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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/11/2025 has been entered.
Election/Restrictions
Claim 21 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/06/2024.
Claim 21 recites “a valve configured to control flow of the fuel from an outlet of the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger, without flowing through a heat source, through three different outlets of the valve,…”, but in elected Species II-5 drawn to Fig. 19, all three paths from second valve 1202 flow through a heat source, such as combustor 16, primary heat exchanger 1220, and secondary heat exchanger 1230.
Therefore, claim 21 does not read on Fig. 19 and is withdrawn.
Claims 1-4, 6-10 and 12 are currently being examined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-4, 6-10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites “a valve configured to control flow of the fuel from an outlet of the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger, without increasing pressure, through three different outlets of the valve, …” which is not supported by the original disclosure.
In patent application publication 20250198343 of the instant application, [0121] describes a valve operable to enable fuel to recirculate through a primary heat exchanger and [0123] describes for any of the recirculation valves described herein, there may be one or more associated pumps configured to convey fuel back to the inlet of the heat exchanger or any suitable components for repressurizing the fuel to enable recirculation may be used. Regarding the elected Species II-5 drawn to Fig. 19, [0409] describes second valve 1202 directing fuel through three paths i-iii but does not describe this is done “without increasing pressure.” Further regarding Fig. 19, [0412] describes that recirculation pipe 1206 may comprise or is associated with one or more pumps configured to convey fuel through 1206 with the pumps positioned upstream of second valve 1202 or anywhere along 1206. The original disclosure, therefore, describes pressurizing flow of the fuel between primary heat exchanger 1220 and second valve 1202 and/or pressurizing the flow of the fuel downstream of second valve 1202; but the original disclosure does not describe flow of the fuel flow between 1220 and 1202, flow of the fuel through 1202, or flow of the fuel downstream of 1202 “without increasing pressure.”
Claims dependent upon claim 1 are rejected as failing to comply with the written description requirement for the same reasons as claim 1.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-4, 6-10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “a valve configured to control flow of the fuel from an outlet of the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger, without increasing pressure, through three different outlets of the valve, …” which is unclear as to whether this recitation means pressure is not increased by and within the valve or this recitation means pressure is not increased downstream of the three outlets of the valve which renders claim 1 indefinite. For current examination purposes, this recitation is interpreted as pressure is not increased downstream of the three outlets of the valve.
Claims dependent upon claim 1 are rejected as being indefinite for the same reasons as claim 1.
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 (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.
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) 1-4, 6-8 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sabnis 20170175675 in view of Clements 20040011052 and White 3566917.
Regarding independent claim 1 and dependent claims 2-4 and 8, as best understood, Sabnis discloses a gas turbine engine (20 Fig. 1) for an aircraft (para. 0046 describes 20 as an aircraft engine) comprising: an engine core (core of 20 which has core airflow path C as shown in Fig. 1) comprising a turbine (54, 46 Fig. 1), a combustor (56 Fig. 1), a compressor (44, 52 Fig. 1), and a core shaft (inner shaft 40, outer shaft 50 Fig. 1) connecting the turbine to the compressor (40 connects 44 to 46 and 50 connects 52 to 54); a fan (42 Fig. 1) located upstream of the engine core and arranged to be driven by the core shaft (inner shaft 40 drives fan 42 per para. 0041), the fan comprising a plurality of fan blades (para. 0051 describes a plurality of fan blades); a nacelle (structure radially outward of fan 42 in Fig. 1) surrounding the fan and the engine core and defining a bypass duct (duct through which bypass flow B is shown in Fig. 1) located radially outside of the engine core, where a bypass ratio, defined as a ratio of a mass flow rate of a flow through the bypass duct to a mass flow rate of a flow through the engine core at cruise conditions, is at least 4 (para. 0004 describes bypass ratio is greater than 10 which is at least 4 as claimed); a fuel supply system, wherein the fuel supply system is arranged to supply fuel for combustion in the combustor (para. 0038 describes fuel being mixed with air and ignited in the combustor which necessarily requires a fuel supply system).
Sabnis does not explicitly disclose a plurality of actuators; wherein the fuel supply system is arranged to supply fuel to fueldraulically drive at least one actuator of the plurality of actuators; a primary fuel-oil heat exchanger arranged to have oil and the fuel flow therethrough, the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger being arranged to transfer heat from the oil to the fuel; and a valve configured to control flow of the fuel from an outlet of the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger, without increasing pressure, through three different outlets of the valve, (i) a first valve outlet that directs the flow of fuel through a recirculation pipe configured to direct the fuel back through the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger, (ii) a second valve outlet that directs the flow of the fuel to a combustor, and (iii) a third valve outlet that directs the flow of the fuel to a secondary fuel-oil heat exchanger; wherein the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger is arranged such that, at cruise, the fuel temperature on entry into the at least one actuator is at least 5°C greater than the fuel temperature on entry to the combustor.
Clements teaches a fuel delivery system for a turbine engine (para. 0001). Clements teaches a plurality of actuators (100 Fig. 2 para. 0027); a fuel supply system (Fig. 2), wherein the fuel supply system is arranged to supply the fuel for combustion in the combustor (para. 0027 describes metered fuel 94 is supplied to a combustor), and to supply fuel to fueldraulically drive at least one actuator of the plurality of actuators (fuel is supplied to actuators 100 in Fig. 2); and
a primary fuel-oil heat exchanger (104, 120 Fig. 2) arranged to have oil and the fuel flow therethrough (Fig. 2), the primary heat exchanger being arranged to transfer heat from the oil to the fuel (paras. 0027, 0028); and
flow of the fuel from an outlet of the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger (in Fig. 2, fuel flows through primary heat exchanger 104 with an outlet on left side of 104 and from the outlet of 104 fuel flows up to filter 86 to high pressure gear pump 82 to and through wash flow filter 90) flows in three different flow paths (the flow of the fuel from 90 is permitted to travel in three paths which are actuation flow 92, metered flow 94, and bypass flow 96 per [0026]), (i) the flow of the fuel is directed through a recirculation pipe (96 Fig. 2) configured to direct fuel back through the heat exchanger (fuel in 96 is directed back through 104 in Fig. 2), (ii) the flow of the fuel is directed to a combustor (para. 0027 describes metered flow 94 is flow that is sent to and burned in the engine combustor), and (iii) the flow of the fuel is directed to a secondary fuel-oil heat exchanger (the flow of the fuel in actuation flow 92 is directed to secondary fuel-oil heat exchanger 120 in Fig. 2);
wherein the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger is arranged such that, at cruise, the fuel temperature on entry into the at least one actuator is at least 5°C greater than the fuel temperature on entry to the combustor (120 is used to ensure that fuel used for actuation purposes is sufficiently heated in order to avoid ice buildup and subsequent failure of actuation systems under certain flight conditions; the arrangement of main heat exchanger 104 upstream of servo heat exchanger 120 allows for an increase in the temperature of the fuel over the temperature of the portion of fuel sent to the combustor which does not flow through 120 such that the at least one heat exchanger of Clements is capable of the intended use of having the fuel temperature on entry into the at least one actuator is at least 5°C greater than the fuel temperature on entry to the combustor as claimed).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Sabnis to include a plurality of actuators; a fuel supply system, wherein the fuel supply system is arranged to supply the fuel for combustion in the combustor and to supply fuel to fueldraulically drive at least one actuator of the plurality of actuators; and a primary fuel-oil heat exchanger arranged to have oil and the fuel flow therethrough, the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger being arranged to transfer heat from the oil to the fuel; flow of the fuel from an outlet of the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger flows in three different flow paths, (i) the flow of the fuel is directed through a recirculation pipe configured to direct fuel back through the heat exchanger, (ii) the flow of the fuel is directed to a combustor, and (iii) the flow of the fuel is directed to a secondary fuel-oil heat exchanger; wherein the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger is arranged such that, at cruise, the fuel temperature on entry into the at least one actuator is at least 5°C greater than the fuel temperature on entry to the combustor as taught by Clements to allow engine components to be actuated using fuel and to prevent ice build-up in the fuel that could prevent actuation while also providing heated fuel for combustion.
Sabnis in view of Clements does not explicitly teach a valve configured to control the flow of the fuel from the outlet of the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger, without increasing pressure, through three different outlets of the valve, (i) a first valve outlet that directs the flow of fuel through the recirculation pipe, (ii) a second valve outlet that directs the flow of the fuel to the combustor, and (iii) a third valve outlet that directs the flow of the fuel to the secondary fuel-oil heat exchanger.
White teaches a valve (manifold/valve assembly 10, 28 in Figs. 1 and 3) configured to control a flow of fuel from a source (per col 1 lines 50-60 manifold 10 includes pipe 12 with a passageway 14 extending longitudinally with a threaded connection with pipe 16 providing a source of fluid, which may be fuel per col 1 lines 8-11; per col 2 lines 20-21 manifold 10 may be cut to desired length; valve 28 is connected to 12 as shown in Figs. 1 and 3 and valve 28 is provided with a pair of bores 20 and a bore 26 to control the flow of fuel from the passageway 14 per col 1 lines 71-72) through three different outlets of the valve (col 1 lines 61-72 describes pipe 12 has valve 28 provided with a pair of bores 20 extending transversely through 12 and bore 26 extending perpendicular to bores 20 as shown in Fig. 3 such that the two bores 20 and bore 26 provide three different outlets of valve 28 which in Fig. 1 are respectively connected with conduits 22, 24 and 25; any remaining unused bores in 12 in Fig. 1 may be plugged including an exit opening at end opposite 16 and 12 may be cut to desired length per col 2 lines 17-21).
Modifying Sabnis in view of Clements to include a valve as taught by White has the valve located downstream of the wash flow filter 90 to direct the fuel flow through the three different outlets of the valve into the three flowpaths, and downstream of 90 in Fig. 2 of Clements pressure of the fuel flow in each of the three paths, which are also downstream of the valve, is not increased by an additional pump as shown in Fig. 2 of Clements. Therefore, as best understood, Sabnis in view of Clements and White teaches the valve is configured to control flow of the fuel from the outlet of the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger, without increasing pressure, through three different outlets of the valve (see 112(b): interpreted as pressure is not increased downstream of the three outlets of the valve) as claimed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Sabnis in view of Clements to have a valve configured to control the flow of the fuel from the outlet of the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger, without increasing pressure, through three different outlets of the valve as taught by White with the valve located downstream of the wash flow filter resulting in (i) a first valve outlet that directs the flow of fuel through the recirculation pipe, (ii) a second valve outlet that directs the flow of the fuel to the combustor, and (iii) a third valve outlet that directs the flow of the fuel to the secondary fuel-oil heat exchanger as combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, in this case combining the wash flow filter receiving the flow of the fuel from the outlet of the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger in the fuel supply system with a valve known in the prior art as controlling fuel flow through three different outlets with the valve receiving the flow of the fuel from the wash flow filter and predictably controlling the flow of the fuel through the three different outlets of the valve, without increasing pressure downstream of the outlets of the valve, to direct the flow of the fuel in the three different flow paths.
"The combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results. . . . [W]hen a patent 'simply arranges old elements with each performing the same function it had been known to perform' and yields no more than one would expect from such an arrangement, the combination is obvious." KSR at 1395-66 (citing Sakraida v. AG Pro, Inc., 425 U.S. 273, 282 (1976)).
The invention of Sabnis in view of Clements and White is also capable of the fuel temperature on entry into the at least one actuator is at least 10, 15, or 20 °C greater than the fuel temperature on entry to the combustor in the respective intended use limitations of claims 2-4 due to the arrangement of heat exchangers 104 and 120 in the fuel system.
Regarding claim 8, the invention of Sabnis in view of Clements and White also teaches the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger (104 Fig. 2 of Clements) is arranged to heat a majority of the fuel (fuel is heated in 104 before being directed to burner staging valve to be burnt in the combustor in Fig. 2 of Clements), and the secondary fuel-oil heat exchanger (120 Fig. 2 of Clements) is arranged to provide additional heat to the fuel to be supplied to fueldraulically drive the at least one fueldraulic actuator (also an intentional use limitation; Sabnis in view of Clements and White is capable of this limitation due to the arrangement of 120 downstream of 104 in the flow of another portion of fuel flow provided to 100 as 120 provides additional heating to fuel provided to 100 in Fig. 2 of Clements). Although not explicitly stated that the fuel heated in 104 is at least the majority of the fuel, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the portion of the fuel being sent to the combustor for combustion after flowing through 104 would be the majority of the fuel since most fuel is used for generating propulsion versus supplying actuators.
Regarding claim 6, Sabnis in view of Clements and White teaches all that is claimed above and Sabnis further discloses the core shaft outputs drive to the fan directly, so as to drive the fan at the same rotational speed as core shaft, such that the engine is a direct drive turbine engine (para. 0003).
Regarding claim 7, Sabnis in view of Clements and White teaches all that is claimed above and Sabnis further discloses the turbine engine comprises a gearbox that receives an input from the core shaft and outputs drive to the fan so as to drive the fan at a lower rotational speed than the core shaft, such that the engine is a geared turbine engine (para. 0024).
Regarding claim 12, Sabnis in view of Clements and White teaches all that is claimed above but Sabnis is silent regarding the fuel supplied to the combustor comprises a mixture of fuel which has been passed through the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger and fuel which has bypassed the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger.
Clements further teaches the fuel supplied to the combustor comprises a mixture of fuel which has been passed through the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger and fuel which has bypassed the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger (fuel flow is sent through 96 to valve 102 which directs the fuel through main heat exchanger 104 and then the fuel flow is returned upstream of filter 86 where the fuel flow combines with additional fuel from boost pump 80, i.e., a mixture of fuel, and the mixture of fuel flows to high pressure gear pump 82 and then through wash flow filter 90 to 94 and then to metering valve 110 to be sent to and burned in the combustor as shown in Fig. 2 and as described in paras. 0026 and 0027). Metered flow is established by setting a metering valve 110 to a known position that corresponds to a value of metered fuel flow, and modulation of head regulator and bypass valve 102 is used to accurately control the pressure drop across metering valve 110 to a constant level which is essential to maintaining the required accurate relationship between metering valve position and metered flow (para. 0027). An overspeed governor 132 provides a signal to open 102 when an overspeed is sensed to reduce the quantity of flow delivered to the engine combustor (para. 0030). Main heat exchanger 104 is able to cool engine oil during non-icing conditions (para. 0036).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Sabnis in view of Clements and White to have the fuel supplied to the combustor comprise a mixture of fuel which has been passed through the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger and fuel which has bypassed the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger as taught by Clements to cool engine oil during non-icing conditions, maintain the required accurate relationship between metering valve position and metered flow and reduce the quantity of flow delivered to the engine combustor during an overspeed condition.
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sabnis 20170175675 in view of Clements 20040011052 and White 3566917 as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Linke-Diesinger (NPL - System of Commercial Turbofan Engines provided in IDS).
Regarding claim 9, Sabnis in view of Clements and White teaches all that is claimed above but Sabnis is silent regarding the primary and secondary fuel-oil heat exchangers are controlled such that, under cruise conditions, a heat transfer ratio of: (a rate of heat transfer from oil to fuel in the secondary fuel-heat exchanger)/(a rate of heat transfer from oil to fuel in the primary and secondary fuel-oil heat exchangers) has a maximum value of at least 0.35.
Linke-Diesinger teaches a thermal management system for an aircraft engine (Fig. 4.9) including a primary fuel-oil heat exchanger and an air-cooled oil heat exchanger (Fig. 4.9). If the fuel temperature reaches the threshold temperature, the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger is switched off and the air-cooled oil heat exchanger is activated. In this instance, the heat transfer rate between the fuel and oil in the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger goes to zero to prevent overheating of the fuel (page 81).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Sabnis in view of Clements and White to include an air-oil heat exchanger and have the gas turbine engine operate to activate the air-oil heat exchanger such that the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger is turned off when the fuel reaches a fuel temperature threshold, as taught by Linke-Diesinger in order to prevent overheating of the fuel.
As modified, Sabnis in view of Clements and White and further in view of Linke-Diesinger teaches turning off the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger. In this instance, a heat transfer ratio of: (a rate of heat transfer from oil to fuel in the secondary fuel-heat exchanger)/(a rate of heat transfer from oil to fuel in the primary and secondary fuel-oil heat exchangers) has a maximum value of at least 1.0 at cruise conditions when the rate of heat transfer in the primary fuel-oil heat exchanger is zero. Thus, the ratio becomes (a rate of heat transfer from oil to fuel in the secondary fuel-oil heat exchanger)/(a rate of heat transfer from oil to fuel in the secondary fuel-oil heat exchanger) which is one. A value of 1.0 is greater than 0.35, such that the heat transfer ratio has a maximum value of at least 0.35 as claimed.
Regarding claim 10, Sabnis in view of Clements and White and further in view of Linke-Diesinger teaches all that is claimed above, and as modified teaches the heat transfer rate in the primary heat exchanger can be reduced to zero to prevent overheating of the fuel. This changes the heat transfer ratio. Thus, the primary and secondary heat exchangers are arranged such that the heat transfer ratio is adjustable in operation of the gas turbine engine, as claimed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/28/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. As discussed above in the 112 rejections, the new limitation added to claim 1 is not supported by the original disclosure and the new limitation also renders claim 1 as indefinite. As best understood, Sabnis in view of Clements and White teaches the new limitation of claim 1 interpreted as pressure is not increased downstream of the three outlets of the valve.
Applicant argues on page 9 of Remarks that since Clements teaches a high pressure gear pump 82 downstream of main heat exchanger 104, that Clements is contrary to the new limitation of claim 1. However, as recited in claim 1, the new limitation regarding “without increasing pressure” appears to apply to the claimed valve but is unclear as to the recitation meaning flow through the claimed valve or meaning flow downstream of the three outlets of the valve. Prior art of record White teaches the claimed valve and Sabnis as modified in view of Clements and White teaches the valve is downstream of the wash flow filter 90 of Clements, and downstream of 90 and the three outlets of the valve fuel flows without increasing pressure as shown in Fig. 2 of Clements.
As discussed above, new claim 21 does not read on the elected Species II-5 drawn to Fig. 19, and is therefore withdrawn, since all three paths of the flow of fuel from the three different outlets of the valve 1202 flow through a heat source.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALYSON JOAN HARRINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-2359. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am - 5 pm 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 supervisor, Phutthiwat Wongwian can be reached on (571) 270-5426. 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.
/A.J.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3741
/PHUTTHIWAT WONGWIAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3741