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 2 objected to because of the following informalities:
Re claim 2, Applicant is advised that as currently drafted independent claim 1 appears to correspond to the connection arrangement shown in Applicant’s Fig. 4 based on the recited connections and sets of ends formed. Assuming the claims are directed to Fig. 4, claim 2 should be amended to only describe features that are applicable to the embodiment (as opposed to conflicting embodiment of Fig. 3), by removing recitation of connecting to “a positive side of the respective power source”. Applicant may clarify the embodiment(s) intended to be encompassed by the claims and intended meaning of the limitation if appropriate.
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) 1-3, 5-7, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwaya (US2016/0276941) in view of Abe (US2023/0231462).
Re claim 1. Iwaya teaches an apparatus for power conversion (see Iwaya: Figs. 1-2), comprising:
a partial power converter (PPCs) (converter <13>, see Iwaya: [0036-0040], Figs. 1),
wherein the PPC comprises three ends (connected terminals <P1/Q2>, and terminals <Q1>, <P2>), the three ends being combined in pairs to form three sets of ends (respective pairs of combination of <P1/Q2>, <Q1>, <P2>),
wherein a first set of the three sets of ends (<P1/Q2, P2>) is configured to connect to a DC bus (first DC voltage source <11>; see discussion below regarding obviousness of arrangement with bus), and a second set of the three sets of ends (<Q1,P2>) is configured to connect to a respective power source (second DC voltage source <12>, see Iwaya: [0036-0040], Fig. 1),
wherein the PPC comprises a first AC-DC converter (second power converter <22>) and a second AC-DC converter (first power converter <21>, see Iwaya: [0041-0042], [0047], Fig. 1), a DC side of the first AC-DC converter having a first DC end (<Q2>) and a second DC end (<Q1>), a DC side of the second AC-DC converter having a third DC end (<P2>) and a fourth DC end (<P1>), and an AC side of the first AC-DC converter and an AC side of the second AC-DC converter being electromagnetically coupled or coupled through a capacitor (see Iwaya: [0041-0042], [0047], Fig. 1 regarding electromagnetic coupling of the AC terminals via isolation transformer <23>),
wherein the first DC end (<Q2>) and the third DC end (<P2>) form the first set (<P1/Q2,P2>), wherein the second DC end (<Q1>) and the third DC end (<P2>) form the second set (<Q1,P2>),
wherein the first DC end (<Q2>) is connected to the fourth DC end (<P1>) to form one of the three ends (<P1/Q2>), and the second DC end (<Q1>) and the third DC end (<P2>) form other two of the three ends, and
wherein a third set of the three sets of ends (<P1/Q2,Q1>) is configured to form a series connection with the respective power source (<12>) and form, together with the respective power source, a parallel connection with the DC bus (<V1>; see Iwaya: [0036-0040], Fig. 1 regarding <V1> being parallel to series combination of <V2>, and <P1/Q2,Q1>), and
wherein the third set (<P1/Q2,Q1>) is different from the first set (<P1/Q2,P2>) and the second set (<Q1,P2>). See Iwaya: [0036-0042], [0047], Figs. 1-2. It is also generally noted that other cited prior art of record similarly disclose the partial power converter topology/connection arrangement that appears to be intended.
Although Iwaya generally discloses a single PPC capable of bidirectional DC-DC conversion between two DC sources/sinks via respective sets of ends (see Iwaya: [0036-0040], Figs. 1-2), Iwaya does not explicitly disclose specific application of the DC-DC converter to a system having plurality of PPCs having respective first one of the three sets of ends connected to a DC bus and respective second one of the three sets of ends connected to a respective power source. One of ordinary skill would appreciate however that DC-DC converters are applicable to a variety of known DC power distribution and conversion system applications. Abe, for example, teaches that it is known in the art of DC power distribution and conversion systems to provide a plurality of bidirectional DC-DC converters (converters <11>, <13>); each arranged such that the first end is connected or connectable to a DC bus (bus <30>), and a second one of the three sets of ends is connectable or connected to a respective power source of a plurality of power sources (electric storage devices <21>, <23>; see Abe: [0027], [0029], [0038], Fig. 1 regarding providing respective DC/DC converters for both charging from and providing power to the DC bus). One of ordinary skill would appreciate that the bidirectional DC-DC converter topology of Iwaya presents a known, equivalent, DC-DC converter circuit capable of bidirectional power transfer in the same manner as the plurality of DC-DC converters in the system of Abe (see Iwaya: [0037-0040], Figs. 1-2; Abe: [0027], [0029], [0038], Fig. 1), and predictably providing benefits such as capability to transfer power in any direction and with either voltage step up/down with converter only needed to provide the compensating voltage difference (see Iwaya: [0012], [0015], [0038], Figs. 1-2). One of ordinary skill would additionally find it obvious to arrange each DC/DC converter such that the first one of the set of ends connected to the DC bus and the second of the set of ends connected to the respective power sources as recited as one of the two potential connection arrangements for the bidirectional DC-DC converter of Iwaya which is capable of DC-DC conversion in either direction and both for step up/down of the voltage (see Iwaya: [0037-0040], Figs. 1-2). It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Abe such that each of the bidirectional DC-DC converters is implemented or substituted with the known, equivalent DC/DC converter topology of Iwaya to produce the recited arrangement for purposes of providing known, equivalent converter circuit means for bidirectional DC-DC conversion also allowing for any voltage step up/down required, with the choice of which ends of the converter circuit of Iwaya to couple to the DC bus and source being one of the two potential arrangements obvious to try and consistent with the capabilities of the DC-DC converter (see Iwaya: [0037-0040], Figs. 1-2).
Re claim 2. Iwaya in view of Abe teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the first DC end (<Q2>) is connected to one of a positive side of the DC bus, a negative side of the DC bus or a positive side of the respective power source (see Iwaya: [0037-0040], Fig. 1; Abe: [0027], [0029], Fig. 1; and discussion of claim 1 regarding obviousness of <Q2> end connected to positive side of DC bus; see also Objection above).
Re claim 3. Iwaya in view of Abe teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein in at least one of the plurality of PPCs, at least one commutation switching device in the first AC-DC converter or the second AC-DC converter is a controllable device and is configured to work at a normally open or normally closed state, and the other commutation switching devices in the first AC-DC converter or the second AC- DC converter are configured to work at a switching state; and/or wherein in at least one of the plurality of PPCs, at least one commutation switching device in the first AC-DC converter or the second AC-DC converter is an uncontrollable device, and the other commutation switching devices in the first AC-DC converter or the second AC-DC converter are controllable devices (see Iwaya: [0041-0042], [0047-0049], Fig. 1 regarding conversion units <21>, <22> comprising diodes/uncontrollable switching devices and MOSFET switches/controllable switching devices).
Re claim 5. Iwaya in view of Abe teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the ratio of a first voltage on the first set to a second voltage on the second set is greater than 1 (see Iwaya: [0036-0040], Figs. 1-2 and discussion of claim 1 above regarding DC-DC conversion for both step up/down, i.e. including V1/bus voltage greater than V2/source voltage).
Re claim 6. Iwaya in view of Abe teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of power sources comprises at least one of a battery, a PV panel, or a grid (see Iwaya: [0036-0037], Fig. 1; Abe: [0027], [0029], Fig. 1 regarding application to system having plurality of electric storage devices/batteries).
Re claim 7. Iwaya in view of Abe teaches a method for controlling an apparatus for power conversion, wherein the apparatus comprises a plurality of partial power converters (PPCs) wherein a first PPC comprises essentially the same components connected and arranged in the same manner recited in claim 1 (see discussion of claim 1 above regarding obviousness of combination of the known DC-DC converter of Iwaya as applied to the DC bus system of Abe). Iwaya in view of Abe further teaches the method comprising: obtaining a working state of the first power source, wherein the first power source stores energy and the working state comprising a charging state and a discharging state (see Abe: [0027], [0029], [0031], [0038], [0044-0045], Figs. 1-3 regarding system control based on the respective energy storage source <21/23> is in charging or discharging state); and bringing at least one of the first AC-DC converter and the second AC-DC converter into a controlled mode, based on the obtained working state, wherein in the controlled mode, at least one commutation switching device in the at least one of the first AC-DC converter and the second AC-DC converter works at a switching state (see Abe: [0027], [0029], [0038], Fig. 1 regarding corresponding DC-DC converter controlled to either charge/discharge the respective source; see Iwaya: [0038-0040], [0041-0042], [0046-0047], [0052], Figs. 1-4 regarding switching at least one switching device of the PPCs based on desired conversion direction and voltage, i.e. whether the element is being charged/discharged).
Re claim 17, the claim recites a system for power conversion essentially requiring the same components arranged and operated in the same manner as recited in claim 1, and is therefore rejected by the same reasoning applied to claim 1 above. Note that any of the PPCs from the combination, or additional power conversion systems as seen in Abe: [0027-0030], Fig. 1 may be considered a power conversion system/PCS connected to the DC bus.
Claim(s) 4, 8-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwaya in view of Abe, as applied respectively above, further in view of Elasser (US2017/0353111).
Re claim 4. Iwaya in view of Abe teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, and discloses that the converter only needs to convert the voltage difference between the two DC terminals (see Iwaya: [0038], Figs. 1-2), but does not explicitly discuss the rated power of the corresponding source and AC-DC converters. Elasser, however, further teaches that it is known in the art of bidirectional DC-DC PPC arrangements that a rated power of each of the overall PPC converter (i.e the first AC-DC converter and the second AC-DC converter) may be designed to be lower than full power rating of the DC elements (see Elasser: [0021], [0028], [0050], Fig. 7 regarding ability of partial power processing converter topologies to have lower rated power than the DC sources). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Iwaya in view of Abe to incorporate the teachings of Elasser by selecting the rated power as recited for purposes of enabling the system to take advantage of the PPC converter arrangement for higher efficiency in power conversion which does not require the PPC to process the full rated power of the source (see Elasser: [0028]).
Re claim 8. Iwaya in view of Abe teaches the method according to claim 7. Although Iwaya generally discloses controlling the DC-DC converter to convert in the desired direction may involve controlling some switches to stay open/closed (see Iwaya: [0038-0040], [0098], Figs. 1-2), Iwaya in view of Abe does not explicitly disclose the controlled mode comprises: bringing one of the first AC-DC converter and the second AC-DC converter into the controlled mode, and another one of the first AC-DC converter and the second AC-DC converter into an uncontrolled mode, wherein in the uncontrolled mode, all commutation switching devices in the AC-DC converter work at a normally open or normally closed state. Elasser, however, teaches that it is known in the art of bidirectional DC-DC PPC circuits (see Elasser: [0021], [0050-0051], Fig. 7) that the system may operate to convert power in desired direction while having all switches on respective one of the AC-DC converter sub-bridges controlled to be all ON or OFF (see Elasser: [0051], Fig. 7 regarding converting power to right side having second bridge switches <234,238,250,254> OFF and switches <236,240,252,256> ON, and converting power to left side having first bridge switches <108-114> OFF). One of ordinary skill would appreciate that the PPC switch control operation depending on desired conversion control taught by Elasser would similarly be applicable to the PPC converters of Iwaya in view of Abe when corresponding voltage conditions are present. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Iwaya in view of Abe to further incorporate the teachings of Elasser by having the PPC switches operated using the known switch control taught by Elasser for purposes of providing known, equivalent switch control for providing desired voltage conversion in desired direction for the converter without requiring active switching of all components (see Elasser: [0051], Fig. 7).
Re claim 9. Iwaya in view of Abe, further in view of Elasser, teaches the method according to claim 8, wherein the bringing one of the first AC-DC converter and the second AC-DC converter into the controlled mode, and another one of the first AC-DC converter and the second AC-DC converter into the uncontrolled mode comprises: determining whether the first power source is in the charging state or in the discharging state; bringing a first converter of the first AC-DC converter and the second AC- DC converter connected to a positive side and a negative side of the first power source into the uncontrolled mode, and a second converter of the first AC-DC converter and the second AC-DC converter into the controlled mode, in response to determining that the first power source is in the charging state; and bringing the first converter into the controlled mode and the second converter into the uncontrolled mode, in response to determining that the first power source is in the discharging state (see Abe: [0027], [0029], [0038], Fig. 1, and discussion of claim 7 above, regarding corresponding DC-DC/PPC converter controlled to convert power in corresponding direction for charging/discharging the respective source; see Elasser: [0051], Fig. 7 regarding converting power to right side having second bridge switches <234,238,250,254> OFF and switches <236,240,252,256> ON, and converting power to left side having first bridge switches <108-114> OFF).
Re claims 10-11. Iwaya in view of Abe, further in view of Elasser, teaches the method according to claim 8, further comprising: determining a control signal of the first PPC based on a reference value and a measured value of a parameter of the first power source, the parameter of the first power source comprising any of a current, a voltages or a power on the first power source (see Iwaya: [0038-0040], Figs. 1-2; Elasser: [0051], Fig. 7 regarding control of PPC based on whether voltage of second end/source is less or greater than voltage of first end/bus/reference value); sending the control signal to the one of the first AC-DC converter and the second AC-DC converter in the controlled mode (see Iwaya: [0038-0040], Figs. 1-2; Elasser: [0051], Fig. 7 regarding control of PPC based on converter directional and voltage relation); wherein the determining the control signal of the first PPC comprises: determining the control signal of the first PPC based on the reference value, the measured value, and an adjusting value of the parameter of the first power source (voltage difference between source and bus), the adjusting value being generated according to properties of the plurality of power sources (see Iwaya: [0038-0040], Figs. 1-2; Elasser: [0051], Fig. 7 regarding control of PPC based on whether voltage of second end/source is less or greater than voltage of first end/bus/reference value, generally based on properties of the source/battery).
Re claim 12. Iwaya in view of Abe, further in view of Elasser, teaches the method according to claim 8, further comprising: determining a control signal of the first PPC based on a measured voltage (see Iwaya: [0038-0040], Figs. 1-2; Elasser: [0051], Fig. 7 regarding switch control of PPC based on whether voltage of second end/source is less or greater than voltage of first end/bus/reference value) and a measured current (see Abe: [0039], [0043], [0045-0046], [0050], [0064-0065], Figs. 1-4, 6 regarding corresponding droop function control, including measured current/power from the source and controlling converter direction and power based thereon) of the first power source; and sending the control signal to the one of the first AC-DC converter and the second AC-DC converter in the controlled mode (see Iwaya: [0038-0040], Figs. 1-2; Elasser: [0051], Fig. 7 regarding control of PPC based on converter directional and voltage relation).
Re claim 13-15. Iwaya in view of Abe, further in view of Elasser, teaches the method according to claim 8, further comprising: determining a control signal of the first PPC based on a first reference voltage and a measured voltage on the DC bus (see Abe: [0039], [0043], [0045-0046], [0050], [0064-0065], Figs. 1-4, 6 regarding converter direction and power control based on measured DC bus voltage compared to one or more reference voltages); and sending the control signal to the one of the first AC-DC converter and the second AC-DC converter in the controlled mode (see discussion of claim 8 above regarding corresponding PPC converter control signal based on desired direction/output level); wherein the determining the control signal of the first PPC based on the first reference voltage and the measured voltage on the DC bus comprises: calculating a second reference voltage based on the first reference voltage and a measured value of any of an output current or an output power of the first PPC, the second reference voltage being a droop function of the measured value of any of the output current or the output power; and determining the control signal based on the second reference voltage and the measured voltage (see Abe: [0039], [0043], [0045-0046], [0050], [0064-0065], Figs. 1-4, 6 regarding corresponding droop function for the measured DC bus voltage and controlling converter direction and power based thereon); wherein a parameter of the droop function is determined at least based on a desired voltage on the DC bus set by an upper controller (see Abe: [0039], [0043], [0045-0046], [0050], [0064-0065], [0085], Figs. 1-4, 6 regarding preset voltage ranges from controllers).
Re claim 16. Iwaya in view of Abe, further in view of Elasser, teaches the method according to claim 10, further comprising: updating the control signal of the first PPC based on a measured voltage on the third one (see Iwaya: [0038-0040], Figs. 1-2; Elasser: [0051], Fig. 7 regarding control of PPC based on the difference in voltage between V2 and V1 and desired conversion direction).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7 April 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant’s first argument that Iwaya does not disclose a partial power converter (PPC) is unpersuasive and appears incorrect. Applicant alleges that Iwaya’s Fig. 1 is a “full power converter”, and that all power is being transferred through the converter with no bypass path. However, Applicant does not appear to provide any actual supporting evidence or reason why Iwaya is not a PPC, and an examination of the prior art and Applicant’s own embodiments supports that Iwaya is indeed a type of partial power processing converter.
Applicant’s attention is directed to Iwaya Fig. 1, which has the first voltage V1 connected both to converter terminal P1 and also directly to the other side of bidirectional converter terminal Q2, forming what Applicant appears to be referring to as a bypass path. Additionally, the negative terminals of V1 and V2 are directly connected together. A comparison with Applicant’s Figs. 2-4, shows that this arrangement is consistent with what Applicant considers a PPC, and it is unclear if Applicant possibly missed the connections of Iwaya. Iwaya therefore appears to provide a “bypass path” in at least the same sense as Applicant’s own embodiments. Additionally, although Iwaya refers to the converter as a “series compensating electric power transmission system” converter, the sections describing its operations which have also been cited by Applicant, such as Iwaya: [0059], [0061-0063], [0069-0073], [0079-0083], [0089-0093] all explicitly describe how in each of the 4 conversion scenarios shown in Fig. 2, the converter is only providing “a part” of the power which is otherwise being supplied between the two voltage elements V1 and V2. Nowhere in Iwaya does there to be any description or suggestion that the converter is a “full power converter” like Applicant alleges. Additionally, Applicant should also consider the large number of prior art references which support that Iwaya’s topology is performing partial power processing, such as for example Elasser: [0021], [0028], [0050], Fig. 7 which describes a similar converter connection arrangement explicitly as “partial power processing”. There appears to be no definition or limitation of a PPC that would exclude the converter arrangement of Iwaya from being considered a PPC despite it describing the arrangement using a different name, and Applicant has not provided any evidence that would otherwise demonstrate that the meaning and scope of a PPC would exclude a converter arrangement such as Iwaya’s. Considering Applicant’s own circuit embodiments, the disclosure of Iwaya, and also the disclosure of other prior art in the field, it appears that one of ordinary skill in the art would consider Iwaya’s arrangement a type of PPC topology.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant’s second argument appears to be that the rejection’s mapping of the three sets of ends and of the 4 DC ends does not match the recited limitations is unpersuasive, because it appears Applicant may have missed part of the connection arrangement of Iwaya: Fig. 1, or misunderstood the rejection mapping. Applicant’s labeling of the first to fourth DC ends (Q2, Q1, P2, P1) in the edited drawing on pg. 9 of the Remarks is confirmed to be the same as the rejection mapping. However, it appears that Applicant misunderstood the mapping of the sets of ends, possibly because Applicant missed that Iwaya: Fig. 1 has terminal P1 directly connected to terminal Q2. Thus the mapping of the office action: “wherein the third set (<P1/Q2,Q1>) is different from the first set (<P1/Q2,P2>) and the second set (<Q1,P2>)” uses the label “P1/Q2” not because they are alternative mappings, but because they are directly electrically connected to each other and together match what Applicant has labeled as the connected first and fourth DC ends. It is believed that the labeling of terminals has been clear and consistent throughout the Office action in light of Iwaya’s figure, with the Office Action first mapping them as “connected terminals <P1/Q2>”, and also has been consistent with Applicant’s own manner of labeling terminals in Applicant’s Fig. 4. It can be seen that the office action clearly mapped 3 different combinations of terminals as the 3 different sets of ends, consistent with Applicant’s own embodiment in Fig. 4. As for the limitation that the third set forms a series connection with the source, parallel to the bus, it can be seen that due to the direct connection of P1 and Q2, that the negative to positive terminal of V2 in series with the end from Q1 to Q2/P1 can be considered parallel to the negative to positive terminal of V1 as mapped in the rejection in the same sense as Applicant’s Fig. 4. While it is somewhat strange to describe the series connection of voltage components with two ends of a converter as parallel to the other voltage component in a partial power converter topology, nevertheless the mapping is done in the same manner and consistent with how Applicant has chosen to describe their own Fig. 4 arrangement (note that the relation may be hard to visualize because of Iwaya’s depiction, but the mapping is electrically identical to what is shown in Applicant’s Fig. 4).
Applicant does not appear to make further arguments against claim 7 sharing similar limitations to claim 1, and further dependent claim limitations.
Applicant is generally advised that the cited prior art of record continues to suggest that the various disclosed DC-DC PPC topology arrangements are known in the art (see as further examples: Marzouk (US2017/0085090), Agamy (US2016/0285374) relevant to the general PPC converter arrangement), along with operation of bidirectional PPC circuit such that only one of the AC-DC bridges is actively switched depending on the desired conversion direction. General use of such PPC circuits in similar, common DC-DC converter applications with plurality of DC sources and a DC bus would also appear to be obvious to those of ordinary skill in the art, and at present it is not apparent how generally applying the known PPC topologies to various known DC bus systems and operations would be distinguished and nonobvious from the prior art to those of ordinary skill. If Applicant believes a particular PPC topology and system application with specific operations unique to the application/components of the system when PPCs are used would be nonobvious over the prior art of record, it is recommended the claims be amended to specifically and clearly claim the intended embodiment structure/connection together with particular details of the system application and operation. Applicant should provide an explanation of intended embodiment and citation to the Specification/Drawings for support in all cases since the intended scope of the claims is already somewhat confusing. If Applicant requires assistance or wishes to discuss the prior art circuit arrangements, office action, or the application, it is encouraged to contact the Examiner as needed.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 DAVID A SHIAO whose telephone number is (571)270-7265. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Rexford Barnie can be reached at (571) 272-7492. 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.
/DAVID A SHIAO/Examiner, Art Unit 2836
/REXFORD N BARNIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights