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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 8, 2026 have been fully considered.
The amendments to the claims do not result in the 35 U.S.C 112(b) rejections being withdrawn. The rationales for the indefiniteness remain substantially similar.
Regarding the 35 U.S.C 102 rejections, the applicant argues that Tang does not disclose a septum wall disposed in the duct that defines a first and second chamber. The examine provides Annotated Figure 1 below, which interprets (II) as a septum wall for the duct (I) which may be considered the exterior profile of (20). (II) defines a first and second chamber as it separates (I) into two chambers. The examiner notes as described in [0085] of Tang that the instances of (21) are connected are separated from each other. The configuration of Tang not only discloses the claimed limitations, but also functions in a substantially identical manner. The applicant appears to associate an undefined narrower interpretation of “septum wall disposed in the duct” than the examiner. It is unclear what these additional requirements are, nor does the examiner find them to be in accordance with the broadest reasonable interpretation.
The examiner finds that the septum wall (II) defines the first and second chamber in a similar manner to the applicant in that the septum wall defines a boundary between the first and second chamber but itself does not define the chambers in their entirety.
Any changes to the rejection are necessitated by amendment and the rejections are therefore final.
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 18-19, 21-22, 24, and 28-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 18 recites, “wherein the arm strap is configured to receive an arm of a user to secure at least a portion of the housing of the leaf blower against the arm of the user and position the leaf blower below a forearm of the user”. The position of the leaf blower may vary based on movement of the user. The location of the leaf blower relative to the user is based on an unspecified orientation and positioning of the leaf blower that is variable due to movement of the user. For example, the leaf blower may be below a persons forearm when their arm is positioned low, but could be above their forearm when their arm is above their head. The examiner therefore finds the claim to be indefinite, see MPEP 2173.05(b). Claims 19 and 24 which are dependent on claim 18 are therefore also rejected.
Claims 21 and 22 recite similar limitations, “wherein the first direction and the second direction operate together to direct a flow of debris downward toward the ground / upward away from the ground in a central region of the flow of air.” The examiner finds this is a functional limitation which describes a result of the operation of the leaf blower. While functional limitations are not necessarily indefinite they can be. See MPEP 2173.05(g):
“Notwithstanding the permissible instances, the use of functional language in a claim may fail "to provide a clear-cut indication of the scope of the subject matter embraced by the claim" and thus be indefinite. In re Swinehart, 439 F.2d 210, 213 (CCPA 1971). For example, when claims merely recite a description of a problem to be solved or a function or result achieved by the invention, the boundaries of the claim scope may be unclear. Halliburton Energy Servs., Inc. v. M-I LLC, 514 F.3d 1244, 1255, 85 USPQ2d 1654, 1663 (Fed. Cir. 2008)”.
The specification does not provide a clear link to specific structure involved that results in the claimed functionality. The examiner also notes that airflow characteristics impact on small debris is a complex physical interaction and how much upward/downward directing of the debris required to satisfy the claim is unclear. Additionally, the operation of the leaf blower and various positioning and interaction with the environment may influence how debris is moved.
Claim 28 recites, “wherein a direction of a flow of air from the leaf blower is based on a differential between the first flow characteristic and the second flow characteristic”. This is a product-by-process claim because it describes a process in which the fan is used to control the flow of air, see MPEP 2113 I. It is also a functional limitation as the control of the direction of air flow is a functional result. See MPEP 2173.05(g). Due to these two aspects of the claim and their interplay, the examiner finds that the structure required by the claim to be indefinite.
Claims 29-31 which are dependent from claim 28 are also rejected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-8, 11, 14-15, 25 and 27-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tang et al. (U.S Pre-Grant Publication 20240209867) hereinafter Tang.
*The embodiment used to reject is the two motor fan blade assembly of Figures 10-15, references to other figures / paragraphs are used for when there is no equivalent figure / paragraph shown for this embodiment but the disclosure from the earlier embodiments are applicable.
PNG
media_image1.png
541
785
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Tang discloses:
An air-moving device configured to propel air {[0004]; leaf blower, Figure 1}, comprising:
a duct {Figure 10, (20) and (30) defines a duct, the outer contour of a cross-section of this duct is seen as (I) in Annotated Figure 1},
a septum wall {Annotated Figure 1 (II) shows the septum wall where which is formed by the touching surfaces of the joined instances of (21) which form (20); [0085]}
disposed in the duct {Annotated Figure 1 (II) is disposed in the duct which has the outer contour shown by the dashed line of (I)}
extending toward an exhaust end of the duct {Annotated Figure 1, (II) extends from an inlet end of (20) to an exhaust end of (20)} and
defining within the duct a first chamber and a second chamber {Figure 13, the upper instance of (21) is a first chamber and the lower instance of (21) is a second chamber}
with a terminal end of the septum wall positioned within the duct and defining an exhaust area within the duct {Annotated Figure 1 (II) has a terminal end at the right side of the figure which defines an exhaust area in (30) within the duct}; a plurality of independently controllable fan systems {[0071]; each motor fan blade assembly (122) is independent; Figure 12 shows two instances of (122) each with their own fan (1221)} comprising:
a first fan system configured to propel a first flow of air having a first flow characteristic through the first chamber {Figures 10-15, the air propelled by the first fan (1221) has a first flow characteristic such as pressure, velocity, etc. through the first chamber}, and
a second fan system configured to propel a second flow of air having a second flow characteristic through the second chamber {Figures 10-15, the air propelled by the second fan (unlabeled instance of 1221) has a second flow characteristic such as pressure, velocity, etc. through the second chamber};
wherein the first flow of air and the second flow of air are combined in the exhaust area to form a combined airflow {Figure 14, air is converged/combined in (30) and then exits; [0087]. The exhaust area may be considered the region downstream of the septum wall until the most downstream end of (30)}.
Regarding claim 3, Tang further discloses:
wherein the exhaust end of the septum wall terminates before the exhaust end of the duct {Figures 14/15, the exhaust end of the septum wall is the end of (20), this terminates before the exhaust end of the duct which is defined by the most downstream portion of (30); [0087]}, and
wherein the exhaust area is between the exhaust end of the septum wall and the exhaust end of the duct {Figures 14/15; the exhaust area is the region in (30) which is between the exhaust end of the septum wall defined by the end (20) and the exhaust end of the duct which is the most downstream portion of (30)}.
Regarding claim 4, Tang further discloses:
wherein the first flow characteristic and the second flow characteristic are different {[0071]; the multiple motors (1223) in Figure 12 are independent and may have different requirements selected. The first and second flow characteristics being different which may be achieved by running the fan blades at different rotational speeds. It is noted that this limitation is related to the airflow generated rather than the fan itself and is therefore directed at a method of using the product of the air-moving device in a particular manner. The multiple independent motor structure of Tang allows the first and second fan blades to be operated such that first and second could have different flow characteristics}.
Regarding claim 5, Tang further discloses:
wherein the first flow characteristic is volume of the first flow of air and the second flow characteristic is volume of the second flow of air {Claim 1 requires that the first fan and second respectively have a first flow of air with a first flow characteristic and a second flow of air with a second flow characteristic. Figures 10-15, the air propelled by the first/second fan (1221) respectively has a first/second flow characteristic such as pressure, velocity, etc. through the first/second chamber. Therefore, for purposes of the claim, the first and second air characteristics may be considered the volume of the flow air although others are still potentially applicable}.
Regarding claim 6, Tang further discloses:
wherein the first flow characteristic is speed of the first flow of air and the second flow characteristic is speed of the second flow of air {Claim 1 requires that the first fan and second respectively have a first flow of air with a first flow characteristic and a second flow of air with a second flow characteristic. Figures 10-15, the air propelled by the first/second fan (1221) respectively has a first/second flow characteristic such as pressure, speed, velocity, etc. through the first/second chamber. Therefore, for purposes of the claim, the first and second air characteristics may be considered the speed of the flow air although others are still potentially applicable}
Regarding claim 7, Tang further discloses:
wherein the first flow characteristic is rotational direction of the first flow of air and the second flow characteristic is rotational direction of the second flow of air {Claim 1 requires that the first fan and second respectively have a first flow of air with a first flow characteristic and a second flow of air with a second flow characteristic. Figures 10-15, the air propelled by the first/second fan (1221) respectively has a first/second flow characteristic such as pressure, speed, velocity, vorticity / rotational direction, etc. through the first/second chamber. Therefore, for purposes of the claim, the first and second air characteristics may be considered the rotational direction of the flow air although others are still potentially applicable. Any airflow produced by a fan such as Tang’s will implicitly have a rotational direction, see MPEP 2112}
Regarding claim 8, Tang further discloses:
comprising a user interface configured to modify, based on user input received at the user interface, at least one of the first flow characteristic or the second flow characteristic {Figure 1, the unlabeled trigger implicitly is the user interface that modifies the first or second flow characteristic which may be air volume, see MPEP 2112; [0032]/[0071]}.
