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 Objections
Claims 1, 10 and 13 are objected to for having multiple periods. Each claim must begin with a capital letter and end with a period. Periods may not be used elsewhere in the claims except for abbreviations. See Fressola v. Manbeck, 36 USPQ2d 1211 (D.D.C. 1995). See: MPEP 608.01 (m).
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 2, “the direction” should be --a direction--,
In line 21, “each pair of steep edges” should be --each of the pair of steep edges--,
In line 25, “the range” should be --a range--, and
In line 25, “one other” should be --one another--.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 18, “each pair of steep edges” should be --each of the pair of steep edges--,
In line 22, “the range” should be --a range--, and
In line 22, “one other” should be --one another--.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 21, “the range” should be --a range--, and
In line 21, “one other” should be --one another--.
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 1-9, 13 and 15 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 is directed toward a planar composite. However, the claim includes language directed toward the planar composite and language directed toward a closed container which renders the claim confusing and indefinite as it is not clear whether the claims are directed toward the planar composite or the closed container. The claim language directed toward the closed container is further confusing as it fails to make clear what structures of the planar composite define the claimed structures of the closed container.
For the purpose of examination, the claims will be considered to be directed toward a planar composite. Note: as the preamble is directed toward a planar composite, the claims should be written in a manner consistent with defining a planar composite where structural features of the planar composite are configured to form respective structural features of the closed container.
Claims 2, 3, 5 and 6 recite claim language directed toward the closed container and thus, are rendered indefinite for the same reasons provided above with respect to claim 1.
Claim 7 is directed toward a process comprising the process steps of providing a planar composite precursor and introducing at least a first plurality of grooves into the planar composite precursor. However, the claim goes on to further define structure of the planar composite obtained from the planar composite precursor as well as structure of the closed container obtained from the planar composite. Accordingly, similarly to claim 1 above, as the claim is directed toward a process, the claim language directed toward the planar composite and the claim language directed toward the closed container render the claim confusing and indefinite, as it is not clear whether the claims are directed toward the process, the planar composite/precursor or the closed container. Additionally, even though the claims are directed toward a process, the claim language directed toward the closed container is further confusing as it fails to make clear what structures of the planar composite define the claimed structures of the closed container.
For the purpose of examination, the claims will be considered to be directed toward the process. Note: as the preamble is directed toward a process, the claims should be written in a manner consistent with the process steps for defining a planar composite/precursor, where any defined structural features are defined with respect to the planar composite/precursor which are configured to form respective structural features of the closed container.
Claims 4, 8, 9, 13 and 15 are rejected as being dependent on, and failing to cure the deficiencies of, independent claim 1.
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.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boldrini et al. (US 2005/0236463 A1, hereinafter Boldrini) in view of Wirtz et al. (US 2020/0207055 A1, hereinafter Wirtz) and Smith (US 3,944,130 A).
Regarding claim 1, Boldrini teaches a planar composite comprising:
at least a first plurality of crease lines (11a, 11b/11d, 11c) arranged and configured such that by folding the planar composite along the crease lines of the first plurality of crease lines and joining portions of the planar composite, at least a part of a container wall of a closed container is obtainable (FIG. 1-8);
wherein the closed container includes a standing base (8) and, in a longitudinal direction, extending along a length of the closed container, opposite the standing base, a head portion (5) (FIG. 1, 7); wherein the head portion includes at least 3 head side surfaces (5a) formed from the planar composite, the head side surfaces being inclined to each other in the longitudinal direction such that the closed container tapers at least in sections in the head portion (FIG. 1, 7);
wherein a perimeter of each of the head side surfaces is respectively formed by a plurality of side edges (defined by 11b/11d, 11c and 12) of the head portion (FIG. 1, 2, 7, 8);
wherein each of the pluralities of side edges includes a pair of steep edges (formed by 11c) opposite to each other in a circumferential direction of the closed container perpendicular to the longitudinal direction (FIG. 1, 2, 7, 8);
wherein each of the pair of steep edges is formed along a pair of crease lines (11c, 11c) of the first plurality of crease lines (FIG. 1, 2, 7, 8); and
wherein the crease lines of each of the pair of crease lines lie in a plane of planar extension of the planar composite and, in this plane of planar extension, run at an angle to one other (FIG. 2, 8) (paragraphs 32-78 and FIG. 1-8).
Boldrini fails to teach the planar composite comprising superimposed layers in a layer sequence in a direction from an outer side of the planar composite to an inner side of the planar composite of a carrier layer, a barrier layer, and an inner polymer layer and also fails to teach the first plurality of crease lines being a first plurality of grooves.
Wirtz teaches an analogous planar composite comprising a first plurality of crease lines arranged and configured such that by folding the planar composite along the crease lines of the first plurality of crease lines and joining portions of the planar composite, at least a part of a container wall of a closed container is obtainable. Wirtz further teaches that it is known and desirable in the prior art to form the planar composite of superimposed layers in a layer sequence in a direction from an outer side of the planar composite to an inner side of the planar composite of a carrier layer, a barrier layer, and an inner polymer layer and to configure the first plurality of crease lines as a first plurality of grooves in order to allow for easy, clean and exactly positioned folding of the planar composite while also allowing for a dimensionally stable food and drink container formed from the planar composite (paragraphs 1-10, 80).
Accordingly, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Boldrini by forming the planar composite of superimposed layers in a layer sequence in a direction from an outer side of the planar composite to an inner side of the planar composite of a carrier layer, a barrier layer, and an inner polymer layer and by configuring the first plurality of crease lines to comprise a first plurality of grooves, as taught by Wirtz, in order to allow for easy, clean and exactly positioned folding of the planar composite while also allowing for a dimensionally stable food and drink container formed from the planar composite.
Boldrini fails to teach the angle being in a range from 40 to 60° to one another. Smith teaches an analogous closed container having standing base and a head portion including inclined head side surfaces (26, 27, 28, 29a/b) such that the closed container tapers at least in sections in the head portion (FIG. 1-3), wherein a perimeter of each of the head side surfaces is respectively formed by a plurality of side edges (15, 17a-20b, 11) of the head portion (FIG. 1-3), wherein each of the pluralities of side edges includes a pair of steep edges (17a/17b, 18a/18b, 19a/19b, 20a/20b) opposite to each other in a circumferential direction of the closed container perpendicular to the longitudinal direction (FIG. 1-3), wherein each of the pair of steep edges is formed along a pair of crease lines (17a/17b, 18a/18b, 19a/19b, 20a/20b) of a first plurality of crease lines (FIG. 1-3), and wherein the crease lines of each of the pair of crease lines lie in a plane of planar extension of the planar composite and, in this plane of planar extension, run at an angle to one other (FIG. 1) (column 1 line 37-column 2 line 52). Smith further teaches that the angles at which the angular crease lines are formed determines the amount of taper provided in the head portion (column 2 lines 33-52).
Although the prior art only discloses pairs of angular crease lines and inclined head side surfaces, the prior art expressly discloses that the degree of incline of the head side surfaces can be adjusted by adjusting the angles at which each angular crease line of the pair of angular crease lines are formed (i.e., adjusting the angle between the pair of angular crease lines). Accordingly, as the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art (i.e., pairs of angular crease lines and inclined head side surfaces) and as the angle between respective pairs of angular crease lines is a variable which achieves a recognized result (i.e., determines the amount of taper provided in the head portion/incline of each head side surface), one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Boldrini to define an angle that achieves a desired taper in the head portion/incline of the head side surfaces, including the claimed angle in a range from 40 to 60° to one another, as suggested by Smith, as it has been held that discovering an optimum or workable range or discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding claim 2, Boldrini as modified by Wirtz and Smith teaches the planar composite of claim 1 above, wherein at least a part of the pluralities of side edges includes a base edge (11d) convexly curved towards the standing base with respect to the head side surface whose perimeter is formed by the side edges (Boldrini: FIG. 7, 8).
Regarding claim 3, Boldrini as modified by Wirtz and Smith teaches the planar composite of claim 1 above, wherein the head side surfaces together form substantially a lateral surface of a regular truncated pyramid (Boldrini: FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 4, Boldrini as modified by Wirtz and Smith teaches the planar composite of claim 1 above, wherein the carrier layer comprises one selected from the group consisting of cardboard, paperboard, and paper, or a combination of at least two thereof (Wirtz: paragraphs 91, 92).
Regarding claim 5, Boldrini as modified by Wirtz and Smith teaches the planar composite of claim 1 above, wherein the at least 3 head side surfaces formed of the planar composite are inclined to each other in the longitudinal direction of the closed container such that each of the head side surfaces is at an angle in a range from 55 to 70° to the longitudinal direction (Smith: column 2 lines 33-52). As disclosed in the rejection of claim 1 above, Smith teaches that the angles at which the angular crease lines are formed determines the amount of taper provided in the head portion (column 2 lines 33-52). Accordingly, the modifications presented in claim 1 above would necessarily produce the claimed range of 55 to 70°.
Regarding claim 6, Boldrini as modified by Wirtz and Smith teaches the planar composite of claim 1 above, wherein the planar composite is configured as a blank for producing the closed container (Boldrini: FIG. 1, 2, 7, 8), wherein a bending stiffness of the planar composite for bending in a first composite direction is greater than for bending in a further composite direction perpendicular to the first composite direction (Wirtz: paragraphs 91, 92), wherein the blank includes a first transverse margin (Boldrini: margin forming the standing base) and a further transverse margin (Boldrini: margin forming the head portion) opposite the first transverse margin along the longitudinal direction (Boldrini: FIG. 2, 8), wherein the further transverse margin is arranged and configured to provide a first part of the head portion of the closed container by folding the further transverse margin along grooves of the first plurality of grooves and joining portions of the further transverse margin to one another (Boldrini: FIG. 1, 2, 7, 8), wherein an edge (12) of the further transverse margin surrounds a further part (9) of the head portion (Boldrini: FIG. 1, 7), wherein the edge extends along at least 50 % of its length at an angle in an angular range of ± 30° about the first composite direction (Smith: column 2 lines 33-52). As disclosed in the rejection of claim 1 above, Smith teaches that the angles at which the angular crease lines are formed determines the amount of taper provided in the head portion (column 2 lines 33-52). As can be clearly seen in both Smith and Boldrini, the angles at which the angular crease line are formed also determined the length of the further transverse margin that surrounds the further part of the head portion (Boldrini: FIG. 1, 7 and Smith: FIG. 2, 3). Accordingly, the modifications presented in claim 1 above would necessarily produce the claimed at least 50% and an angular range of ± 30°.
Regarding claim 7, Boldrini teaches a process comprising as process steps:
providing a planar composite precursor (paragraph 47); and
introducing at least a first plurality of crease lines (11a, 11b/11d, 11c) into the planar composite precursor (paragraph 47), wherein the crease lines of the first plurality of crease lines are introduced such that by folding a planar composite obtained from the planar composite precursor along the crease lines of the first plurality of crease lines and joining portions of the planar composite, at least a part of a container wall of a closed container is obtainable (FIG. 1-8);
wherein the closed container includes a standing base (8) and, in a longitudinal direction, extending along a length of the closed container, opposite the standing base, a head portion (5) (FIG. 1, 7); wherein the head portion includes at least 3 head side surfaces (5a) formed from the planar composite, the head side surfaces being inclined to each other in the longitudinal direction such that the closed container tapers at least in sections in the head portion (FIG. 1, 7);
wherein a perimeter of each of the head side surfaces is respectively formed by a plurality of side edges (defined by 11b/11d, 11c and 12) of the head portion (FIG. 1, 2, 7, 8);
wherein each of the pluralities of side edges includes a pair of steep edges (formed by 11c) opposite to each other in a circumferential direction of the closed container perpendicular to the longitudinal direction (FIG. 1, 2, 7, 8);
wherein each of the pair of steep edges is formed along a pair of crease lines (11c, 11c) of the first plurality of crease lines (FIG. 1, 2, 7, 8); and
wherein the crease lines of each of the pair of crease lines lie in a plane of planar extension of the planar composite and, in this plane of planar extension, run at an angle to one other (FIG. 2, 8) (paragraphs 32-78 and FIG. 1-8).
Boldrini fails to teach the planar composite comprising a carrier layer and also fails to teach the first plurality of crease lines being a first plurality of grooves. Wirtz teaches an analogous planar composite comprising a first plurality of crease lines arranged and configured such that by folding the planar composite along the crease lines of the first plurality of crease lines and joining portions of the planar composite, at least a part of a container wall of a closed container is obtainable. Wirtz further teaches that it is known and desirable in the prior art to form the planar composite with a carrier layer and to configure the first plurality of crease lines as a first plurality of grooves in order to allow for easy, clean and exactly positioned folding of the planar composite while also allowing for a dimensionally stable food and drink container formed from the planar composite (paragraphs 1-10, 80).
Accordingly, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Boldrini by forming the planar composite with a carrier layer and by configuring the first plurality of crease lines to comprise a first plurality of grooves, as taught by Wirtz, in order to allow for easy, clean and exactly positioned folding of the planar composite while also allowing for a dimensionally stable food and drink container formed from the planar composite.
Boldrini fails to teach the angle being in a range from 40 to 60° to one another. Smith teaches an analogous closed container having standing base and a head portion including inclined head side surfaces (26, 27, 28, 29a/b) such that the closed container tapers at least in sections in the head portion (FIG. 1-3), wherein a perimeter of each of the head side surfaces is respectively formed by a plurality of side edges (15, 17a-20b, 11) of the head portion (FIG. 1-3), wherein each of the pluralities of side edges includes a pair of steep edges (17a/17b, 18a/18b, 19a/19b, 20a/20b) opposite to each other in a circumferential direction of the closed container perpendicular to the longitudinal direction (FIG. 1-3), wherein each of the pair of steep edges is formed along a pair of crease lines (17a/17b, 18a/18b, 19a/19b, 20a/20b) of a first plurality of crease lines (FIG. 1-3), and wherein the crease lines of each of the pair of crease lines lie in a plane of planar extension of the planar composite and, in this plane of planar extension, run at an angle to one other (FIG. 1) (column 1 line 37-column 2 line 52). Smith further teaches that the angles at which the angular crease lines are formed determines the amount of taper provided in the head portion (column 2 lines 33-52).
Although the prior art only discloses pairs of angular crease lines and inclined head side surfaces, the prior art expressly discloses that the degree of incline of the head side surfaces can be adjusted by adjusting the angles at which each angular crease line of the pair of angular crease lines are formed (i.e., adjusting the angle between the pair of angular crease lines). Accordingly, as the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art (i.e., pairs of angular crease lines and inclined head side surfaces) and as the angle between respective pairs of angular crease lines is a variable which achieves a recognized result (i.e., determines the amount of taper provided in the head portion/incline of each head side surface), one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Boldrini to define an angle that achieves a desired taper in the head portion/incline of the head side surfaces, including the claimed angle in a range from 40 to 60° to one another, as suggested by Smith, as it has been held that discovering an optimum or workable range or discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding claim 8, Boldrini as modified by Wirtz and Smith teaches a container precursor comprising the planar composite accordingly to claim 1 above or a blank of the planar composite according to claim 1 for producing a closed container (Boldrini: paragraphs 32-78 and FIG. 1-8, Wirtz: paragraphs 1-10, 80, and Smith: column 1 line 37-column 2 line 52).
Regarding claim 9, Boldrini as modified by Wirtz and Smith teaches a closed container comprising a container wall surrounding a container interior, the container wall being at least partially formed of the planar composite accordingly to claim 1 above or a blank of the planar composite according to claim 1 for producing a closed container (Boldrini: paragraphs 32-78 and FIG. 1-8, Wirtz: paragraphs 1-10, 80, and Smith: column 1 line 37-column 2 line 52).
Regarding claim 10, Boldrini teaches a closed container comprising a container wall surrounding a container interior, the container wall being formed at least in part of a planar composite,
wherein the closed container includes a standing base (8) and, in a longitudinal direction, extending along a length of the closed container, opposite the standing base, a head portion (5) (FIG. 1, 7); wherein the head portion includes at least 3 head side surfaces (5a) formed from the planar composite, the head side surfaces being inclined to each other in the longitudinal direction such that the closed container tapers at least in sections in the head portion (FIG. 1, 7);
wherein a perimeter of each of the head side surfaces is respectively formed by a plurality of side edges (defined by 11b/11d, 11c and 12) of the head portion (FIG. 1, 2, 7, 8);
wherein each of the pluralities of side edges includes a pair of steep edges (formed by 11c) opposite to each other in a circumferential direction of the closed container perpendicular to the longitudinal direction (FIG. 1, 2, 7, 8);
wherein the steep edges of each pair of steep edges of each of the head side surfaces lie in a plane of the respective head side surface and, in this plane of the respective head side surface, run at an angle to one other (FIG. 2, 8) (paragraphs 32-78 and FIG. 1-8).
Boldrini fails to teach the planar composite comprising superimposed layers in a layer sequence in a direction from an outer side of the planar composite to an inner side of the planar composite of a carrier layer, a barrier layer, and an inner polymer layer. Wirtz teaches an analogous closed container having a container wall being formed at least in part of a planar composite and further teaches that it is known and desirable in the prior art to form the planar composite of superimposed layers in a layer sequence in a direction from an outer side of the planar composite to an inner side of the planar composite of a carrier layer, a barrier layer, and an inner polymer layer in order to form a dimensionally stable food and drink container (paragraphs 1-10).
Accordingly, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Boldrini by forming the planar composite of superimposed layers in a layer sequence in a direction from an outer side of the planar composite to an inner side of the planar composite of a carrier layer, a barrier layer, and an inner polymer layer, as taught by Wirtz, in order to form a dimensionally stable food and drink container.
Boldrini fails to teach the angle being in a range from 40 to 60° to one another. Smith teaches an analogous closed container having standing base and a head portion including inclined head side surfaces (26, 27, 28, 29a/b) such that the closed container tapers at least in sections in the head portion (FIG. 1-3), wherein a perimeter of each of the head side surfaces is respectively formed by a plurality of side edges (15, 17a-20b, 11) of the head portion (FIG. 1-3), wherein each of the pluralities of side edges includes a pair of steep edges (17a/17b, 18a/18b, 19a/19b, 20a/20b) opposite to each other in a circumferential direction of the closed container perpendicular to the longitudinal direction (FIG. 1-3), wherein each of the pair of steep edges is formed along a pair of crease lines (17a/17b, 18a/18b, 19a/19b, 20a/20b) of a first plurality of crease lines (FIG. 1-3), and wherein the crease lines of each of the pair of crease lines lie in a plane of planar extension of the planar composite and, in this plane of planar extension, run at an angle to one other (FIG. 1) (column 1 line 37-column 2 line 52). Smith further teaches that the angles at which the angular crease lines are formed determines the amount of taper provided in the head portion (column 2 lines 33-52).
Although the prior art only discloses pairs of angular crease lines and inclined head side surfaces, the prior art expressly discloses that the degree of incline of the head side surfaces can be adjusted by adjusting the angles at which each angular crease line of the pair of angular crease lines are formed (i.e., adjusting the angle between the pair of angular crease lines). Accordingly, as the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art (i.e., pairs of angular crease lines and inclined head side surfaces) and as the angle between respective pairs of angular crease lines is a variable which achieves a recognized result (i.e., determines the amount of taper provided in the head portion/incline of each head side surface), one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify Boldrini to define an angle that achieves a desired taper in the head portion/incline of the head side surfaces, including the claimed angle in a range from 40 to 60° to one another, as suggested by Smith, as it has been held that discovering an optimum or workable range or discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding claim 11, Boldrini as modified by Wirtz and Smith teaches the closed container of claim 9 above, wherein a first part of the container wall is formed from the planar composite or the blank (3, 8, 5) (Boldrini: FIG. 1, 7) and wherein a further part of the container wall is formed from an element (9) other than the planar composite or the blank (Boldrini: paragraphs 38, 39 and FIG. 1, 7).
Regarding claim 12, Boldrini as modified by Wirtz and Smith teaches the closed container of claim 11 above, wherein the element other than the planar composite or the blank is a non-planar component (Boldrini: paragraphs 38, 39 and FIG. 1, 7).
Regarding claim 13, Boldrini as modified by Wirtz and Smith teaches a process, comprising as process steps:
providing the planar composite according to claim 1, or a blank of the planar composite according to claim 1 for making a closed container, the planar composite or the blank comprising a first longitudinal margin and a further longitudinal margin (Boldrini: FIG. 2, 8);
folding the planar composite or blank along grooves of the at least first plurality of grooves (Boldrini: abstract, paragraphs 7-9, 16-18, 32, 33, 65, 66, 74); and
contacting and joining the first longitudinal margin with the further longitudinal margin to obtain a longitudinal seam (Boldrini: paragraph 65).
Regarding claim 14, Boldrini as modified by Wirtz and Smith teaches a process, comprising as process steps:
providing the container precursor according to claim 8;
forming and closing a head portion of the container precursor (Boldrini: paragraphs 38, 39, 74);
filling the container precursor with a foodstuff (Boldrini: paragraphs 13, 32); and
forming and closing a stationary base of the container precursor by folding the planar composite or the blank along grooves of the at least first plurality of groove and joining portions of the planar composite or the blank to one another to obtain a closed container (Boldrini: paragraphs 7-9, 16-18, 33, 65, 66).
Regarding claim 15, Boldrini as modified by Wirtz and Smith teaches a use of the planar composite accordingly to claim 1, wherein the planar composite is for producing a foodstuff container (Boldrini: abstract, paragraph 32).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NINA KAY ATTEL whose telephone number is (571)270-3972. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7AM-4PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nathan Newhouse can be reached at 571-272-4544. 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.
/NINA K ATTEL/Examiner, Art Unit 3734
/NATHAN J NEWHOUSE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3734
Prosecution Insights