DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
This office action is a final rejection in response to the filing of the applicant’s amendments / remarks filed on 01/13/2026. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (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 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.
3. Claims 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Singleton et al, US Patent Application Publication (US 2023/0210395 A1).
Regarding Claim 19, Singleton et al discloses a server (110, Fig 3A) for managing ambient conditions of a user (par. [0096]), comprises:
a processor (740, Fig 7);
a memory (735, Fig 7) coupled to the processor (740, Fig 7) configured to store a program (par. [0191]) readable by the processor (740, Fig 7) to:
receive sensor data and user activity data from one of a smart wearable device (par. [0105]) and a charging device (par. [0095]-[0096]);
receive user preferences from a user device; and send instructions to the charging device for operating one or more loT devices connected with the charging device, wherein the instructions are sent based on the sensor data and the user preference (see Figs 1-10 and par. [0012]-[0020],[0097],[0105],[0120]; abstract).
Regarding Claim 20, Singleton et al discloses the server as claimed in claim 18, wherein the server (110, Fig 3A): receives, through the charging device (Fig 3A), information of usage pattern of the one or more loT devices by the user (par. [0031]-[0032]);
provides recommendations to the user for storing the information as the user preferences; and sends the instructions to the charging device for operating the one or more loT devices based on a response of the user towards the recommendations (see Figs 1-10 and par. [0097],[0120]).
Regarding Claim 21, Singleton et al discloses the server as claimed in claim 18, wherein the recommendations are provided to the user and the user preferences are received from the user through a user device (see Figs 1-10 and par. [0098]-[0099],[0103],[0106]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, 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.
5. Claims 1-4,6-16,18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nelmes et al, US Patent (US 9,836,069 B1) in view of Kim et al US Patent Application Publication (US 2022/0209581 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Nelmes et al discloses a charging device (see Figs 1-9C, in particular 5A) (204), comprising:
a plurality of sensors (520,522,525,554) configured to monitor different environmental conditions and user activity (see Fig 2, 5A; column 13, line 40 to column 14, line 67);
a controller (502) connected with the plurality of sensors (520,522,525,554) (see Fig 2, 5A; column 13, line 40 to column 14, line 67), wherein the controller (502) is configured to process data received from the plurality of sensors (520,522,525,554); and
a wireless communication module (504) connected with the controller (502) to transmit processed data to a server (164) (see Fig 2 and 5A; column 13, line 40 to column 14, line 67,
Nelmes et al does not clearly discloses further comprises a wireless charging coil for wireless charging of a smart wearable device.
However, Kim et al is an analogous art pertinent to the problem to be solved in this application in which discloses an electronic device to improve the efficiency of wireless charging (see Figs 1-8) and further discloses comprising a wireless charging coil (311L) for wireless charging of a smart wearable device (201) (see Figs 1-8; par. [0004],[0012]-[0013],[0055],[0068]-[0071]).
Therefore, it would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nelmes et al with the teachings of Kim et al by including further comprises a wireless charging coil for wireless charging of a smart wearable device in order to provide wireless charging by using both the magnetic induction type and the magnetic resonance type, thereby having excellent compatibility with wireless charging equipment or environment and may improve charging efficiency during wireless charging (Kim et al, par. [0014]-[0015];
in addition, while features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477-78, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431-32 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (The absence of a disclosure in a prior art reference relating to function did not defeat the Board's finding of anticipation of claimed apparatus because the limitations at issue were found to be inherent in the prior art reference); see also In re Swinehart, 439 F.2d 210, 212-13, 169 USPQ 226, 228-29 (CCPA 1971); In re Danly, 263 F.2d 844, 847, 120 USPQ 528, 531 (CCPA 1959). "Apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). (see MPEP 2114).
Furthermore, it has been held that a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Exparte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). (See MPEP 2114)).
Regarding Claim 2, Nelmes et al discloses the charging device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the plurality of sensors (520,522,525,554) includes a sound sensor (520), a photodetector (525), a humidity sensor (102), a temperature sensor (102), an air quality sensor (104), and a radio frequency meter (152) (see Figs 1-5; column 5, lines 5-19; column 6, lines 30-61; column 13, 40 to column 14, line 25).
Regarding Claim 3, Nelmes et al discloses the charging device as claimed in claim 1, further comprises an infrared camera (522,118,524) connected with the controller (502) to monitor the user activity (see Fig 5A; column 14, lines 9-12).
Regarding Claim 4, Nelmes et al discloses the charging device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the wireless communication module (504) operates using Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, Near Field Communication (NFC) (see Fig 5A; column 8, lines 23-59; column 14, line 2 to column 15, line 24).
Regarding Claim 6, Nelmes et al discloses the charging device as claimed in claim 1, further comprises a microphone (520) for receiving voice commands of the user (see Fig 5A; column 13, line 65 to column 14, line 2).
Regarding Claim 7, Nelmes et al discloses the charging device as claimed in claim 1, further comprises a speaker (518) for providing notifications and alerts to the user (see Fig 5A; column 13, lines 60-64).
Regarding Claim 8, Nelmes et al discloses the charging device as claimed in claim 1, further communicates with other charging devices (204-1 to 204-2) present in vicinity, for communicating the data to server (164) (see Fig 2 and column 8, lines 23-59).
Regarding Claim 9, Nelmes et al discloses the charging device as claimed in claim 1, further receives user preferences from the server (164) (see Figs 1-5A; column 27, lines 1-15);
Nelmes et al does not clearly discloses communicates with loT devices for implementing the user preference.
However, Kim et al is an analogous art pertinent to the problem to be solved in this application in which discloses an electronic device to improve the efficiency of wireless charging (see Figs 1-8) and further discloses communicates with loT devices for implementing the user preference (see Figs 1-8 and par. [0045],[0054],[0059]).
Therefore, it would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nelmes et al with the teachings of Kim et al by including communicating with loT devices for implementing the user preference in order to provide wireless charging by using both the magnetic induction type and the magnetic resonance type, thereby having excellent compatibility with wireless charging equipment or environment and may improve charging efficiency during wireless charging (Kim et al, par. [0014]-[0015]).
Regarding Claim 10, Nelmes et al discloses the charging device as claimed in claim 1, further comprises a power source (110) to power the plurality of sensors (520,522,525,554,102,104,152), the controller (502) and the wireless module (504) (See Figs 1-5).
Regarding Claim 11, Nelmes et al discloses the charging device as claimed in claim 1;
Nelmes et al does not clearly discloses comprising a Printed Circuit Board (PCB) integrated with one or more layers selected from single-sided, double-sided, or multi-layered configurations, for integrating the plurality of sensors and the controller to facilitate data collection and processing.
However, Kim et al is an analogous art pertinent to the problem to be solved in this application in which discloses an electronic device to improve the efficiency of wireless charging (see Figs 1-8) and further discloses comprising a Printed Circuit Board (PCB) (701,715) integrated with one or more layers selected from single-sided, double-sided, or multi-layered configurations, for integrating the plurality of sensors and the controller to facilitate data collection and processing (See Figs 1-8 and par. [0051],[0115],[0120],[0122],[0146],[0148]).
Therefore, it would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nelmes et al with the teachings of Kim et al by including comprising a Printed Circuit Board (PCB) integrated with one or more layers selected from single-sided, double-sided, or multi-layered configurations, for integrating the plurality of sensors and the controller to facilitate data collection and processing in order to provide wireless charging by using both the magnetic induction type and the magnetic resonance type, thereby having excellent compatibility with wireless charging equipment or environment and may improve charging efficiency during wireless charging (Kim et al, par. [0014]-[0015]).
Regarding Claim 12, Nelmes et al discloses the charging device as claimed in claim 1;
Nelmes et al does not clearly discloses wherein a wireless charging coil is mounted on a surface of the charging device and configured to generate an electromagnetic field for inductive charging of the wearable device, wherein power is transferred when the wearable device is in contact with or proximate to the wireless charging coil.
However, Kim et al is an analogous art pertinent to the problem to be solved in this application in which discloses an electronic device to improve the efficiency of wireless charging (see Figs 1-8) and further discloses wherein a wireless charging coil (311L) is mounted on a surface of the charging device (202) and configured to generate an electromagnetic field for inductive charging (321L) of the wearable device (201), wherein power is transferred when the wearable device (201) is in contact with or proximate to the wireless charging coil (311L) (see Figs 1-3; par. [0070],[0073]-[0079],[0082]).
Therefore, it would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nelmes et al with the teachings of Kim et al by including wherein a wireless charging coil is mounted on a surface of the charging device and configured to generate an electromagnetic field for inductive charging of the wearable device, wherein power is transferred when the wearable device is in contact with or proximate to the wireless charging coil in order to provide wireless charging by using both the magnetic induction type and the magnetic resonance type, thereby having excellent compatibility with wireless charging equipment or environment and may improve charging efficiency during wireless charging (Kim et al, par. [0014]-[0015]).
Regarding Claim 13, Nelmes et al discloses the charging device as claimed in claim 1;
Nelmes et al does not clearly discloses wherein a wireless charging coil is further configured to adjust the electromagnetic field strength based on the proximity of the wearable device to optimize power transfer efficiency.
However, Kim et al is an analogous art pertinent to the problem to be solved in this application in which discloses an electronic device to improve the efficiency of wireless charging (see Figs 1-8) and further discloses
wherein a wireless charging coil (311L) is further configured to adjust the electromagnetic field strength based on the proximity of the wearable device (201) to optimize power transfer efficiency (see Figs 1-3; par. [0006],[0009],[0015],[0067],[0070],[0073]-[0079],[0082],[0108],[0110]).
Therefore, it would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nelmes et al with the teachings of Kim et al by including wherein a wireless charging coil is further configured to adjust the electromagnetic field strength based on the proximity of the wearable device to optimize power transfer efficiency in order to provide wireless charging by using both the magnetic induction type and the magnetic resonance type, thereby having excellent compatibility with wireless charging equipment or environment and may improve charging efficiency during wireless charging (Kim et al, par. [0014]-[0015]).
Regarding Claim 14, Nelmes et al in view of Kim et al discloses the charging device as claimed in claim 11, wherein the Printed Circuit Board (PCB) (701,715) includes connections to the wireless communication module (190), enabling transmission of data captured by the plurality of sensors to a server (108) (see Kim et al Figs 1-8; par. [0033],[0035],[0049],[0054],[0118],[0120],[0147],[0149]).
Therefore, it would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nelmes et al with the teachings of Kim et al by including wherein the Printed Circuit Board (PCB) includes connections to the wireless communication module, enabling transmission of data captured by the plurality of sensors to a server in order to provide wireless charging by using both the magnetic induction type and the magnetic resonance type, thereby having excellent compatibility with wireless charging equipment or environment and may improve charging efficiency during wireless charging (Kim et al, par. [0014]-[0015]).
Regarding Claim 15, Nelmes et al in view of Kim et al discloses the charging device as claimed in claim 11, wherein the Printed Circuit Board (PCB) (701,715) includes a power converter (311a) configured to convert alternating current (AC) from an external power source (Power input, Fig 3) to direct current (DC) for powering the plurality of sensors (311c,314), the controller (312), and the wireless communication module (313) (see Kim et al Figs 1-8; par. [0068]-[0086]).
Therefore, it would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nelmes et al with the teachings of Kim et al by including wherein the Printed Circuit Board (PCB) includes a power converter configured to convert alternating current (AC) from an external power source to direct current (DC) for powering the plurality of sensors, the controller, and the wireless communication module in order to provide wireless charging by using both the magnetic induction type and the magnetic resonance type, thereby having excellent compatibility with wireless charging equipment or environment and may improve charging efficiency during wireless charging (Kim et al, par. [0014]-[0015]).
Regarding Claim 16, Nelmes et al discloses the charging device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the controller (502) is programmed to analyze environmental data over time to determine user- specific circadian rhythm patterns based on variations in light exposure and noise levels (see Figs 1-5A; column 10, lines 48-65; column 13, line 40 to column 14, line 50).
Regarding Claim 18, Nelmes et al discloses the charging device as claimed in claim 1;
Nelmes et al does not clearly discloses wherein the charging device may be controlled by a server for controlling loT devices for ensuring optimum health and wellness of the user.
However, Kim et al is an analogous art pertinent to the problem to be solved in this application in which discloses an electronic device to improve the efficiency of wireless charging (see Figs 1-8) and further discloses wherein the charging device may be controlled by a server (108) for controlling loT devices (104) for ensuring optimum health and wellness of the user (see Figs 1-13; par. [0012], [0055]).
Therefore, it would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nelmes et al with the teachings of Kim et al by including wherein the charging device may be controlled by a server for controlling loT devices for ensuring optimum health and wellness of the user in order to provide wireless charging by using both the magnetic induction type and the magnetic resonance type, thereby having excellent compatibility with wireless charging equipment or environment and may improve charging efficiency during wireless charging (Kim et al, par. [0014]-[0015]) and also to utilize physiological data collected via wearable devices, as well as additional data collected from other devices, to gain better insights into the user's overall health.
6. Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nelmes et al, US Patent (US 9,836,069 B1) in view of Kim et al US Patent Application Publication (US 2022/0209581 A1) in further view of Singleton et al US Patent Application Publication (2023/0210395 A1).
Regarding Claim 17, Nelmes et al in view of Kim et al discloses the charging device as claimed in claim 15;
Nelmes et al in view of Kim et al does not clearly discloses wherein the charging device is configured to generate an alarm based on circadian rhythm of the user.
However, Singleton et al is an analogous art pertinent to the problem to be solved in this application in which discloses Methods, systems, and devices for leveraging data from multiple data sources are described. A method includes receiving physiological data associated with a user from a wearable device and receiving additional data from an external device different from the wearable device, the additional data including at least data associated with characteristics of an environment associated with the user (see Figs 1-10) and further discloses wherein the charging device (200) is configured to generate an alarm based on circadian rhythm (HRV, par. [0089]) of the user (see Figs 1-10 and par. [0089]).
Therefore, it would have been an obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nelmes et al in view of Kim et al with the teachings of Singleton et al by including wherein the charging device is configured to generate an alarm based on circadian rhythm of the user in order to utilize physiological data collected via wearable devices, as well as additional data collected from other devices, to gain better insights into the user's overall health. In particular, aspects of the present disclosure may leverage data from multiple data sources (e.g., physiological data from wearable devices, additional data from external devices) to identify relationships (e.g., physiological relationships) between a user's physiological data and their surrounding environment in order to provide more accurate and helpful guidance to the user regarding their behavioral characteristics and overall health (Singleton et al, par. [0014]).
Response to Arguments
7. Applicant's arguments filed on 01/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, now amended by the applicant by including previous claim 5, the applicant argued in applicant’s remarks (page 7 of 9) that:
“Nelmes is directed toward smart home devices (e.g., a smart home controller, or other smart device in a smart home environment). Nelmes does not disclose or suggest any charging devices, whatsoever, much less for a smart wearable device. Although Kim teaches a charging device having a wireless charging coil, there is no teaching in either reference, nor any rational basis, that would motivate one having ordinary skill in the art to add a wireless charging coil to the smart home device of Nelmes. The Examiner alleges that the motivation for doing so would be "to provide wireless charging by using both the magnetic induction type and the magnetic resonance type," however such capability is neither disclosed nor suggested for the smart home devices of Nelmes, as wireless charging functions of the smart devices are not contemplated, whatsoever. One having ordinary skill in the art would not have had any rational basis, therefore, to combine Kim's wireless charging coil with Nelmes's sensor-based smart home devices.”
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner respectfully disagrees, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
In this case, the smart devices disclosed in the Nelmes prior art (204 in Fig 5A), are smart devices that are powered either by smart wall plug 120V or battery powered (Column 8, lines 24-59).
In addition, Nelmes contemplates many modifications and is not limited to the embodiments shown, see Column 27, lines 25-38 disclosing: “The foregoing description, for purpose of explanation, has been described with reference to specific embodiments. However, the illustrative discussions above are not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the scope of the claims to the precise forms disclosed. Many modifications and variations are possible in view of the above teachings. For example, the teachings above concerning smart door handles could be applied in an analogous manner to smart window handles. The embodiments were chosen in order to best explain the principles underlying the claims and their practical applications, to thereby enable others skilled in the art to best use the embodiments with various modifications as are suited to the particular uses contemplated”, therefore this includes wireless power charging;
The applicant also argued that:
“In fact, one having ordinary skill in the art would have been discouraged from doing so, as it is known in the art that inductive/wireless charging technology, such as that disclosed in Kim, can interfere with Bluetooth and other communication protocols. As Nelmes specifically discloses the use of Bluetooth in its smart home devices, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been reluctant to add a wireless charging feature to such devices, given the need for reliable communication to accomplish the intended use of the disclosed device. That is, modifying Nelmes to provide Kim's wireless charging coil may render Nelmes unsatisfactory for its intended purpose. Accordingly, one having ordinary skill in the art would not have been motivated to modify Nelmes in this manner.”;
In response to applicant’s argument, the examiner respectfully disagrees since Nelmes discloses the use of wireless communications protocols (Bluetooth, Wi-fi, Zigbee, Ethernet, Homeplug and others), see Column 7, lines 55 to Column 8, line 2.
Kim discloses the use of wireless communications protocols Bluetooth, Wi-fi, NFC communications as part of the electronic device structure connected with coils (see Fig 3 and par. [0079]) and this wireless communications protocols does not interfere as argued by the applicant and reliable communication is achieved and wireless power is used to power the electronic device 201.
Regarding claim 19, the applicant argued in applicant’s remarks (page 8 of 9) that:
“Although the Examiner vaguely relies on paragraphs [0012]-[0020], [0097], [0105], [0120], and the Abstract of Singleton for allegedly disclosing comparable receipt of user preferences from a user device and sending instructions based on such user preferences, no such specific disclosure appears to be found in Singleton, as user preferences are not considered or discussed whatsoever in Singleton.”;
In response to applicant’s argument, the examiner respectfully disagrees since in paragraph [0105] discloses:
“[0105] For example, the system 300-a may collect physiological data associated with the user 102-a via the wearable device 104-a, and may acquire additional data via the user device 106-a. The additional data may include any data or information associated with the user 102-a, the user's surrounding environment, and the like. For example, the additional data may include data associated with past or upcoming travel plans for the user 102-a, an upcoming time zone change for the user 102-a (e.g., upcoming time zone change corresponding to an upcoming vacation), a Daylight Savings time shift, or any combination thereof. In this example, the system 300-a may identify or predict a relationship between the user's physiological data and the additional data, and may display instructions for adjusting behavioral characteristics of the user 102-a based on the identified relationship. For instance, the system 300-a may identify that the user 102-a will be traveling to a different time zone, and may thereby instruct the user 102-a (e.g., via a GUI of the user device 106-a) to adjust the user's sleep schedule to properly prepare for the upcoming time zone change, jetlag, etc.”,
The prior art discloses user preferences, collections of physiological data associated with the user and display instructions for adjusting behavioral characteristics of the user’s 102-a devices based on the identified relationship), the broad claim language does not specify or define the “user preferences” and does not require a particular operation / performance of the devices.
Examiner Note
8. The examiner cites particular columns and lines numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Conclusion
9. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see the cited prior art in the PTO-892 form attached.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALFONSO PEREZ BORROTO whose telephone number is (571) 270-1714. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F (9am-4pm).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Rexford Barnie can be reached on (571) 272-7492. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a
USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /ALFONSO PEREZ BORROTO/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2836