Regarding claim 11, Tang discloses:
A leaf blower {[0004]; leaf blower, Figure 1} comprising:
a housing {Figures 10-15, the stationary portions of (11), (12), (20), and (30) form the housing and include a first chamber formed by the upper instance of (21) and a second chamber adjacent to the first chamber formed by the lower instance of (21)} including:
a septum wall disposed in the housing and defining within the housing a first chamber and a second chamber {Annotated Figure 1 (II) is disposed within (I) which is part of the housing; (II) defines a first chamber which is the upper instance of (21) and a second chamber which is the lower instance of (21)},
the housing including an inlet end and an exhaust end and the septum wall extending from the inlet end towards the exhaust end {Figure 10, the most upstream end of (11) at the upper left of the figure is the inlet end; the exhaust end is the most downstream of (30) at the lower right of the figure. The septum wall (II) in Annotated Figure 1 extends from the inlet end towards the exhaust end};
a first fan system configured to propel air having a first flow characteristic through the first chamber {Figures 10-15, the air propelled by the first fan (1221) has a first flow characteristic such as pressure, velocity, etc. through the first chamber}; and
a second fan system configured to propel air having a second flow characteristic, different than the first flow characteristic, through the second chamber {Figures 10-15, the air propelled by the second fan (unlabeled instance of 1221) has a second flow characteristic such as pressure, velocity, etc. through the second chamber};
wherein the first fan system and the second fan system are configured relative to each other to create a flow of air that combines the air having the first flow characteristic and the air having the second flow characteristic before the flow of air exits the housing {Figure 14, air is converged/combined in (30) and then exits; [0087]. Airflow before this region is separate with different flow characteristics}.
Regarding claim 14, Tang further discloses:
wherein the housing further comprises a first air intake associated with the first chamber and a second air intake associated with the second chamber {Figure 12, the left/upstream side of (121) is two circular shapes which form a distinct first air intake associated with the first chamber and a distinct second air intake associated with the second chamber}
Regarding claim 15, Tang further discloses:
wherein the housing further comprises a first exhaust associated with the first chamber and a second exhaust associated with the second chamber {Figures 10-15, upstream of (30) there is a first exhaust associated with the first chamber and separate second exhaust associated with the second chamber; mixing only occurs once the flow reaches (30); [0087]}.
Regarding claim 25, Tang discloses:
A leaf blower {[0004]; leaf blower, Figure 1} comprising:
a duct including a septum wall defining a first chamber and a second chamber within the duct {Figure 10, (20) and (30) defines a duct, the outer contour of a cross-section of this duct is seen as (I) in Annotated Figure 1. The duct has a septum wall (II) shown in Annotated Figure 1 that defines a first chamber as the upper instance of (21) and a second chamber as the lower instance of (21)},
the duct including an inlet end and an exhaust end {Figure 10, the upstream end of (20) is at the upper left of the figure and is the inlet end; the exhaust end is the downstream of (20)/(30) at the lower right of the figure};
wherein the septum wall extends from the inlet end to the exhaust end and defines the first chamber to be adjacent the second chamber {Annotated Figure 1 (II) extends from the inlet end to the exhaust end and defines the first chamber to be adjacent the second chamber as described above}
a first fan system configured to propel air having a first flow characteristic through the first chamber {Figures 10-15, the air propelled by the first fan (1221) has a first flow characteristic such as pressure, velocity, etc. through the first chamber}; and
a second fan system configured to propel air having a second flow characteristic, different than the first flow characteristic, through the second chamber {Figures 10-15, the air propelled by the second fan (unlabeled instance of 1221) has a second flow characteristic such as pressure, velocity, etc. through the second chamber};
a user interface configured to modify, based on user input received at the user interface, at least one of the first flow characteristic or the second flow characteristic {Figure 1, the unlabeled trigger implicitly is the user interface that modifies the first or second flow characteristic which may be air volume, see MPEP 2112; [0032]/[0071]}.
Regarding claim 27, Tang further discloses:
wherein an exhaust end of the septum wall terminates before the exhaust end of the duct {Figures 14/15, the exhaust end of the septum wall which right end of (20) terminates before the exhaust end of the duct that is at the downstream section of (30) where mixing occurs; [0087]}
Regarding claim 28, Tang further discloses:
wherein a direction of a flow of air from the leaf blower is based on a differential between the first flow characteristic and the second flow characteristic {[0071]; the multiple motors (1223) in Figure 12 are independent and one or more motors may be selected to run based on requirements. The first and second flow characteristics being different changing the direction of a flow of air can may be achieved by running the fan blades at different rotational speeds. It is noted that this limitation is related to the airflow generated rather than a clear aspect of the physical apparatus. Therefore the limitation is a method of using the product of the air-moving device in a particular manner. The multiple independent motor structure of Tang allows the first and second fan blades to be operated such that first and second could have different flow characteristics that cause the direction of the flow of air to be controlled. Additionally see the 35 U.S.C 112(b) rejection above. Also, see MPEP 2112.01 as the claim limitation may also be considered a functional property of the leaf blower which the examiner presumes to be inherent based on the structure recited by the claimed to be substantially identical to the structure of Tang}.
Regarding claim 29, Tang further discloses:
wherein the first flow characteristic is volume of a first flow of air and the second flow characteristic is volume of a second flow of air {The discussion for the rejection of claim 28 above remains the same for when the first and second flow characteristics are the volume of the first flow of air and the second flow of air respectively. The multiple motors (1223) in Figure 12 are independent and one or more motors may be selected to run based on requirements can create different volumes of air flow; [0071]}.
Regarding claim 30, Tang further discloses:
wherein the first flow characteristic is speed of a first flow of air and the second flow characteristic is speed of a second flow of air {The discussion for the rejection of claim 28 above remains the same for when the first and second flow characteristics are the speed of the first flow of air and the second flow of air respectively. The multiple motors (1223) in Figure 12 are independent and one or more motors may be selected to run based on requirements can create different speeds of air flow; [0071]}.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 18, 19, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang et al. (U.S Pre-Grant Publication 20240209867) hereinafter Tang in view of Steinke (U.S Pre-Grant Publication 20220159917) hereinafter Steinke.
Regarding claim 18, Tang further discloses the leaf blower of claim 11, but is silent regarding:
an arm strap on an outer surface of the housing; and
a user interface on an outer surface of the housing;
wherein the arm strap is configured to receive an arm of a user to secure at least a portion of the housing of the leaf blower against the arm of the user and position the leaf blower below a forearm of the user, and
wherein the user interface is proximate to a hand of the user.
Steinke pertains to leaf blowers. Steinke teaches:
an arm strap on an outer surface of the housing {Figure 5 (520) is on the outer surface of the housing via (510)}; and
a user interface on an outer surface of the housing {Figure 5 (530) is a user interface on the outer surface of the housing which includes (540). The housing may be considered stationary structures/components of the leaf blower};
wherein the arm strap is configured to receive an arm of a user to secure at least a portion of the housing of the leaf blower against the arm of the user and position the leaf blower below a forearm of the user {Figure 5 depicts a user using the arm strap (520) to secure the housing below the arm and center of mass of the leaf blower below the forearm; it is noted the arm of the user can always be raised}, and
wherein the user interface is proximate to a hand of the user {Figure 5, (530) is in the user’s hand}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used an arm strap and user interface as taught by Steinke for the leaf blower of Tang. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so to decrease the fatigue of the user {Steinke [0061]}.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Tang and Steinke further teaches:
wherein the user interface has a vertical extending protrusion configured to be gripped by the hand of the user {Steinke Figure 5 (530) is a vertical extending protrusion gripped by the hand of the user}.
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Tang and Steinke further teaches:
further comprising a user interface configured to modify, based on user input received at the user interface, at least one of the first flow characteristic or the second flow characteristic {Tang Figure 1, the unlabeled trigger implicitly is the user interface that modifies the first or second flow characteristic which may be air volume, see MPEP 2112; [0032]/[0071]}.
Claims 20-22 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang et al. (U.S Pre-Grant Publication 20240209867) hereinafter Tang in view of Suzuki et al. (EP0765996) hereinafter Suzuki.
Regarding claim 20, Tang discloses the leaf blower of claim 11, but is silent regarding the rotation directions of the fans and is therefore silent regarding:
wherein the first fan system rotates in a first direction and the second fan system rotates in a second direction, wherein the first direction and the second direction are counter rotating.
Suzuki pertains to adjacent axial fans and is therefore reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor of controlling airflow in systems with 2 axial fans.
Suzuki teaches:
wherein the first fan system rotates in a first direction and the second fan system rotates in a second direction {Figure 1, see arrows, the first fan (5) rotates counterclockwise while the second fan rotates clockwise; [0015]},
wherein the first direction and the second direction are counter rotating {Figure 1, see arrows, the first fan (5) rotates counterclockwise while the second fan rotates clockwise; [0015]}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have had the fans of Tang be counterrotating as taught by Suzuki. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so as the fans of Tang are independently controlled {Tang [0071]} and the counterrotation of the adjacent axial fans can produced airflow that when combined has rotational components that offset to produce a straightened flow {Suzuki [0032]}.
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Tang and Suzuki further teaches:
wherein the first direction and the second direction operate together to direct a flow of debris downward toward the ground in a central region of the flow of air {Suzuki [0015]/[0032] and Figure 1 teaches the first and second direction are as claimed in claim 20. It is noted that the limitation of claim 21 is related to the airflow and its properties rather than a clear aspect of the physical apparatus. Therefore the limitation is a method of using the product of the air-moving device in a particular manner. The multiple independent motor structure of Tang allows the first and second fan blades to be operated such that first and second could have different flow characteristics that cause the direction of the flow of air to be controlled. Additionally see the 35 U.S.C 112(b) rejection above. Also, see MPEP 2112.01 as the claim limitation may also be considered a functional property of the leaf blower which the examiner presumes to be inherent based on the structure recited by the claimed to be substantially identical to the structure of Tang}.
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Tang and Suzuki further teaches:
wherein the first direction and the second direction operate together to direct a flow of debris upward away from the ground in a central region of the flow of air {Suzuki [0015]/[0032] and Figure 1 teaches the first and second direction are as claimed in claim 20. It is noted that the limitation of claim 21 is related to the airflow and its properties rather than a clear aspect of the physical apparatus. Therefore the limitation is a method of using the product of the air-moving device in a particular manner. The multiple independent motor structure of Tang allows the first and second fan blades to be operated such that first and second could have different flow characteristics that cause the direction of the flow of air to be controlled. Additionally see the 35 U.S.C 112(b) rejection above. Also, see MPEP 2112.01 as the claim limitation may also be considered a functional property of the leaf blower which the examiner presumes to be inherent based on the structure recited by the claimed to be substantially identical to the structure of Tang}.
Regarding claim 31, Tang discloses the leaf blower of claim 25, but does not disclose:
wherein the first flow characteristic is rotational direction of a first flow of air and the second flow characteristic is rotational direction of a second flow of air.
Suzuki pertains to adjacent axial fans and is therefore reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor of controlling airflow in systems with 2 axial fans.
Suzuki teaches:
a first flow characteristic is rotational direction of a first flow of air and a second flow characteristic is rotational direction of a second flow of air {Suzuki [0015]/[0032] and Figure 1 teaches the first and second fans rotate in the first and second direction respectively which results in different flow characteristics}.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a user control to adjust the fan rotation direction of at least one of the fans of Tang based on the teachings of Suzuki. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to do so as the fans of Tang are independently controlled {Tang [0071]} and the counterrotation of the adjacent axial fans can produced airflow that when combined has rotational components that offset to produce a straightened flow {Suzuki [0032]}
It is noted that the user interface configured to modify at least one of the first flow characteristic or second flow characteristic of claim 25 is still satisfied with the first and second flow characteristics being rotational direction as required by the limitation of claim 31. The unlabeled trigger of Suzuki implicitly is the user interface that modifies speed of the fans, see MPEP 2112; [0032]/[0071]. The speed of the fans change the rotational properties of the fan which are not perfectly along the axis of rotational due to the influence of other aspects such as the casings. Therefore, the speed of the fan will change the rotational directional of each of the first and second flows}.
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 MICHAEL K. REITZ whose telephone number is (571)272-1387. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 a.m. -5:30 p.m.
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, Courtney Heinle can be reached at 5712703508. 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.
/MICHAEL K. REITZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights