DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on October 1, 2025 has been entered.
Applicant has amended Claims 1, 13, and 14. Claims 1 – 3, 5, and 7 – 14 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered.
With regards to the 103 rejection of Claim 1 and its dependents, new grounds of rejection are presented below, necessitated by amendment, and incorporating the Yamamura reference, thereby rendering applicant’s arguments moot.
With regards to the 102 rejection of Claim 13, applicant’s arguments are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Hayama does not disclose the intermediate portions of the first and second exhaust assembly brought into contact with each other at a position of a center line extending a front-rear direction of the vehicle. Examiner respectfully disagrees. First, looking at applicant’s own disclosure (Figure 8 and Paragraph 64), it is clear that having the intermediate portions brought into contact with one another means that the heat shielding cover (42) of the first exhaust assembly and the heat shielding cover (46) of the second exhaust assembly are in contact with one another (see Paragraph 64 of instant spec). In other words, neither the exhaust pipe itself, nor the catalyst itself is brought into contact with its corresponding pipe or catalyst, respectively. Instead ancillary components (heat shields) of each exhaust assembly are brought together. Looking at Figures 5 and 6 of Hayama, a stay portion (313) comprises a first distinct stay portion (314) for the first intermediate portion of the first exhaust assembly and a second distinct stay portion (315) for the second intermediate portion of the second exhaust assembly. These first and second stay portions qualify as “heat shields” or some other ancillary component of each respective catalyst. Furthermore, these stay portions are brought in contact with one another by a screw (Col. 7, Line 22: “the first stay portion 314 is joined to the catalyst chamber 311 and the second stay portion 315 is joined to the catalyst chamber 321. The first stay portion 314 and the second stay portion 315 are fixed to each other by a screw and are thus integrated”). As such, the claim requirements are met. The previous 102 stands.
With regards to the 103 rejection of Claim 14, applicant’s arguments are persuasive and the prior art rejection is withdrawn. New 112 grounds of rejection are presented below.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55, which papers have been placed of record in the file. Claims 1 – 3, 5, and 7 – 14 are entitled to a priority date of September 28, 2023.
Title
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Examiner suggests amending to “Saddle-type vehicle with exhaust pipe catalyst arrangement”, or the like.
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 14 recites a portion of the exhaust pipe of the first exhaust assembly which is located on an upstream side than the first catalyst and a portion of the exhaust pipe of the second exhaust assembly which is located on a downstream side than the second catalyst are disposed across with each other at a position in a front-rear direction of the vehicle. This is grammatically incorrect. Examiner believes applicant the underlined words “than” should be corrected to “of”, and the underlined word “with” should be corrected to “from”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 – 3, 5, and 7 – 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites the second portion containing the second catalyst inside of the second portion. This is not commensurate with the instant disclosure and is not supported. Figures 4 and Paragraph 26 of the spec clearly teach the second catalyst being located in the third portion. For the purposes of examination, art will be applied under the interpretation that applicant intended for the catalyst to be located in the third portion. Examiner suggests amending accordingly.
Claims 2, 3, 5,and 7 – 12 are rejected by virtue of their dependence on Claim 1.
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.
Claims 3, 10, 12, 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 catalyst. The metes and bounds of the claim are unascertainable because Claim 1 requires first and second catalysts, and it is unclear which catalyst is being referred to. For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted as referring to both the first and second catalysts.
Claim 10 recites a flow passage axis line. The metes and bounds of the claim are unascertainable because Claim 1 already requires a flow passage axis line, and it is unclear whether the line recited in Claim 10 is a new line or refers to the same one recited in Claim 1. For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted as referring to the same flow passage axis line.
Claim 12 recites that at least one catalyst. The metes and bounds of the claim are unascertainable because Claim 1 requires first and second catalysts, and it is unclear which catalyst is being referred to. For purposes of examination, the claim will be interpreted as referring to both the first and second catalysts.
Claim 14 recites a portion of the exhaust pipe of the first exhaust assembly which is located on an upstream side than the first catalyst and a portion of the exhaust pipe of the second exhaust assembly which is located on a downstream side than the second catalyst are disposed across with each other at a position in a front-rear direction of the vehicle. The metes and bounds of the claim are unascertainable because it is unclear what applicant is claiming. Looking at Figure 9, an upstream side of catalyst (51) is pipe (49a) and a downstream side of catalyst (54) is pipe (52c). Pipe portions (49a) and (52c) are aligned in the front-rear direction, but they are not across from each other in the front-rear direction. They are also not across from each other in the left-right direction – such a relationship can be found by, or example, pipes (52c) and (49c). Thus, it is unclear what applicant is claiming because the language does not match up with either the drawings or the spec. Although no art rejection is given for Claim 14, allowability cannot be determined given the lack of clarity present.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 3 recites the intermediate portion of the exhaust pipe includes a portion in which the catalyst is filled, and a flow passage axis line of the portion extends along the left-right direction of the vehicle. The language of Claim 3 is not further limiting. Claim 1, upon which Claim 3 depends, already requires a catalyst in the intermediate portion and a flow passage thereof being in the left right direction.
Claim 5 recites the at least one catalyst includes: a first catalyst housed in the first portion of the intermediate portion; and a second catalyst housed in the third portion of the intermediate portion. The language of Claim 5 is not further limiting. Claim 1, upon which Claim 5 depends, already requires these exact features.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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, 5, 7, and 10 – 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamakura et al. (hereafter “Yamakura” – US 2007/0277517).
With regards to Claim 1:
Yamakura discloses a straddle-type vehicle (Figures 1 – 5) comprising:
a vehicle body frame (body frame 5, including frames 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16) including an engine mounting frame (main frame portion 15, Paragraph 30, Figure 2);
an internal combustion engine (engine 25) mounted on the engine mounting frame and having an intake port (intake ports 27a, 28a, Figure 2) and an exhaust port (exhaust ports 27b, 28b, Figure 2);
a swing arm (swing arm 20, Figure 3) extending rearward from the engine mounting frame and having a front end portion pivotally supported by a pivot shaft at a rear portion of the engine mounting frame (see Figure 3 and Paragraph 29: “A swing arm 20 is provided to support a rear wheel 19, while the front-end portion of the swing arm 20 is pivotally supported, as being capable of swinging up and down, by the right and the left pivot frames 12”);
a rear wheel (rear wheel 19) connected to a rear end portion of the swing arm (as shown in Figure 3); and
at least one exhaust assembly including an exhaust pipe (exhaust pipes 31, 32, Figure 2) connected to the exhaust port of the internal combustion engine, a muffler (muffler 38) connected to the exhaust pipe, and at least one catalyst (catalyst 54d) housed in an intermediate portion of the exhaust pipe on an upstream side of the muffler (see Figure 4, upstream portion 36 of exhaust assembly, and downstream portion 37 including muffler 38, with catalyst 54 located in a housing 35 at an intermediate portion), the at least one catalyst including a first catalyst and a second catalyst (see Figure 4 and Paragraph 53, two catalysts 54d shown, “A catalyst 54d for exhaust-gas purification is provided inside each of the first and the third communication pipes 54a and 54c”), wherein
the pivot shaft is disposed higher than a lower portion of the engine mounting frame (pivot shaft not explicitly labeled, but swing arm 20 is clearly shown in Figure 3 engaging with pivot frame 12 at a point higher than, for example, lower frame 13 of the body frame),
the catalyst is disposed in front of the rear wheel, behind the internal combustion engine, and below the swing arm (see Figure 3, catalyst housing 35 and inlet and outlet 51, 52 of the housing, are located in front of rear wheel 19, behind engine 25, and below swing arm 20),
the exhaust pipe further includes an upstream portion (upstream portion 36, see Figure 4) extending in a front-rear direction of the vehicle on an upstream side of the intermediate portion (see Figure 4) and a downstream portion (downstream portion 37,see Figure 4) extending in the front-rear direction of the vehicle on a downstream side of the intermediate portion,
the upstream portion and the downstream portion are disposed on one side in a left-right direction of the vehicle (see Figure 4, both 36 and 37 are located on one side of the vehicle), the intermediate portion of the exhaust pipe includes:
a first portion (pipe 56, leading to inlet 51 and first communication pipe 54a) connected to the upstream portion and extending from the upstream portion toward an other side in the left-right direction of the vehicle (as shown in Figure 4), the first portion containing the first catalyst inside of the first portion (54d located within communication pipe 54a, see Figure 4 and Paragraph 53);
a second portion curved from the first portion (portion of housing 35 where the exhaust reverses flow direction from one side of the vehicle back towards the other side, see Figure 4 and Paragraph 53); and
a third portion (communication pipe 54c leading to outlet 52 and pipe 57) extending from the second portion toward the one side in the left-right direction of the vehicle and connected to the downstream portion, the [third] portion containing the second catalyst inside of the second portion (catalyst 54d located in communication pipe 54c, see Figure 4 and Paragraph 53), and
a flow passage axis line of the first portion and a flow passage axis line of the third portion are disposed at different heights from each other (see Figures 2 and 3, inlet 51 and outlet 52 of the housing 35 are located at different heights).
