DETAILED ACTION
This action is filed in response to the application filed on 6/10/2024.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgement is made of Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statements (IDS) form PTO-1149 filed on 2/27/2025. This IDS has been considered.
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 1-4, 8-11, and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Filkovski (US20100071457 A1) in view of Kilic (US 20200347714 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Filkovski teaches a method for performing a diagnostic task (e.g. see [0004] “In illustrative embodiments, the time period for movement and the amount of movement are both monitored so as to generate PST data that may be utilized for diagnostics and analyzed for the existence of trends”), the method comprising:
when a first limit switch detects that a first device is in a first position (e.g. see [0028] “Therefore, as illustrated in FIG. 2, a plurality of switches 240 and 245 may be utilized to generate position data to indicate a location of a valve member (i.e. first device) during the PST. In one implementation, the first switch 240, may be, for example, a valve open switch and the second switch 245, may be for example, a valve closed switch”),
when a second limit switch detects that the first device is in a second position (e.g. see [0028] “Therefore, as illustrated in FIG. 2, a plurality of switches 240 and 245 may be utilized to generate position data to indicate a location of a valve member during the PST. In one implementation, the first switch 240, may be, for example, a valve open switch and the second switch 245, may be for example, a valve closed switch”), and
performing the diagnostic task based on at least one of the first output or the second output (e.g. see [0041] “Presuming that the first switch is a valve open limit switch, a determination at 415 that the first switch is activated provides an indication that the subject valve is fully open, which is necessary in order to perform accurate PST diagnostics. Accordingly, if it is determined that the first switch is activated, control proceeds to 420, at which the PST diagnostics continue”).
Filkovski does not explicitly disclose powering a second device based on a first output of the first limit switch; and powering the second device based on a second output of the second limit switch.
In the same field of endeavor, Kilic teaches powering a second device based on a first output of the first limit switch; and powering the second device based on a second output of the second limit switch (e.g. see [0121] “A position sensor 621 (e.g., a limit switch) may be installed in association with each actuator 618 to generate signals or information indicative of choke position… The actuators 618, the pressure sensors 624, and the position sensors 621 may be communicatively connected directly with the data communication hub 802 via one or more multi-wired electrical cables or conductors 827, such as may permit the data communication hub 802 to receive and/or process the signals or information from the pressure sensors 624 and the position sensors 621, and transmit control signals (e.g., electrical power) to the actuators 618 (i.e. second device) based on the received signals or information” (i.e. the actuators are powered based on the position of the limit switches 621, Examiner notes Fig. 11 shows two limit switches)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to combine the limit switches of Filkovski with the powering of a second device as taught in Kilic for the purpose of performing a diagnostic task with the advantage of selectively powering the second device only in appropriate conditions in order to maintain proper operation of the system.
Regarding Claim 2, Filkovski and Kilic teach the limitations of Claim 1. Filkovski further discloses wherein the first device is a valve (e.g. see [0028] “Therefore, as illustrated in FIG. 2, a plurality of switches 240 and 245 may be utilized to generate position data to indicate a location of a valve member (i.e. first device) during the PST.”).
Regarding Claim 3, Filkovski and Kilic teach the limitations of Claim 2. Filkovski further discloses wherein performing the diagnostic task includes determining at least one of (a) a number of open and close cycles of the valve, (b) a first duration of time that the valve remained open, (c) a second duration of time that the valve remained closed, (d) an open-to-closed time of the valve, or (e) a closed-to-open time of the valve (e.g. see [0048] “Returning to FIG. 4, following generation of the alarm fault, control proceeds to 430, at which an indication that the PST diagnostics have failed is generated. Alternatively, if the second switch did not activate at 435, further operations are performed for providing an escalating and repetitive cycle of PST diagnostics. More specifically, the operations performed at 435, 440, 450 and 465 constitute a repeating cycle, wherein the subject valve is de-energized for periods of time that become progressively longer as the cycle repeats. The pulse period of de-energizing of the valve increases by an incremental value (e.g., 1 millisecond, 5 milliseconds, etc.) beginning at the base pulse time (as explained herein in more detail with reference to FIG. 7). Therefore, for each cycle of operations performed at 435, 440, 450 and 465 (explained herein) the period of de-energizing increases by an incremental period of time (constant) until: (1) corresponding movement of the valve member is registered; or (2) a maximum PST pulse time is exceeded.”).
Regarding Claim 4, Filkovski and Kilic teach the limitations of Claim 2. Filkovski further discloses wherein the first position corresponds to the valve being fully open and the second position corresponds to the valve being closed (e.g. see [0034] “Thus, in one implementation, the first switch 350 of the first valve 300, may be, for example, a valve open switch and the second switch 355 of the first valve 300, may be for example, a valve closed switch”).
Regarding Claim 8, Filkovski an apparatus comprising: interface circuitry; machine-readable instructions; and at least one processor circuit (e.g. see [0035] “The main control system 375 is in communication with the PST controller 370 so as to cooperate to control performance of various PST operations (as explained herein with reference to FIGS. 4-6; this communication may be performed via network 380, which may be implemented in whole or in part as an Ethernet, wireless or wired communication network. Thus, the main control system 375 may provide instruction to the PST controller 370 to perform PST operations, wherein the PST controller 370 may be implemented, for example, in whole or in part in logic programmed into a Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) or other programmable microprocessor device(s) that can be incorporated on a printed circuit board”) to be programmed by the machine-readable instructions to:
when a first limit switch detects that a first device is in a first position (e.g. see [0028] “Therefore, as illustrated in FIG. 2, a plurality of switches 240 and 245 may be utilized to generate position data to indicate a location of a valve member (i.e. first device) during the PST. In one implementation, the first switch 240, may be, for example, a valve open switch and the second switch 245, may be for example, a valve closed switch”),
when a second limit switch detects that the first device is in a second position (e.g. see [0028] “Therefore, as illustrated in FIG. 2, a plurality of switches 240 and 245 may be utilized to generate position data to indicate a location of a valve member during the PST. In one implementation, the first switch 240, may be, for example, a valve open switch and the second switch 245, may be for example, a valve closed switch”), and
perform a diagnostic task based on at least one of the first output or the second output (e.g. see [0041] “Presuming that the first switch is a valve open limit switch, a determination at 415 that the first switch is activated provides an indication that the subject valve is fully open, which is necessary in order to perform accurate PST diagnostics. Accordingly, if it is determined that the first switch is activated, control proceeds to 420, at which the PST diagnostics continue”).
Filkovski does not explicitly disclose power a second device based on a first output of the first limit switch; and power the second device based on a second output of the second limit switch.
In the same field of endeavor, Kilic teaches power a second device based on a first output of the first limit switch; and power the second device based on a second output of the second limit switch (e.g. see [0121] “A position sensor 621 (e.g., a limit switch) may be installed in association with each actuator 618 to generate signals or information indicative of choke position… The actuators 618, the pressure sensors 624, and the position sensors 621 may be communicatively connected directly with the data communication hub 802 via one or more multi-wired electrical cables or conductors 827, such as may permit the data communication hub 802 to receive and/or process the signals or information from the pressure sensors 624 and the position sensors 621, and transmit control signals (e.g., electrical power) to the actuators 618 (i.e. second device) based on the received signals or information” (i.e. the actuators are powered based on the position of the limit switches 621, Examiner notes Fig. 11 shows two limit switches)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to combine the limit switches of Filkovski with the powering of a second device as taught in Kilic for the purpose of performing a diagnostic task with the advantage of selectively powering the second device only in appropriate conditions in order to maintain proper operation of the system.
Regarding Claim 9, Filkovski and Kilic teach the limitations of Claim 8. Filkovski further discloses wherein the first device is a valve (e.g. see [0028] “Therefore, as illustrated in FIG. 2, a plurality of switches 240 and 245 may be utilized to generate position data to indicate a location of a valve member (i.e. first device) during the PST.”).
Regarding Claim 10, Filkovski and Kilic teach the limitations of Claim 9. Filkovski further discloses wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to perform the diagnostic task by determining at least one of (a) a number of open and close cycles of the valve, (b) a first duration of time that the valve remained open, (c) a second duration of time that the valve remained closed, (d) an open-to-closed time of the valve, or (e) a closed-to-open time of the valve (e.g. see [0048] “Returning to FIG. 4, following generation of the alarm fault, control proceeds to 430, at which an indication that the PST diagnostics have failed is generated. Alternatively, if the second switch did not activate at 435, further operations are performed for providing an escalating and repetitive cycle of PST diagnostics. More specifically, the operations performed at 435, 440, 450 and 465 constitute a repeating cycle, wherein the subject valve is de-energized for periods of time that become progressively longer as the cycle repeats. The pulse period of de-energizing of the valve increases by an incremental value (e.g., 1 millisecond, 5 milliseconds, etc.) beginning at the base pulse time (as explained herein in more detail with reference to FIG. 7). Therefore, for each cycle of operations performed at 435, 440, 450 and 465 (explained herein) the period of de-energizing increases by an incremental period of time (constant) until: (1) corresponding movement of the valve member is registered; or (2) a maximum PST pulse time is exceeded.”).
Regarding Claim 11, Filkovski and Kilic teach the limitations of Claim 9. Filkovski further discloses wherein the first position corresponds to the valve being fully open and the second position corresponds to the valve being closed (e.g. see [0034] “Thus, in one implementation, the first switch 350 of the first valve 300, may be, for example, a valve open switch and the second switch 355 of the first valve 300, may be for example, a valve closed switch”).
Regarding Claim 15, Filkovski teaches at least one non-transitory machine-readable medium comprising machine-readable instructions (e.g. see [0035] “The main control system 375 is in communication with the PST controller 370 so as to cooperate to control performance of various PST operations (as explained herein with reference to FIGS. 4-6; this communication may be performed via network 380, which may be implemented in whole or in part as an Ethernet, wireless or wired communication network. Thus, the main control system 375 may provide instruction to the PST controller 370 to perform PST operations, wherein the PST controller 370 may be implemented, for example, in whole or in part in logic programmed into a Programmable Logic Controller (PLC) or other programmable microprocessor device(s) that can be incorporated on a printed circuit board”), to cause the at least one processor circuit to at least:
when a first limit switch detects that a first device is in a first position (e.g. see [0028] “Therefore, as illustrated in FIG. 2, a plurality of switches 240 and 245 may be utilized to generate position data to indicate a location of a valve member (i.e. first device) during the PST. In one implementation, the first switch 240, may be, for example, a valve open switch and the second switch 245, may be for example, a valve closed switch”),
when a second limit switch detects that the first device is in a second position (e.g. see [0028] “Therefore, as illustrated in FIG. 2, a plurality of switches 240 and 245 may be utilized to generate position data to indicate a location of a valve member during the PST. In one implementation, the first switch 240, may be, for example, a valve open switch and the second switch 245, may be for example, a valve closed switch”), and
performing the diagnostic task based on at least one of the first output or the second output (e.g. see [0041] “Presuming that the first switch is a valve open limit switch, a determination at 415 that the first switch is activated provides an indication that the subject valve is fully open, which is necessary in order to perform accurate PST diagnostics. Accordingly, if it is determined that the first switch is activated, control proceeds to 420, at which the PST diagnostics continue”).
Filkovski does not explicitly disclose powering a second device based on a first output of the first limit switch; and powering the second device based on a second output of the second limit switch.
In the same field of endeavor, Kilic teaches powering a second device based on a first output of the first limit switch; and powering the second device based on a second output of the second limit switch (e.g. see [0121] “A position sensor 621 (e.g., a limit switch) may be installed in association with each actuator 618 to generate signals or information indicative of choke position… The actuators 618, the pressure sensors 624, and the position sensors 621 may be communicatively connected directly with the data communication hub 802 via one or more multi-wired electrical cables or conductors 827, such as may permit the data communication hub 802 to receive and/or process the signals or information from the pressure sensors 624 and the position sensors 621, and transmit control signals (e.g., electrical power) to the actuators 618 (i.e. second device) based on the received signals or information” (i.e. the actuators are powered based on the position of the limit switches 621, Examiner notes Fig. 11 shows two limit switches)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to combine the limit switches of Filkovski with the powering of a second device as taught in Kilic for the purpose of performing a diagnostic task with the advantage of selectively powering the second device only in appropriate conditions in order to maintain proper operation of the system.
Regarding Claim 16, Filkovski and Kilic teach the limitations of Claim 15. Filkovski further discloses wherein the first device is a valve (e.g. see [0028] “Therefore, as illustrated in FIG. 2, a plurality of switches 240 and 245 may be utilized to generate position data to indicate a location of a valve member (i.e. first device) during the PST.”).
Regarding Claim 17, Filkovski and Kilic teach the limitations of Claim 16. Filkovski further discloses wherein the machine-readable instructions are to cause one or more of the at least one processor circuit to perform the diagnostic task by determining at least one of (a) a number of open and close cycles of the valve, (b) a first duration of time that the valve remained open, (c) a second duration of time that the valve remained closed, (d) an open-to-closed time of the valve, or (e) a closed-to-open time of the valve (e.g. see [0048] “Returning to FIG. 4, following generation of the alarm fault, control proceeds to 430, at which an indication that the PST diagnostics have failed is generated. Alternatively, if the second switch did not activate at 435, further operations are performed for providing an escalating and repetitive cycle of PST diagnostics. More specifically, the operations performed at 435, 440, 450 and 465 constitute a repeating cycle, wherein the subject valve is de-energized for periods of time that become progressively longer as the cycle repeats. The pulse period of de-energizing of the valve increases by an incremental value (e.g., 1 millisecond, 5 milliseconds, etc.) beginning at the base pulse time (as explained herein in more detail with reference to FIG. 7). Therefore, for each cycle of operations performed at 435, 440, 450 and 465 (explained herein) the period of de-energizing increases by an incremental period of time (constant) until: (1) corresponding movement of the valve member is registered; or (2) a maximum PST pulse time is exceeded.”).
Regarding Claim 18, Filkovski and Kilic teach the limitations of Claim 16. Filkovski further discloses wherein the first position corresponds to the valve being fully open and the second position corresponds to the valve being closed (e.g. see [0034] “Thus, in one implementation, the first switch 350 of the first valve 300, may be, for example, a valve open switch and the second switch 355 of the first valve 300, may be for example, a valve closed switch”).
Claims 5-7, 12-14, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Filkovski (US20100071457 A1) in view of Kilic (US 20200347714 A1), and in further view of Koenig (US20080097652).
Regarding Claim 5, Filkovski and Kilic teach the limitations of Claim 1. Filkovski does not explicitly disclose powering the second device based on a continuous signal output by a power supply of a valve controller.
In the same field of endeavor, Koenig teaches powering the second device based on a continuous signal output by a power supply of a valve controller (e.g. see [0029] “Both line power supplies 49 and 21 of the limit switch 43 as well as of the external operator control 19 are engineered to provide a constant supply voltage to the corresponding microcomputers (23, 47) and thus also to the position sensor 39”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to combine the second device of Filkovski with the power embodiment of Koenig for the purpose of performing a diagnostic task with the advantage of selectively powering the second device only in appropriate conditions in order to maintain proper operation of the system.
Regarding Claim 6, Filkovski, Kilic, and Koenig teach the limitations of Claim 5. Filkovski does not explicitly disclose powering the second device based on the at least one of the first output or the second output when a current value corresponding to the continuous signal is less than a threshold.
In the same field of endeavor, Koenig teaches powering the second device based on the at least one of the first output or the second output when a current value corresponding to the continuous signal is less than a threshold (e.g. see [0010] “In one preferred embodiment, the power supply for a positioner or position controller comprises a supply voltage of 7 to 8 volts, particularly with an amperage of less than approximately 1 mA (i.e. less than a threshold) or more than approximately 2 mA and/or an amperage supply of 4 to 20 mA. By picking a voltage signal, particularly a 24 volt signal, the power supply of the limit switch can be configured for a solenoid valve of a pneumatic actuator which vents the air power to close the final control element particularly when the 24 volt signal is down. In addition or as an alternative thereto the limit signal transmitter can be provided with a supply voltage of 7 to 8 volts, and particularly with an amperage of less than approximately 1 mA or more than approximately 2 mA”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to combine the second device of Filkovski with the power embodiment of Koenig for the purpose of performing a diagnostic task with the advantage of selectively powering the second device only in appropriate conditions in order to maintain proper operation of the system.
Regarding Claim 7, Filkovski, Kilic, and Koenig teach the limitations of Claim 1. Filkovski does not explicitly disclose wherein the second device corresponds to a sensor operatively coupled to the first device.
In the same field of endeavor, Koenig teaches wherein the second device corresponds to a sensor operatively coupled to the first device (e.g. see [0026] “The limit signal transmitter microcontroller 47 too, receives via the wire pair 41 a position signal from the position sensor 39 (i.e. the second device), i.e. signals for a final position of the final control valve 1 (i.e. the first device) in critical situations such as in an emergency. The position sensor 39 is also electrically powered via the wire pair 41,” and [0032] “The positioning system 3 in accordance with the preferred embodiment for the final control valve 1 comprises two smart electronic units, each independent of the other, namely the position/controller 15 and the limit signal transmitter 43 engineered in accordance with the preferred embodiment to access just a single position sensor 39 in assuring all safety aspects for operating a process engineering plan”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the second device embodiment of Filkovski as modified by Kilic, with the sensor embodiment of Koenig for the purpose of performing a diagnostic task with the advantage of additional data sources in order to improve the accuracy of any diagnostic determinations.
Regarding Claim 12, Filkovski and Kilic teach the limitations of Claim 8. Filkovski does not explicitly disclose wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to power the second device based on a continuous signal output by a power supply of a valve controller.
In the same field of endeavor, Koenig teaches wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to power the second device based on a continuous signal output by a power supply of a valve controller (e.g. see [0029] “Both line power supplies 49 and 21 of the limit switch 43 as well as of the external operator control 19 are engineered to provide a constant supply voltage to the corresponding microcomputers (23, 47) and thus also to the position sensor 39”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to combine the second device of Filkovski with the power embodiment of Koenig for the purpose of performing a diagnostic task with the advantage of selectively powering the second device only in appropriate conditions in order to maintain proper operation of the system.
Regarding Claim 13, Filkovski, Kilic, and Koenig teach the limitations of Claim 12. Filkovski does not explicitly disclose wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to power the second device based on the at least one of the first output or the second output when a current value corresponding to the continuous signal is less than a threshold.
In the same field of endeavor, Koenig teaches wherein one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to power the second device based on the at least one of the first output or the second output when a current value corresponding to the continuous signal is less than a threshold (e.g. see [0010] “In one preferred embodiment, the power supply for a positioner or position controller comprises a supply voltage of 7 to 8 volts, particularly with an amperage of less than approximately 1 mA (i.e. less than a threshold) or more than approximately 2 mA and/or an amperage supply of 4 to 20 mA. By picking a voltage signal, particularly a 24 volt signal, the power supply of the limit switch can be configured for a solenoid valve of a pneumatic actuator which vents the air power to close the final control element particularly when the 24 volt signal is down. In addition or as an alternative thereto the limit signal transmitter can be provided with a supply voltage of 7 to 8 volts, and particularly with an amperage of less than approximately 1 mA or more than approximately 2 mA”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to combine the second device of Filkovski with the power embodiment of Koenig for the purpose of performing a diagnostic task with the advantage of selectively powering the second device only in appropriate conditions in order to maintain proper operation of the system.
Regarding Claim 14, Filkovski, Kilic, and Koenig teach the limitations of Claim 8. Filkovski does not explicitly disclose wherein the second device corresponds to a sensor operatively coupled to the first device.
In the same field of endeavor, Koenig teaches wherein the second device corresponds to a sensor operatively coupled to the first device (e.g. see [0026] “The limit signal transmitter microcontroller 47 too, receives via the wire pair 41 a position signal from the position sensor 39 (i.e. the second device), i.e. signals for a final position of the final control valve 1 (i.e. the first device) in critical situations such as in an emergency. The position sensor 39 is also electrically powered via the wire pair 41,” and [0032] “The positioning system 3 in accordance with the preferred embodiment for the final control valve 1 comprises two smart electronic units, each independent of the other, namely the position/controller 15 and the limit signal transmitter 43 engineered in accordance with the preferred embodiment to access just a single position sensor 39 in assuring all safety aspects for operating a process engineering plan”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the second device embodiment of Filkovski as modified by Kilic, with the sensor embodiment of Koenig for the purpose of performing a diagnostic task with the advantage of additional data sources in order to improve the accuracy of any diagnostic determinations.
Regarding Claim 19, Filkovski and Kilic teach the limitations of Claim 15. Filkovski does not explicitly disclose wherein the machine-readable instructions are to cause one or more of the at least one processor circuit to power the second device based on a continuous signal output by a power supply of a valve controller.
In the same field of endeavor, Koenig teaches wherein the machine-readable instructions are to cause one or more of the at least one processor circuit to power the second device based on a continuous signal output by a power supply of a valve controller (e.g. see [0029] “Both line power supplies 49 and 21 of the limit switch 43 as well as of the external operator control 19 are engineered to provide a constant supply voltage to the corresponding microcomputers (23, 47) and thus also to the position sensor 39”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to combine the second device of Filkovski with the power embodiment of Koenig for the purpose of performing a diagnostic task with the advantage of selectively powering the second device only in appropriate conditions in order to maintain proper operation of the system.
Regarding Claim 20, Filkovski, Kilic, and Koenig teach the limitations of Claim 19. Filkovski does not explicitly disclose wherein the machine-readable instructions are to cause one or more of the at least one processor circuit to power the second device based on the at least one of the first output or the second output when a current value corresponding to the continuous signal is less than a threshold.
In the same field of endeavor, Koenig teaches wherein the machine-readable instructions are to cause one or more of the at least one processor circuit to power the second device based on the at least one of the first output or the second output when a current value corresponding to the continuous signal is less than a threshold (e.g. see [0010] “In one preferred embodiment, the power supply for a positioner or position controller comprises a supply voltage of 7 to 8 volts, particularly with an amperage of less than approximately 1 mA (i.e. less than a threshold) or more than approximately 2 mA and/or an amperage supply of 4 to 20 mA. By picking a voltage signal, particularly a 24 volt signal, the power supply of the limit switch can be configured for a solenoid valve of a pneumatic actuator which vents the air power to close the final control element particularly when the 24 volt signal is down. In addition or as an alternative thereto the limit signal transmitter can be provided with a supply voltage of 7 to 8 volts, and particularly with an amperage of less than approximately 1 mA or more than approximately 2 mA”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to combine the second device of Filkovski with the power embodiment of Koenig for the purpose of performing a diagnostic task with the advantage of selectively powering the second device only in appropriate conditions in order to maintain proper operation of the system.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Leon (US4805451 A) teaches wherein the second device is a sensor, powering the second device based on the position of a limit switch, and performing diagnostic tasks.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NYLA GAVIA whose telephone number is (703)756-1592. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:30pm.
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, Catherine Rastovski can be reached at 571-270-0349. 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.
/NYLA GAVIA/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/Catherine T. Rastovski/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Prosecution Insights