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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species 1 (Fig 3A) and Species 4 (Fig 4) in the reply filed on 8/21/26 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 564, 512, 514 are not shown in Fig 5. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 231 in Fig 2. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in GB on 2023-11-13. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the 2317341.2 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claim 2-6, 9-11, 14 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. “the gas turbine engine combustor” is indefinite – it is unclear if it refers to the core combustor or the auxiliary combustor.
Claim 8 is 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. “the heat exchanger is provided … in auxiliary combustor exhaust gas flow and main conduit hydrogen flow” is indefinite because it is unclear how a heat exchanger is provided “in” two flows. Flows are conventionally provided within a heat exchanger, not the other way around.
Claim 10 is 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. “the first passage” and “the second passage” lacks antecedent basis.
Claim 15-19 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. It is unclear what is meant by “diverting a portion of hydrogen fuel flow … in hydrogen fuel flow”.
Claim 19 is 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 19 is an apparatus dependent upon a method. It is unclear what structure is imparted by the dependency. Furthermore, “the fuel system in accordance with claim 15” is indefinite because claim 15 is drawn to a method, not a fuel system.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2023/0258148 (Ledwith).
Regarding claim 1-3, 14, Ledwith teaches a fuel system for a hydrogen-fuelled gas turbine engine (Fig 1, para 38-43) comprising: a main fuel conduit configured to conduct hydrogen fuel from a hydrogen storage unit to a core combustor of the gas turbine engine (hydrogen storage unit 58, core combustor 30; para 48); a pre-heater comprising an auxiliary combustor configured to combust hydrogen fuel diverted from the main fuel conduit to heat hydrogen fuel in the main fuel conduit (para 54; auxiliary combustor 70b; main fuel conduit from the hydrogen storage unit 58 diverts hydrogen to the auxiliary combustor to heat hydrogen fuel that was in the main fuel conduit; furthermore, “to heat hydrogen fuel …” is a statement of intended use, and does not differentiate the claimed structure from the prior art); and a first exhaust passage configured to conduct combustion products from the auxiliary combustor to the core combustor of the gas turbine engine (Fig 1; para 54-59; first passage between 70B/74B and 30), the gas turbine engine combustor comprises at least one fuel injector configured to provide hydrogen fuel to the core combustor (para 53; injector 92, 94), the or each fuel injector comprise a feed-arm configured to provide fuel to a fuel spray nozzle of the injector (“one or more spray bars 94 arranged about the axial centerline 36 and disposed within (e.g., projecting into) the combustion chamber 90 of the combustor 30”; spray nozzle construed as the injection point of the fuel in the combustion chamber), a gas turbine engine comprising a fuel system in accordance with any of the preceding claims (para 41-43).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 4-11, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2023/0258148 (Ledwith) in view of US 2002/0197574 (Jones).
Regarding claim 4-11, 13, Ledwith fails to teach the feed-arm comprises a first passage configured to conduct hydrogen fuel to the fuel spray nozzle, and a second passage configured to conduct auxiliary combustor exhaust gases to the fuel spray nozzle, the first passage is in thermal communication with the second passage, such that heat from the auxiliary combustor exhaust gases is transmitted to the fuel within the first passage, the first and second passages are coaxial, with the first passage being provided within the second passage, wherein the fuel system comprises a heat exchanger configured to exchange heat between hydrogen fuel in the main fuel conduit, and auxiliary combustor exhaust gases, wherein the heat exchanger is provided upstream of the main gas turbine engine combustor in auxiliary combustor exhaust gas flow and main conduit hydrogen flow, the or each injector comprises a plurality of spray nozzles, the or each injector comprises a first set of spray nozzles in fluid communication with the first passage, and a second set of spray nozzles in fluid communication with the second passage, the second set of spray nozzles is provided at least part annularly around the first set of spray nozzles, the fuel system comprises an exhaust valve configured to control exhaust flow through the first exhaust passage. However, Jones teaches a fuel system comprising a feed-arm (Fig 1; feed arm comprising housing 14 and the components inside it) comprising a first passage configured to conduct hydrogen fuel to the fuel spray nozzle (52, 54), and a second passage configured to conduct auxiliary combustor exhaust gases to the fuel spray nozzle (second passage 56 receives combustor exhaust gases/flue gases from 32; para 18 – flue gases may be from “another source” – e.g. from the auxiliary combustor), the first passage is in thermal communication with the second passage, such that heat from the auxiliary combustor exhaust gases is transmitted to the fuel within the first passage (second passage directly surrounds the first passage; therefore heat is transferred from 52 to the surrounding fluid), the first and second passages are coaxial, with the first passage being provided within the second passage (see fig 1-2), wherein the fuel system comprises a heat exchanger configured to exchange heat between hydrogen fuel in the main fuel conduit, and auxiliary combustor exhaust gases, wherein the heat exchanger is provided upstream of the main gas turbine engine combustor in auxiliary combustor exhaust gas flow and main conduit hydrogen flow (the arrangement of the passages 56 and 52 is a heat exchanger - second passage 56 directly surrounds the first passage 52; therefore heat is transferred from 52 to the surrounding fluid – upstream of the combustor), the or each injector comprises a plurality of spray nozzles (Fig 1-2; 54 has a plurality of spray nozzles/holes), the or each injector comprises a first set of spray nozzles in fluid communication with the first passage (Fig 1-2; first passage 52, 54 has a first plurality of spray nozzles/holes), and a second set of spray nozzles in fluid communication with the second passage (second set of spray nozzles 57, second passage inside 56), the second set of spray nozzles is provided at least part annularly around the first set of spray nozzles (see Fig 2), the fuel system comprises an exhaust valve configured to control exhaust flow through the first exhaust passage (valve 34; para 18). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to make the feed-arm comprising a first passage configured to conduct hydrogen fuel to the fuel spray nozzle, and a second passage configured to conduct auxiliary combustor exhaust gases to the fuel spray nozzle, the first passage is in thermal communication with the second passage, such that heat from the auxiliary combustor exhaust gases is transmitted to the fuel within the first passage, the first and second passages are coaxial, with the first passage being provided within the second passage, wherein the fuel system comprises a heat exchanger configured to exchange heat between hydrogen fuel in the main fuel conduit, and auxiliary combustor exhaust gases, wherein the heat exchanger is provided upstream of the main gas turbine engine combustor in auxiliary combustor exhaust gas flow and main conduit hydrogen flow, the or each injector comprises a plurality of spray nozzles, the or each injector comprises a first set of spray nozzles in fluid communication with the first passage, and a second set of spray nozzles in fluid communication with the second passage, the second set of spray nozzles is provided at least part annularly around the first set of spray nozzles, the fuel system comprises an exhaust valve configured to control exhaust flow through the first exhaust passage in order to reduce NOx, as taught by Jones (para 7-9). It has been held that combining or simple substitution of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results renders the limitation obvious (see MPEP 2141 (III)). In this case, making the feed-arm comprising a first passage configured to conduct hydrogen fuel to the fuel spray nozzle, and a second passage configured to conduct auxiliary combustor exhaust gases to the fuel spray nozzle, the first passage is in thermal communication with the second passage, such that heat from the auxiliary combustor exhaust gases is transmitted to the fuel within the first passage, the first and second passages are coaxial, with the first passage being provided within the second passage, wherein the fuel system comprises a heat exchanger configured to exchange heat between hydrogen fuel in the main fuel conduit, and auxiliary combustor exhaust gases, wherein the heat exchanger is provided upstream of the main gas turbine engine combustor in auxiliary combustor exhaust gas flow and main conduit hydrogen flow, the or each injector comprises a plurality of spray nozzles, the or each injector comprises a first set of spray nozzles in fluid communication with the first passage, and a second set of spray nozzles in fluid communication with the second passage, the second set of spray nozzles is provided at least part annularly around the first set of spray nozzles, the fuel system comprises an exhaust valve configured to control exhaust flow through the first exhaust passage yields predictable results (combustion, reduced emissions).
Claim(s) 1-2, 7-8, 12-19, as best understood, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2023/0280032 (Clark) in view of US 2023/0258148 (Ledwith) and US 2002/0197574 (Jones).
Regarding claim 1-2, 7-8, 12-14, Clark teaches a fuel system for a hydrogen-fuelled gas turbine engine (Fig 4A) comprising: a main fuel conduit configured to conduct hydrogen fuel from a hydrogen storage unit to a core combustor of the gas turbine engine (Fig 1, 5A, para 54-56; para storage unit 104, main fuel conduit 502, core combustor 306); a pre-heater comprising an auxiliary combustor configured to combust hydrogen fuel diverted from the main fuel conduit to heat hydrogen fuel in the main fuel conduit (Fig 5A; para 87-88; auxiliary combustor 504; main fuel conduit 502), the gas turbine engine combustor comprises at least one fuel injector configured to provide hydrogen fuel to the core combustor (implicit fuel injector injecting fuel into combustor 306), wherein the fuel system comprises a heat exchanger configured to exchange heat between hydrogen fuel in the main fuel conduit, and auxiliary combustor exhaust gases, wherein the heat exchanger is provided upstream of the main gas turbine engine combustor in auxiliary combustor exhaust gas flow and main conduit hydrogen flow (heat exchanger 504/502 upstream of 306– para 88), wherein the auxiliary combustor comprises a second exhaust passage configured to direct auxiliary combustor exhaust flow to a second outlet, bypassing the gas turbine engine core combustor (combustion products of 504 exhausted to bypass duct or outside of the nacelle; para 91), a gas turbine engine comprising a fuel system in accordance with any of the preceding claims (Fig 4A).
Clark fails to teach a first exhaust passage configured to conduct combustion products from the auxiliary combustor to the core combustor of the gas turbine engine or an exhaust valve configured to control exhaust flow through the first exhaust passage. However, Ledwith teaches that exhaust from auxiliary combustor may be directed through a first exhaust passage to the core combustor of the gas turbine engine (Fig 1; para 54-59; first passage between 70B/74B and core combustor 30). Jones teaches that flue gases may be directed to the core combustor and an exhaust valve configured to control exhaust flow through the first exhaust passage (Fig 1; passage 56 receives combustor exhaust gases/flue gases from an exhaust valve 34 which controls flow; para 18 – flue gases may be from “another source” – e.g. from the auxiliary combustor). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to direct an exhaust of the auxiliary combustor through a first exhaust passage to the core combustor of the gas turbine engine and an exhaust valve configured to control exhaust flow through the first exhaust passage to reduce NOx, as taught by Ledwith and Jones. It has been held that combining or simple substitution of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results renders the limitation obvious (see MPEP 2141 (III)). In this case, directing an exhaust of the auxiliary combustor through a first exhaust passage to the core combustor of the gas turbine engine and an exhaust valve configured to control exhaust flow through the first exhaust passage yields predictable results (combustion).
Regarding claim 15, 19, Clark teaches a method of operating a fuel system of a hydrogen fuelled gas turbine engine (Fig 4A, para 87) comprising: operating a core combustor to combust hydrogen fuel in a core compressor air flow (core combustor 306; para 68-74); diverting a portion of hydrogen fuel flow upstream of the core combustor in hydrogen fuel flow (Fig 5A; portion of hydrogen diverted to 503, 504), and combusting the diverted portion in an auxiliary combustor (504; para 87-88), a control system configured to operate the fuel system in accordance with claim 15 (para 75; FADEC)
Clark fails to teach directing an exhaust of the auxiliary combustor through a first exhaust passage to the core combustor of the gas turbine engine. However, Ledwith teaches that exhaust from auxiliary combustor may be directed through a first exhaust passage to the core combustor of the gas turbine engine (Fig 1; para 54-59; first passage between 70B/74B and core combustor 30). Jones teaches that flue gases may be directed to the core combustor (Fig 1; passage 56 receives combustor exhaust gases/flue gases from 32; para 18 – flue gases may be from “another source” – e.g. from the auxiliary combustor). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to direct an exhaust of the auxiliary combustor through a first exhaust passage to the core combustor of the gas turbine engine to reduce NOx, as taught by Ledwith and Jones. It has been held that combining or simple substitution of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results renders the limitation obvious (see MPEP 2141 (III)). In this case, directing an exhaust of the auxiliary combustor through a first exhaust passage to the core combustor of the gas turbine engine yields predictable results (combustion).
Regarding claim 16-18, Clark in view of Ledwith and Jones further teaches operating a valve configured to control flow through the first exhaust passage (Jones, Fig 1, valve 34), controlling the valve such that a main gas turbine engine NOx emissions target is met (Jones para 7-9, 18), operating the auxiliary combustor such that a main gas turbine engine NOx emissions target is met (Jones para 7-9; in the combination, the auxiliary combustor provides the flue gases). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to operate a valve configured to control flow through the first exhaust passage, control the valve such that a main gas turbine engine NOx emissions target is met, and operate the auxiliary combustor such that a main gas turbine engine NOx emissions target is met in order to reduce emission and provide a simple economical burner as taught by Jones (para 4-9).
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 1-19 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-17 of copending Application No. 18/917168 (reference application, hereinafter Ravikanti). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the present claims are anticipated by the reference claims.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Regarding claim 1-14, Ravikanti teaches a fuel system for a hydrogen-fuelled gas turbine engine (cl 1) comprising: a main fuel conduit configured to conduct hydrogen fuel from a hydrogen storage unit to a core combustor of the gas turbine engine (cl 1); a pre-heater comprising an auxiliary combustor configured to combust hydrogen fuel diverted from the main fuel conduit to heat hydrogen fuel in the main fuel conduit (cl 1); and a first exhaust passage configured to conduct combustion products from the auxiliary combustor to the core combustor of the gas turbine engine (cl 3 – the “second passage configured to conduct the auxiliary combustor exhaust gases…”), the gas turbine engine combustor comprises at least one fuel injector configured to provide hydrogen fuel to the core combustor (cl 1), the or each fuel injector comprise a feed-arm configured to provide fuel to a fuel spray nozzle of the injector (cl. 1), a gas turbine engine comprising a fuel system in accordance with any of the preceding claims (cl 12), the feed-arm comprises a first passage configured to conduct hydrogen fuel to the fuel spray nozzle, and a second passage configured to conduct auxiliary combustor exhaust gases to the fuel spray nozzle (cl 1-4), the first passage is in thermal communication with the second passage, such that heat from the auxiliary combustor exhaust gases is transmitted to the fuel within the first passage (cl 6), the first and second passages are coaxial, with the first passage being provided within the second passage (cl 5), a heat exchanger configured to exchange heat between hydrogen fuel in the main fuel conduit, and auxiliary combustor exhaust gases (cl 1), the heat exchanger is provided upstream of the main gas turbine engine combustor in auxiliary combustor exhaust gas flow and main conduit hydrogen flow (cl 1, 3), the or each injector comprises a plurality of spray nozzles (cl 7), the or each injector comprises a first set of spray nozzles in fluid communication with the first passage, and a second set of spray nozzles in fluid communication with the second passage (cl 8), the second set of spray nozzles is provided at least part annularly around the first set of spray nozzles (cl 9) the auxiliary combustor comprises a second exhaust passage configured to direct auxiliary combustor exhaust flow to a second outlet, bypassing the gas turbine engine core combustor (cl 10), the fuel system comprises an exhaust valve configured to control exhaust flow through the first exhaust passage (cl 11), a gas turbine engine comprising a fuel system in accordance with any of the preceding claims (cl 12).
Regarding claim 15-19, Ravikanti teaches a method of operating a fuel system of a hydrogen fuelled gas turbine engine (cl 13) comprising: operating a core combustor to combust hydrogen fuel in a core compressor air flow (cl 13); diverting a portion of hydrogen fuel flow upstream of the core combustor in hydrogen fuel flow, and combusting the diverted portion in an auxiliary combustor (cl 13); and directing an exhaust of the auxiliary combustor through a first exhaust passage to the core combustor of the gas turbine engine (cl 14; valve exhaust of the auxiliary combustor to the core combustor – a first exhaust passage is implicit), the method comprises operating a valve configured to control flow through the first exhaust passage (cl 14), the method comprises controlling the valve such that a main gas turbine engine NOx emissions target is met (cl 15), the method comprises operating the auxiliary combustor such that a main gas turbine engine NOx emissions target is met (cl 16), A control system configured to operate the fuel system in accordance with claim 15 (cl 17).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2013/0125798 teaches exhaust gases being directed to the core combustion chamber (Fig 10). US 2022/0099299 teaches a fuel system with an auxiliary combustor (Fig 5).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5063. The examiner can normally be reached 8 am - 4 pm, Monday-Friday.
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, Phutthiwat (Pat) Wongwian can be reached at 571-270-5426. 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.
/ANDREW H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights