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 .
Election/Restrictions
This application contains claims directed to the following patentably distinct species
Species 1 (Figs.2A-2D claims 1-8): a campus board climbing assembly wherein the adjustment system further comprises one or more adjustable frames with one or more actuators which pivot one or more lever assemblies with a pivot point located at or near the bottommost of the plurality of panels.
Species 2 (Figs.3A-3D claims 1-4, and 9-10): a campus board climbing assembly wherein the adjustment system further comprises one or more adjustable frames comprising a rotatable frame having a plurality of fingers, each of which is connected to a rear surface of one of the plurality of panels, wherein the plurality of fingers have different lengths, with the length of the fingers increasing moving vertically upward, such that rotation of the rotatable frame brings about the stepped climbing surface.
Species 3 (Figs.4A-4D claims 1-4, and 11-12): a campus board climbing assembly wherein the adjustment system further comprises one or more adjustable frames comprises a plurality of mechanical linkages, each of which is connected to a rear surface of one of the plurality of panels wherein the plurality of mechanical linkages have different lengths, with the length of the mechanical linkages increasing moving vertically upward, such that forward movement of the one or more adjustable frames brings about the stepped climbing surface.
The species are independent or distinct because each species discloses different structural and functional limitations. In addition, these species are not obvious variants of each other based on the current record.
Applicant is required under 35 U.S.C. 121 to elect a single disclosed species, or a single grouping of patentably indistinct species, for prosecution on the merits to which the claims shall be restricted if no generic claim is finally held to be allowable. Currently, claims 1-4, and 13-20 are generic.
There is a serious search and/or examination burden for the patentably distinct species as set forth above because at least the following reason(s) apply:
The different structural and functional limitations would require a separate search and consideration per species. For instance species 1 requires a frame system with an actuator which moves a lever system to adjust the panels of the climbing wall by pushing the rectangular frame forward at an angle through a lower pivot point, while species 2 requires an axis element and fingers of different lengths protruding therefrom where the axis elements rotate in order to move the fingers which push the panels out, species 3 requires a mechanical linkage in a scissor style formation with no actuators that are present on only one side of the back surfaces of the panels and which extend outward to push each panel forward. All three species have completely independent structures and functions from each other as claimed and depicted in the figures.
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of a species to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected species or grouping of patentably indistinct species, including any claims subsequently added. An argument that a claim is allowable or that all claims are generic is considered nonresponsive unless accompanied by an election.
The election may be made with or without traverse. To preserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the election of species requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable on the elected species or grouping of patentably indistinct species.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the species, or groupings of patentably indistinct species from which election is required, are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing them to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the species unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other species.
Upon the allowance of a generic claim, applicant will be entitled to consideration of claims to additional species which depend from or otherwise require all the limitations of an allowable generic claim as provided by 37 CFR 1.141.
During a telephone conversation with Peter Lish on 02/20/2026 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of species 1, claims 5-8. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 9-12 withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made to the instant application’s claim for priority to provisional application 63/531,894, and as such the earliest date of priority of 08/10/2023 is granted to the instant application.
Drawings
Photographs, color photographs and color drawings are not accepted in utility applications unless a petition filed under 37 CFR 1.84(a)(2) is granted. Any such petition must be accompanied by the appropriate fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(h), one set of color drawings or color photographs, as appropriate, if submitted via the USPTO patent electronic filing system or three sets of color drawings or color photographs, as appropriate, if not submitted via the via USPTO patent electronic filing system, and, unless already present, an amendment to include the following language as the first paragraph of the brief description of the drawings section of the specification:
The patent or application file contains at least one photograph. Copies of this patent or patent application publication with color drawing(s) will be provided by the Office upon request and payment of the necessary fee.
Color photographs will be accepted if the conditions for accepting color drawings and black and white photographs have been satisfied. See 37 CFR 1.84(b)(2).