With regards to Claim 2:
Yamakura disclose the intermediate portion is disposed at a position closer to a center line extending in the front-rear direction of the vehicle than at least one of the upstream portion and the downstream portion in the left-right direction of the vehicle (see Figure 4, catalysts 54d in housing 35 are closer to longitudinal center line of vehicle than upstream portion 36 or downstream portion 37 of the exhaust assembly).
With regards to Claim 3:
Yamakura discloses the intermediate portion of the exhaust pipe includes a portion in which the catalyst is filled (first and third portions of the intermediate portion as per Claim 1, corresponding to communication pipes 54a and 54c, both of which contain a catalyst 54d, see Paragraph 53), and a flow passage axis line of the portion extends along the left-right direction of the vehicle (both communication pipes 54a, 54c extend in a left-right direction, see Figure 4).
With regards to Claim 5:
Yamakura discloses the at least one catalyst includes: a first catalyst housed in the first portion of the intermediate portion (catalyst 54d housing in communication pipe 54a in housing 35, see Figure 4 and Paragraph 53); and a second catalyst housed in the third portion of the intermediate portion (catalyst 54d housing in communication pipe 54c in housing 35, see Figure 4 and Paragraph 53).
With regards to Claim 7:
Yamakura discloses the third portion is disposed higher than the first portion (see Figures 2 and 3, inlet 52 corresponding to communication pipe 54c and the recited third portion, is located higher than inlet 51 corresponding to communication pipe 54a and the recited first portion).
With regards to Claim 10:
Yamakura discloses the exhaust pipe includes a curved corner portion connecting the upstream portion to the intermediate portion (see Figure 4, portion 56 as it traverses towards housing inlet 51 is curved), and a flow passage cross-sectional area of the curved corner portion increases toward a downstream side in at least a part of the corner portion along a flow passage axis line (see transition of pipe portion 56 into housing inlet 51, traversing a protruding portion 51a, which is a “tapered shape like a funnel”, Paragraph 47, thereby increasing its cross-sectional area as it guides exhaust to the housing 35).
With regards to Claim 11:
Yamakura discloses a heat shielding cover covering the intermediate portion of the exhaust pipe (see Figures 4, 5, housing 35 which houses the catalysts 54d and communication pipes 54a, 54c acts as a heat shield) wherein the heat shielding cover is disposed to have a gap to the intermediate portion (see Figure 4, gap present between walls of housing 35 and communication pipes 54a, 54c).
With regards to Claim 12:
Yamakura discloses an oxygen sensor (oxygen sensor 59, see Figure 4 and Paragraph 61) disposed on an upstream side of the at least one catalyst (see location of sensor 59 upstream of catalyst 54d in exhaust portion 56), wherein the oxygen sensor is attached to the intermediate portion of the exhaust pipe (see Figure 4).
Claim 13 is are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hayama (US 9016422).
With regards to Claim 13:
Hayama discloses a straddle-type vehicle (Figures 1 – 5) comprising:
a vehicle body frame (vehicle body frame 3 includes a head pipe 5, main tubes 6, a center tube 7, down tubes 8, under tubes 9) including an engine mounting frame (Col. 5, Lines 42: “engine 29 is supported by the main tubes 6 and the center tube 7”);
an internal combustion engine (engine 29) mounted on the engine mounting frame and having an intake port (not shown/labeled but inherent in the system) and an exhaust port (unlabeled ports connecting to exhaust pipes 291, 292);
a swing arm (swing arm 36) extending rearward from the engine mounting frame (ass seen in Figure 3) and having a front end portion pivotally supported by a pivot shaft at a rear portion of the engine mounting frame (Col. 5, Lines 38 – 49);
a rear wheel (rear wheel 35) connected to a rear end portion of the swing arm; and
at least one exhaust assembly (exhaust assemblies 291, 292) including an exhaust pipe (pipes 291, 292, 295, 296, 297, 298, 316, 317) connected to the exhaust port of the internal combustion engine, a muffler (mufflers 33, 34) connected to the exhaust pipe, and at least one catalyst (catalyst devices 31, 32) housed in an intermediate portion of the exhaust pipe on an upstream side of the muffler (as shown in Figure 5), wherein
the pivot shaft is disposed higher than a lower portion of the engine mounting frame (see Figure 1, swing arm is connected to center tube 7, which is higher than, for example, down tubes 8),
the catalyst is disposed in front of the rear wheel (see Figure 2), behind the internal combustion engine (see Figure 2), and below the swing arm (see Figure 2),
the at least one exhaust assembly includes a first exhaust assembly (first side assembly 291, Figure 5) and a second exhaust assembly (second side assembly 292) disposed each on a left side and a right side of the vehicle, and
the intermediate portion of the exhaust pipe of the first exhaust assembly and the intermediate portion of the exhaust pipe of the second exhaust assembly are brought into contact with each other at a position of a center line extending a front-rear direction of the vehicle (looking at applicant’s own disclosure (Figure 8 and Paragraph 64), it is clear that having the intermediate portions brought into contact with one another means that the heat shielding cover (42) of the first exhaust assembly and the heat shielding cover (46) of the second exhaust assembly are in contact with one another (see Paragraph 64 of instant spec). In other words, neither the exhaust pipe itself, nor the catalyst itself is brought into contact with its corresponding pipe or catalyst, respectively. Instead ancillary components (heat shields) of each exhaust assembly are brought together. Looking at Figures 5 and 6 of Hayama, a stay portion (313) comprises a first distinct stay portion (314) for the first intermediate portion of the first exhaust assembly and a second distinct stay portion (315) for the second intermediate portion of the second exhaust assembly. These first and second stay portions qualify as “heat shields” or some other ancillary component of each respective catalyst. Furthermore, these stay portions are brought in contact with one another by a screw (Col. 7, Line 22: “the first stay portion 314 is joined to the catalyst chamber 311 and the second stay portion 315 is joined to the catalyst chamber 321. The first stay portion 314 and the second stay portion 315 are fixed to each other by a screw and are thus integrated”)..
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 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 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamakura et al. (hereafter “Yamakura” – US 2007/0277517) in view of Hayama et al. (hereafter “Hayama” – US 2016/0245147).
With regards to Claim 8:
Yamakura does not explicitly disclose a side cover covering the upstream portion and the downstream portion from the one side in the left-right direction across the upstream portion and the downstream portion, wherein the side cover covers a void between the first portion and the third portion from the one side in the left-right direction. Hayama (Figures 1 – 3) teaches an exhaust assembly (40, Figure 3) of a saddle-type vehicle (see Figure 1) including upstream (41), downstream (65), and intermediate (61, 43) portions. Hayama goes on to teach a side cover (under cowl 31 and protectors 34) covering the upstream portion and the downstream portion from the one side in the left-right direction across the upstream portion and the downstream portion (as shown in Figure 1), wherein the side cover covers the intermediate portion from the one side in the left-right direction (as shown in Figure 1). MPEP 2143A teaches it is obvious to combine prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable results. In this case, under cowls and protectors are known in the art to, much like their name-sake, protect the exhaust assembly from certain exterior damage and to protect users from the exhaust assembly. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Yamakura by adding a side cover covering the upstream, downstream, and intermediate portions of the exhaust assembly, including covering a void between the first and third portions of the intermediate portion, in order to yield the predictable benefits described above.
With regards to Claim 9:
The Yamakura modification of Claim 8 does not explicitly teach a step on which a foot of a rider is placed, wherein the step is disposed on the one side in the left-right direction with respect to the side cover, and is disposed vertically above the side cover in a side view of the vehicle. Hayama (Figures 1, 2) teaches a step (foot rests 46) on which a foot of a rider is placed (Paragraph 35), wherein the step is disposed on the one side in the left-right direction with respect to the side cover, and is disposed vertically above the side cover in a side view of the vehicle (see Paragraph 35: “Foot rests 46L, 46R on which an occupant places his feet are mounted on the pivot frame 18”, with pivot frame 18 being located above the protectors 34 as per Figure 1). MPEP 2143A teaches it is obvious to combine prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable results. In this case, foot rests are widely known in the art to facilitate placement of feet during riding of the vehicle. Given the teachings of Hayama, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Yamakura as modified in Claim 8 by adding foot rests above the protectors in order to yield the predictable benefits described above.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamakura et al. (hereafter “Yamakura” – US 2007/0277517) in view of Kurasawa (EP 3524501).
With regards to Claim 11:
Alternatively, Yamakura does not explicitly disclose a heat shielding cover covering the intermediate portion of the exhaust pipe wherein the heat shielding cover is disposed to have a gap to the intermediate portion. Kurasawa (Figure 11) teaches an exhaust assembly intermediate portion including a catalyst (140) and a heat shielding cover (heat insulation plate 150) covering the intermediate portion of the exhaust pipe wherein the heat shielding cover is disposed to have a gap to the intermediate portion (as shown in Figure 11). The heat shield prevents transmission of excessive heat to the catalyst (Paragraph 103). MPEP 2143A teaches it is obvious to combine prior art elements according to known methods in order to yield predictable results. In this case, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Yamakura by adding a heat shield covering the intermediate portion in order to yield the predictable benefits described above.
Inquiries
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAERT DOUNIS whose telephone number is (571)272-2146. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon. - Thurs: 10a - 4:30p.
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, MARK LAURENZI can be reached on (571) 270-7878. 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.
/Laert Dounis/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Thursday, February 26, 2026