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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1- 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-19 of U.S. Patent No.12,140,608. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-19 of instant application are generic to all that is recited in claims 1-10 of U.S. Patent No. 12,140,608. That is, claims 1-19 of Patent No. 12,140,608 falls entirely within the scope of claims 1-19 of instant application or, in other words, claims 1-19 of instant application are anticipated by claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 12,140,608.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, 10-13, 17-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IDS provided: Lee et al. Newly Proposed Hybrid Type Mutli-DOF Operation Motor for Multi-Copter UAV Systems, 2015 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition, IEEE Xplore, pages 2782-2790 (hereinafter referred to as Lee) in view of Dooley US 2010/0019707 A1 in view of Talov et al. RU 2331152 C1 (hereinafter referred to as Talov).
Regarding claim 1, Lee a system comprising: an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) (abstract); at least one sensorless motor of the UAV (UAV System, pg. 2787, col. 1, par. 2), the at least one sensorless motor (voice coil actuator that was modified included the design of inductance linearly to operate sensorless motor, pg. 2786, col. 2), comprising a set of windings and a rotor (fig. 13, voice coil actuator of hybrid type multi-DOF operation motor, pg. 2788, col. 2, last par.); at least one propeller connected to the at least one sensorless motor (fig. 15, pg. 2788, col. 2, par. 3- pg.2789, col. 1, par. 1).
Lee does not disclose a microcontroller in communication with the at least one sensorless motor, wherein the microcontroller is configured to: determine a rotation rate of the at least one propeller; determine a rotation direction of the at least one propeller; and provide an output to stop the at least one propeller if at least one of: if the determined rotation rate is not a desired rotation rate
and if and the determined rotation direction is not a desired rotation direction; wherein the output to stop the at least one propeller further comprises energizing the at least one sensorless motor with current at a same frequency as a measured frequency of a back electromotive force (EMF).
Dooley discloses a microcontroller (a microprocessor or embedded control system running a software program, par. [0056]) in communication with the at least one sensorless motor (sensorless motor driving system for starting a motor driven by a sensorless controller, par. [0007]),
wherein the microcontroller is configured to:
determine a rotation rate (rotation of a rotor, par. [0019], [0051]), (clm. 3) of the at least one propeller;
determine a rotation direction (clm. 3) of the at least one propeller; and
provide an output to stop the at least one propeller if at least
one of: if the determined rotation rate is not a desired rotation rate (If the direction of rotation is incorrect, however, then the ramp-up frequency may be started at zero frequency instead, as described above, to stop the rotor rotation and position, par. [0054])
and if and the determined rotation direction is not a desired rotation direction (If the direction of rotation is incorrect, however, then the ramp-up frequency may be started at zero frequency instead, as described above, to stop the rotor rotation and position, par. [0053]);
Lee and Dooley serve as evidence of the level of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. Note that the prior art includes each element substantially as claimed, and that in combination, each element performs the same function as it does separately, and that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the combination as a predictable result. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Lee in view of Dooley to provide a sensorless motor driving system for starting a motor driven by a sensorless controller, the sensorless motor driver for starting the motor according to a start attempt and for driving the motor according to a sensorless operating mode once the motor is started. The motivation would be allows rotation the of the rotor in the correct direction even if the rotor rotation is not synchronized with the drive signal frequency. Ensures that the rotor will rotate initially in the correct direction, thus avoiding the possibility of the reverse direction ramp up.
Talov discloses wherein the output to stop the at least one propeller (frequency braking of an AC motor, Description) further comprises energizing the at least one sensorless motor (fig.1, elm. 5, Description) with current at a same frequency as a measured frequency of a back electromotive force (EMF) (a motor EMF control signal supplied to its second input from the regulator EMF, depending on the specific current value of the motor EMF, the proposed device provides (at any time) the current value of the frequency of the stator field of the engine matches the current value motor emf in all modes of operation, Description, 2nd to last par.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention device for controlling a frequency-controlled electric drive, relationship between the current values of the EMF and the stator field frequency of the asynchronous AC motor in all modes as taught in Talov in modifying the apparatus of Lee and Dooley, in order to of ensure current stator field frequency value compliance with current motor EMF value at any time and in all modes of operation but depending on specific current motor EMF value (see Talov: abs.).
Regarding claim 2, Lee, Dooley and Talov discloses the system of claim 1, Dooley further system of claim 1, wherein the microcontroller is further configured to: provide an output to start the at least one propeller if the at least one propeller is stopped at the desired rotation rate and the desired rotation direction (fig. 3, If the direction of rotation was determined to be correct, the first frequency selected for the ramp-up frequency may be equal to the frequency detected from the phases if the direction of rotation was correct, step. 50, par. [0054]-[0055]).
The references are combined for the same reason already applied in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 3, Lee, Dooley and Talov discloses the system of claim 1, Dooley wherein the determined rotation rate is based on the measured frequency of the back-EMF generated by the at least one sensorless motor (fig. 3, par. [0053]-[0055]).
The references are combined for the same reason already applied in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 4, Lee, Dooley and Talov: discloses the system of claim 1, Lee does not disclose wherein the measured frequency of the back-EMF is measured before the at least one sensorless motor is turned on.
Dooley discloses wherein the measured frequency of the back-EMF is measured before the at least one sensorless motor is turned on (If the rotor is rotating in the correct direction (e.g. a correlated three phase generated EMF or other affirmative feedback is detected), the system may be switched to the run mode. par. [0057]).
The references are combined for the same reason already applied in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 6, Lee, Dooley and Talov discloses the system of claim 1, Dooley discloses the microcontroller is further configured to: provide an output to continue rotation of the at least one propeller if the determined rotation rate is at the desired rotation rate and the determined rotation direction is at the desired rotation direction (If the rotor is already rotating, as mentioned the generated voltages from the phases may be used to determine the state of the rotor and its direction of rotation prior to applying the ramp up. If the direction of rotation was determined to be correct, the first frequency selected for the ramp-up frequency may be equal to the frequency detected from the phases if the direction of rotation was correct, par. [0054]).
The references are combined for the same reason already applied in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 7, Lee, Dooley and Talov discloses the system of claim 1, Lee further discloses comprising: a wing panel of the UAV (fig. 1, actuator multi-copter system needed for the multi-degree of freedom drive corresponds to the hybrid type multi-DOG operation motor target system, pg. 2782, col. 1, par. 3), wherein the at least one sensorless motor (hybrid type multi-DOG operation motor) is attached to the wing panel; and at least one landing pod (see fig. 1), wherein the wing panel is supported by the at least one landing pod.
Regarding claim 10, Dooley discloses a method comprising: determining, by a microcontroller in communication with at least one sensorless motor (a sensorless motor driving system for starting a motor driven by a sensorless controller, par. [0007], a microprocessor or embedded control system running a software program, par. [0056]), a rotation rate of the at least one motor (rotation of a rotor, par. [0019], [0051]), (clm. 3); determining, by the microcontroller (a microprocessor or embedded control system running a software program, par. [0056]), a rotation direction of the at least one motor (clm. 3); providing, by the microcontroller, an output to start the at least one motor if the at least one motor is stopped at the desired rotation rate and the desired rotation direction (starting frequency ramp-up may commence at zero frequency, say if the rotor is stop of rotating in an undesirable way, or a frequency other than zero if the rotor is already rotating in a desirable manner. The step 50 may therefore comprise the step of determining an initial rotation state of the rotor, par. 0055]).
Dooley does not disclose at least one sensorless motor connected to at least one propeller; wherein the output comprises energizing the at least one sensorless motor with AC power matched in frequency to the measured rotation rate.
However Lee discloses at least one sensorless motor (voice coil actuator that was modified included the design of inductance linearly to operate sensorless motor, pg. 2786, col. 2) connected to at least one propeller (fig. 1, multi-degree of freedom operation motor in the multi-copter system, abstract)(fig. 15, BLDC motor for rotating operation, external frame of the H-MDOF operation motor, and the shaft is connected to the tilting operation motor through bearing. BLDC motor is an outer rotor type, and it has a stator structure including coil on the inside. one end of the shaft is attached directly with multi-copter propeller for direct drive, pg. 2788, col. 2, par. 3- pg.2789, col. 1, par. 1).
Dooley and Lee serve as evidence of the level of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. Note that the prior art includes each element substantially as claimed, and that in combination, each element performs the same function as it does separately, and that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the combination as a predictable result. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Dooley in view of Lee for the purpose of applying the multi-degree operation motor in UAV systems.
Talov discloses wherein the output comprises energizing the at least one sensorless motor frequency braking of an AC motor, Description) with AC power matched in frequency to the measured rotation rate(a motor EMF control signal supplied to its second input from the regulator EMF, depending on the specific current value of the motor EMF, the proposed device provides (at any time) the current value of the frequency of the stator field of the engine matches the current value motor emf in all modes of operation, Description, 2nd to last par.)..
The references are combined for the same reason already applied in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 11, Dooley, Lee and Talov discloses the method of claim 10, Dooley discloses further comprising: providing, by the microcontroller, an output to continue rotation of the at least one propeller if the determined rotation rate is not the desired rotation rate (if the direction of rotation is incorrect, however, then the ramp-up frequency may be started at zero frequency instead, as described above, to stop the rotor rotation and position, par. [0054]). and the determined rotation direction is at the desired rotation direction (If the direction of rotation is incorrect, however, then the ramp-up frequency may be started at zero frequency instead, as described above, to stop the rotor rotation and position, par. [0053]).
Regarding claim 12, Dooley, Lee and Talov discloses the method of claim 10, Dooley discloses providing, by the microcontroller (a microprocessor or embedded control system running a software program, par. [0056]), an output to continue rotation of the at least one propeller if the determined rotation rate is at the desired rotation rate and the determined rotation direction is at the desired rotation direction (If the rotor is already rotating, as mentioned the generated voltages from the phases may be used to determine the state of the rotor and its direction of rotation prior to applying the ramp up. If the direction of rotation was determined to be correct, the first frequency selected for the ramp-up frequency may be equal to the frequency detected from the phases if the direction of rotation was correct, par. [0054]).
Regarding claim 13, Dooley, Lee and Talov discloses the method of claim 10, Dooley discloses wherein the determined rotation rate (clm. 3) is based on a measured frequency of a back electromotive force (EMF) generated by at least one sensorless motor (the driving system 10 also has a generated electromotive force (generated-EMF) detector 16, par. [0015]) (detector can be an electromotive force (EMF) detector which produces a voltage according to an absence or a presence of an EMF as produced by a rotation of a motor. The detector 16 can also have an EMF detector circuit for detecting EMF signals generated from the rotation of the rotor, par. [0019]).
Regarding claim 17, Dooley, Lee and Talov discloses the method of claim 13, Dooley further discloses wherein providing the output further comprises: adjusting, by the microcontroller, the rotation rate of the at least one sensorless motor to the desired rotation rate if the measured rotation direction is the desired rotation direction (the encoder 30 encodes the binary signal such that the encoder output provides a six step drive pattern, suited to drive each of the switches of the 3 phase bridge driver circuit, start signal frequency delivered to the input of the binary counter increases (or ramps up) in frequency according to the rate of change of speed desired for the motor, par. [0034]).
Regarding claim 18, Dooley, Lee and Talov discloses the method of claim 13, Dooley further discloses wherein the measured rotation rate is based on a measured frequency of a back electromotive force (EMF) generated by the at least one sensorless motor (driving system 10 also has a generated electromotive force (generated-EMF) detector 16, par. [0015] ) detector 16 can be any type of detector which detects a rotation of a rotor of the motor 12. Such a detector can be an electromotive force (EMF) detector which produces a voltage according to an absence or a presence of an EMF as produced by a rotation of a motor. The detector 16 can also have an EMF detector circuit for detecting EMF signals generated from the rotation of the rotor (known as generated-EMF) at zero voltage-crossings, par. [0019], clm. 3.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Dooley in view of Talov as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mullin et al. US 5,811,946 A hereinafter referred to as Mullin).
Regarding claim 5, Lee, Dooley and Talov discloses the system of claim 1, Lee, Dooley and Talov do not disclose wherein the measured frequency of the back-EMF is proportional to the rotation rate of the at least one propeller.
However Mullin discloses the measured frequency of the back-EMF (col. 1, ln. 9-11) is proportional to the rotation rate of the at least one propeller (col. 5, ln. 43-50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a system and method for controlling, in real time, the velocity of a D.C. motor which includes an adjustable voltage source, timing and control circuitry for periodically inhibiting the adjustable voltage source from applying voltage to the motor, as taught in Mullin in modifying the system of Lee, Dooley and Talov. The motivation would be to provide a velocity feedback control system which operates accurately and efficiently in real time using direct measurement of the back EMF.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Dooley in view of Talov as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of OAKLEY et al. US 2015/0232181 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Oakley).
Regarding claim 8, Lee, Dooley and Talov discloses the system of claim 1, Lee, Dooley and Talov do not disclose the wherein the UAV is a high altitude long endurance aircraft. However Oakley discloses the UAV is a high altitude long endurance aircraft (par. [0052]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a high performance platform for high or low altitude surveillance, with a payload such as camera systems for photographic missions, as taught in Oakley in modifying the system of Lee, Dooley and Talov. The motivation would be reliable to achieve a maximum flight time with a minimum of down time.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Dooley in view of Talov as applied to claim above, and further in view of Marson et al. EP 2104222 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Marson).
Regarding claim 9, Lee, Dooley and Talov discloses the system of claim 1, Lee, Dooley and Talov do not disclose the wherein the at least one sensorless motor is a brushless AC motor. However Marson the at least one sensorless motor is a brushless AC motor (par. [0001]-[0002]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a method and device for controlling a brushless AC motor by regulating angle and/or regulating voltage modulus are varied as the function of the compensation angle and/or voltage respectively, as taught in Marson in modifying the system of Lee, Dooley and Talov. The motivation would be to maintain quadrature of the rotor flux and stator current alongside fluctuations in a load, and hence ensure fast and effective response to load-induced variations in torque.
Claim(s) 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dooley in view of Lee in view of Talov as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Zhang et al. WO 2019119877A1 with equivalent English translation provided by Zhang et al. US 2020/0317325 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Zhang).
Regarding claim 20, Dooley, Lee and Talov discloses the method of claim 13, Dooley, Lee and Talov do not disclose wherein the rotation direction is at least one of: clockwise and counterclockwise.
However Zhang discloses the rotation direction is at least one of: clockwise and counterclockwise (the rotating direction of the driving device 200: clockwise or counterclockwise, par. [0082]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a folding propeller mounted on the driving device by the hub, and a rotating shaft of the driving device is assembled to a center hole of the hub, its rotating shaft can drive the folding propeller to rotate along a specific direction, as taught in Zhang in modifying the method of Dooley, Lee and Bankestrom. The motivation would be providing movement power for a movable object using the power component wherein the driving device may be any device capable of driving the folding propeller to rotate.
Claim(s) 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dooley in view of Lee in view of Bankestrom US 2014/0324236 A1 in view of Yaskawa et al. WO 2004/006424 A1 (hereinafter referred to as Yaskawa).
Regarding claim 14, Dooley discloses a method comprising: measuring, by a microcontroller in communication with at least one sensorless motor (a sensorless motor driving system for starting a motor driven by a sensorless controller, par. [0007], a microprocessor or embedded control system running a software program, par. [0056]) connected to at least one propeller, a rotation rate (clm. 3) of the at least one propeller; measuring, by the microcontroller, a rotation direction of the at least one propeller; determining, by the microcontroller, if the measured rotation direction is a desired rotation direction (If the rotor is already rotating, as mentioned the generated voltages from the phases may be used to determine the state of the rotor and its direction of rotation prior to applying the ramp up. If the direction of rotation was determined to be correct par. [0054]); and providing, by the microcontroller, an output to the at least one sensorless motor to bring the sensorless motor to a desired rotation rate (par. [0054]) and the desired rotation direction (If the rotor is already rotating, as mentioned the generated voltages from the phases may be used to determine the state of the rotor and its direction of rotation prior to applying the ramp up. If the direction of rotation was determined to be correct par. [0054]).
Dooley does not disclose at least one sensorless motor connected to at least one propeller determining and, by the microcontroller, if the measured rotation rate is above a predetermined threshold, wherein the output comprises energizing the at least one sensorless motor with AC power matched in frequency to the measured rotation rate.
However Lee discloses at least one sensorless motor connected to at least one propeller (fig. 13, the voice coil actuator of hybrid type multi-DOF operation motor, (a) shows a part of the frame using BLDC actuator; (b) shows the whole frame using BLDC actuator; and (c) shows the whole frame using torque actuator. Figure 15 is the BLDC motor for rotating operation, external frame of the H-MDOF operation motor, and the shaft is connected to the tilting operation motor through bearing. BLDC motor is an outer rotor type, and it has a stator structure including coil on the inside. Also, one end of the shaft is attached directly with multi-copter propeller for direct drive, pg. 2877, col. 2, par. 3- pg. 2878, col. 1, par. 1).
Bankestrom discloses determining and, by the microcontroller, if the measured rotation rate is above a predetermined threshold (par. [0001] providing an indication of an alarm if the relevance level is above a predetermined threshold, par. [0022]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a measurement device arranged at a location in proximity of a main bearing for determining a measurement indicative of a current flow at the location. A control unit connected to the device forms a parameter based on the measurement. The control unit matches the parameter with predetermined current flow profiles each indicating a condition of a rotating system, and determines a relevance level for a corresponding condition if a matching current flow profile is found. The control unit provides an indication of an alarm if the relevance level is above a preset threshold, as taught in Bankestrom in modifying the method of Dooley and Lee. The motivation would be to ensures monitoring and fault prediction in relation to a rotating system, thus resulting in increased efficiency of the rotating system while enabling more efficient, durable, and fail-safe monitoring and fault prediction.
Yaskawa discloses wherein the output comprises energizing the at least one sensorless motor (fig. 1, elm. 2) with AC power matched in frequency to the measured rotation rate (frequency corresponding to the rotation direction and the speed are set in a frequency adjustment circuit and started, and the output frequency is made to match the speed of the AC motor, clm. 1, 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to providing alternating current sensorless vector control device, as taught in Yaskawa in modifying the apparatus of Dooley, Lee and Bankestrom. The motivation would be to enable smooth restart of AC generator in a free run state (see Yaskawa: Descrip.).
Regarding claim 15, Dooley, Lee and Bankestrom discloses the method of claim 14, Dooley further discloses wherein the rotation rate of the at least one propeller is measured while the at least one sensorless motor is unpowered, and wherein the rotation direction of the at least one propeller is measured while the at least one sensorless motor is unpowered (par. [0053]-[0054]).
Regarding claim 16, Dooley, Lee and Bankestrom discloses the method of claim 14, Dooley further discloses wherein providing the output further comprises: stopping, by the microcontroller, a rotation of the at least one sensorless motor if the measured rotation direction is not the desired rotation direction (par. [0054]); starting, by the microcontroller, the rotation of the at least one sensorless motor in the desired rotation direction (par. [0055]); and increasing, by the microcontroller, the rotation rate of the at least one sensorless motor to the desired rotation rate (par. [0023]).
Claim(s) 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dooley in view of Lee in view of Talov as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Bankestrom.
Regarding claim 19, Dooley, Lee and Talov discloses the method of claim 13, Dooley, Lee do not disclose wherein the measured rotation rate below the predetermined threshold allows for safe operation of the at least one sensorless motor.
However Bankestrom discloses the measured rotation rate below the predetermined threshold allows for safe operation of the at least one sensorless motor (par. [0022]).
The references are combined for the same reason already applied in the rejection of claim 14.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COURTNEY G MCDONNOUGH whose telephone number is (571)272-6552. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 pm.
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, EMAN ALKAFAWI can be reached at (571) 272-4448. 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.
/COURTNEY G MCDONNOUGH/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/EMAN A ALKAFAWI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858
6/5/2026
Prosecution Insights