DETAILED ACTION
This is a non-final Office Action in response to communications received on 10/08/2024. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority or Provisional
Priority to 10/10/2023 is recognized.
Drawings
The drawings filed on 10/08/2024 are acknowledged.
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 6-7 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 6 recites “ …. and the drainage pipe includes non-woven fabric …”, which lacks antecedent basis and therefore makes the claims indefinite. Claim 6 depends on Claim 1.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites “ ….a head part of the injection pipe installed on the internal partition wall and …”, which lacks antecedent basis and therefore makes the claims indefinite. Claim 7 depends on claims 6 and 1.
Appropriate correction 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.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Kim (KR 101433000) in view of Seeley (US 12,312,762).
Regarding claim 1, Kim and Seeley discloses the limitations of claim 1 as follows:
A prefabricated wire mesh assembly for a ballast, the assembly comprising: a lower mesh including a bottom mesh, which is a horizontal mesh to form a bottom portion of a box-shaped prefabricated wire mesh assembly for a ballast, and side-wall meshes, which are horizontal meshes to form side portions of the box-shaped prefabricated wire mesh assembly for a ballast on edges of the bottom mesh; and an injection pipe which is horizontally disposed on each of the side wall meshes and is erected and installed along with the side-wall meshes when the side-wall meshes are erected and installed, wherein the injection pipe installed on the side-wall meshes is installed before an internal space of the prefabricated wire mesh assembly for a ballast is filled with gravel particles to be installed in the gravel particles without insertion resistance. Kim, Paras. [0009]-[0012], [0021], [0032]-[0036], [0056], [0066]-[0067], and Figs. 3-6, discloses a prefabricated wire mesh assembly for a ballast. Specifically teaches a “gabion” which refers to a stall net filing stone inside a housing made of wire net. And discloses that a lower mesh including a bottom mesh to form a bottom portion of a box-shaped prefabricated wire mesh assembly. And it’s demonstrated by the unit gabion 100 including a sole plate 120 formed of a circular polygonal network 20. And further teaches side-wall meshes to form side portions of the box-shaped assembly, and describes a wall 110 formed into a polygonal shape by bending a reticulum or network 10 the sole plate 120 is coupled to the lower portion of the wall 110. Regarding the pipe limitations, Kim discloses a pipe installed on the side-wall meshes, and teaches a steel pipe 300 coupled to an inner surface of each corner of the wall 110. The pipe is installed before the internal space is filled with gravel particles to prevent insertion resistance. And shows a detailed step by step method comprising:
“….. Bending the net (10) to form a polygonal wall (110); Fixing the steel pipe (300) to the inner surface of the …………….. Placing the stone 200 in an inner space formed by the wall 110 and the base 120”. Since the pipe 300 is fixed to the wall 110, prior to placing the stone 200, then it would avoid the insertion resistance.
Kim does not explicitly disclose:
an injection pipe which is horizontally disposed on each of the side wall meshes and is erected and installed along with the side-wall meshes … .
However, Seeley, Col. 1, ll. 32-59, Col.2, ll. 1-8, Col. 3, ll. 45-67, teaches a method to inject grout into loose soil, rock, and inert debris fill. Once the grout is injected, it flows through the gravel until the entire mass becomes one solid formation. And further teaches that it is preferable to place the grouting piped in the fill as it is being deposited, rather than trying to drill them in after.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to utilize the pre-installed steel pipe of Kim as an injection pipe to deliver a solidifying material into the rock fill as taught by Seeley, to bypass the difficulties of drilling into or inserting pipes into loose rocks, in order to improve load resistance.
Regarding claim 2, Kim and Seeley disclose the limitations of claim 1. Kim and Seeley discloses:
The assembly of claim 1, wherein a drainage pipe is further disposed horizontally on the bottom mesh without interference with the injection pipe to guide rainwater introduced into a gravel ballast to be drained on an upper surface of a roadbed without directly infiltrating into the roadbed under the gravel ballast. Kim discloses the bottom mesh (sole plate 120) and the injection pipe (steel pipe 300) located in the corners, but it does not explicitly disclose adding a separate horizontal drainage pipe on the bottom mesh to guide rainwater away from the underlying roadbed.
However, Seeley, Col. 1, ll. 60-67, Col. 3, ll. 45-67, teaches laying pipes horizontally within a rock or debris fill. And further teaches that placing a perforated pipe horizontally at the bottom of a rock fill, surrounded by gravel and protective cloth, is a well-known prior art technique used for drainage. And specifically notes that these configurations are standard “subdrain systems known, as burrito drain, used for a water outlet”.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to utilize a horizontal drainage pipe, such as the standard subdrain system as discussed by Seeley, along the bottom mesh (sole plate 120) of Kim’s gabion assembly, to guide rainwater out of the rock fill, in order to prevent the roadbed from becoming saturated and destabilized.
Regarding claim 3, Kim and Seeley disclose the limitations of claim 1. Kim discloses:
The assembly of claim 1, further comprising an internal partition wall which is a vertical mesh having the same vertical height as the side-wall mesh, wherein a lower portion of the internal partition wall is connected with the bottom mesh, and side portions of the internal partition wall are connected with the side-wall meshes to partition the internal space. Kim discloses a gabion box assembly, and utilizing single shape-retraining wires 400 to span the internal space to prevent the walls from bulging ([0032], and Fig. 4).
Kim and Seeley do not explicitly disclose replacing the single wires with an internal partition wall made of vertical mesh that connects the bottom and side walls.
However, it is a well-known technique in the art to utilize internal partition walls (as diaphragms) within elongated wire mesh gabion baskets, sized to the same height as the side, and partition the gabion into multiple cells.
The same motivation to combine utilized in claim 1 is equally applicable in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 4, Kim and Seeley disclose the limitations of claim 1. Kim and Seeley discloses:
The assembly of claim 3, wherein the injection pipe is further pre-set vertically on the internal partition wall for the injection pipe to be inserted into the gravel particles and installed in the partitioned internal space without insertion resistance. Kim discloses installing the pipes in the outer corners of the box.
Seeley, Col. 4, ll. 16-24, explicitly teaches using multiple injection pipes and outlet locations throughout a large fill to ensure the solidifying material reaches all areas. And notes that the grouting system “needs to create numerous outlets to ensure that the grout reaches all points where it is needed to solidify the fill mass”, ( a plurality of discharge holes).
Kim and Seeley do not explicitly disclose tying an injection pipe directly to a vertical internal mesh wall within a gabion.
Once a person having ordinary skill in the art introduces the internal partition wall into the center of the wire mesh assembly (as discussed in the rejection of claim 3), it would have been obvious to preset an additional injection pipe vertically against the newly added internal partition wall to ensure the solidifying material is evenly distributed into the central zones of the fill, to reach all points of the fill mass, and bypassing the insertion resistance.
Regarding claim 5, Kim and Seeley disclose the limitations of claim 1. Kim and Seeley discloses:
The assembly of claim 4, wherein the internal partition wall controls movement of the gravel particles filling the internal space to prevent outflow of the gravel particles for a gravel-ballasted track to be constructed without forming a ballast shoulder of the prefabricated wire mesh assembly for a ballast. The combination as stablished in claims 3-4, provides the identical physical structure of a wire mesh box partitioned by a vertical mesh wall. Where a standard mesh partition wall (diaphragm) within a wire basket performs the function of controlling the movement of the fill material. By partitioning the space, the vertical mesh prevents the gravel particles from flowing out, moving between compartments, or the exterior walls. Please not that claim 5 describes an intended use of the claimed apparatus, and the modified Kim’s gabion assembly identically reinforced wire mesh box, partition wall, and the pipe structure, therefore, it is fully capable of being placed on a roadbed and filled with gravel to act as a railway track foundation. Therefore, because the modified prior art is structurally identical and capable of performing the recited function, the limitations of claim 5 do not render the assembly patentable.
The same motivation to combine utilized in claim 1 is equally applicable in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 6, Kim and Seeley disclose the limitations of claim 1. Kim and Seeley discloses:
The assembly of claim 1, wherein the injection pipe includes a pipe in which the discharge holes are formed, a filling material injected into the injection pipe is solidified by including the solidifying material filling gaps between the gravel particles through the discharge holes, and the drainage pipe includes non-woven fabric that covers a perforated pipe to filter a foreign material. Seeley, Col. 1, ll. 52-67, Col. 2, ll. 1-8, Col. 4, ll. 16-25, teaches that the grouting system “needs to create numerous outlets to ensure that the grout reaches all points” ( a plurality of discharge holes). And discloses “numerous ports in the distribution pipe”. And further teaches injecting grout (a solidifying material) into the voids of the large fill items, and explains that the grout “will flow out through the numerous ports …. Into the gravel where it can freely flow through the gravel … to all parts of the loosely placed fill, until the entire mass becomes one solid formation”. And teaches that wrapping a perforated pipe in a filtering/wrapping material is a standard configuration in the art. And explicitly acknowledge that a perforated section of pipe covered with a wrapping material is similar to “subdrain systems known as a “burrito drain” except they are used for a water outlet”.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to provide the injection pipe of the modified Kim assembly with discharge holes and to inject grout through them as taught by Seeley, to allow the material to freely flow into the gaps between the gravel, in order to bind the stones into solid mass.
Regarding claim 7, Kim and Seeley disclose the limitations of claim 1. Kim and Seeley discloses:
The assembly of claim 6, further comprising a top mesh which is a horizontal mesh installed so that a head part of the injection pipe installed on the internal partition wall and the lower mesh is exposed to an outside, wherein a sleeper and a rail are disposed on an upper surface of the top mesh for the prefabricated wire mesh assembly for a ballast to be used as a gravel ballast. Kim, Paras. [0009]-[0012], [0021], [0056], teaches the addition of a horizontal “top plate 130” formed of a network (mesh) that is coupled to the upper portion of the wall to close the unit gabion. And further teaches that the end of the steel pipe 300 is “exposed to the outside”.
Seeley also requires the head part of the injection pipe to be exposed to the outside, as grouting equipment must connect to the pipe to pump the material into the fill mass.
It is well known in the art that railway tracks comprise sleepers (cross-ties) and rails laid upon the upper surface of a stabilized gravel bed.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to provide the modified gabion assembly of Kim with the top plate (top mesh) while ensuring that the head of the injection pipe remains exposed, in order to securely contain the stone fill from the top, and prevent the gravel from escaping.
Claims 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Kim (KR 101433000) in view of Seeley (US 12,312,762), and further in view of Uzuka (US 3,878,987).
Regarding claim 8, Kim-Seeley and Uzuka disclose the limitations of claim 8 as follows:
A method of constructing a gravel-ballasted track using a prefabricated wire mesh assembly for a ballast, the method comprising: an operation (a) of manufacturing a lower mesh including a bottom mesh and a side-wall mesh and bringing the lower mesh to a site; Kim, Paras. [0009]-[0012], [0021], [0032]-[0036], [0056], [0066]-[0067], and Figs. 3-6, discloses a method of manufacturing a gabion comprising fabricating a rectangular net 10 and a sole plate 120.
an operation (b) of installing a drainage pipe on the bottom mesh and horizontally installing an injection pipe on the side-wall mesh, forming an internal space by erecting the injection pipe and the side-wall mesh, which are horizontally set, together, and assembling the lower mesh into a box shape with an open top; Kim, Paras. [0009]-[0012], [0021], [0032]-[0036], [0056], [0066]-[0067], and Figs. 3-6, teaches fixing a steel pipe 300 to an inner surface of the wall 110.
Seeley, Col. 1, ll. 52-67, teaches laying perforated pipes wrapped in cloth on a bed of gravel to act as a subdrain or “burrito drain” water outlet.
As stablished in the structural rejection, it would be an obvious modification to attach the Kim pipe 300 to the flat wire net prior to bending it. Therefore, erecting the pipe and the side-wall mesh together, to optimize efficiency.
an operation (c) of manufacturing a prefabricated wire mesh assembly for a ballast in a box shape with an open top by installing an internal partition wall, on which the injection pipe is installed, in the internal space and fixing the internal partition wall to the lower mesh to allow the internal partition wall to partition the internal space; As stablished in the structural rejection, it is well known to include internal vertical mesh partitions (diaphragms) to prevent gabion walls from bulging.
Seeley, Col. 1, ll. 52-67, Col. 4, ll. 16-25, further teaches providing numerous pipes and outlet points based on the volume of the zone to ensure proper grout distribution, making it obvious to secure an injection pipe to the internal partition wall.
an operation (e) of filling the partitioned internal space of the box-shaped prefabricated wire mesh assembly for a ballast with an open top, which is installed on the roadbed, with the gravel particles and injecting the filling material through the injection pipe so that the filling material fills gaps between the gravel particles and is solidified. Seeley, Col. 1, ll. 30-67, Col.2, ll. 1-8, Col. 4, ll. 16-25, explicitly teaches placing rock fill around pre-installed pipes and injecting grout (a solidifying filling material) through the pipes so that it freely flows through the gravel until “the entire mass becomes one solid formation”. And specifically teaches this order of operations to overcome the insertion resistance that occurs when attempting to drill pipes into loose rock formations.
Kim-Seeley do not explicitly disclose:
an operation (d) of installing the box-shaped prefabricated wire mesh assembly with an open top on a roadbed;
However, Uzuka, Abstract, Col. 3, ll. 17-55, Col. 4, ll. 24-32, related specifically to railway track and the method of modifying and stabilizing a railway ballast bed placed on a roadbed, teaches injecting a “quick-hardening injection material” into the track structure. and further states the purpose of the injected material is to fill adjacent voids in the ballast so that the ballast is “consolidated with said injection material, thereby increasing the ballast resistance”.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to apply the wire mesh gabion assembly and pre-installed pipe grouting method of Kim and Seeley to the construction of a gravel ballasted railway on a roadbed as taught by Uzuka, in order to improve the resistance of track deflection.
Regarding claim 9, Kim-Seeley and Uzuka disclose the limitations of claim 8. Kim-Seeley and Uzuka discloses:
The method of claim 8, wherein the bottom mesh in the operation (a) is a rectangular horizontal mesh to form a bottom portion of the box-shaped prefabricated wire mesh assembly for a ballast, and the side-wall meshes in the operation (a) are rectangular horizontal meshes to form side portions of the box-shaped prefabricated wire mesh assembly for a ballast and are formed on edges of the bottom mesh. Kim, Paras. [0009]-[0012], [0021], [0032]-[0038], and Figs. 3-6, explicitly teaches “manufacturing a rectangular reticulum 10” to form the mesh components. And further teaches that “the wall 110 may be formed in a rectangular shape”. Since Kim teaches a box shaped unit gabion by coupling a rectangular sole plate 120 to the lower portions of rectangular walls 110, the side-wall meshes are inherently formed on the edges of the bottom mesh to enclose the space. Shown in Figs. 3-6.
the same motivation to combine utilized in claim 8 is equally applicable in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 10, Kim-Seeley and Uzuka disclose the limitations of claim 8. Kim-Seeley and Uzuka disclose:
The method of claim 8, wherein the drainage pipe in the operation (b) allows rainwater and the like to be drained to the outside of the gravel ballast along an upper surface of the roadbed by filtering foreign materials by covering a perforated pipe with non-woven fabric and is horizontally disposed on the bottom mesh to prevent interference with the internal partition wall. Kim teaches the wire mesh assembly.
Seeley, Col. 1, ll. 30-67, Col.2, ll. 1-8, Col. 4, ll. 16-25, teaches the construction of the claimed drainage pipe. And acknowledges that it is a standard practice in the art to use a perforated section of pipe covered with a wrapping material which filters material, as a water outlet, and identifying this configuration as a standard “subdrain systems known as burrito drain”.
The combination further teaches, disposing this drainage pipe horizontally on the bottom mesh so that it avoids physical interference with the internal partition wall (introduced in step c of claim 8) which represents a routine design choice.
the same motivation to combine utilized in claim 8 is equally applicable in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 11, Kim-Seeley and Uzuka disclose the limitations of claim 8. Kim-Seeley and Uzuka discloses:
The method of claim 10, wherein the injection pipe in the operation (b) has a pipe shape with a plurality of discharge holes, is initially set horizontally on the side-wall mesh and then is vertically erected when the side-wall mesh is erected, and is installed before the internal space is filled with the gravel particles so that the injection pipe is installed without insertion resistance due to the gravel, and the side-wall mesh, on which the injection pipe is horizontally installed, is erected to form the internal space using the side-wall mesh around the bottom mesh so that the lower mesh is assembled into a box shape with an open top. Seeley, Col. 1, ll. 30-67, Col.2, ll. 1-8, Col. 4, ll. 16-25, teaches that the injection pipe requires numerous outlets or ports (a plurality of discharge holes) to ensure that the solidifying grout reaches all points of the fill mass. Regarding the folding mechanism, as established in the rejection of claim 1, modifying the manufacturing sequence of Kim to secure the injection pipe to the wire mesh before bending it (setting it horizontally and erecting it along with the side-wall mesh), represents an arrangement of known manufacturing steps.
the same motivation to combine utilized in claim 8 is equally applicable in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 12, Kim-Seeley and Uzuka disclose the limitations of claim 8. Kim-Seeley and Uzuka discloses:
The method of claim 8, wherein the roadbed in the operation (d) is in contact with the drainage pipe of the box-shaped prefabricated wire mesh assembly for a ballast with an open top, and the drainage pipe guides rainwater, which infiltrates into the gravel ballast from an upper surface of the roadbed, to be drained without water accumulation. The combination of Kim-Seeley and Uzuka teaches the installation of an open-top wire mesh assembly on a roadbed, with a drainage pipe disposed horizontally on the bottom mesh.
Seeley, Col. 1, ll. 30-67, Col.2, ll. 1-8, Col. 4, ll. 16-25, teaches the use of standard subdrain systems (burrito drains) to act as a “water outlet” for a fill mass.
Uzuka, Col. 1, Table 1, Col. 3, ll. 5-10, Col. 6, ll. 45-56, identifies rainwater penetration and accumulation as a primary cause of ballast sinking, mud pumping, and track settling. And further teaches draining rainwater from the ballast to prevent it from invading the roadbed.
The same motivation to combine utilized in claim 8 is equally applicable in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 13, Kim-Seeley and Uzuka disclose the limitations of claim 8. Kim-Seeley and Uzuka discloses:
The method of claim 8, wherein the gravel particles in the operation (e) include washed gravel and crushed stones, and fill the partitioned internal space of the box-shaped prefabricated wire mesh assembly for a ballast with an open top installed on the roadbed to allow the side-wall mesh of the lower mesh and the internal partition wall , on which the injection pipe is installed, to control movement of the gravel to prevent outflow of the gravel so that the gravel-ballasted track is constructed without forming a separate ballast shoulder . Seeley, Col. 1, ll. 30-67, Col.2, ll. 1-8, Col. 3, ll. 1-10, teaches utilizing gravel as the fill material.
Uzuka, Col. 1, Table 1, Col. 4, ll. 22-30, Col. 6, ll. 3-23, teaches utilizing crushed stones for the railway ballast.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to utilize a standard mixture of washed gravel and crushed stones to fill the modified Kim assembly, to provide optimal drainage and load-bearing properties, as taught by Uzuka.
Regarding the functional language of controlling movement and preventing outflow, it describes the inherent function of the prior art apparatus. A gabion of Kim is a wire mesh box designed specifically to enclose stone filler. When the internal space is filled with gravel, the side-wall meshes and the partition walls act as barriers that control the movement of the particles and prevent their outward flow.
Further, since the modified Kim wire mesh assembly is a self-contained, shape box that locks the ballast inside, therefore, constructing the track without a separate ballast shoulder is an expected result of utilizing the modified Kim gabion for the railway track bed as taught by Uzuka.
The same motivation to combine utilized in claim 8 is equally applicable in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 14, Kim-Seeley and Uzuka disclose the limitations of claim 8. Kim-Seeley and Uzuka discloses:
The method of claim 8, further comprising an operation (f) of installing a top mesh on an upper surface of the internal partition wall and the side-wall mesh so that a head part of the injection pipe is exposed, and constructing sleepers and rails on an upper surface of the top mesh for completion, wherein the top mesh, which is a horizontal mesh corresponding to the bottom mesh of the lower mesh, is a horizontal mesh installed so that the head part of the injection pipe is exposed to an outside because the internal space is filled with the gravel particles, and the sleepers and the rails are disposed on an upper surface of the top mesh so that the prefabricated wire mesh assembly for a ballast is used as a gravel ballast. Kim, Paras. [0009]-[0012], [0021], [0032]-[0038], and Figs. 3-6, explicitly teaches the addition of a horizontal top plate 130 formed of a network (mesh) that is coupled to the upper portion of the wall to close the unit gabion. And further teaches that the end of the steel pipe 300 is exposed to the outside.
Seeley also requires the head part of the injection pipe to be exposed to the outside, as grouting equipment must connect to the pipe to pump the material into the fill mass.
Regarding the railway construction steps, Uzuka, Col. 1, Table 1, Col. 4, ll. 22-55, Col. 6, ll. 3-23, Col. 7, ll. 1-10, teaches the method of constructing a railway track by installing sleepers (cross-ties) and rails on top of a prepared, ballast foundations. And shows that “rails 1 are laid over these two rows of large panel sleepers”, and “thereafter, rails 1 are fastened with rail fastening devices 7 …. to the large panel sleepers” after the ballast has been prepared and consolidated.
The same motivation to combine utilized in claim 8 is equally applicable in the instant claim.
References Considered But Not Relied Upon
Rajaram (US 2003/0052182) teaches a rail track structure for securing railway rails on a ballast track or a solid track includes a standard sleeper used on the ballast track.
Theurer (US 5,566,619) teaches a subgrade supporting a ballast bed for a track is rehabilitated by lifting the track off the ballast bed, removing an upper, portion of the ballast from the ballast bed, comminuting the removed ballast to obtain gravel, storing the gravel, and laying the track on a remaining portion of the ballast bed.
Conclusion
Accordingly, claims 1-14 are rejected.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PEGAH BARZEGAR whose telephone number is (703)756-4755.
The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:00 - 5:00. Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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, Samuel Morano can be reached on 571-272-6684. 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/patentcenter 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.
/P.B./Examiner, Art Unit 3615
/S. Joseph Morano/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3615
Prosecution Insights