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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/16/2026 & 11/11/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 5, 7, 11, and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 5 and 11 recite “each of photovoltaic modules.” This should be corrected to “each photovoltaic module” or “each of the photovoltaic modules.”
Claim 7 recites “A fault detection method, applied to …; wherein the method comprises.” For proper grammar and punctuation, this should be corrected to “A fault detection method applied to …, wherein the method comprises:”.
Claim 14 recites “each photovoltaic modules.” This should be corrected to “each photovoltaic module.”
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 3–5 and 9–14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites “the preset voltage.” However, claim 1, from which claim 3 depends, does not previously introduce a “preset voltage.” It is therefore unclear which voltage value is referenced by “the preset voltage.” Claim 14 depends from claim 3 and incorporates this indefiniteness.
Claim 4 recites “the preset impedance value.” However, claim 1, from which claim 4 depends, does not previously introduce a “preset impedance value.” It is therefore unclear which impedance value is referenced by “the preset impedance value.”
Claim 9 recites “the preset voltage.” However, claim 7, from which claim 9 depends, does not previously introduce a “preset voltage.” It is therefore unclear which voltage value is referenced by “the preset voltage.”
Claim 10 recites “the preset impedance value.” However, claim 7, from which claim 10 depends, does not previously introduce a “preset impedance value.” It is therefore unclear which impedance value is referenced by “the preset impedance value.”
Claim 11 recites “the preset voltage.” However, claim 11 depends from claim 7, which does not introduce a “preset voltage.” Although claim 8 introduces a preset voltage, claim 11 does not depend from claim 8. It is therefore unclear which voltage value is referenced by “the preset voltage.”
Claims 5, 11, and 14 recite that a photovoltaic module comprises “a diode reversely connected in parallel.” The claims do not identify the component with which the diode is connected in parallel. Therefore, the required structural relationship between the diode and the photovoltaic module or photovoltaic cells is unclear.
Claims 5, 11, and 14 further recite “a sum of conduction voltage drops of diodes reversely connected in parallel in the photovoltaic strings.” It is unclear whether the claimed “sum” is determined:
• for the diodes in one photovoltaic string;
• separately for the diodes in each photovoltaic string; or
• collectively for the diodes in all of the parallel-connected photovoltaic strings.
Consequently, the boundaries of the required range for “the preset voltage” cannot be determined with reasonable certainty.
Claims 12 and 13 depend from claim 2, which already introduces “a first photovoltaic string.” Claims 12 and 13 each again introduce “a first photovoltaic string” rather than referring to “the first photovoltaic string.” It is therefore unclear whether the first photovoltaic string recited in each of claims 12 and 13 is the same first photovoltaic string introduced in claim 2 or a different photovoltaic string. This uncertainty affects whether the respective reverse-connection, voltage-mismatch, and short-circuit determinations must concern the same photovoltaic string or may concern different photovoltaic strings.
For purposes of examination only, the Examiner considers “the preset voltage” in claims 3 and 9, and as inherited by claim 14, to mean “a preset voltage”; “the preset impedance value” in claims 4 and 10 to mean “a preset impedance value”; and “the preset voltage” in claim 11 to mean a preset voltage satisfying the voltage range recited in claim 11. The Examiner further considers “a diode reversely connected in parallel” in claims 5, 11, and 14 to mean a diode connected in reverse parallel across its corresponding photovoltaic module, and considers “a sum of conduction voltage drops of diodes reversely connected in parallel in the photovoltaic strings” to mean the sum of the conduction voltage drops of the reverse-parallel diodes within an individual photovoltaic string. Finally, the Examiner considers “a first photovoltaic string” reintroduced in claims 12 and 13 to refer to the same first photovoltaic string previously introduced in claim 2. Claims 3–5 and 9–14 have been examined under these interpretations. These interpretations are made solely to facilitate examination and do not resolve the identified indefiniteness.
Appropriate amendment is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumar et al. (U.S. 2017/0317500 A1) in view of Falk et al. (U.S. 2012/0126626 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kumar et al. disclose a combiner device, comprising at least two photovoltaic strings connected in parallel (PV strings are connected through combiner boxes providing a parallel connection point and a master combiner, see paragraph [0003]), and further comprising: a current detection circuit (current sensors 38, 40 and 42 monitor currents flowing through the positive, negative and ground conductors, see paragraph [0026]), wherein the current detection circuit is configured to detect a current of each of the photovoltaic strings (current sensors 38 and 40 provide real-time current signals representing the outputs of the respective PV arrays to controller 36, see paragraph [0026]); and a controller is configured to determine whether a reverse connection fault occurs in the photovoltaic strings based on the current, the voltage, and the insulation impedance (controller 36 controls the DC breakers associated with the respective combiner channels, see paragraph [0025]).
Kumar et al. are not understood to explicitly disclose a voltage detection circuit, an insulation impedance detection circuit, the voltage detection circuit is configured to detect a voltage of the photovoltaic strings connected in parallel, the insulation impedance detection circuit is configured to detect an insulation impedance of the photovoltaic strings connected in parallel.
Falk et al. disclose a voltage detection circuit (a DC combiner box integrates voltage monitoring in addition to current and ground-fault monitoring, see paragraph [0006]); an insulation impedance detection circuit (a central insulation monitoring unit monitors ground faults by measuring insulation resistance, see paragraph [0023]); the voltage detection circuit is configured to detect a voltage of the photovoltaic strings connected in parallel (voltage monitoring is provided in the DC combiner box that collects the outputs of the photovoltaic strings, see paragraph [0006]); the insulation impedance detection circuit is configured to detect an insulation impedance of the photovoltaic strings connected in parallel (central insulation monitoring unit 15 records the insulation status of the overall photovoltaic system, including the parallel-connected strings, see paragraph [0030]); and the controller is configured to determine whether a reverse connection fault occurs in the photovoltaic strings based on the current, the voltage, and the insulation impedance (direction-sensitive power sensors detect reverse current indicating reversed polarity, while controller modules centrally process string-current and insulation-status information while string voltage is applied to the device, see paragraph [0030]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to modify Kumar et al. by incorporating voltage monitoring, insulation-resistance monitoring and direction-sensitive string-current detection as taught by Falk et al., as doing so would provide more reliable discrimination and selective isolation of reverse-polarity and insulation faults because Falk et al. emphasize in paragraph [0030] that reverse-current and insulation-status information may be centrally processed to identify and disconnect an affected string while the remaining strings continue supplying electrical energy, thus improving fault-detection accuracy and photovoltaic-system availability.
PNG
media_image1.png
954
1575
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Kumar et al. and Falk et al. disclose the combiner device according to claim 1 (as set forth above), wherein Kumar et al. further disclose wherein the controller is configured to determine that a reverse connection fault occurs in a first photovoltaic string (controller 36 identifies and classifies a fault associated with a particular photovoltaic array or combiner input channel; under BRI, “reverse connection fault” identifies the fault classification assigned by the controller when the following electrical conditions are satisfied, see paragraph [0040]) in a case that an absolute value of the voltage is less than a preset voltage (under BRI, applying this threshold-comparison technique to the monitored DC-voltage magnitude constitutes comparing the absolute value of the voltage with a preset voltage, see paragraph [0034]), the insulation impedance is greater than a preset impedance value (see [0038, wherein ground-leakage current below the fault threshold as the absence of a validated insulation fault; at the monitored voltage, leakage current below the threshold corresponds under Ohm’s law to insulation impedance above a preset impedance value, see paragraph [0038]) and a current of the first photovoltaic string is less than zero (see paragraph [0039]), wherein the first photovoltaic string is any one of the at least two photovoltaic strings connected in parallel (Kumar identifies the particular photovoltaic array or combiner input channel corresponding to the detected fault, see paragraph [0040]).
