meets the claimed the 3D printing system of claim 41, wherein the scheduling engine is further configured to optimize the 3D print job queue based on printing bandwidth of the fleet and the respective print job completion times by inserting a lower-priority print job ahead of a higher-priority print job in the 3D print job queue when the higher-priority print job remains completable by the print job request time of the higher-priority print job. (Tschanz teaches given an order queue line and a number of configurations, a particular configuration is selected which minimizes the cost function based on queue delays, printing time and total number of figurines in a configuration [0026] Mok teaches transferring processed data to the queue of a particular RP system in a RP center, with consideration of the availability of required dedicated systems, the queuing time against a requested deadline, [0087]. Examiner notes the “cost function” of Tschanz and “requested deadline” of Mok meets the claimed “higher-priority print job”).
Regarding claim 61, Tschanz as modified meets the claimed 3D printing system of claim 41, wherein the scheduling engine is configured to determine the respective priority score by determining a lead time (Mok teaches considering the queuing time against a requested deadline [0087] Examiner notes the queuing time meets the claimed “lead time”) for the respective print job based on a difference between the print job completion time and the print job request time, and ranking the respective print job relative to the other print job requests based on the lead time. Tschanz teaches given an order queue line and a number of configurations, a particular configuration is selected which minimizes the cost function based on queue delays, printing time and total number of figurines in a configuration [0026].
Claim(s) 48 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tschanz et al. (US 2013/0290220 A1) in view of Mok et al. (US 2002/0147521 A1) and in further view of Nevins (US 9,533,526 B1).
Regarding claims 48, Tschanz does not disclose wherein the print job attributes of the requested print job include a loyalty attribute corresponding to a requestor of the print job.
Nevins meets the claimed wherein the print job attributes of the requested print job include a loyalty attribute corresponding to a requestor of the print job. (Nevins teaches additive manufacturing system 100 at a retail location where the cost of the headband 4110 can optionally depend upon the amount whether the customer is a member of a selected loyalty or rewards program, and/or other variables, Col. 44, lines 6-35. Tschanz teaches customer information is considered when determining which items form the queue to print, see [0050], to meeting or exceeding customer's expectations as to timeliness, see [0030]. Thus the combination of Tschanz and Nevins meets the claim).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the loyalty or rewards information of Nevins with the 3D printing queue of Tschanz because it improves customer experiences to attract new and repeat customers, see Col. 18, lines 63-67.
Claim(s) 53, 54, 57, 58, 62, and 63 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tschanz et al. (US 2013/0290220 A1) in view of Mok et al. (US 2002/0147521 A1).
Regarding claim 53, Tschanz meets the claimed method for controlling a fleet of 3D printers (the printer 104 is in communication with the computer system 102 and is configured to print [0034]) comprising: receiving, by a processing system having one or more processors, (Processor 106, Fig. 1) a plurality of print job requests, each print job request indicating a respective 3D print job of a respective 3D item to be performed (the computer system may receive or generate a queue of items for printing [0025]) for each print job request: determining, by the processing system, a set of print job attributes corresponding to the respective 3D print job, (e.g., cost for printing the beds based on a height of the figurines in the print bed, [0026]) the print job attributes including one or more properties of the respective 3D item indicated by the print job request, a print job completion time indicating a first amount of time required to complete the 3D print job, (printing time [0026])
determining, by the processing system, a respective priority score of the respective print job based on the one or more properties of the respective 3D item, the print job completion time, and the print job request time; (given an order queue line and a number of configurations, a particular configuration is selected which minimizes the cost function based on queue delays, printing time and total number of figurines in a configuration [0026])
maintaining, by the processing system, a 3D print job queue based on the respective priority score of the respective print job, (scoring which minimizes the cost function, see [0026]) wherein the 3D print job queue indicates an order to process the print job request with respect to other print job requests; and selectively assigning, by the processing system. (queue of times for printing [0025]).
Tschanz does not teach a fleet of 3D printers and selectively assign the respective print job request to the fleet of 3D printers according to the 3D print job queue.
Mok teaches a fleet of 3D printers; Mok prototype production system, comprising: a plurality of machining apparatuses [0007] including layered manufacturing (an additive process) and material removal (a subtractive process), [0081]. and selectively assign the respective print job request to the fleet of 3D printers according to the 3D print job queue. (Each sub-job is assigned to a dedicated system and allocated a time based upon the schedule of the dedicated system, [0131], Fig. 10 depicts Extrusion System 1 and Extrusion System 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use the printing queue of Tschanz with a plurality of additive manufacturing apparatuses as taught by Mok because it allows for optimizing the utility of each dedicated system at every new job received by the particular printing system and updating the customer with the current progress, see [0087].
