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 .
Claim Interpretation
The claims repeated reference a “rear side” and a “front side” of the claimed bottom plate. The bottom plate, being a plate which forms a distillation tray, does not have a side which is unambiguously the “front side” thereof, nor does it have a side which is unambiguously the “rear side thereof”. In other words, any side of a distillation tray, and thus the bottom plate forming said tray, can be fairly considered to be a front side or a rear side, as long as it is not considered to be both at the same time.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: the “at least one gas transmission part” in claim 20, the “liquid transmission part” in claim 20, the “holding unit” in claim 22.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 36 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim 36 does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because it is drawn to a use without reciting any method steps (See MPEP 2173.05(q)I).
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.
Claim 24-27, 29-31, 36 is 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 24 recites the limitation "the rear side of the bottom plate" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 24 recites the limitation "the front side thereof" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 25 recites the limitation "the rear side of the bottom plate" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 26 recites the limitation "the form of a plate" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 27 is rejected due to its dependency on indefinite claim 26.
Claim 29 recites the limitation "the rear side of the bottom plate" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 29 recites the limitation "its one end" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. To overcome this rejection, Applicant should amend claim 29 to recite --one end-- in place of “its one end”.
Claim 29 recites the limitation "its free claw end" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. To overcome this rejection, Applicant should amend claim 29 to recite --a free claw end-- in place of “its free claw end”.
Claim 30 recites the limitation "the front side of the bottom plate" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 31 recites the limitation "the at least one protruding gas transmission part" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Note: There is sufficient antecedent basis for --the at least one protruded gas transmission part-- but not for "the at least one protruding gas transmission part".
Claim 31 recites the limitation "the through hole" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 35 recites the limitation "its rear side" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. To overcome this rejection, Applicant should amend claim 35 to recite --a rear side thereof-- in place of “its rear side”.
Claim 36 is indefinite because it recites a use but fails to recite any method steps (See MPEP 2173.05(q)I).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/35 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.
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
Claim(s) 20-22, 25-28, 30-33, 37, and 38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Binkley et al. (US 2008/0277260), hereafter referred to as Binkley.
With regard to claims 20 and 21: Binkley teaches a plurality of mass transfer trays 48,49,…, each mass transfer tray comprising a bottom plate, at least one gas transmission part (raised inlet section/active inlet area) 51/71, a liquid transmission part (central active area/valved panel) 52, wherein the mass transfer tray has a plurality of valves 100 in the liquid transmission part 52 (Figures 1-4, paragraphs [0030]-[0041]).
With regard to claim 22: Wherein the bottom plate is provided with at least one through hole, each of which is positioned corresponding to a respective valve 100, (Figures 1-4, paragraphs [0030]-[0041]), each valve 100 comprises a movable valve body (circular top surface) 130 and a holding unit comprised of securement legs 132 and 134 for holding the valve body 130, and the valve 100 is configured to have an open position where the valve body is held by the holding unit 132 and 134, and a closed position where the valve body 130 closes the respective through hole in the bottom plate (Figures 5 and 6, paragraphs [0042]-[0046]).
With regard to claim 25: The valve body 130 is configured to block, in the closed position of the valve, the through hole from a rear side (top side) of the bottom plate (Figures 5 and 6, paragraphs [0042]-[0046]).
With regard to claim 26: The valve body 130 is configured in the form of a plate (Figures 5 and 6, paragraphs [0042]-[0046]).
With regard to claim 27: An aperture 137C for pressure balance is formed at the center of the plate of the valve (Figures 5 and 6, paragraphs [0042]-[0046]).
With regard to claim 28: The holding unit comprises a plurality of holding claws (securement legs) 132 and 134 which are arranged circumferentially at a distance from one another (Figures 5 and 6, paragraphs [0042]-[0046]).
With regard to claim 30: The gas transmission part 51/71 is protruded from a front (top) side of the bottom plate, and the liquid transmission part 52 is adjacent to the gas transmission part 51/71 (Figures 1-4, paragraphs [0030]-[0041]).
With regard to claim 31: The at least one gas transmission part 51/71 is protruded and the bottom plate has at least one recess which is recessed away from the at least one protruding gas transmission part, and wherein and the valves 100 and corresponding through holes are arranged in the recess (Figures 1-4, paragraphs [0030]-[0041]).
With regard to claim 32: The mass transfer tray is a crossflow tray (Figures 1-4, paragraphs [0030]-[0041]).
With regard to claim 33: The mass transfer tray and/or the valves may be at least stainless steel (paragraph [0039]).
With regard to claim 37: Binkley teaches a column 10 for thermal treatment of fluid mixtures, the column comprising a cylindrical vertical column body (tower) 12 which forms a column cavity and a plurality of trays 48, 49,… mounted in the column cavity and vertically spaced apart from one another (Figures 1-4, paragraphs [0030]-[0041]); the trays each being mass transfer trays according to claim 20, for mass transfer between gas and liquid phases of the fluid mixtures (Figures 1-4, paragraphs [0030]-[0041]; see rejection of claim 20 above).
With regard to claim 38: Binkley teaches a thermal separation process comprising performing thermal separation between at least one gas ascending and at least one liquid descending within a column according to claim 37 (Figures 1-4, paragraphs [0030]-[0041]; see rejection of claim 37 above).
Claim(s) 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Binkley.
With regard to claim 36: Binkley teaches all of the limitations of claim 20 as discussed in the 102 rejections above.
Binkley teaches using a mass transfer tray according to claim 20 in a mass transfer process (Figures 1-4, paragraphs [0030]-[0041]; see rejection of claim 37 above). Though Binkley does not explicitly describe the mass transfer process as such, it is understood that the mass transfer process may be at least one of distillation, stripping, and rectification.
In the unlikely alternative, Binkley’s teachings to the mass transfer process would clearly suggest distillation, stripping, and/or rectification to one of ordinary skill in the art. Thus, if it were not already so in Binkley, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Binkley by carrying out distillation, stripping, and/or rectification using the mass transfer trays disclosed therein.
Claim(s) 20-22, 24-26, 28-30, 32-34, and 36-38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Huggins et al. (US 2,772,080), hereafter referred to as Huggins.
With regard to claims 20 and 21: Huggins teaches a plurality of mass transfer trays 16 and 17, each comprising comprising a bottom plate, a plurality of gas transmission parts openings 34 and a liquid transmission part (top surfaces of the trays), wherein the mass transfer tray has a plurality of valves, comprised of dished covers 28 and associated spiders 29, and located in the liquid transmission part (Figures 1-5 and 11-13, Column 2 Line 20-Column 3 Line 57).
With regard to claim 22: The bottom plate is provided with a plurality of through holes 27, each of which is positioned corresponding to a respective valve 28/29, each valve comprises a movable valve body (dished cover) 28 and a holding unit (spider) 29 for holding the valve body, and the valve 28/29 is configured to have an open position where the valve body 28 is held by the holding unit 29, and a closed position where the valve body 28 closes the respective through hole 27 in the bottom plate (Figures 1-5, Column 2 Line 20-Column 3 Line 57).
With regard to claim 24: The holding unit 29 is fixedly connected to a rear side (top or bottom) of the bottom plate opposite to a front side (bottom side or top side) thereof (Figures 1-5, Column 2 Line 20-Column 3 Line 57). Note: This limitation is satisfied by Huggins regardless of whether the claimed “rear side” is read upon the top or the bottom of the taught bottom plate, as the holding unit 29 is connected fixedly to both sides of the bottom plate (Figure 3, Column 2 Lines 44-56).
With regard to claim 25: The valve body is configured to block, in the closed position of the valve, the through hole from the rear side (top side) of the bottom plate (Figure 3, Column 2 Lines 44-56).
With regard to claim 26: The valve body 28 is configured as a plate (Figures 1-5, Column 2 Line 20-Column 3 Line 57).
With regard to claims 28 and 29: The holding unit 29 comprises a plurality of holding claws which are arranged circumferentially at a distance from one another; wherein each holding claw is configured to be fixedly connected at one end (the end featuring split leg 30) to a rear side (the top side or the bottom side) of the bottom plate, and to hold, at a free claw end, the valve body 28 when the valve is in the open position (Figures 1-5, Column 2 Line 20-Column 3 Line 57; see annotated Figure 5 below). Note: These limitations are satisfied by Huggins regardless of whether the claimed “rear side” is read upon the top or the bottom of the taught bottom plate, as the ends of each holding claw featuring split leg 30 are fixedly connected to both sides of the bottom plate (Figure 3, Column 2 Lines 44-56).
PNG
media_image1.png
319
364
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 30: The at least one gas transmission part 34 is protruded from the front side (the top side or the bottom side) of the bottom plate, and the liquid transmission part (top surfaces of the trays) is adjacent to the at least one gas transmission part 34 (Figures 1-5 and 11-13, Column 2 Line 20-Column 3 Line 57). Note: This limitation is satisfied by Huggins regardless of whether the claimed “front side” is read upon the top or the bottom of the taught bottom plate, as the gas transmission part 34 protrudes from both the top and bottom sides of the tray (Figure 3, Column 2 Lines 44-56).
With regard to claim 32: The mass transfer trays 16 and 17 are crossflow trays (Figures 1-5, Column 2 Line 20-Column 3 Line 57).
With regard to claim 33: The mass transfer tray and the valves may be made of at least stainless steel (Column 4 Lines 50-65).
With regard to claim 34: There is a connection area between the gas transmission part 34 and the bottom plate, said connection area is rounded (Figures 1-5 and 11-13, Column 2 Line 20-Column 3 Line 57).
With regard to claim 36: Huggins teaches using the mass transfer trays according to claim 20 in a liquid separation process, i.e. fractionation, (Figures 1-5 and 11-13, Column 1 Lines 15-25, Column 2 Line 20-Column 3 Line 57; see rejection of claim 20 above). Because said separation process is fractionation, it is understood that it includes distillation, rectification, and/or stripping.
With regard to claim 37: Huggins teaches a column for thermal treatment (fractionation) of fluid mixtures, the column comprising a cylindrical vertical column body (shell) 15 which forms a column cavity and a plurality of trays 16 and 17 mounted in the column cavity and vertically spaced apart from one another, the trays each comprising a mass transfer tray according to claim 20, for mass transfer between gas and liquid phases of the fluid mixtures (Figures 1-5 and 11-13, Column 1 Lines 15-25, Column 2 Line 20-Column 3 Line 57; see rejection of claim 20 above).
With regard to claim 38: Huggins teaches a thermal separation process, comprising performing thermal separation between at least one gas ascending and at least one liquid descending within a column according to claim 37 (Figures 1-5 and 11-13, Column 1 Lines 15-25, Column 2 Line 20-Column 3 Line 57; see rejection of claim 37 above).
Claim(s) 20-26, 30-32, and 35-38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nutter et al. (US 2,658,737), hereafter referred to as Nutter
With regard to claims 20 and 21: Nutter teaches a plurality of mass transfer trays 2 and 3, each mass transfer tray comprising a bottom plate, at least one gas transmission part (relief valve) 11 and a liquid transmission part (top surface of the tray), wherein the mass transfer tray has a plurality of valves (flow elements) 19 located in the liquid transmission part (Figures 1-4, Columns 6-10).
With regard to claim 22: The bottom plate is provided with a plurality of through holes, each of which is positioned corresponding to a respective valve (flow element) 19, each valve comprises a movable valve body 19 and a holding unit comprised of bolt 22, u-shaped support 27, and transverse bar 23 for holding the valve body 19, and the valve is configured to have an open position where the valve body 19 is held by the holding unit 22/23/27, and a closed position where the valve body closes the respective through hole in the bottom plate (Figures 1-4, Columns 6-10).
With regard to claims 22 and 23: The bottom plate is provided with a plurality of through holes, each of which is positioned corresponding to a respective valve (flow element) 19 (Figures 1-4, Columns 6-10). In an embodiment, i.e. that of Figure 14, each valve comprises a movable valve body (flow-regulating element) 90 and a holding unit comprised of bolt 92 for holding the valve body 90, and the valve is configured to have an open position where the valve body 90 is held by the holding unit 92, and a closed position where the valve body closes the respective through hole in the bottom plate (Figure 14, Column 12 Line 59-Column 13 Line 21).
Wherein the valve further comprises a cylindrical tube (side/skirt of bubble cap) 102 arranged coaxially to and around the holding unit (Figure 14, Column 12 Line 59-Column 13 Line 21).
With regard to claim 24: The holding unit 22/23/27 is fixedly connected to the rear side (top side or bottom side) of the bottom plate opposite to the front side (bottom side or top side) thereof. Note: This limitation is satisfied by Huggins regardless of whether the claimed “rear side” is read upon the top or the bottom of the taught bottom plate, as the holding unit 22/23/27 is connected fixedly to both sides of the bottom plate, i.e. by the u-shaped support 27 and the transverse bar 25 respectively (Figures 1-4, Columns 6-10).
With regard to claim 25: The valve body 19 is configured to block, in the closed position of the valve, the through hole from the rear side (top side) of the bottom plate (Figures 1-4, Columns 6-10).
With regard to claim 26: The valve body 19 is configured as a plate (Figures 1-4, Columns 6-10).
With regard to claim 30: the at least one gas transmission part (relief valve) 11 is protruded from the front side (top side) of the bottom plate, and the liquid transmission part (top surface of the tray) is adjacent to the at least one gas transmission part 11 (Figures 1-4, Columns 6-10).
With regard to claim 31: The at least one gas transmission part 11 is protruded and the bottom plate has at least one recess which is recessed away from the at least one protruding gas transmission part, and wherein the through hole and the valve 19 are arranged in the recess (Figures 1-4, Columns 6-10).
With regard to claim 32: The mass transfer tray is a crossflow tray (Figures 1-4, Columns 6-10).
With regard to claim 35: The bottom plate comprises, on a rear side (top side) thereof, a spacer (annular upwardly extending flange) 17 located around the through hole, so that the valve body 19 abuts against the spacer 17 when the valve is in the closed position (Figures 1-4, Columns 6-10).
With regard to claim 36: Nutter teaches using the mass transfer trays according to claim 20 in a liquid separation process, i.e. distillation, (Figures 1-4, Column 1, Columns 6-10, see rejection of claim 20 above).
With regard to claim 37: Nutter teaches a column for thermal treatment of fluid mixtures, comprising a cylindrical vertical column body (tower) 1 which forms a column cavity and a plurality of trays 2 and 3 mounted in the column cavity and vertically spaced apart from one another, the trays each comprising a mass transfer tray according to claim 20, for mass transfer between gas and liquid phases of the fluid mixtures (Figures 1-4, Column 1, Columns 6-10, see rejection of claim 20 above).
With regard to claim 38: Nutter teaches a thermal separation process, e.g. distillation, comprising performing thermal separation between at least one gas ascending and at least one liquid descending within a column according to claim 37 (Figures 1-4, Column 1, Columns 6-10, see rejection of claim 37 above).
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Huggins et al. (US 2,819,050) teach valves for mass transfer trays, said valves being similar in structure to those of the Huggins reference relied upon above.
Thrift (US 2,903,251) teach mass transfer trays and a mass transfer column similar to those presently claimed. Thrift could be relied upon in an alternate 102 rejections of many of the claims.
Hepp (US 2,921,777) teaches a valve construction for a mass transfer tray. Hepp could be relied upon as a primary and/or second reference in alternate prior art rejections. Furthermore, it is noted that some of Hepp’s features are particularly relevant to the invention as disclosed in the specification (See Figures 4-11).
Glitsch (US 3,037,754) teaches valves for mass transfer trays, said valves being similar in structure to those of the Huggins reference relied upon above.
Thrift (US 3,056,562) teach mass transfer trays and a mass transfer column similar to those presently claimed. Thrift could be relied upon in an alternate 102 rejections of many of the claims.
Fleming et al. (US 11,958,001) teaches mass transfer trays and a mass transfer column similar to those presently claimed. Thrift could be relied upon in an alternate 102 rejections of many of the claims.
Nieuwoudt (US 11,260,317) teaches mass transfer trays and a mass transfer column similar to those presently claimed. Nieuwoudt could be relied upon in an alternate 102 rejections of many of the claims. Furthermore, it is noted that some of Hepp’s features are particularly relevant to the invention as disclosed in the specification (See Figures 19-28).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN "LUKE" PILCHER whose telephone number is (571)272-2691. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.
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, In Suk Bullock can be reached at 5712725954. 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.
/JONATHAN LUKE PILCHER/ Examiner, Art Unit 1772
Prosecution Insights