Regarding claim 3, Kumar et al. and Falk et al. disclose the combiner device according to claim 1 (as set forth above), wherein Kumar et al. further disclose wherein the controller is further configured to determine that a voltage mismatch fault occurs in a first photovoltaic string (controller 36 compares detected electrical patterns with predefined patterns selected according to photovoltaic-module operating characteristics; under BRI, a “voltage mismatch fault” is the fault classification assigned to a string exhibiting the following abnormal electrical condition, see paragraph [0036]) in a case that the voltage is greater than the preset voltage (Kumar teaches predefined thresholds selected according to the design specifications of the particular photovoltaic application; under BRI, applying the threshold comparison to the monitored bus voltage constitutes determining whether the voltage is greater than the preset voltage, see paragraph [0034]) and the current of the first photovoltaic string is less than zero (see causes current flowing from the common bus toward the string to have a value less than zero, see paragraph [0039]), wherein the first photovoltaic string is any one of the at least two photovoltaic strings connected in parallel (Kumar identifies the particular photovoltaic array or combiner input channel corresponding to the detected fault, see paragraph [0040]).
Regarding claim 4, Kumar et al. and Falk et al. disclose the combiner device according to claim 1 (as set forth above), wherein Kumar et al. further disclose wherein the controller is further configured to determine that a short-circuit fault occurs in a first photovoltaic string (controller 36 detects a sudden ground fault caused by a sudden electrical short, see paragraph [0032]) in a case that the insulation impedance is less than the preset impedance value (Kumar detects the short circuit when the monitored ground-fault current exceeds a predefined threshold; under BRI and Ohm’s law, ground current exceeding the threshold at the monitored voltage corresponds to insulation impedance below a preset impedance value, see paragraph [0033]) and the current of the first photovoltaic string is less than zero (Kumar compares separately sensed currents associated with a particular photovoltaic array; under BRI, current flowing toward the photovoltaic string relative to a positive outward-current reference direction has a value less than zero, see paragraph [0039]), wherein the first photovoltaic string is any one of the at least two photovoltaic strings connected in parallel (Kumar locates the ground fault within a particular photovoltaic array or input channel, see paragraph [0040]).
Regarding claim 5, Kumar et al. and Falk et al. disclose the combiner device according to claim 2 (as set forth above), wherein Kumar et al. further disclose wherein each of photovoltaic modules in the photovoltaic strings comprises a diode reversely connected in parallel (Kumar’s photovoltaic strings comprise individual photovoltaic modules connected in series; under BRI, the broadly disclosed photovoltaic modules encompass conventional photovoltaic modules having reverse-parallel bypass diodes that conduct when the corresponding module is reverse biased, see paragraph [0024]), and the preset voltage is greater than a sum of conduction voltage drops of diodes reversely connected in parallel in the photovoltaic strings and less than open-circuit voltages of all the photovoltaic strings (Kumar teaches selecting predefined fault patterns and thresholds according to the operating characteristics and specifications of the photovoltaic modules and the number of modules connected in series; under BRI, selecting the threshold above the cumulative bypass-diode conduction voltage and below the normal string open-circuit voltage distinguishes a diode-clamped abnormal string from normally operating strings, see paragraph [0036]).
Regarding claim 6, Kumar et al. and Falk et al. disclose a photovoltaic system (photovoltaic system 10 comprises photovoltaic arrays 14 and combiner structures, see paragraph [0024]), comprising: a DCAC circuit (DC-to-AC power inverter 48 converts the DC voltage from bus bars 24 and 26 into a fixed-frequency AC output, see paragraph [0027]); and at least one combiner device according to claim 1 (as set forth above); wherein Kumar et al. further disclose an output terminal of the combiner device is connected to an input terminal of the DCAC circuit (positive bus bar 24 carrying the combiner output is connected through DC disconnect switch 50 to the input of DC-to-AC power inverter 48, see paragraph [0027]).
Regarding claim 7, Kumar et al. disclose a fault detection method, applied to a photovoltaic system comprising a DCAC circuit and at least two photovoltaic strings connected in parallel (the DC-to-AC power conversion system includes multiple PV arrays connected through a re-combiner to an inverter, see paragraph [0030]); wherein the method comprises: obtaining a current of each of the photovoltaic strings (technique 72 samples DC current data from the current sensors associated with the photovoltaic strings and combiner channels, see paragraph [0032]).
Kumar et al. are not understood to explicitly disclose obtaining a voltage of the photovoltaic strings connected in parallel, obtaining an insulation impedance of the photovoltaic strings connected in parallel, and determining whether a reverse connection fault occurs in the photovoltaic strings based on the current, the voltage, and the insulation impedance.
Falk et al. disclose obtaining a voltage of the photovoltaic strings connected in parallel (a DC combiner box integrates voltage monitoring for the collected photovoltaic outputs, see paragraph [0006]); obtaining an insulation impedance of the photovoltaic strings connected in parallel (the central insulation monitoring unit measures the insulation resistance of the photovoltaic strings, see paragraph [0023]); and determining whether a reverse connection fault occurs in the photovoltaic strings based on the current, the voltage, and the insulation impedance (the controller centrally evaluates direction-sensitive reverse-current information and insulation status while string voltage is applied to identify and isolate a reversed or faulty string, see paragraph [0030]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art, prior to the effective filing date, to modify Kumar et al.’s fault-detection method by obtaining and evaluating the voltage and insulation resistance taught by Falk et al. together with Kumar et al.’s sensed current data, as doing so would provide more reliable identification and isolation of reverse-polarity and insulation faults because Falk et al. emphasize in paragraph [0030] that reverse-current and insulation-status information may be centrally processed to isolate an affected string while maintaining operation of the remaining strings, thus improving fault discrimination and system availability.
Regarding claim 8, Kumar et al. and Falk et al. disclose the fault detection method according to claim 7 (as set forth above), wherein Kumar et al. further disclose wherein the determining whether a reverse connection fault occurs in the photovoltaic strings based on the current, the voltage, and the insulation impedance comprises: determining that a reverse connection fault occurs in a first photovoltaic string (Kumar’s controller identifies and classifies a fault associated with a particular photovoltaic array or combiner input channel; under BRI, “reverse connection fault” identifies the classification assigned when the following electrical conditions are satisfied, see paragraph [0040]) in a case that an absolute value of the voltage is less than a preset voltage (Kumar teaches predefined fault thresholds selected according to the design specifications of the photovoltaic system; under BRI, applying this comparison to the monitored DC-voltage magnitude constitutes determining whether the absolute value is below the preset voltage, see paragraph [0034]), the insulation impedance is greater than a preset impedance value (Kumar treats ground-leakage current below the fault threshold as the absence of a validated insulation fault; under Ohm’s law, leakage current below the threshold at the monitored voltage corresponds to insulation impedance above a preset impedance value, see paragraph [0038]) and a current of the first photovoltaic string is less than zero (Kumar separately monitors current corresponding to a particular photovoltaic array; under BRI, current flowing toward the string is negative when normal outward string current is defined as positive, see paragraph [0039]), wherein the first photovoltaic string is any one of the at least two photovoltaic strings connected in parallel (Kumar identifies the particular photovoltaic array or combiner input channel corresponding to the fault, see paragraph [0040]).
Regarding claim 9, Kumar et al. and Falk et al. disclose the fault detection method according to claim 7 (as set forth above), wherein Kumar et al. further disclose determining that a voltage mismatch fault occurs in a first photovoltaic string (Kumar compares detected electrical patterns with predefined patterns selected according to photovoltaic-module operating characteristics; under BRI, a “voltage mismatch fault” is the classification assigned to a string exhibiting the following abnormal condition, see paragraph [0036]) in a case that the voltage is greater than the preset voltage (Kumar teaches predefined fault thresholds selected according to system design specifications; under BRI, applying this comparison to monitored bus voltage constitutes determining whether the voltage exceeds the preset voltage, see paragraph [0034]) and the current of the first photovoltaic string is less than zero (Kumar separately monitors current associated with a particular photovoltaic array; under BRI, reverse current has a value less than zero when normal outward string current is defined as positive, see paragraph [0039]), wherein the first photovoltaic string is any one of the at least two photovoltaic strings connected in parallel (Kumar identifies a particular photovoltaic array or combiner input channel corresponding to the detected fault, see paragraph [0040]).
Regarding claim 10, Kumar et al. and Falk et al. disclose the fault detection method according to claim 7 (as set forth above), wherein Kumar et al. further disclose determining that a short-circuit fault occurs in a first photovoltaic string (Kumar detects a sudden ground fault caused by a sudden electrical short, see paragraph [0032]) in a case that the insulation impedance is less than the preset impedance value (Kumar detects the fault when monitored ground current exceeds a predefined threshold; under BRI and Ohm’s law, ground-leakage current exceeding the threshold corresponds to insulation impedance below a preset impedance value, see paragraph [0033]) and the current of the first photovoltaic string is less than zero (Kumar separately monitors current associated with a particular photovoltaic array; under BRI, current flowing toward the string is negative relative to the normal outward-current direction, see paragraph [0039]), wherein the first photovoltaic string is any one of the at least two photovoltaic strings connected in parallel (Kumar locates the ground fault within a particular photovoltaic array or combiner input channel, see paragraph [0040]).
Regarding claim 11, Kumar et al. and Falk et al. disclose the fault detection method according to claim 7 (as set forth above), wherein Kumar et al. further disclose wherein each of photovoltaic modules in the photovoltaic strings comprises a diode reversely connected in parallel (Kumar’s photovoltaic strings comprise individual photovoltaic modules connected in series; under BRI, the broadly disclosed photovoltaic modules encompass conventional photovoltaic modules having reverse-parallel bypass diodes, see paragraph [0024]), and the preset voltage is greater than a sum of conduction voltage drops of diodes reversely connected in parallel in the photovoltaic strings and less than open-circuit voltages of all the photovoltaic strings (Kumar teaches configuring predefined fault patterns according to photovoltaic-module operating characteristics and the number of modules connected in series; under BRI, selecting the threshold between the cumulative bypass-diode conduction voltage and normal string open-circuit voltage provides a predictable distinction between abnormal and normal string operation, see paragraph [0036]).
Regarding claim 12, Kumar et al. and Falk et al. disclose the combiner device according to claim 2 (as set forth above), wherein Kumar et al. further disclose wherein the controller is further configured to determine that a voltage mismatch fault occurs in a first photovoltaic string (Kumar’s controller compares sensed electrical patterns with predefined fault patterns selected according to photovoltaic-module operating characteristics; under BRI, “voltage mismatch fault” identifies the classification assigned to the following abnormal electrical condition, see paragraph [0036]) in a case that the voltage is greater than the preset voltage (Kumar teaches thresholds selected according to the design specifications of the particular photovoltaic application; under BRI, applying this comparison to monitored bus voltage constitutes determining whether the voltage exceeds the preset voltage, see paragraph [0034]) and the current of the first photovoltaic string is less than zero (Kumar separately monitors current associated with a particular photovoltaic array; under BRI, current flowing toward the string is negative when normal outward string current is designated positive, see paragraph [0039]), wherein the first photovoltaic string is any one of the at least two photovoltaic strings connected in parallel (Kumar identifies the particular photovoltaic array or combiner input channel corresponding to the detected fault, see paragraph [0040]).
Regarding claim 13, Kumar et al. and Falk et al. disclose the combiner device according to claim 2 (as set forth above), wherein Kumar et al. further disclose wherein the controller is further configured to determine that a short-circuit fault occurs in a first photovoltaic string (Kumar’s controller detects a sudden ground fault caused by a sudden electrical short, see paragraph [0032]) in a case that the insulation impedance is less than the preset impedance value (Kumar identifies the fault when monitored ground current exceeds a predefined threshold; under BRI and Ohm’s law, ground current exceeding the threshold corresponds to insulation impedance below a preset impedance value, see paragraph [0033]) and the current of the first photovoltaic string is less than zero (Kumar separately monitors current corresponding to a particular photovoltaic array; under BRI, current flowing toward the photovoltaic string has a value less than zero relative to the normal outward-current direction, see paragraph [0039]), wherein the first photovoltaic string is any one of the at least two photovoltaic strings connected in parallel (Kumar locates the fault within a particular photovoltaic array or combiner input channel, see paragraph [0040]).
Regarding claim 14, Kumar et al. and Falk et al. disclose the combiner device according to claim 3 (as set forth above), wherein Kumar et al. further disclose wherein each photovoltaic modules in the photovoltaic strings comprises a diode reversely connected in parallel (Kumar’s photovoltaic strings comprise individual photovoltaic modules connected in series; under BRI, the broadly disclosed photovoltaic modules encompass conventional photovoltaic modules containing reverse-parallel bypass diodes, see paragraph [0024]), and the preset voltage is greater than a sum of conduction voltage drops of diodes reversely connected in parallel in the photovoltaic strings and less than open-circuit voltages of all the photovoltaic strings (Kumar teaches selecting predefined fault patterns according to photovoltaic-module operating characteristics, module specifications, and the number of modules connected in series; under BRI, selecting the threshold between the cumulative bypass-diode conduction voltage and normal string open-circuit voltage predictably distinguishes an abnormal diode-clamped string from normal string operation, see paragraph [0036]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. 2018/0159466 A1 to Ringer et al. disclose in Fig. 1 a method for testing the strings (3) of a photovoltaic system, and also to a photovoltaic inverter (1) for carrying out this method. According to the invention, each relay (14), each current-measuring device (15) and the voltage-measuring device (16) are connected to the control device (7) and said control device is designed to control each relay (14), each current-measuring device (15) and the voltage-measuring device (16) in such a way as to automatically ascertain at least individual values of the U/I characteristic curve of each string (3), and said control device is connected to at least one interface (17) for connection to sensors for measuring environmental parameters in the region of the string (3) and is connected to a memory (10) for storing the ascertained values for creating a test report, wherein the control device (7) is further designed to convert the ascertained values optionally to Standard Test Conditions under defined environmental conditions and to compare said ascertained values with values which are stored in the memory (10).
U.S. 2021/0211092 A1 to Becnel et al. disclose an apparatus comprises a plurality of power sources, one or more processors embedded with the plurality of power sources, and memory storing processor executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to modify duty cycles of the power sources, and to modify timing for each phase of a multiphase cycle. In some cases, the apparatus: transfers, for each phase of the multiphase cycle, power from a different power source of a plurality of power sources to a load; determines, for each phase of the multiphase cycle, an input voltage associated with the transferred power, an output voltage associated with the transferred power, and current from the power source associated with the transferred power; determines a duty cycle associated with the power source; modifies duty cycles of the power sources; and modifies timing for each phase of the multiphase cycle.
U.S. 2023/0396057 A1 to Zhang et al. disclose a photovoltaic system, a direct-current combiner box, and a fault isolation method. The photovoltaic system includes a fault isolation circuit and a DC/DC conversion circuit. A first end of the fault isolation circuit is connected to N photovoltaic strings, and a second end of the fault isolation circuit is connected to an input end of the DC/DC conversion circuit. The fault isolation circuit includes a multipole switch, and each group of photovoltaic strings in the N photovoltaic strings is connected to an input end of a power conversion circuit through one pole of switch in the multipole switch. Each group of photovoltaic strings includes at least two photovoltaic strings. When a reverse connection fault occurs in the N photovoltaic strings, the entire multipole switch is turned off in linkage.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRUNG NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1966. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon- Friday 8AM - 4:00PM Eastern Time. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Huy Phan can be reached on 571-272-7924. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Examiner: /Trung Q. Nguyen/- Art 2858
/HUY Q PHAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights