DETAILED ACTION
This is a non-final Office action in reply to the response filed 08/04/2026.
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 2, 6, and 21-25 are pending;
Claims 1, 2, and 6 are currently amended; claims 3-5 and 7-20 have been cancelled; claims 21-25 are new;
Claims 1, 2, 6, and 21-25 are rejected herein.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species C in the reply filed 08/04/2026 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)).
All pending claims, i.e., claims 1, 2, 6, and 21-25, are deemed to be readable on the elected Species C and therefore are being examined on the merits.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted 01/05/2025 has been considered by the Examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Lines 3 and 4, "and adjustment" appears to be --and an adjustment--.
Line 6, "The adjustable mounting point adjustment mechanism may" appears to be --The adjustment mechanism of the adjustable mounting point may--.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 2 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 8, "the pivot bracket outside surface" appears to be --the outside surface of the pivot bracket--.
Claim 1, line 10, "the fixed bracket inside surface" appears to be --the inside surface of the fixed bracket--.
Claim 1, lines 11 and 12, "the hoist subframe" appears to be --the hoist system subframe--.
Claim 1, line 12, "the hoist subframe" appears to be --the hoist system subframe--.
Claim 1, lines 13 and 14, it is advised that "a pivot hole" be changed to --at least one pivot hole-- or "at least one pivot hole" be changed to --a pivot hole-- for correspondence and concentricity.
Claim 1, line 19, "angular" appears to be --an angular--.
Claim 2, line 2, "holes" appears to be --hole--.
Claim 2, line 3, "and any" appears to be --and between any--.
Claim 2, line 3, "holes" appears to be --hole--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1, 2, 6, and 21-25 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.
Regarding claim 1, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation "the length" (line 3) in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation "a first parallel subframe member" in line 4 is indefinite. To what structure is the first subframe member parallel? Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation "a second parallel subframe member" in line 5 is indefinite. To what structure is the second subframe member parallel? Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 1, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation "the connection" (line 9) in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 1, the preamble of claim 1, "[an] adjustable mounting point for use with a hoist system" in line 1, functionally recites "a hoist system" as a functional element that is not a required structure within the scope of claim 1. However, the limitations "a fixed bracket, disposed along the length of a hoist system subframe, comprising an inside surface, and fixedly connected to one or both of a first parallel subframe member or a second parallel subframe member" (lines 3-5) in the body of claim 1, the limitations "the at least one mounting hole facilitates the connection of an attachment to the pivot bracket" (line 9) in the body of claim 1, and the limitations "which engages with the at least one fixation hole and the hoist subframe" (lines 11 and 12) in the body of claim 1, positively recite the "hoist system subframe," the "first parallel subframe member," the "second parallel subframe member," and the "attachment" as required structures within the scope of claim 1, since each of the limitations "disposed along," "fixedly connected to," "facilitates," and "engages with" introduces positive recitation(s) thereafter. As best understood, the "adjustable mounting point" recited in claim 1 appears to be refer to the adjustable mounting point (300) as shown in Figure 3A. Also, as best understood, none of the "hoist system subframe," the "first parallel subframe member," the "second parallel subframe member," and the "attachment" appears to be a structural component of the "adjustable mounting point" (300). Instead, the "hoist system subframe," the "first parallel subframe member," the "second parallel subframe member," and the "attachment" appear to be structural components of the "hoist system" in the preamble of claim 1, wherein the "first parallel subframe member" and the "second parallel subframe member" appear to be structural components of the "hoist system subframe." As such, the positive recitations of the "hoist system subframe," the "first parallel subframe member," the "second parallel subframe member," and the "attachment" in the body of claim 1 render the scope of claim 1 indefinite. It is not clear as to whether claim 1 is directed to a combination of the "adjustable mounting point," the "hoist system subframe," the "first parallel subframe member," the "second parallel subframe member," and the "attachment" or directed to a subcombination of the "adjustable mounting point" adapted to be used with the "hoist system subframe," the "first parallel subframe member," the "second parallel subframe member," and the "attachment." Applicant is advised to clearly claim the combination in the preamble or properly place the "hoist system subframe," the "first parallel subframe member," the "second parallel subframe member," and the "attachment" in intended use consistently throughout claim 1. For the purpose of examination, based on the positive recitations of the "hoist system subframe," the "first parallel subframe member," the "second parallel subframe member," and the "attachment" in the body of claim 1, claim 1 is considered to be directed to a combination of the "adjustable mounting point," the "hoist system subframe," the "first parallel subframe member," the "second parallel subframe member," and the "attachment." Similar rejection and similar interpretation apply to the limitations in claim 25 (lines 1 and 2, where the "attachment" is further positively recited in the body of claim 25). Appropriate correction is required.
Regarding claim 2, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation "the angular position" (lines 3 and 4) in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 6 and 21-24 are rejected as being dependent from a rejected claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 2, 6, and 21-25, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (CN 116374013 A), hereinafter Wang, in view of Franiak et al. (US 11,142,111 B2), hereinafter Franiak, and Madadi et al. (US 12,710,134 B2), hereinafter Madadi.
Regarding claim 1, Applicant is reminded that, as presented under 35 U.S.C. § 112 above in the current Office action, for the purpose of examination, based on the positive recitations of the "hoist system subframe," the "first parallel subframe member," the "second parallel subframe member," and the "attachment" in the body of claim 1, claim 1 is considered to be directed to a combination of the "adjustable mounting point," the "hoist system subframe," the "first parallel subframe member," the "second parallel subframe member," and the "attachment."
Wang1 discloses a mounting point (31, fig 1) for use with a vehicle (see translation, paragraph n0054), comprising: a fixed bracket (31, fig 1), disposed along the length of a vehicle system frame (1, fig 5), comprising an inside surface (see Figures 1 and 5), and fixedly connected to the vehicle system frame (see Figures 1 and 5, see translation, paragraph n0054); at least one fixation hole (see Figures 1 and 5, see translation, paragraph n0054), disposed on the fixed bracket inside surface (see Figures 1 and 5, see translation, paragraph n0054); a fixation mechanism (see Figures 1 and 5, see translation, paragraph n0054), which engages with the at least one fixation hole and the vehicle system frame to fixedly connect the fixed bracket to the vehicle system frame (see Figures 1 and 5, see translation, paragraph n0054); wherein the fixed bracket facilitates the connection of an attachment (2, 32, 4, 5, 7, 8, fig 3) to the vehicle system frame (see Figure 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
412
456
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: connector][AltContent: textbox (Inside Surface)]
[AltContent: textbox (Fixation Hole)]
[AltContent: connector]
Wang does not disclose: (1) wherein the vehicle comprises a hoist system, wherein the hoist system comprises a hoist system subframe having a first parallel subframe member and a second parallel subframe member; (2) wherein the mounting point is an adjustable mounting point for use with the hoist system, comprising: a fixed bracket, disposed along the length of the hoist system subframe, comprising an inside surface, and fixedly connected to one or both of the first parallel subframe member or the second parallel subframe member; a pivot bracket, disposed adjacent to the fixed bracket, comprising an outside surface, and pivotally connected to the fixed bracket; at least one mounting hole disposed on the pivot bracket outside surface, wherein the at least one mounting hole facilitates the connection of the attachment to the pivot bracket; at least one fixation hole, disposed on the fixed bracket inside surface; a fixation mechanism, which engages with the at least one fixation hole and the hoist subframe to fixedly connect the fixed bracket to the hoist subframe; a pivot hole, disposed on the fixed bracket, corresponding to and concentric with at least one pivot hole disposed on the pivot bracket; a pivot mechanism, which engages with the fixed bracket and the pivot bracket to pivotally connect the pivot bracket to the fixed bracket; at least one adjustment hole, disposed on the fixed bracket, corresponding to and concentric with at least one adjustment hole disposed on the pivot bracket; and an adjustment mechanism, which is configured to facilitate angular adjustment of the pivot bracket, relative to the fixed bracket, between a plurality of angles.
With respect to the missing limitations (1) above, Franiak teaches a vehicle (col 5, line 61) comprising a hoist system (col 5, line 58), wherein the hoist system includes a hoist system subframe (102, fig 8) having a first parallel subframe member (114, fig 8, the left rail 114) and a second parallel subframe member (114, fig 8, the right rail 114).
PNG
media_image2.png
658
914
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Wang and Franiak are analogous art because they are at least from the same field of endeavor, i.e., supports. Since Wang expressly states that the vehicle system frame (Wang: 1, fig 3) can be any fixed structure used to arrange parts (Wang: see translation, paragraph n0039), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to form the vehicle (Wang: see translation, paragraph n0054) with a hoist system (Franiak: col 5, line 58) having a hoist system subframe (Franiak: 102, fig 8), with the vehicle system frame being formed as a first parallel subframe member (Franiak: 114, fig 8, the left rail 114) of the hoist system subframe or a second parallel subframe member (Franiak: 114, fig 8, the right rail 114) of the hoist system subframe, as taught by Franiak, with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation would have been to provide the vehicle of Wang with a hoist system as one of its functions to appeal to consumers.
With respect to the missing limitations (2) above, Madadi teaches an adjustable mounting point (100, fig 1), comprising: a fixed bracket (110, fig 1), disposed along the length of a structure (col 3, lines 53-56), comprising an inside surface (see Figures 1 and 2B), and fixedly connected to the structure (col 3, lines 53-56); a pivot bracket (130, fig 1), disposed adjacent to the fixed bracket (see Figure 1), comprising an outside surface (see Figure 1), and pivotally connected to the fixed bracket (see Figures 1-4B); at least one mounting hole (140, fig 3B) disposed on the pivot bracket outside surface (see Figures 1 and 3B), wherein the at least one mounting hole facilitates the connection of an attachment to the pivot bracket (col 4, lines 61-65); at least one fixation hole (120, fig 2C), disposed on the fixed bracket inside surface (see Figures 1 and 2C); a fixation mechanism (col 4, lines 27-32), which engages with the at least one fixation hole and the structure to fixedly connect the fixed bracket to the structure (col 4, lines 27-32); a pivot hole (116, fig 2B), disposed on the fixed bracket (see Figure 2B), corresponding to and concentric with at least one pivot hole (136, fig 3A) disposed on the pivot bracket (see Figures 1-4B); a pivot mechanism (150, 170, figs 4A & 4B), which engages with the fixed bracket and the pivot bracket to pivotally connect the pivot bracket to the fixed bracket (see Figures 1-4B); at least one adjustment hole (114, fig 2B), disposed on the fixed bracket (see Figure 2B), corresponding to and concentric with at least one adjustment hole (134, fig 3A) disposed on the pivot bracket (see Figures 1-4B); and an adjustment mechanism (160, 180, figs 4A & 4B), which is configured to facilitate angular adjustment of the pivot bracket, relative to the fixed bracket, between a plurality of angles (see Figures 1-4B, see col 5, lines 13-59).
PNG
media_image3.png
892
452
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Madadi is analogous art because it is at least from the same field of endeavor, i.e., supports. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to form the mounting point (Wang: 31, fig 1) as an adjustable mounting point (Madadi: 100, fig 1) for use with a hoist system (Wang: see translation, paragraph n0054, as modified by, Franiak: col 5, line 58), comprising: a fixed bracket (Madadi: 110, fig 1), disposed along the length of a hoist system subframe (Franiak: 102, fig 8) of the hoist system, comprising an inside surface (Madadi: see Figures 1 and 2B), and fixedly connected to one or both of a first parallel subframe member or a second parallel subframe member (Wang: 1, fig 3, as modified by, Franiak: 114, fig 8; Madadi: col 3, lines 53-56); a pivot bracket (Madadi: 130, fig 1), disposed adjacent to the fixed bracket (Madadi: see Figure 1), comprising an outside surface (Madadi: see Figure 1), and pivotally connected to the fixed bracket (Madadi: see Figures 1-4B); at least one mounting hole (Madadi: 140, fig 3B) disposed on the pivot bracket outside surface (Madadi: see Figures 1 and 3B), wherein the at least one mounting hole facilitates the connection of the attachment (Wang: 2, 32, 4, 5, 7, 8, fig 3) to the pivot bracket (Madadi: col 4, lines 61-65; Wang: see Figure 3); at least one fixation hole (Madadi: 120, fig 2C), disposed on the fixed bracket inside surface (Madadi: see Figures 1 and 2C); a fixation mechanism (Madadi: col 4, lines 27-32), which engages with the at least one fixation hole and the hoist system subframe to fixedly connect the fixed bracket to the hoist system subframe (Madadi: col 4, lines 27-32; Wang: see Figure 3; Franiak: see Figure 8); a pivot hole (Madadi: 116, fig 2B), disposed on the fixed bracket (Madadi: see Figure 2B), corresponding to and concentric with at least one pivot hole (Madadi: 136, fig 3A) disposed on the pivot bracket (Madadi: see Figures 1-4B); a pivot mechanism (Madadi: 150, 170, figs 4A & 4B), which engages with the fixed bracket and the pivot bracket to pivotally connect the pivot bracket to the fixed bracket (Madadi: see Figures 1-4B); at least one adjustment hole (Madadi: 114, fig 2B), disposed on the fixed bracket (Madadi: see Figure 2B), corresponding to and concentric with at least one adjustment hole (Madadi: 134, fig 3A) disposed on the pivot bracket (Madadi: see Figures 1-4B); and an adjustment mechanism (Madadi: 160, 180, figs 4A & 4B), which is configured to facilitate angular adjustment of the pivot bracket, relative to the fixed bracket, between a plurality of angles (Madadi: see Figures 1-4B, see col 5, lines 13-59), as taught by Madadi, with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation would have been to enhance adjustability of the mounting point of Wang as to enable the mudguard of Wang to be adjustable to more positions. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Wang, Franiak, and Madadi to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1.
Accordingly, Wang, as modified by Franiak and Madadi with respect to claim 1, teaches an adjustable mounting point (Wang: 31, fig 1, as modified by, Madadi: 100, fig 1) for use with a hoist system (Wang: see translation, paragraph n0054, as modified by, Franiak: col 5, line 58), comprising: a fixed bracket (Madadi: 110, fig 1), disposed along the length of a hoist system subframe (Franiak: 102, fig 8), comprising an inside surface (Madadi: see Figures 1 and 2B), and fixedly connected to one or both of a first parallel subframe member or a second parallel subframe member (Wang: 1, fig 3, as modified by, Franiak: 114, fig 8; Madadi: col 3, lines 53-56); a pivot bracket (Madadi: 130, fig 1), disposed adjacent to the fixed bracket (Madadi: see Figure 1), comprising an outside surface (Madadi: see Figure 1), and pivotally connected to the fixed bracket (Madadi: see Figures 1-4B); at least one mounting hole (Madadi: 140, fig 3B) disposed on the pivot bracket outside surface (Madadi: see Figures 1 and 3B), wherein the at least one mounting hole facilitates the connection of an attachment (Wang: 2, 32, 4, 5, 7, 8, fig 3) to the pivot bracket (Madadi: col 4, lines 61-65; Wang: see Figure 3); at least one fixation hole (Madadi: 120, fig 2C), disposed on the fixed bracket inside surface (Madadi: see Figures 1 and 2C); a fixation mechanism (Madadi: col 4, lines 27-32), which engages with the at least one fixation hole and the hoist system subframe to fixedly connect the fixed bracket to the hoist system subframe (Madadi: col 4, lines 27-32; Wang: see Figure 3; Franiak: see Figure 8); a pivot hole (Madadi: 116, fig 2B), disposed on the fixed bracket (Madadi: see Figure 2B), corresponding to and concentric with at least one pivot hole (Madadi: 136, fig 3A) disposed on the pivot bracket (Madadi: see Figures 1-4B); a pivot mechanism (Madadi: 150, 170, figs 4A & 4B), which engages with the fixed bracket and the pivot bracket to pivotally connect the pivot bracket to the fixed bracket (Madadi: see Figures 1-4B); at least one adjustment hole (Madadi: 114, fig 2B), disposed on the fixed bracket (Madadi: see Figure 2B), corresponding to and concentric with at least one adjustment hole (Madadi: 134, fig 3A) disposed on the pivot bracket (Madadi: see Figures 1-4B); and an adjustment mechanism (Madadi: 160, 180, figs 4A & 4B), which is configured to facilitate angular adjustment of the pivot bracket, relative to the fixed bracket, between a plurality of angles (Madadi: see Figures 1-4B, see col 5, lines 13-59).
Regarding claim 2, wherein the adjustment mechanism is selectively positionable between any of the at least one adjustment holes of the fixed bracket and any of the at least one adjustment holes of the pivot bracket to adjust the angular position of the pivot bracket, relative to the fixed bracket, between the plurality of angles (Madadi: see Figures 1-4B, see col 5, lines 13-59).
Regarding claim 6, wherein the adjustment mechanism comprises at least one bolt (Madadi: col 5, lines 52-56, the clevis pin 160 may comprise one or more bolts).
Regarding claim 21, wherein the at least one adjustment hole disposed on the pivot bracket comprises three adjustment holes (Madadi: 134, fig 3A).
Regarding claim 22, wherein the adjustment mechanism comprises a plurality of bolts (Madadi: col 5, lines 52-56, the clevis pin 160 may comprise one or more bolts).
Regarding claim 23, wherein the plurality of angles comprises a first angle, a second angle, and a third angle (Madadi: see Figures 1-4B, see col 5, lines 13-59).
Regarding claim 24, Wang, as modified by Franiak and Madadi with respect to claim 1, teaches the adjustable mounting point, but is silent as to whether or not the first angle is about 90 degrees, the second angle is about 93 degrees, and the third angle is about 87 degrees.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to set the first angle to be about 90 degrees, set the second angle to be about 93 degrees, and set the third angle to be about 87 degrees, with a reasonable expectation of success, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. The motivation would have been to allow the mudguard of Wang to be placed at the desired positions. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the combination of Wang, Franiak, and Madadi to obtain the invention as specified in claim 24.
Regarding claim 25, wherein the attachment comprises a fender bracket (Wang: 32, 4, 5, 7, 8, fig 3).
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.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claims 1, 2, 6, and 21-25 of the present application are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being anticipated by claims 1-25 of copending Application No. 19/068,083 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all limitations of claims 1, 2, 6, and 21-25 of the present application are disclosed by claims 1-25 of copending Application No. 19/068,083.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure. See the attached PTO-892 for various supports.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Guang H Guan whose telephone number is (571) 272-7828. The examiner can normally be reached weekdays (10:00 AM - 6:00 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, Jonathan Liu can be reached at (571) 272-8227. 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.
/G. H. G./Examiner, Art Unit 3631
/JONATHAN LIU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3631
1 A copy of Wang, including a translation, is attached to the current Office action.