In addition, the drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “guide rail and an element that travels along the guide rail” of claim 3, the “hand crank” of claim 15, the “grip” of claim 16, and the “user-held peg” of claim 18 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities:
On line 2 “each of the one or more adjustable frames” should be –each adjustable frame of the one or more adjustable frames--.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities:
On line 2 “frames comprises a lever” should be –frames comprise a lever--
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-20 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.
The term “substantially ” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially ” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. As a result it is unclear what the applicant is considering a "substantially continuous climbing surface".
Claim 2 recites the limitation “the system” on line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation as a system has not yet been claimed. The examiner notes that appears that the claim is referencing the adjustment system claimed previously in independent claim 1s and if that is the case, suggests amending the claim language to be –in which the adjustment system--.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “the slidable connection” on line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation as a slidable connection has not yet been claimed. The examiner notes that claim 1 does recite “wherein each of the plurality of panels is slidably connected to the first and second side panes” but a structure of a slidable connection has not been claimed.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “the pivot point” on line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation as a pivot point has not yet been claimed.
Dependent claims 13-20 are rejected due to their dependency on a rejected base claim.
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 18
invention.
Claim(s) 1-6,13-14,16, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Schneider DE 102005063225 A1.
Regarding claim 1:
Schneider discloses a campus board climbing assembly comprising: a plurality of panels (Handle support surfaces 2), each panel having a front surface (rectangular functional surface 4), a rear surface (See annotated figure 2, where the examiner notes since the panels are a 3-dimensional object they inherently include a back surface), a first side surface (The examiner notes that the handle support surfaces are stated as having lateral edges in paragraph [0033] of the translated description, which are side surfaces and since they are 3-dimensional panels they inherently include a first side surface), and a second side surface (The examiner notes that the handle support surfaces are stated as having lateral edges in paragraph [0033] of the translated description, which are side surfaces and since they are 3-dimensional panels they inherently include a first side surface), wherein the plurality of panels are stacked vertically such that the front surfaces together form a climbing surface (See figure 1); a first side pane and a second side pane (Profile rails 6. The examiner notes that the definition of a pane as provided by Meriam-Webster dictionary is “a piece, section, or side of something” and therefore the side profile rails 6 are being considered panes.), wherein each of the plurality of panels is slidably connected to the first and second side panes (“In a further embodiment of the invention, it is provided that the handle support surfaces are individually or synchronously adjustable, in particular pivotably movable and/or slidably attached to the profile rails.” See paragraph [0014] of the translated description. The examiner notes that the grooves 23 which are part of the side panes 6, allow the handle support surfaces to slide up and down the lengths of the panes to adjust their position.); and an adjustment system configured to move the plurality of panels between at least: a first position, in which the front surfaces of the panels form a substantially continuous climbing surface (The examiner notes that due to the unclear nature of the claim language, with no further structural or functional limitations, the handle support surfaces/panels of Schneider can be oriented either to be flat as shown in figure 1 at the bottom, for either storage or a continuous walled climbing surface), and a second position, in which the front surfaces of the panels form a stepped climbing surface The examiner notes that page 1 of the specification of the instant application defines a stepped configuration as “the panels near the top of the campus board climbing assembly extend further forward than the panels near the bottom of the campus board climbing assembly.” Therefore as shown in figures 1 and 2 of Schneider the user can angle/orient the panels to create a stepped climbing surface where the top panels extend further forward than the bottom panels. See figures 1 and 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
522
646
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
690
502
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2:
Schneider discloses the campus board climbing assembly of claim 1, in which the system is configured to move the plurality of panels to a plurality of different positions in which the front surfaces of the panels form a stepped climbing surface (The examiner notes that as stated above in the rejection of claim 1, that page 1 of the specification of the instant application defines a stepped configuration as “the panels near the top of the campus board climbing assembly extend further forward than the panels near the bottom of the campus board climbing assembly.” Therefore as shown in figures 1 and 2 of Schneider the user can angle/orient the panels to create a stepped climbing surface where the top panels extend further forward than the bottom panels. See figures 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 3:
Schneider discloses the campus board climbing assembly of claim 1, wherein the slidable connection comprises the combination of a guide rail (Groove 23. The examiner notes that due to the unclear nature of the claim language and the lack of direction from the drawings of the instant application, pages 6-7 of the specification of the instant application state, “This may take a variety of forms, including for example, a configuration in which one of (i) the side pane and (ii) the side surface of the panel comprises a guide rail, e.g. track, and the other one of the side pane and the side surface of the panel comprises an element, such as a carriage, roller, trolley, drawer slide, etc., that travels along the guide rail.” Therefore the groove 23 in the profile rails 6 which allows the locking levers 10 to slide along the profile rail to change the position as stated in paragraph [0014] of the translated description where it states, “By shifting individual grip surfaces along the profile rails, the distance between the grip surfaces can be varied to simulate different climbing situations.” ) and an element that travels along the guide rail (Locking levers 10).
Regarding claim 4:
Schneider discloses the campus board climbing assembly of claim 1, wherein the adjustment system comprises one or more adjustable frames (triangular chamfers 15 which include semi-circular slots 18, which are shown in detail in figure 2), each of the one or more adjustable frames being configured (i) to rotate or pivot forward, causing the plurality of panels to move in a forward direction (“The lower grip support surfaces 2a can be moved from a rest position parallel to the profile rail 6 in a clockwise direction to a substantially vertically aligned functional position by a pivoting movement about a pivot axis 11, as shown in Fig. 2.” See paragraph [0034]), and (ii) to rotate or pivot rearward, causing the plurality of panels to move in a rearward direction (“The upper handle support surface 2b, on the other hand, can be moved from the illustrated rest position, aligned parallel to the profile rail 6, counterclockwise as shown in Fig. 2 into a substantially horizontal or horizontally oriented functional position.” See paragraph [0034].)
Regarding claim 5:
Schneider discloses the campus board climbing assembly of claim 4, wherein the one or more adjustable frames are positioned behind the plurality of panels and between the first and second side panes (The examiner notes that as depicted in figure 1 the adjustable frame of the triangular chamfers 15 are behind each panel and in between the profile rails/panes).
Regarding claim 6:
Schneider discloses the campus board climbing assembly of claim 4, wherein the adjustment system further comprises one or more actuators configured to bring about the rotation or pivoting of the one or more adjustable frames (“In a further embodiment of the invention, it is provided that at least one handle support surface and/or at least one pivot joint and/or at least one support strut is assigned an adjustment device, which is in particular electrically operable. The adjustment device can, for example, be designed as an electrically driven geared motor and act directly on the swivel joint to adjust an angle between the profile rails and the support arms, or directly on at least one grip support surface to set an angular position relative to the profile rail.” See paragraph [0027] of the translated description. The examiner notes that an electrically driven geared motor is an actuator)
Regarding claim 13:
Schneider discloses the campus board climbing assembly of claim 1, wherein the adjustment system is configured to be operated automatically (“In a further embodiment of the invention, it is provided that at least one handle support surface and/or at least one pivot joint and/or at least one support strut is assigned an adjustment device, which is in particular electrically operable. The adjustment device can, for example, be designed as an electrically driven geared motor and act directly on the swivel joint to adjust an angle between the profile rails and the support arms, or directly on at least one grip support surface to set an angular position relative to the profile rail.” See paragraph [0027]).
Regarding claim 14:
Schneider discloses the campus board climbing assembly of claim 1, wherein the adjustment system is configured to be operated manually (“The adjustment of the handle carrying surfaces can be provided in particular by means of clamping levers that can be operated manually by the user and that ensure a reliable fixing of the handle carrying surfaces.” See paragraph [0014]).
Regarding claim 16:
Schneider discloses the campus board climbing assembly of claim 1, in which the front surface of one or more of the plurality panels, and optionally the front surfaces of each of the plurality of panels, comprises at least one grip (The examiner notes that it appears like the claim language is merely claiming that one, some, or all of the front surfaces of the panels comprise at least one grip, which paragraph [0033] of the translated description discusses that the handle support surfaces include a rectangular functional surface with a plurality of receiving device through holes, which enable the use of handle adapted elements 5 which are grips).
Regarding claim 18:
Schneider discloses the campus board climbing assembly of claim 1, in which the front surface of one or more of the panels, and optionally the front surfaces of each of the plurality of panels, comprises one or more apertures configured to receive a user-held peg (The examiner notes that it appears like the claim language is merely claiming that one, some, or all of the front surfaces of the panels comprise apertures configured to receive a user-held peg, which paragraph [0033] of the translated description states, “The handle support surfaces 2 are manufactured as essentially flat, edge-folded sheet metal panels made of aluminum or steel sheet and have on a rectangular functional surface 4 a multitude of schematically illustrated receiving devices 13 designed as through holes, which enable the screwing on of not shown, prefabricated or individually adapted handle elements 5., which since the user held pegs have not been positively recited, only as the functionality of the apertures, the apertures of Schneider could receive a user held peg since they are configured to accept handle elements as stated).
Regarding claim 19:
Schneider discloses the campus board climbing assembly of claim 1, in which the first and second side panes are mounted to a support structure (support struts 8 which connect the connecting joints 19 to the profile rails 6 and support arms 7).
Regarding claim 20:
Schneider discloses the campus board climbing assembly of claim 1, in which the climbing surface has a first incline angle when in the first position and a second incline angle when in the second position (“In a further embodiment of the invention, it is provided that the support strut is attached to the profile rail and/or to the support arm in a sliding and/or pivoting manner for an angle adjustment between the profile rail and the support arm. This allows the inclination of the profile rails relative to the support arms to be easily changed, thus simulating different climbing situations on walls with varying degrees of overhang.” See paragraph [0016]), the second incline angle being greater than the first incline angle (“The angle between the profile rail and the support arm is designed to have an angle range of 0 degrees to 55 degrees, preferably from 0 degrees to 75 degrees. At an angle of 0 degrees, the support arm is compactly positioned against the profile rail and aligned parallel to it. At low angles, the grip surfaces simulate a strongly overhanging wall section, while at higher angles a smaller overhang is simulated.” See paragraph [0017] with the examiner noting that 0 would be the smallest first angle the assembly can be set-up with, and 75 being the highest second incline angle it can have.).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schneider DE 102005063225 A1 and further in view of Sweeney et al. US 20220016505 A1.
Schneider teaches the invention as substantially claimed above.
Regarding claim 15:
Schneider teaches the campus board climbing assembly of claim 14, but fails to teach wherein the adjustment system is configured to be operated by a hand crank.
Sweeny, however, teaches an adjustable-incline climbing wall comprising a climbing surface and a system for adjusting the climbing surface to a desired incline (See abstract), and further teaches wherein the adjustment system is configured to be operated by a hand crank (hand crank 54, with paragraph [0059] stating, “At least one of the first and second jacks, and optionally both, may either comprise a hand crank 54 or be configured to receive a hand crank. Using the hand crank 54, a user may move the climbing surface 13 within the permitted range of angles”.)
PNG
media_image3.png
528
468
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the climbing assembly of Schneider to use a hand crank to operate the adjustment system as taught by Sweeney, since Schneider already allows for manual adjustment of both the overall incline of the climbing wall, and manual adjustment of each individual panel through the use of locking pins, levers, and sliding joints so the hand crank would allow for precise control over the incline adjustment of the wall and would remove the need for locking pins and levers to be manually actuated by the user to hold the wall in place once adjusted to their needs.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schneider DE 102005063225 A1, and further in view of Speed US 12036461 B2.
Schneider teaches the invention as substantially claimed above.
Regarding claim 17:
Schneider discloses the campus board climbing assembly of claim 16, in which the at least one grip comprises a rung.
Speed, however, teaches systems and methods for providing climbing walls including a climbing wall that has a base member and a climbing surface that includes at least one climbing hold (See abstract) and further teaches where at least one grip comprises a rung (“Moreover, in some embodiments, the sizing of the holds 200 is carefully optimized for a wide range of climbers. Moreover, in some embodiments, one or more portions of the climbing holds (or flow holds) are symmetrical and/or are otherwise shaped for uses as a natural “pull-down” holds, like a ladder rung.” See col. 31 lines 40-45”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the climbing grips of Schneider to include a rung as taught by Speed, as Schneider is already configured to accept various climbing holds, and a rung increases the variety of climbing exercises/movements/ the user can execute while training with the climbing assembly.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art of record fails to teach or disclose the campus board climbing assembly of dependent claim 7 including wherein the one or more adjustable frames comprise a lever, and in regards to dependent claim 8 the closest prior art of record fails to teach, wherein the pivot point for the lever assembly is located at or near the bottommost of the plurality of panels, such that the upper portion of the lever assembly is pivoted forward a greater distance than the lower portion of the lever assembly to bring about the stepped climbing surface.
The closest prior art of record includes Schneider DE 102005063225 A, Sudeith et al US 20200171369 A1, and Speed US 12036461 B1.
Schneider DE 102005063225 A: Mobile Climbing Wall For Sport Climbing Training, Has Supporting Device And Supporting Surfaces Adjustably Coupled With Each Other On Underground For Free-standing, Variable Positioning Of Supporting Surfaces, as discussed above teaches a wall with multiple hand support surface panels which are configured to have adjustable position by pivoting along an axis provided by side frames connected to profile rails in order to vary the position of each panel. It fails to teach wherein the one or more adjustable frames comprise a lever, with the examiner noting even though each panel which can be adjusted by an actuator as discussed in the rejections above do not have a lever connecting the actuator to the side frames (triangular chamfers 15) and it would not have been obvious to modify the invention to include a lever for each panel.
Sudeith et al. US 20200171369 A1: Expandable Climbing Panel and Climbing Wall Having Such a Panel, which teaches a climbing wall comprising one or more expandable climbing panels, where the expandable climbing panel may be configured so that changing the angle of a portion of the climbing wall in one direction causes the climbing panel to expand, such that the panel provides an increased climbing surface area, and changing the angle of the portion of the climbing wall in the other direction causes the climbing panel to contract, such that the panel provides a reduced climbing surface area. It further teaches actuators (actuators 111 and 112) which are configured to change the angle of the attached wall portions, where the actuator are connected directly to the framework 106, however it fails to teach a lever which is acted upon by the actuator and further fails to teach wherein the pivot point for the lever assembly is located at or near the bottommost of the plurality of panels, such that the upper portion of the lever assembly is pivoted forward a greater distance than the lower portion of the lever assembly to bring about the stepped climbing surface.
PNG
media_image4.png
662
504
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Speed US 12036461 B1: Systems and Methods for Providing an Adjustable Climbing Wall, which teaches systems and methods for providing climbing walls including a climbing wall that has a base member and a climbing surface that includes at least one climbing hold, and further teaches wherein the one or more adjustable frames comprise a lever (lever arms 71) with a lower pivot point (pivotal coupling 73). However this would not make sense to modify the main reference of Schneider to include these structures as the invention of Schneider does not allow for the levers and back sided frame structures of Speed. In addition, an alternate rejection in view of Speed as the main reference for independent claim 1, and dependent claims 4 and 6 which claim 7 depends on would not be proper as speed does not teach every limitation of independent claim 1 and would require multiple modifications due to hindsight in order to function as claimed.
PNG
media_image5.png
648
532
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN ANGELO DICUIA whose telephone number is (703)756-4713. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:30.
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, LoAn Jimenez can be reached at (571) 272-4966. 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.
/J.A.D./Examiner, Art Unit 3784
/Megan Anderson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3784