Tschanz does not teach a print job request time indicating a second amount of time until printing of the respective 3D item is to be completed, by detecting that a 3D printer of the fleet has completed or is nearing completion of a print job and thereby has available printing bandwidth; assigning, to the 3D printer having the available printing bandwidth, a print job request from a head of the 3D print job queue; recalculating, in response to the detecting, the respective priority score of each remaining print job request and re-ordering the 3D print job queue based on the recalculated priority scores; and causing the 3D printer having the available printing bandwidth to print the respective 3D item of the assigned print job request.
Mok teaches a print job request time indicating a second amount of time until printing of the respective 3D item is to be completed (Mok teaches transferring processed data to the queue of a particular RP system in a RP center, with consideration of the availability of required dedicated systems, the queuing time against a requested deadline, [0087], Fig. 5-6. It may be necessary to re-select a central control system and sequentially a local RP data processing system if all RP systems in a RP factory fail to meet the delivery deadline [0159]. Examiner notes the “deadline” meets the claimed “time required to complete the job”) by detecting that a 3D printer of the fleet has completed or is nearing completion of a print job and thereby has available printing bandwidth; (Mok teaches [0106] the global RP data processing to identify the best central control system of a RP factory to execute a particular RP fabrication. The criteria considered preferably include…the job capacity of the RP factory (e.g. the number of jobs presently undertaken thereby), [0106]. Mok teaches usage of each dedicated system will be monitored, [0130], Fig. 10. Examiner notes that the claimed “bandwidth” is given broadest reasonable interpretation to include available capacity which is met by the “capacity” and “usage” of Mok as shown in Fig. 10 based on previously assigned sub-jobs) assigning, to the 3D printer having the available printing bandwidth, a print job request from a head of the 3D print job queue; (Mok teaches each sub-job is assigned to a dedicated system and allocated a time based upon the schedule of the dedicated system, [0131]) recalculating, in response to the detecting, the respective priority score of each remaining print job request and re-ordering the 3D print job queue based on the recalculated priority scores; (Mok teaches transferring processed data to the queue of a particular RP system in a RP center, with consideration of the availability of required dedicated systems, the queuing time against a requested deadline, [0087]) and causing the 3D printer having the available printing bandwidth to print the respective 3D item of the assigned print job request. (Mok teaches execute a particular RP fabrication, [0106]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to determine the first time once printing begins and second time (deadline) when determining the queue order and accounting for available printing bandwidth because it allows for optimizing the utility of each dedicated system at every new job received by the particular printing system and updating the customer with the current progress, see [0087].
Regarding claim 54, Tschanz as modified meets the claimed method of claim 53, wherein the determining the respective priority score of the respective print job is based on a set of hierarchical scoring rules and the print job attributes of the respective print jobs. (Tschanz teaches given an order queue line and a number of configurations, a particular configuration is selected which minimizes the cost function based on queue delays, printing time and total number of figurines in a configuration [0026]).
Regarding claim 57, Tschanz as modified meets the claimed method of claim 53, wherein the respective print job request time of the respective print job is determined based on a requested pickup time received in the respective print job request. (Tschanz teaches a customer may be provided with a time estimate for when the item will be ready, [0051]. Tschanz teaches customer information is considered when determining which items form the queue to print, see [0050], to meeting or exceeding customer's expectations as to timeliness, see [0030]. Thus, the teaching of Tschanz to measure how long a customer has been waiting renders obvious “pickup time”).
Regarding claim 58, Tschanz as modified meets the claimed method of claim 53, wherein the respective print job completion time of the respective print job request is determined by: retrieving a design record from a design library (binary representation 306 defines an outer perimeter of the figurine for the view/angle at which the image was captured, [0045], Fig. 3) corresponding to the respective 3D item to be printed; determining a print time (printing time [0026]) of the respective 3D item to be 3D printed from the design record; and determining the first amount of time based on the print time. (Tschanz teaches speed bonus for batches that include smaller items and which will take less time to print [0052], which means that the algorithm calculates the time for the whole batch).
Regarding claim 62, Tschanz as modified meets the claimed method of claim 53, wherein the selectively assigning further comprises optimizing the 3D print job queue based on printing bandwidth of the fleet and the respective print job completion times by inserting a lower-priority print job ahead of a higher-priority print job in the 3D print job queue when the higher-priority print job remains completable by the print job request time of the higher- priority print job. (Tschanz teaches given an order queue line and a number of configurations, a particular configuration is selected which minimizes the cost function based on queue delays, printing time and total number of figurines in a configuration [0026] Mok teaches transferring processed data to the queue of a particular RP system in a RP center, with consideration of the availability of required dedicated systems, the queuing time against a requested deadline, [0087]. Examiner notes the “cost function” of Tschanz and “requested deadline” of Mok meets the claimed “higher-priority print job”).
Regarding claim 63, Tschanz as modified meets the claimed method of claim 53, wherein the determining the respective priority score comprises determining a lead time (Mok teaches considering the queuing time against a requested deadline [0087] Examiner notes the queuing time meets the claimed “lead time”) for the respective print job based on a difference between the print job completion time and the print job request time, and ranking the respective print job relative to the other print job requests based on the lead time. (Tschanz teaches given an order queue line and a number of configurations, a particular configuration is selected which minimizes the cost function based on queue delays, printing time and total number of figurines in a configuration [0026]).
Claim(s) 43 and 55 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tschanz et al. (US 2013/0290220 A1) in view of Mok et al. (US 2002/0147521 A1) and in further view of Schwartz (US 2018/0120817 A1).
Regarding claims 43 and 55, Tschanz as modified does not teach wherein the scheduling engine is configured to determine the priority score of the respective print job based on a machine-learned scoring model and the respective print job attributes of the respective print job, wherein the machine- learned scoring model is trained on previously performed print jobs.
Schwartz teaches wherein the scheduling engine is configured to determine the priority score of the respective print job based on a machine-learned scoring model and the respective print job attributes of the respective print job, wherein the machine- learned scoring model is trained on previously performed print jobs. (The scoring may be based on weights determined by a second machine learning model (e.g., statistical, decision tree, neural network, or a combination thereof). For example, the score for a candidate orientation may represent the “cost” or difficulty of printing the part using the candidate orientation, see [0084]. Training data may also be collected from previous prints based on the orientations before and after operator input [0087]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the machine learning model of Schwartz with the scoring algorithm for 3D printing of Tschanz because it improves time and material efficiency in 3D printing, see [0005]-[0006].
Claim(s) 44 and 56 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tschanz et al. (US 2013/0290220 A1) in view of Mok et al. (US 2002/0147521 A1) in further view of Pettis (US 2017/0031635 A1).
Regarding claims 44 and 56, Tschanz does not meet the claimed wherein the respective print job request time of the respective 3D print job is determined based on a distance between a current location of a requestor of the 3D print job from a physical location of the fleet of 3D printers.
Pettis meets the claimed wherein the respective print job request time of the respective 3D print job is determined based on a distance between a current location of a requestor of the 3D print job from a physical location of the fleet of 3D printers. (Pettis teaches a 3D printing system including a mobile device 312 may include location awareness technology such as Global Positioning System (“GPS”), and the print server may determine a location of the mobile device 312 initiating the print job and locate a closest printer for fabrication of the object, see [0059]. Thus, the print server of Pettis must determine the distance of the requestor, which in combination with Tschanz teaches the expected time for a requestor, meets the claim).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to measure the distance from a requestor as taught by Pettis with the 3D printing algorithm of Tschanz because it improves the allocation of resources for remote users, see [0004].
Claim(s) 47 and 59 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tschanz et al. (US 2013/0290220 A1) in view of Mok et al. (US 2002/0147521 A1) in further view of Gain (US 2016/0361878).
Regarding claim 47, Tschanz does not explicitly teach wherein the respective print job completion time of the respective print job is further based on a pre-processing amount of time to pre-process the respective print job and a post-processing amount of time to post-process the respective 3D item after the respective 3D item has been printed.
Gain meets the claimed wherein the respective print job completion time of the respective print job is further based on a pre-processing amount of time to pre-process the respective print job and a post-processing amount of time to post-process the respective 3D item after the respective 3D item has been printed. (Gain teaches a 3D printing algorithm where the time includes the pre and post processing and time required to make the part 100, see [0051]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the pre and post processing time in the time to make the part as taught by Gain with the 3D printing algorithm of Tschanz so the user can be better informed of time required.
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Van Esbroeck (US 2020/0122388 A1) teaches [0031] By automating the design and preprocessing steps (i.e. the above processes), the fast turnaround time to delivery of printable data is achieved based on the input using 3D scan data of the patients' anatomy. The uploading process can be done by the same person or artificial intelligence.
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 MICHAEL M. ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-0467. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30AM-6PM.
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, Sam Zhao can be reached at (571)270-5343. 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.
/MICHAEL M. ROBINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1744
Prosecution Insights