DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The Office Action is in response to Applicant’s Amendment and Remarks filed on 07/02/2026. This Action is made FINAL.
Claims 1-8 are pending for examination.
Response to Amendment
The amendments to claim 1 have overcome the prior 101 rejection.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-2, and 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al. (“Path Generation for Autonomous Locomotion of Articulated Steering Wheel Loader”) in view of KATAYAMA et al. (JP 2017204089 A) All citations based on NPL merged document and further in view of ENOMOTO (US 20160236704 A1).
Takahashi and KATAYAMA cited in previous office action.
Regarding claim 1,
Takahashi teaches:
An articulated vehicle comprising:
(Takahashi – On page 1, it states “a wheel loader is a major machine…”)
a self-position sensor for detecting the position at the work site; and
(Takahashi – On page 7 it states “4 RECOGNITION OF THE RELATIVE POSITION AND ORIENTATION OF THE DUMP TRUCK BY USE OF A VISION SYSTEM”)
set a reference point of the articulated vehicle on a straight line passing perpendicularly through the center of the left and right axles of the wheels of the frame on the advancing direction side of the front and rear frames, either on the axle
(Takahashi – On page 6 it states “Usually, the tracking point is set at the center of the rear axle. However, if the tracking point is set at the center of the rear axle of awheel loader… This means that the tracking point should be changed in the path to include the turning point…”)
Takahashi teaches an articulated vehicle with a position sensor and a reference point of the vehicle. However, Takashi does not teach a front frame having a pair of left and right wheels; a rear frame having a pair of left and right wheels rotatably connected to the front frame in a left and right direction; a steering cylinder that bends the front frame and the rear frame in the left and right direction; a direction switching valve that controls a flow rate and direction of hydraulic oil applied to the steering cylinder; and a controller that controls the direction switching valve such that the articulated vehicle travels along a target trajectory predetermined at the work site, wherein the controller is configured to; set a reference point of the articulated vehicle on a straight line passing perpendicularly through the center of the left and right axles of the wheels of the frame on the advancing direction side of the front and rear frames, on the advancing direction side of the axle, calculate the position of the reference point at the work site based on the detection result of the self-position sensor, calculate the steering control amount, which is an amount of bending of the front frame relative to the rear frame, such that the position of the reference point at the work site approaches the target trajectory, and control the direction switching valve using the calculated steering control amount as a control command.
KATAYAMA teaches:
a front frame having a pair of left and right wheels;
a rear frame having a pair of left and right wheels rotatably connected to the front frame in a left and right direction;
(KATAYAMA – On page 3 it states “With reference to FIG. 2, the configuration of the vibrating roller 1 (may be referred to as “roller” for omission) will be described. The vibration roller 1 includes a vehicle body 10, two iron wheels 11 and 11 attached to the front and rear of the vehicle body 10, an articulate mechanism 12 disposed at the lower part of the vehicle body 10, and an all-round prism installed at the upper part of the vehicle body 10.”)
a steering cylinder that bends the front frame and the rear frame in the left and right direction;
(KATAYAMA – On page 4, it states “The articulate mechanism 12 includes a front wheel holding portion 12a that rotatably holds the front wheel 11a, a rear wheel holding portion 12b that rotatably holds the rear wheel 11b, and a center that connects the front wheel holding portion 12a and the rear wheel holding portion 12b. A pin 12c and a steering cylinder (not shown) interposed between the front wheel holding portion 12a and the rear wheel holding portion 12b are provided. When a control command for correcting the traveling direction (control command using the steering angle θ as a control command angle) is received from the autonomous traveling control device 15, the steering cylinder expands and contracts according to the steering angle θ. When the steering cylinder expands and contracts, the front wheel holding portion 12a is refracted around the center pin 12c, and the direction of the front wheel 11a changes accordingly.”)
a controller that controls the direction switching such that the articulated vehicle travels along a target trajectory predetermined at the work site,
(KATAYAMA – On page 1 it states “An autonomous travel controller controls a construction machine 1 that performs autonomous travel.” On page 4, it states “That is, the vibration roller 1 performs a predetermined number of times of rolling by reciprocating traveling repeatedly moving forward and backward, so that correction is performed so that the front wheel 11a becomes the reference point when moving forward and the rear wheel 11b becomes the reference point when moving backward.” Note: The examiner interprets the predetermined commands for movement on the work site as a predetermined trajectory.)
wherein the controller is configured to;
set a reference point of the articulated vehicle on a straight line passing perpendicularly through the center of the left and right axles of the wheels of the frame on the advancing direction side of the front and rear frames, on the advancing direction side of the axle,
calculate the position of the reference point at the work site based on the detection result of the self-position sensor,
(KATAYAMA – On page 4 it states “ With reference to FIG. 3, the reference point and the reference direction when performing the independent running control of the vibration roller 1 will be described. The vibration roller 1 can move forward and backward as described above, but here, the description will be made on the assumption that the vibration roller 1 moves forward. Therefore, the position of the prism as the reference point is corrected to the center position of the rotation axis of the front wheel 11a. In addition, although mentioned later for details, the direction (azimuth angle G (deg)) of the vehicle body 10 of the vibration roller 1 is detected by attitude | position detection sensor S1 (refer FIG. 4). Further, the steering angle θ (deg) of the articulate mechanism 12 is detected by a steering angle detection sensor S3 (see FIG. 4).”)
calculate the steering control amount, which is an amount of bending of the front frame relative to the rear frame, such that the position of the reference point at the work site approaches the target trajectory, and
(KATAYAMA – On page 3 it states “The reference line of the rolling path is a virtual line along the extending direction (longitudinal direction) of the rolling path, and is a travel route that is a target of autonomous traveling of the vibration roller 1. The reference line can be set at an arbitrary position of the rolling path. In the present embodiment, the center line of the compaction path is adopted as the reference line.”)
control the direction switching using the calculated steering control amount as a control command.
(KATAYAMA – On page 4, it states “When a control command for correcting the traveling direction (control command using the steering angle θ as a control command angle) is received from the autonomous traveling control device 15, the steering cylinder expands and contracts according to the steering angle θ. When the steering cylinder expands and contracts, the front wheel holding portion 12a is refracted around the center pin 12c, and the direction of the front wheel 11a changes accordingly.”)
KATAYAMA teaches an articulated vehicle with a front and back wheel with a steering cylinder in between. However, Takahashi and KATAYAMA do not teach a direction switching valve that controls a flow rate and direction of hydraulic oil supplied to the steering cylinder.
ENOMOTO teaches:
a direction switching valve that controls a flow rate and direction of hydraulic oil supplied to the steering cylinder; and
a controller that controls the direction switching valve such that the articulated vehicle travels
control the direction switching valve using the calculated steering control amount as a control command.
(ENOMOTO – Paragraph [0053] states “Specifically, a directional control valve 25a constituting steering valve 25 is switched to a left turn stage L when hydraulic oil is supplied to a left pilot port, and switched to a right turn stage R when hydraulic oil is supplied to a right pilot port. When directional control valve 25a is switched to left turn stage L, hydraulic oil from pump 30 is supplied to a bottom side oil chamber of left steering cylinder 23L and a rod side oil chamber of right steering cylinder 23R, and the hydraulic oil provided in the bottom side oil chamber of right steering cylinder 23R and in the rod side oil chamber of left steering cylinder 23L is brought back to a tank 31 through a drain oil passage Pd.” Paragraph [0142] states “Controller 150 sets the steering angle to be larger in accordance with an operation amount of tilting operation by running operation lever 22 based on a detection of the “L” level at input terminal I1.”)
Takahashi, KATAYAMA, and ENOMOTO are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of control of an articulated vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Takahashi and KATAYAMA with ENOMOTO. It would have been obvious to combine an articulated vehicle with a position sensor and a reference point and the calculation of the steering control amount and calculation of a new reference point based on the movement of the articulated vehicle with a hydraulic oil valve to control steering because the adjustment of these calculations allows for the articulated vehicle to be more efficient in its movements to complete the job required.
Regarding claim 2,
Takahashi, KATAYAMA and ENOMOTO teach the limitations of claim 1.
KATAYAMA further teaches:
the controller is configured to calculate the steering control amount so that the distance between the center of the left and right axles of the wheels of the frame on the advancing direction side of the front and rear frames and the target trajectory is equal to or less than the distance between the center of the axles of the wheels of the frame on the opposite side of the advancing direction and the target trajectory.
(KATAYAMA – On page 6 it states “The autonomous traveling control device 15 calculates a steering angle θ necessary for autonomous traveling, creates a control command using the calculated steering angle θ as a control command angle, and periodically outputs the control command (for example, 100 milliseconds).)… Here, a “rolling step” is assumed as a traveling pattern controlled by the autonomous traveling control device 15. In the rolling step, the vibrating roller 1 is reciprocated on the rolling pressure path by the number of times of rolling. The autonomous running control device 15 obtains the center line of the rolling compaction path by calculation in advance for autonomous running in the rolling compaction process. For example, the autonomous traveling control device 15 calculates the center line of the compaction path from the coordinates (x, y) of both ends (start point, target point) of the center line of each compaction path. The direction from the starting point of the center line of the rolling path to the target point is defined as “θT”. In addition, the autonomous traveling control device 15 sets a band-like region that spreads evenly on both the left and right sides from the center line of the rolling compaction path as an allowable range of displacement. The width (Xcm) of the permissible range of misregistration only needs to be determined in advance as a threshold value, for example, about 20 cm (about ± 20 cm from the center line of the compaction path)…”)
Takahashi, KATAYAMA and ENOMOTO are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of control of an articulated vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Takahashi and KATAYAMA with ENOMOTO. It would have been obvious to combine an articulated vehicle with a position sensor and a reference point with the calculation of the steering control amount and calculation of a new reference point based on the movement of the articulated vehicle because the adjustment of these calculations allows for the articulated vehicle to be more efficient in its movements to complete the job required.
Regarding claim 4,
Takahashi, KATAYAMA and ENOMOTO teach the limitations of claim 1.
KATAYAMA further teaches:
further comprising a vehicle information acquisition sensor for detecting the advancing direction of the vehicle, wherein the controller is configured to set the reference point of the articulated vehicle according to the advancing direction of the articulated vehicle determined based on the detection result of the vehicle information acquisition sensor.
(KATAYAMA – On page 5 it states “The speed detection sensor S2 detects a speed V (km / h) at which the vibration roller 1 moves forward and backward. The speed detection sensor S2 is, for example, a rotary encoder that detects the rotational speed of the iron wheel 11, and is installed on the rear wheel 11b. The velocity V (km / h) is transferred to the autonomous traveling control device 15 and used for calculation of the current position using inertial navigation (INS).” On page 4 it further states “the position of the prism as the reference point is corrected to the center position of the rotation axis of the front wheel 11a. In addition, although mentioned later for details, the direction (azimuth angle G (deg)) of the vehicle body 10 of the vibration roller 1 is detected by attitude | position detection sensor S1 (refer FIG. 4). Further, the steering angle θ (deg) of the articulate mechanism 12 is detected by a steering angle detection sensor S3 (see FIG. 4).”)
Takahashi, KATAYAMA and ENOMOTO are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of control of an articulated vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Takahashi and KATAYAMA with ENOMOTO. It would have been obvious to combine an articulated vehicle with a position sensor and a reference point with the calculation of the steering control amount and calculation of a new reference point based on the movement of the articulated vehicle because the adjustment of these calculations allows for the articulated vehicle to be more efficient in its movements to complete the job required.
Regarding claim 5,
Takahashi, KATAYAMA and ENOMOTO teach the limitations of claim 2.
KATAYAMA further teaches:
wherein the controller is configured to calculate a target position at the work site from a predetermined route plan and the position of the reference point at the work site, and sets the reference point of the articulated vehicle according to the advancing direction of the articulated vehicle determined based on the position of the reference point at the work site and the target position.
(KATAYAMA – On page 3 it states “The reference line of the rolling path is a virtual line along the extending direction (longitudinal direction) of the rolling path, and is a travel route that is a target of autonomous traveling of the vibration roller 1.” On page 4 it further states “the position of the prism as the reference point is corrected to the center position of the rotation axis of the front wheel 11a. In addition, although mentioned later for details, the direction (azimuth angle G (deg)) of the vehicle body 10 of the vibration roller 1 is detected by attitude | position detection sensor S1 (refer FIG. 4). Further, the steering angle θ (deg) of the articulate mechanism 12 is detected by a steering angle detection sensor S3 (see FIG. 4).”)
Takahashi, KATAYAMA and ENOMOTO are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of control of an articulated vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Takahashi and KATAYAMA with ENOMOTO. It would have been obvious to combine an articulated vehicle with a position sensor and a reference point with the calculation of the steering control amount and calculation of a new reference point based on the movement of the articulated vehicle because the adjustment of these calculations allows for the articulated vehicle to be more efficient in its movements to complete the job required.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al. (“Path Generation for Autonomous Locomotion of Articulated Steering Wheel Loader”) in view of KATAYAMA et al. (JP 2017204089 A) All citations based on NPL merged document and further in view of ENOMOTO (US 20160236704 A1) and further in view of Layfield et al. (US 20230312029 A1).
Layfield cited in previous office action.
Regarding claim 3,
Takahashi, KATAYAMA and ENOMOTO teach the limitations of claim 1.
KATAYAMA further teaches:
the controller is configured to set the reference point of the articulated vehicle according to the advancing direction indicated
(KATAYAMA – On page 4 it states “ With reference to FIG. 3, the reference point and the reference direction when performing the independent running control of the vibration roller 1 will be described. The vibration roller 1 can move forward and backward as described above, but here, the description will be made on the assumption that the vibration roller 1 moves forward. Therefore, the position of the prism as the reference point is corrected to the center position of the rotation axis of the front wheel 11a. In addition, although mentioned later for details, the direction (azimuth angle G (deg)) of the vehicle body 10 of the vibration roller 1 is detected by attitude | position detection sensor S1 (refer FIG. 4). Further, the steering angle θ (deg) of the articulate mechanism 12 is detected by a steering angle detection sensor S3 (see FIG. 4).”)
KATAYAMA teaches the reference point changing based on the advancing direction. Takahashi, KATAYAMA and ENOMOTO do not teach a forward/reverse indication switch.
Layfield teaches:
further comprising a forward/reverse indication switch for indicating the advancing direction of the articulated vehicle, wherein
the controller is configured to set the advancing direction indicated by the forward/reverse indication switch.
(Layfield – Paragraph [0206] states “The controller 502 operates to detect the conditions for activation of anti-idling mode at step 1906, based at least in part on received vehicle data 1901. With respect to anti-idling mode in the illustrated example, the vehicle data 1901 used by the controller 502 at step 1906 includes vehicle transmission data 1902 indicating the state of the transmission of the towing vehicle 13 (e.g. whether the engine is on but the towing vehicle 13 is in park, neutral, reverse, or a drive gear).”)
Takahashi, KATAYAMA, ENOMOTO and Layfield are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of control of an articulated vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Takahashi, KATAYAMA and ENOMOTO with Layfield. It would have been obvious to combine an articulated vehicle with a position sensor and the calculation of the steering control amount and calculation of a new reference point based on the movement of the articulated vehicle with a forward/reverse indication switch because the switch allows both the user and the system to keep track of the direction the system is moving. This allows for the system to calculate the reference point with more efficiency since it can determine the new point without having to sense the direction each time.
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al. (“Path Generation for Autonomous Locomotion of Articulated Steering Wheel Loader”) in view of KATAYAMA et al. (JP 2017204089 A) and further in view of ENOMOTO (US 20160236704 A1) and further in view of Araki et al. (JP 7369626 B2) (All citations based on NPL merged documents)
Araki cited in previous office action.
Regarding claim 6,
Takahashi, KATAYAMA and ENOMOTO teach the limitations of claim 5.
However, Takahashi, KATAYAMA and ENOMOTO do not teach the limitations of claim 6.
Araki teaches:
wherein the controller is configured to switch the route plan according to the position of the reference point in the articulated vehicle when the reference point is changed.
(Araki – On page 4 it states “The first control unit 21 generates a route plan based on information indicating the positional relationship between the two reference points and the two feature points, and performs processing for determining the travel route of the vehicle 1 according to the route plan.”)
Takahashi, KATAYAMA, ENOMOTO, and Araki are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of control of a vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Takahashi, KATAYAMA and ENOMOTO with Araki. It would have been obvious to combine an articulated vehicle with a position sensor and the calculation of the steering control amount and calculation of a new route plan when the reference point has changed because following a plan based on a previous reference point would not be accurate to the current situation. The system would be more efficient with a new calculation based on its updated information of the reference point and a route plan.
Regarding claim 7,
Takahashi, KATAYAMA and ENOMOTO teach the limitations of claim 1.
However, Takahashi, KATAYAMA and ENOMOTO do not teach the limitations of claim 7.
Araki teaches:
the controller is configured to, when the reference point is changed, calculate a speed control amount, which is a target traveling speed of the articulated vehicle at the work site, so that the distance between the target position and the position of the reference point at the work site is equal to or less than the distance between the target position before the change of the reference point and the position of the reference point at the work site.
(Araki – On page 9 it states “The control device 20 of the second embodiment switches the method of determining the movement route of the vehicle 1 from the first control section 21 to the second control section 22 when the value of q becomes equal to or less than a predetermined threshold value. That is, when the value of q becomes less than or equal to a predetermined threshold, route planning is switched to direct feedback.” Note: The value of q is the target position. On page 7 it further states “The control device 20 outputs… to the drive unit 31 and the steering unit 32… corresponds to a speed (moving speed) command [m/s] to the drive unit 31”)
Takahashi, KATAYAMA, ENOMOTO, and Araki are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of control of a vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Takahashi, KATAYAMA and ENOMOTO with Araki. It would have been obvious to combine an articulated vehicle with a position sensor and the calculation of the steering control amount and calculation of new steering amounts and other control commands when the reference point has changed because following controls based on a previous reference point would not be accurate to the current situation. The system would be more efficient with new calculations based on its updated information of the reference point and a route plan.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi et al. (“Path Generation for Autonomous Locomotion of Articulated Steering Wheel Loader”) in view of KATAYAMA et al. (JP 2017204089 A) (All citations based on NPL merged documents) and further in view of ENOMOTO (US 20160236704 A1) and further in view of Howson et al. (US 20230243466 A1).
Howson cited in previous office action.
Regarding claim 8,
Takahashi, KATAYAMA and ENOMOTO teach the limitations of claim 2.
KATAYAMA further teaches:
the controller is configured to;
when the front frame side is the direction of travel, set the reference point of the articulated vehicle between the axle of the wheel of the front frame , and when the rear frame side is the direction of travel, set the reference point of the articulated vehicle between the axle of the wheel of the rear frame and the rear end of the rear frame.
(KATAYAMA – On page 3 it states “The reference line of the rolling path is a virtual line along the extending direction (longitudinal direction) of the rolling path, and is a travel route that is a target of autonomous traveling of the vibration roller 1.” On page 4 it further states “the position of the prism as the reference point is corrected to the center position of the rotation axis of the front wheel 11a. In addition, although mentioned later for details, the direction (azimuth angle G (deg)) of the vehicle body 10 of the vibration roller 1 is detected by attitude | position detection sensor S1 (refer FIG. 4). Further, the steering angle θ (deg) of the articulate mechanism 12 is detected by a steering angle detection sensor S3 (see FIG. 4).”)
KATAYAMA teaches an articulated vehicle with a controller that is configured to change the reference point of the vehicle based on the direction of the motion of the vehicle. However, KATAYAMA does not teach a pair of lift arms extended forward, positioned at locations spaced apart in the width direction and supported on the front frame so as to be able to raise and down, and a bucket supported on the front end of the pair of lift arms so as to be able to tilt, and the reference point of the articulated vehicle between the axle of the wheel of the front frame and the tip of the bucket.
Howson teaches:
comprising a pair of lift arms extended forward, positioned at locations spaced apart in the width direction and supported on the front frame so as to be able to raise and down, and
(Howson – Fig. 1, see below, elements 124)
PNG
media_image1.png
722
970
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a bucket supported on the front end of the pair of lift arms so as to be able to tilt, wherein
(Howson – Fig. 1, see above, elements 122)
when the front frame side is the direction of travel, set the reference point of the articulated vehicle between the axle of the wheel of the front frame and the tip of the bucket,
(Howson – Paragraph [0034] states “The sliding fit between the cylindrical pin 206 and the circular apertures 212 allow the first and second rigid links 202, 204 to pivot or articulate with respect to each other and with respect to the pivot axis 208 that may serve as a fixed point of reference. Accordingly, the location of the pivot axis 208 and the circular aperture 212 defined by the first and second structural eyes 210, 214 can serve as a frame of reference or coordinate system via which rotation and relative motion of the kinematic link 200 can be represented” Note: The examiner interprets the reference point being the hinge of the bucket as a point between the axle of the wheel of the front frame and the tip of the bucket.)
Takahashi, KATAYAMA, ENOMOTO, and Howson are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of control of a vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Takahashi, KATAYAMA and ENOMOTO with Howson. It would have been obvious to combine an articulated vehicle with a pair of arms and a bucket because this allows for the vehicle to complete its purpose with efficiency. The adjustment of the reference point allows for compensation of the front end of the vehicle having an extension that is different from the back.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH GALYN MARTINEZ whose telephone number is (703)756-1537. The examiner can normally be reached MON-THURS 9-2.
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, James Lee can be reached at (571)270-5965. 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.
/E.G.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/ABDHESH K JHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights