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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 – 11 and 13 - 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Verge (US Pat. No. 7141950).
Referring to claim 1, Verge discloses a method for controlling a motor controller (system controller 21 controlling fan controller 23 and motor drive, Fig. 2), comprising: in a first mode (legacy PWM/tach mode, Fig. 3 waveform 32–33):
transmitting a control signal (PWM duty cycle input, line 21c, Fig. 2) from a fan controller (fan controller 23, Fig. 2) to a first motor controller through a first line (line 21c, Fig. 2);
transmitting a first feedback signal (tachometer pulse output, waveform 33a, Fig. 3; line 21d, Fig. 2) from the first motor controller to the fan controller through a second line (line 21d, Fig. 2), wherein the control signal is configured to control a rotation speed (PWM duty cycle specifies speed, col. 1 lns 32-35 and col. 5 lns 25-30) of a first fan coupled to the first motor controller (fan 22 driven by fan controller 23, Fig. 2), and
the first feedback signal corresponds to an actual rotation speed of the first fan (tach pulses reflect RPM, Fig. 3 waveform 33a);
setting a voltage of the second line (line 21d repurposed for comm. when pulled high/low, Fig. 2) to a specific level of voltage to inform the first motor controller to enter a second mode using the fan controller (voltage state on tach/comm. line triggers switch to bi-directional mode, Fig. 9 block 93–95) transmitting an instruction (speed/parameter command transmitted in bi-directional communication mode, Fig. 2 line 21d “Comm. Input/Output”; Fig. 9 blocks 93–101) from the fan controller to the first motor controller through the second line to set the rotation speed of the first fan to a specific rotation speed, in the second mode (bi-directional communication commands sent over line 21d “Comm. Input/Output” between system controller 21 and fan controller 23, Fig. 2; communication mode operations, Fig. 9 blocks 93–101); and
controlling the first fan to rotate at the specific rotation speed and ignoring the control signal using the first motor controller (PWM control signal on line 21c not used during post-communication transition, Fig. 2; Fig. 9 blocks 104–105), after switching from the second mode to the first mode (fan continues operation based on commanded/stored parameter rather than PWM duty cycle input on line 21c, Fig. 9 blocks 104–105).
As to claim 2, Verge discloses wherein in the second mode applying an Inter-Integrated Circuit (I2C) protocol to communicate between the fan controller (fan controller 123 with I²C module, Fig. 10B) and the first motor controller using the first line as a serial clock line (SCL) and using the second line as a serial data line (SDA) (system controller 121 with I²C module using line 121c as SCL and line 121d as SDA, Fig. 10A–10B).
As to claim 3, Verge discloses wherein in the second mode transmitting a clock signal from the fan controller to the first motor controller through the first line (I²C clock on line 121c from system controller 121 to fan controller 123, col. 8 lns 32-54)) and transmitting a first electronic parameter from the first motor controller to the fan controller through the second line (data on line 121d from fan controller 123 back to system controller 121, col. 8 lns 32-54)).
As to claim 4, Verge discloses wherein the electronic parameter comprises a temperature, a voltage, an output current, an output power, and/or an actual rotation speed of the first motor controller (fan controller 23 sending operating condition data such as speed, temperature, and coil current to system controller 21 via line 21d, Fig. 4 waveform 43c).
As to claim 5, Verge discloses wherein the control signal is a pulse-amplitude modulation (PWM) signal (PWM signal on line 21c between system controller 21 and fan controller 23, Fig. 2) and the first feedback signal is a frequency generator (FG) signal (tach pulses on line 21d from fan controller 23 to system controller 21, Fig. 2; tach generator 67 in Fig. 6).
As to claim 6, Verge discloses wherein the first motor controller is configured to switch to the second mode (fan controller 23 switching modes upon PWM frequency change, Fig. 3 waveform 31–33) when the first motor controller determines that the voltage of the second line is set to the specific level of voltage over a preset time (line 21d held at defined voltage during comms initiation, Fig. 3 waveform 32–33).
As to claim 7, Verge discloses wherein the preset time is the period of the first feedback signal corresponding to a lowest rotation speed of the first fan in the first mode (fan speed feedback measured by tach pulses on line 21d, Fig. 3 waveform 33a, the system operates in legacy mode and the signals on line 21d are tachometer signals indicating fan speed, col. 2, lines 66 – 67; at lowest fan speed the pulse period is longest, and this maximum period defines the preset time used for mode switching).
As to claim 8, Verge discloses wherein storing the control signal corresponding to a current rotation speed using the first motor controller (fan controller 23 storing PWM duty cycle input as speed reference, Fig. 6 microprocessor 61 with registers 62, 65), before switching to the second mode (transition shown in Fig. 9, block 96–100); and controlling the first fan to rotate at the current rotation speed using the first motor controller, after switching to the second mode (fan continues at stored/default speed until new comms data received, Fig. 9, block 104).
As to claim 9, Verge discloses wherein transmitting a stop instruction from the fan controller (system controller 21 sending command packet, Fig. 4 waveform 42–43b; FIG. 4 shows the waveforms on the various lines when the system goes from the legacy mode of operation to the bi-directional communication mode and data is being transmitted from the fan controller 23 to the fan controller 21, col. 3, lines 21 – 25; As such, the fan controller only returns to legacy mode when its microprocessor issues an appropriate command to its I²C module. That command originates from a message received from the system controller, meaning the system controller can send a stop instruction telling the fan controller to switch back to legacy mode) to the first motor controller through the second line to inform the first motor controller to switch to the first mode, in the second mode (reversion triggered by command sent via line 21d, Fig. 4 waveform 43).
As to claim 10, Verge discloses wherein transmitting an instruction from the fan controller to the first motor controller through the second line to set the rotation speed of the first fan to a specific rotation speed, in the second mode (command and data bytes transmitted over line 21d, Fig. 3 waveform 32a–33b, boxes “c” and “d1/d2”).
As to claim 11, Verge discloses wherein controlling the first fan to rotate at the specific rotation speed and ignoring the control signal using the first motor controller, after switching from the second mode to the first mode (fan controller 23 drives fan based on commanded speed parameter rather than PWM duty cycle when reverting, Fig. 9 block 104–105; When the system switches from bi-directional communication mode back to legacy mode, the fan does not immediately follow the duty cycle on line 21c but instead continues to run at the specific commanded or stored speed set during communication mode, as shown in FIG. 9, blocks 104–105. The specification at col. 7, lines 42–49 explains that in bi-directional communication, the fan is made to rotate at a speed determined by parameters stored in the fan controller’s microprocessor, and these parameters remain in effect until the PWM-based control resumes. Thus, the fan controller effectively ignores the duty cycle signal during this transition, honoring the last commanded value and satisfying the limitation that after switching from the second mode to the first mode, the fan operates independently of the PWM duty cycle).
As to claim 13, Verge discloses wherein the fan controller transmits an address message on the second line to communicate with the first motor controller corresponding to the address message, in the second mode (address “a” transmitted as part of packet on line 21d, Fig. 3 waveform 33b).
As to claim 15, Verge discloses wherein a control system comprising a fan controller (fan controller 23, Fig. 2; block diagram Fig. 6) and a first motor controller, coupled to a first fan (motor driver/bridge driving fan 22, Fig. 2; bridge driver 68, Fig. 6), wherein the first motor controller is connected to the fan controller through a first line and a second line (PWM line 21c and tach/comm line 21d, Fig. 2); wherein, in a first mode, the fan controller is configured to transmit a control signal to the first motor controller through the first line (PWM output on line 21c from system controller 21 to fan controller 23, Fig. 2; PWM input at Fig. 6), the fan controller is configured to receive a first feedback signal from the first motor controller through the second line (tach signal on line 21d from fan controller 23 back to system controller 21, Fig. 2; tach generator 67, Fig. 6), wherein the control signal is configured to control a rotation speed of a first fan coupled to the first motor controller, and the first feedback signal corresponds to an actual rotation speed of the first fan (PWM duty cycle command, tach pulses feedback, Fig. 2), and the fan controller is configured to set a voltage of the second line to a specific level of voltage to inform the first motor controller to enter a second mode (comm line 21d modulated to signal mode change, Fig. 3 waveform 32–33);
wherein, in the second mode, the fan controller is configured to transmit an instruction (speed/parameter command transmitted in bi-directional communication mode, Fig. 2 line 21d “Comm. Input/Output”; Fig. 9 blocks 93–101) to the first motor controller through the second line to set the rotation speed of the first fan to a specific rotation speed (bi-directional communication commands transmitted over line 21d “Comm. Input/Output” between system controller 21 and fan controller 23, Fig. 2; communication mode operations, Fig. 9 blocks 93–101); wherein the first motor controller is configured to control the first fan to rotate at the specific rotation speed (fan operates according to commanded/stored parameter, Fig. 9 blocks 104–105) and to ignore the control signal (PWM duty cycle control on line 21c not followed during post-communication transition, Fig. 2 line 21c; Fig. 9 blocks 104–105), after switching from the second mode to the first mode (return from communication mode to legacy PWM/tach mode shown in Fig. 9 blocks 104–105).
As to claim 16, Verge discloses wherein in the second mode the fan controller and the first motor controller are configured to apply an Inter-Integrated Circuit (I2C) protocol to communicate with each other using the first line as a serial clock line (SCL) and using the second line as a serial data line (SDA) (system controller 121 with I²C module on line 121c as SCL and fan controller 123 on line 121d as SDA, Fig. 10A–10B).
As to claim 17, Verge discloses wherein in the second mode the fan controller is configured to transmit a clock signal (a clock signal, col. 8, lines 32-54) to the first motor controller through the first line (clock sent via line 121c in I²C embodiment, Fig. 10A–10B) and the fan controller is configured to receive a first electronic parameter from the first motor controller through the second line (data returned on SDA line 121d from fan controller 123, Fig. 10A–10B).
As to claim 18, Verge discloses wherein the electronic parameter comprises a temperature, a voltage, an output current, an output power, and/or an actual rotation speed of the first motor controller (fan controller 23 providing status data including fan speed, coil current, temperature via comm line 21d, Fig. 4 waveform 43c).
As to claim 19, Verge discloses wherein the first motor controller is configured to switch to the second mode when the first motor controller determines that the voltage of the second line is set to the specific level of voltage over a preset time (fan controller 23 detecting sustained high/low signal level on line 21d, Fig. 3 waveform 32–33).
As to claim 20, Verge discloses wherein the preset time is the period of the first feedback signal corresponding to a lowest rotation speed of the first fan in the first mode (fan speed feedback measured by tach pulses on line 21d, Fig. 3 waveform 33a, the system operates in legacy mode and the signals on line 21d are tachometer signals indicating fan speed, col. 2, lines 66 – 67; at lowest fan speed the pulse period is longest, and this maximum period defines the preset time used for mode switching).
As to claim 21, Verge discloses wherein the first motor controller is configured to store the control signal corresponding to a current rotation speed before switching to the second mode (stored PWM duty cycle in registers of fan controller 23, Fig. 6) and the first motor controller is configured to control the first fan to rotate at the current rotation speed after switching to the second mode (fan continues at stored/default RPM until new comms data, Fig. 9 blocks 97–104).
As to claim 22, Verge discloses wherein in the second mode the fan controller is configured to transmit a stop instruction to the first motor controller through the second line to inform the first motor controller to switch to the first mode (system controller 21 sending command packet, Fig. 4 waveform 42–43b; FIG. 4 shows the waveforms on the various lines when the system goes from the legacy mode of operation to the bi-directional communication mode and data is being transmitted from the fan controller 23 to the fan controller 21, col. 3, lines 21 – 25; As such, the fan controller only returns to legacy mode when its microprocessor issues an appropriate command to its I²C module. That command originates from a message received from the system controller, meaning the system controller can send a stop instruction telling the fan controller to switch back to legacy mode).
As to claim 23, Verge discloses wherein in the second mode the fan controller is configured to transmit an instruction to the first motor controller through the second line to set the rotation speed of the first fan to a specific rotation speed (data packet including speed setting transmitted over line 21d, Fig. 3 waveform 32a–33b).
As to claim 24, Verge discloses wherein the first motor controller is configured to control the first fan to rotate at the specific rotation speed and to ignore the control signal, after switching from the second mode to the first mode (fan runs at commanded parameter, ignoring PWM duty cycle, Fig. 9 blocks 104–105).
As to claim 25, Verge discloses wherein the control system further comprises a second motor controller (I2C bus can support multiple fan controllers via addressing; Box "a" indicates the address of data that is to be accessed by the microprocessor in fan controller 23. Box "d1" indicates data byte 1 of "n" data bytes. Box "d2" indicates data byte 2 of "n" data bytes. (There can be any number of such data bytes) Box "cs", col. 3, lines 61 - 67), the second motor controller is connected to the fan controller through the first line and a third line (I²C bus embodiment with multiple fan controllers addressed on SCL 121c and separate SDA lines, Fig. 10A–10B); in the first mode the fan controller is configured to transmit the control signal to the second motor controller through the first line (PWM clock on 121c, Fig. 10A–10B), the fan controller is configured to receive a second feedback signal from the second motor controller through the third line (alternate SDA line for second fan controller, Fig. 10B); wherein the control signal is configured to control a rotation speed of a second fan coupled to the second motor controller, and the second feedback signal corresponds to an actual rotation speed of the second fan (fan 22 equivalent under second controller, Fig. 10B); the fan controller is configured to set a voltage of the third line to the specific level of voltage to inform the second motor controller to enter the second mode (mode switch over SDA line for addressed controller, Fig. 10B); and in the second mode the fan controller and the first motor controller are configured to apply an I2C protocol to communicate with each other using the first line as the SCL and using the third line as the SDA (I²C master/slave on 121c and third line, Fig. 10A–10B); the fan controller is configured to transmit the clock signal to the second motor controller through the first line (clock on 121c, Fig. 10A–10B) and to receive a second electronic parameter from the second motor controller through the third line (SDA response on alternate data line, Fig. 10B).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Verge (US Pat. No. 7141950) in view of Goeson et al. (US Pub. No. 20170297585), hereinafter referred to as Goeson.
As to claim 14, Verge discloses wherein the fan controller informs the first motor controller to switch to the first mode (system controller 21 issues return-to-legacy command over line 21d, Fig. 4 waveform 42–43).
Goeson discloses, what Verge lacks, in response to a determination that a time interval (loss of communication diagnosed when a controller fails to receive a command within a predetermined period, para. [0048]–[0052]) that the controller has not received a response (communication not received from another module, para. [0054]) from the first motor controller is longer than a preset time (predetermined period used as a timeout threshold, para. [0051]).
Verge and Goeson are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely fan/motor control systems with fallback operation in response to communication loss.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Verge and Goeson before him or her, to modify the single fan controller architecture of Verge to include the timeout-based fallback of Goeson.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been Goeson’s recognition that loss of communication can leave the system without cooling or control, and that a timeout-based reversion mechanism improves fault tolerance and ensures continued safe operation (para. [0048]–[0057]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Goeson with Verge to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 12 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Verge (US Pat. No. 7141950) in view of Thomspons et al. (US Pat. No. 6950969).
As to claim 12, Verge discloses wherein in the first mode transmitting the control signal from the fan controller; transmitting a second feedback signal from the second motor controller to the fan controller through a third line (second SDA line corresponding to another fan, Fig. 10B I²C expansion concept); wherein the control signal is configured to control a rotation speed of a second fan coupled to the a motor controller (fan 22 equivalent controlled by fan controller 123, Fig. 10B), and the second feedback signal corresponds to an actual rotation speed of the second fan (tach/data returned via alternate SDA line, Fig. 10B); setting a voltage of the third line to the specific level of voltage to inform the second motor controller to enter the second mode using the fan controller (mode switch over SDA line for addressed second controller, Fig. 10A–10B); and in the second mode applying an I2C protocol to communicate between the fan controller and the second motor controller using the first line as the SCL and using the third line as the SDA (I²C bus supporting multiple addressed devices, Fig. 10A–10B); transmitting the clock signal from the fan controller to the second motor controller through the first line (SCL clock on 121c, Fig. 10A–10B) and transmitting a second electronic parameter from the motor controller to the fan controller through the third line (SDA response from second motor controller, Fig. 10B).
Thompson discloses, what Verge lacks, second motor controller (multiple fan controller, Fig. 1).
Verge and Thompson are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely electronic/computer fan control systems and multi-fan thermal management.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Verge and Thompson before him or her, to modify the single-controller, two-wire PWM/tach architecture of Vege to include the multi-controller arrangement of Thompson.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to improve system scalability and fan system control.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Thompson with Verge to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Claim 25 recite the corresponding limitation of claim 12. Therefore, they are rejected accordingly.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/26/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Response to Applicant’s Arguments
Applicant argues that Verge, Goeson, and Thompson fail to disclose the amended limitation that:
after switching from the second mode to the first mode, the first motor controller controls the fan to rotate at the specific rotation speed while ignoring the control signal.
The arguments have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
1. Verge expressly teaches speed control by command parameters rather than PWM
Verge discloses two different speed-control mechanisms:
• In legacy mode, PWM duty cycle on line 21c determines fan speed
(Col. 1, lines 32–35; Col. 2, line 49 – Col. 3, line 16)
• In bi-directional communication mode, speed is determined by digitally transmitted data over line 21d
(Col. 2, line 49 – Col. 3, line 16)
Verge further explains:
“The fan is made to rotate at a speed determined by parameters stored in the microprocessor 61 in the fan controller as indicated by block 104. The parameters that indicate the fan speed during the second mode of operation can be changed by commands from the system controller.” (Col. 7, lines 56–67)
Thus, Verge explicitly teaches that in the second mode the controller receives a command and stores a fan-speed parameter, and the fan is driven according to that commanded parameter.
This disclosure corresponds directly to the claim limitation of:
transmitting an instruction … to set the rotation speed of the fan to a specific rotation speed.
2. Verge discloses operation after leaving the second mode
Applicant asserts Verge only describes operation within the bi-directional mode. The flow diagram of FIG. 9 shows otherwise.
FIG. 9 shows:
• blocks 103–104: communication mode and parameter-based speed control
• block 96: detection of mode change
• blocks 97–100: return to legacy mode
After the communication mode activity, the controller transitions back to legacy mode (block 96 → 97). The fan controller does not immediately receive a new PWM speed command at the moment of transition. Instead, the fan continues operating based on the previously stored parameter (block 104) until a new PWM control input is processed during legacy operation.
Therefore, during this transition interval:
• the fan speed is determined by the stored command parameter, and
• the PWM duty cycle on line 21c is not controlling the fan speed.
This directly corresponds to the claim requirement that the controller operates at the commanded speed while not using the control signal.
3. Applicant’s reliance on the “default error speed” passage is misplaced
Applicant cites Col. 7, lines 42–49 and argues Verge only sets a default speed when communication fails.
However, that passage addresses an incorrect communication-mode detection condition (block 102) and not the parameter-controlled operation of block 104.
The limitation at issue concerns operation after a valid command is received. That behavior is disclosed in Col. 7, lines 56–67 and FIG. 9 block 104, not the error-mode discussion cited by Applicant.
4. Why PWM is not controlling the fan after the mode change
The claims require:
controlling the fan at the specific rotation speed and ignoring the control signal after switching back to the first mode.
Verge explicitly teaches:
• PWM determines speed only in legacy mode (Col. 1, lines 32–35)
• In communication mode, speed is determined by stored command parameters (Col. 7, lines 56–67)
• The system transitions from communication mode to legacy mode via FIG. 9 blocks 96–97
Because the speed at the time of transition is still governed by the stored command parameter from block 104, the PWM duty cycle on line 21c is not determining speed during that interval. The controller therefore operates the fan according to the commanded speed rather than the PWM signal.
This satisfies the claimed feature without requiring any interpretation beyond the described operation of the controller in Verge.
5. Role of Goeson and Thompson
Goeson was applied only to claim 14 to teach timeout-based communication loss detection and fallback operation. It was not relied upon for the command-based speed control discussed above.
Thompson was applied to teach multiple controllers and does not relate to Applicant’s present argument regarding post-mode-transition speed control.
In summary:
Verge expressly discloses:
• sending a command that sets a specific fan speed,
• storing the commanded speed parameter in the controller, and
• operating the fan based on that parameter after the communication activity while the PWM duty cycle is not controlling speed.
Accordingly, the amended limitations of claims 1 and 15 are taught by Verge, and the rejections under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103 are maintained.
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUANITO C BORROMEO whose telephone number is (571)270-1720. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 9 - 5.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Henry Tsai can be reached on 5712724176. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/J.C.B/ Assistant Examiner, Art Unit 2184
/HENRY TSAI/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2184