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 .
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed on 2 June 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-11 and 13-20 remain pending in the application, of which Claims 11 and 13-14 are withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 9, 15-16 and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McElroy (US 5,008,841) in view of Guyton (US 3955592).
Regarding Claim 1, McElroy discloses a check valve (Figure 1; abstract). The valve comprising:
a valve body (10 generally), comprising: a valve housing (12);
a central bore (together 16, 14 and 18; Figure 1) formed through the valve housing (Figure 1), wherein the central bore (together 16, 14 and 18; Figure 1) has at least a first bore section (16), a second bore section (14), and a third bore section (18), wherein a transition from the second bore section to the third bore section is radiused such that an inner surface of the central bore at the transition is a continuous surface (Figure 1); and
a top bore (see Annotated Figure A) formed through a top of the valve housing intersecting the central bore (Figure 1);
a valve cover (30), wherein the valve cover is disposed in the top bore of the valve body (Figure 1 with at least a portion located within the bore); and
a flapper assembly (20, 22, 24 and 36 generally; Figure 1) disposed in the central bore of the valve body (Figure 1), the flapper assembly comprising a flapper (20), a valve seat (36), and a hinge (22), wherein:
the flapper comprising:
a downstream side (see Annotated Figure A),
an upstream side (see Annotated Figure A); and
a pin (24);
the hinge (see Annotated Figure A) comprising a hinge body (see Annotated Figure A) and a pin bore of the hinge body (into which pin 24 is inserted), wherein the hinge body is disposed in a recess of the valve housing (see Annotated Figure A) to secure the flapper to the valve body; and
the valve seat (36) is disposed in the central bore of the valve body (Figure 1), the valve seat (36) comprising a sealing face (see Annotated Figure A) configured to seal against the upstream side of the flapper (when closed; Figure 1), and an outer surface (the radially outer surface) configured to seal against the inner surface of the central bore of the valve body (Figure 1 against 12),
but fails to expressly disclose the valve housing comprising a locking pin hole and a groove in the outer surface of the valve seat; a locking pin including a removal bore, the locking pin disposed in the locking pin hole of the valve housing and in the groove of the valve seat, the locking pin configured to axially retain the valve seat with respect to the valve housing.
Guyton teaches a check valve (Figures 8-10) with a valve housing (236 generally), the valve housing (236 generally) comprising a locking pin hole (Figure 8, the threaded hole that screw 278 in inserted into) and a groove (280) in the outer surface of the valve seat (246; Figure 8); a locking pin (278) including a removal bore (shown within the top of pin 278 in Figure 10), the locking pin disposed in the locking pin hole of the valve housing and in the groove of the valve seat (Figure 8), the locking pin configured to axially retain the valve seat with respect to the valve housing (Figure 8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the valve seat and housing of McElroy with the locking pin and hole as taught by Guyton for the advantage of removably retaining the valve seat within the body, as taught by Guyton (Col 9, lines 15-22).
PNG
media_image1.png
479
825
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure A - McElroy
Regarding Claim 2, McElroy as modified discloses a sensor (50) coupled to the valve body (to 30 as seen in Figure 1) and configured to determine a configuration of the flapper (Col 1, line 59 – Col 2, line 13), wherein the configuration of the flapper includes an attached configuration and a detached configuration (Col 2, lines 5-13; Col 4, lines 40-47 both disclose being able to detect when an internal part is loose or missing).
Regarding Claim 3, McElroy as modified discloses where the attached configuration is defined as the flapper being pivotally coupled to the valve housing by the hinge and movable between an open position and a closed position (Col 2, lines 5-13; Col 4, lines 40-47 both disclose by detecting the disk position); and the detached configuration is defined as the flapper no longer being pivotally coupled to the valve housing (Col 2, lines 5-13; Col 4, lines 40-47 both disclose being able to detect when an internal part is loose or missing).
Regarding Claim 9, McElroy as modified discloses where the sensor (50) comprises one or more indicator (84), wherein the indicator is a visual indicator configured to indicate when the flapper is in the attached configuration and when the flapper is in the detached configuration (Col 6, line 66 – Col 7 line 1; which would show the data from Col 2, lines 5-13; Col 4, lines 40-47).
Regarding Claim 15, McElroy disclose a method for determining a configuration of a valve (Col 2, lines 5-13; Col 4, lines 40-47), The method comprising:
coupling a sensor (50) to the valve (10 generally), the valve comprising:
a valve body (10 generally), wherein the sensor (50) is coupled to the valve body (via 30), the valve body comprising a valve housing (12); and
a flapper assembly (20, 22, 24 and 36 generally; Figure 1) disposed in and coupled to the valve body (Figure 1), the flapper assembly comprising a flapper (20), a hinge (see Annotated Figure A), and a valve seat (36), the flapper comprising a pin (24), the hinge (see Annotated Figure A) comprising a hinge body (see Annotated Figure A) and a pin bore of the hinge body (into which pin 24 is inserted), wherein the hinge body is disposed in a recess of the valve housing (see Annotated Figure A) to secure the flapper to the valve body; and
wherein when the flapper is in an attached configuration, the flapper is movable between an open position where fluid is allowed to flow through the valve body in a downstream direction (shown in Figure 1) and a closed position where fluid is stopped from flowing through the valve body in an upstream direction (when 20 rests on seat 36); and wherein when the flapper is in a detached configuration (Col 2, lines 5-13; Col 4, lines 40-47 discloses a missing piece), the flapper is decoupled from the valve body (Col 2, lines 5-13; Col 4, lines 40-47);
pumping fluid in the downstream direction (shown by the arrow in Figure 1);
monitoring the flapper (via the sensor 50; Col 2, lines 5-13; Col 4, lines 40-47); and
providing an indication when the flapper is in the attached configuration or the detached configuration (via 84 of Figure 3),
but fails to expressly disclose the valve housing comprising a locking pin hole and a groove in the outer surface of the valve seat; a locking pin including a removal bore, the locking pin disposed in the locking pin hole of the valve housing and in the groove of the valve seat, the locking pin configured to axially retain the valve seat with respect to the valve housing.
Guyton teaches a check valve (Figures 8-10) with a valve housing (236 generally), the valve housing (236 generally) comprising a locking pin hole (Figure 8, the threaded hole that screw 278 in inserted into) and a groove (280) in the outer surface of the valve seat (246; Figure 8); a locking pin (278) including a removal bore (shown within the top of pin 278 in Figure 10), the locking pin disposed in the locking pin hole of the valve housing and in the groove of the valve seat (Figure 8), the locking pin configured to axially retain the valve seat with respect to the valve housing (Figure 8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the valve seat and housing of McElroy with the locking pin and hole as taught by Guyton for the advantage of removably retaining the valve seat within the body, as taught by Guyton (Col 9, lines 15-22).
Regarding Claim 16, McElroy as modified discloses where the sensor (50) is an accelerometer (Col 5, lines 51-55) and monitoring the flapper comprises detecting a first vibration profile and a second vibration profile (Col 6 lines 14-19), the accelerometer detecting the first vibration profile when the flapper is in the attached configuration (Col 2, lines 5-13; Col 4, lines 40-47) and detecting the second vibration profile when the flapper is in the detached configuration (Col 2, lines 5-13; Col 4, lines 40-47).
Regarding Claim 18, McElroy discloses a check valve (Figure 1; abstract). The valve comprising:
a valve body (10 generally), the valve body comprising a valve housing (12),
a flapper assembly (20, 22, 24 and 36 generally; Figure 1) disposed in and coupled to the valve body (Figure 1), the flapper assembly comprising a flapper (20), a hinge (see Annotated Figure A) and a valve seat (36), the flapper comprising a pin (24),
the hinge (see Annotated Figure A) comprising a hinge body (see Annotated Figure A) and a pin bore of the hinge body (into which pin 24 is inserted), wherein the hinge body is disposed in a recess of the valve housing (see Annotated Figure A) to secure the flapper to the valve body; and
wherein the flapper is configurable in: an attached configuration, comprising an open position when fluid is allowed to flow through the valve body in a downstream direction (Figure 1) and a closed position when fluid is stopped from flowing through the valve body in an upstream direction (when flapper 20 rests on seat 36); and
a detached configuration when the flapper is decoupled from the valve body (Col 2, lines 5-13; Col 4, lines 40-47 discloses a missing piece);
a sensor (50) coupled to the valve body (via 30), the sensor configured to determine whether the flapper is in the attached configuration or the detached configuration (Col 2, lines 5-13; Col 4, lines 40-47 discloses a missing piece) and provide an indication when the flapper is in the detached configuration (via 84 of Figure 3),
but fails to expressly disclose the valve housing comprising a locking pin hole and a groove in the outer surface of the valve seat; a locking pin including a removal bore, the locking pin disposed in the locking pin hole of the valve housing and in the groove of the valve seat, the locking pin configured to axially retain the valve seat with respect to the valve housing.
Guyton teaches a check valve (Figures 8-10) with a valve housing (236 generally), the valve housing (236 generally) comprising a locking pin hole (Figure 8, the threaded hole that screw 278 in inserted into) and a groove (280) in the outer surface of the valve seat (246; Figure 8); a locking pin (278) including a removal bore (shown within the top of pin 278 in Figure 10), the locking pin disposed in the locking pin hole of the valve housing and in the groove of the valve seat (Figure 8), the locking pin configured to axially retain the valve seat with respect to the valve housing (Figure 8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the valve seat and housing of McElroy with the locking pin and hole as taught by Guyton for the advantage of removably retaining the valve seat within the body, as taught by Guyton (Col 9, lines 15-22).
Regarding Claim 19, McElroy as modified discloses where the sensor (50) is an accelerometer (Col 5, lines 51-55) and monitoring the flapper comprises detecting a first vibration profile and a second vibration profile (Col 6 lines 14-19), the accelerometer detecting the first vibration profile when the flapper is in the attached configuration (Col 2, lines 5-13; Col 4, lines 40-47) and detecting the second vibration profile when the flapper is in the detached configuration (Col 2, lines 5-13; Col 4, lines 40-47).
Claim(s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McElroy (US 5,008,841) in view of Guyton (US 3955592) in further view of Reilly (US 6000473).
Regarding Claim 4, McElroy as modified disclose where the flapper (20) further comprising: a first flapper body portion (the arm 22); and a second flapper body portion (the disc 20) coupled to the first flapper body portion (Figure 1), but fails to expressly disclose wherein the first flapper body portion is made of a metallic material and the second flapper body portion is made of a non-metallic material.
Reilley teaches a check valve (abstract; Figures 2-5) where the flapper comprising a first flapper body portion (60) and a second flapper body portion (66) coupled to the first flapper body portion (Figure 4) wherein the first flapper body portion (60) is made of a metallic material (Col 7, lines 26-30) and the second flapper body portion (66) is made of a non-metallic material (rubber is disclosed in Col 7, lines 26-30).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the first body portion and second body portion of McElroy so that the first body portion is made of a metallic material and the second body portion is made of a non-metallic material since selection of a known material on the basis of its suitability for an intended use involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would be to provide a commonly used material that is inexpensive and durable.
Regarding Claim 5, McElroy as modified discloses where the first flapper body portion (the arm 22) of the flapper comprises a flapper arm (22) coupled to the hinge by a pin (24; see Annotated Figure A), and wherein the second flapper body portion (the disc 20) of the flapper comprises the upstream side of the flapper (Figure 1).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McElroy (US 5,008,841) in view of Guyton (US 3955592) in further view of Reilly (US 6000473) in further view of Dusterhoft et al (US 2022/0205338).
Regarding Claim 6, McElroy, as modified teach all essential elements of the current invention as discussed above but fails to expressly teach where the first flapper body portion and the second flapper body portion are bonded together and are mated by one or more dovetail connections.
Dusterhoft et al teach a flapper valve (Figure 5) with a first flapper body portion (108) and a second flapper body portion (102) where the first body portion and the second body portion are bonded together and are mated by one or more dovetail connections (Figure 5; ¶ 23-24).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of McElroy, as modified by Guyon and Reilly with the dovetail connection as taught by Dusterhoft et al for the advantage of securely mating the first and second flapper body portions together, as taught by Dusterhoft et al (¶ 16).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McElroy (US 5,008,841) in view of Guyton (US 3955592) in further view of Au-Yang (US 5,257,545).
Regarding Claim 7, McElroy as modified discloses where the sensor (50) is an accelerometer (Col 5, lines 51-55) and the accelerometer is configured to detect a first vibration profile and a second vibration profile (Col 6 lines 14-19), the accelerometer detecting the first vibration profile when the flapper is in the attached configuration (Col 2, lines 5-13; Col 4, lines 40-47) and detecting the second vibration profile when the flapper is in the detached configuration (Col 2, lines 5-13; Col 4, lines 40-47),
But fails to expressly disclose where the accelerometer is coupled to the valve body by a magnetic connection.
Au-Yang teaches a sensor (38), where the sensor is an accelerometer (38; Col 3, lines 59-66) where the accelerometer is coupled to the valve body by a magnetic connection (Col 3, lines 59-66 teaches magnetic mounting).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the accelerometer mounting system of McElroy with the accelerometer mounting system as taught by Au-Yang for the advantage of use of known technique to improve similar devices (using a magnetic mount to mount an accelerometer on a valve body) in the same way (to secure the accelerometer onto a valve body).
Claim(s) 8, 17 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McElroy (US 5,008,841) in view of Guyton (US 3955592) in further view of Twerdochlib (US 4,777,979).
Regarding Claim 8, McElroy as modified discloses a sensor (50) detecting the first flapper configuration when the flapper is in the attached configuration (Col 2, lines 5-13; Col 4, lines 40-47) and detecting the second flapper configuration when the flapper is in the detached configuration (Col 2, lines 5-13; Col 4, lines 40-47),
But fails to expressly disclose where the sensor is a proximity sensor; and the proximity sensor is configured to detect a first flapper position and a second flapper position.
Twerdochlib teaches a valve (Figure 1) with a sensor (27 generally), where the sensor is a proximity sensor (Col 3, lines 21-26); and the proximity sensor is configured to detect a first flapper position and a second flapper position (Col 4, lines 8-21), the proximity sensor detecting the first flapper position when the flapper is in the attached configuration (Col 4, lines 8-21 and detecting the opening and closing of the flapper) and detecting the second flapper position when the flapper is in the detached configuration (Col 4, lines 8-21 discloses determining a clapper is missing if there is no change when the valve is exercised).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of McElroy with the proximity sensor as taught by Twerdochlib for the advantage of simple substitution of one known element for another (the proximity sensor of Twerdochlib for the accelerometer of McElroy) to obtain predictable results (to measure the position and presence of the valve flapper).
Regarding Claims 17 and 20, McElroy as modified discloses a sensor (50) detecting the first flapper configuration when the flapper is in the attached configuration (Col 2, lines 5-13; Col 4, lines 40-47) and detecting the second flapper configuration when the flapper is in the detached configuration (Col 2, lines 5-13; Col 4, lines 40-47),
But fails to expressly disclose where the sensor is a proximity sensor; and monitoring the flapper comprises detecting a first flapper position and a second flapper position.
Twerdochlib teaches a valve (Figure 1) with a sensor (27 generally), where the sensor is a proximity sensor (Col 3, lines 21-26); and the proximity sensor is configured to detect a first flapper position and a second flapper position (Col 4, lines 8-21), the proximity sensor detecting the first flapper position when the flapper is in the attached configuration (Col 4, lines 8-21 and detecting the opening and closing of the flapper) and detecting the second flapper position when the flapper is in the detached configuration (Col 4, lines 8-21 discloses determining a clapper is missing if there is no change when the valve is exercised).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of McElroy with the system as taught by Twerdochlib for the advantage of simple substitution of one known element for another (the proximity sensor of Twerdochlib for the accelerometer of McElroy) to obtain predictable results (to measure the position and presence of the valve flapper).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McElroy (US 5,008,841) in view of Guyton (US 3955592) in further view of Smith (US 2,280,757) in further view of Scaramucci (US 3,292,658).
Regarding Claim 10, McElroy as modified teaches all essential elements of the current invention as discussed above but fails to expressly teach where the hinge body comprising a first hinge body piece made of a non-metallic material and a second hinge body piece made of the non-metallic material and wherein there is a gap between the first hinge body piece and the second hinge body piece.
Smith teaches a flapper (18 generally) with a hinge (16) having a hinge body (Figure 2) and a pin (12) where the hinge body comprising a first hinge body piece (the left hinge body 16 shown in Figure 2) and a second hinge body piece (the right hinge body 16 shown in Figure 2) and wherein there is a gap between the first hinge body piece and the second hinge body piece (Figure 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the hinge body of McElroy to include first and second hinge body pieces since a mere duplication of essential working part of device involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would be to lower the weight of the clapper by removing material from the hinge body.
Scaramucci teaches a flapper (at least Figure 1) further comprising: a first body portion (the arm 28); and a second body portion (the disc 26) coupled to the first body portion (Figure 1); with a hinge body piece made of a non-metallic material (Col 3, lines 71-73 disclose “The hinge spring means 28 may be fabricated from rubber, synthetic rubber, synthetic plastic or any one of the many synthetic resilient materials which are presently available in the art”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the hinge body piece of McElroy so that the hinge body piece made of a non-metallic material since selection of a known material on the basis of its suitability for an intended use involves only routine skill in the art. The motivation for doing so would be to provide a commonly used material that is inexpensive and durable.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McElroy (US 5,008,841) in view of Guyton (US 3955592) in further view of Witkowski et al (US 20100263744).
Regarding Claim 21, McElroy as modified teach all essential elements of the current invention as discussed above but fails to expressly teach where the locking pin further comprises a debris cap disposed over the removal bore.
Witkowski et al teach a flapper valve (Figure 1) with a locking pin (61), where the locking pin further comprises a debris cap (43) disposed over the removal bore (Figure 1 into 51; ¶ 24).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the locking pin of Guyton with the debris cover as taught by Witkowski et al for the advantage of combining prior art elements according to known methods (a debris cover within a flapper valve) to yield predictable results (to secure the flap within the system).
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McElroy (US 5,008,841) in view of Guyton (US 3955592) in further view of Mills (US 5056548).
Regarding Claim 22, McElroy as modified teach all essential elements of the current invention as discussed above but fails to expressly teach where the hinge body comprises a first hinge body piece disposed within a first hinge recess of the valve housing and a second hinge body piece disposed within a second hinge recess of the valve housing.
Mills teaches a flapper valve (Figures 1-2 and 6) with a hinge body (68, 64 and 65 in Figure 6) where the hinge body comprises a first hinge body piece (64) disposed within a first hinge recess of the valve housing (43) and a second hinge body piece (65) disposed within a second hinge recess of the valve housing (44).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the valve of McElroy with the hinge recesses as taught by Mills for the advantage of combining prior art elements according to known methods (hinge recess in a flapper valve) to yield predictable results (to secure the flap within the system).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2 June 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant amends Claims 1, 15 and 18 to recite a portion of the limitations of Claim 10, as well as the limitation ”wherein the hinge body is disposed in a recess of the valve housing to secure the flapper to the valve body” and argues that McElroy fails to disclose these limitations. Specifically Applicant argues that McElroy is silent as to the hinge body disposed in a recess of the valve housing to secure the flapper to the valve body.
As seen in the Annotated Figure A, the valve housing is shown with a protruding portion into/onto which the pin 24 attaches in the cut view of the Annotated Figure A. This projecting portion would create a recess between the protruding portions, into which the hinge body fits and each end of the pin sits. Therefore, as seen in the Annotated Figure A, McElroy discloses a pin (24); the hinge (see Annotated Figure A) comprising a hinge body (see Annotated Figure A) and a pin bore of the hinge body (into which pin 24 is inserted), wherein the hinge body is disposed in a recess of the valve housing (see Annotated Figure A) to secure the flapper to the valve body.
Therefore, this argument is unpersuasive.
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 NICOLE GARDNER whose telephone number is (571)270-0144. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8AM-4PM EST.
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 supervisors, KENNETH RINEHART (571-272-4881) or CRAIG SCHNEIDER (571-272-3607) can be reached by telephone. 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.
/NICOLE GARDNER/
Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights