DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-20 are presented for examination on the merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. 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.
3. 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 of this title, 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.
4. Claims 1, 3-11, 13-15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Honjo (US 2016/0232778 A1) in view of Gershzohn (US 20110240798 A1).
As to claim 1, Honjo discloses in systems and methods for processing coexisting signals for rapid response to user input having claimed:
a. a system for detecting smoke, soot, or particulates within enclosures read on ¶ 0003 & ¶ 0040, (some of these devices are capable of communicating with each other using a network. Some of these devices may be hazard detection systems, such as smoke detectors, carbon monoxide detectors, combination smoke and carbon monoxide detectors, or may be other systems for detecting other conditions have been used in residential, commercial, and industrial settings for safety and security considerations. While one or more hazard detection embodiments are described further herein in the context of being used in a residential home, such as a single-family residential home, the scope of the present teachings is not so limited. More generally, hazard detection systems are applicable to a wide variety of enclosures such as, for example, duplexes, townhomes, multi-unit apartment buildings, hotels, retail stores, office buildings, and industrial buildings);
b. an enclosed module comprising a plurality of electrical components read on ¶ 0059, (FIG. 2 shows an illustrative block diagram of hazard detection system 205 being used in an illustrative enclosure 200 in accordance with some embodiments. FIG. 2 also shows optional hazard detection system 207 and router 222. Hazard detection systems 205 and 207 can be similar to hazard detection systems 105 and 107 in FIG. 1, enclosure 200 can be similar to enclosure 100 in FIG. 1, and router 222 can be similar to router 122 in FIG. 1. Hazard detection system 205 can include several components, including system processor 210, high-power wireless communications circuitry 212 and antenna, low-power wireless communications circuitry 214 and antenna, non-volatile memory 216, speaker 218, sensors 220, which can include one or more safety sensors 221 and one or more non-safety sensors 222, safety processor 230, alarm 234, power source 240, power conversion circuitry 242, high quality power circuitry 243, and power gating circuitry 244);
c. a first light source in the enclosed module, the first light source emitting light continuously or at predetermined time intervals; a first light sensor in the enclosed module, the first light sensor detecting light emitted by the first light source; and a control circuit operatively coupled to the first light sensor, the control circuit triggering a predetermined action upon light detected by the first light sensor from the first light source being at least partially obstructed and falling below a predetermined light threshold level read on ¶ 0048 & ¶ 0071, (hazard detection system 105 can monitor environmental conditions associated with enclosure 100 and alarm occupants when an environmental condition exceeds a predetermined threshold. The monitored conditions can include, for example, smoke, heat, humidity, carbon monoxide, radon, methane and other gasses. Sensors deemed necessary can vary based on the functionality and features of hazard detection system 205. In one embodiment, hazard detection system 205 can be a combination smoke, fire, and carbon monoxide alarm system. In such an embodiment, detection system 205 can include the following necessary safety sensors 221: a smoke detector, a carbon monoxide (CO) sensor, and one or more temperature sensors. Smoke detectors typically use optical detection, ionization, or air sampling techniques to trigger the smoke condition. Optical scattering and obscuration detection techniques may use infrared light emitting diodes (LEDs) and photodiodes. When smoke and/or other matter (e.g., water vapor) enters a smoke chamber, the light emitted by the LED(s) is scattered, which enables the photodiodes to detect the light. If no smoke or other matter (e.g., water vapor) is in the smoke chamber, then the photodiodes are not be able to detect the light being emitted by the LED(s). Ionization techniques may use a radioactive material such as Americium-241 to ionize the air, which creates a measurable current between detector two plates. When smoke particles enter the chamber, they bind to the ions. The reaction produces a measurable drop in the conducted current between detector plates; the resulting drop indicates smoke detection). Honjo does not explicitly recite the optical light source, sensor, and control circuit are disposed within an enclosed power distribution module comprising a plurality of electrical components.
However, Gershzohn in sensor data from a number of sensors associated with an aircraft cures this deficiency by teaching that it may be beneficial wherein:
a. the optical light source, sensor, and control circuit are disposed within an enclosed power distribution module comprising a plurality of electrical components read on ¶ 0009-0010 & ¶ 0025, (technologies are described herein for detecting, isolating, and recovering from fire or smoke events within an aircraft or aircraft cabin. The aircraft is equipped with various sensors that detect conditions of a fire or smoke event. Through the utilization of intelligent algorithms, the technologies can determine the source of the fire or smoke based on sensor data. The technologies can then isolate and depower components of the aircraft as necessary and automatically suppress the fire or smoke without human interaction. According to one aspect presented herein, various technologies provide for detecting and recovering from a fire event within an aircraft. The technologies receive sensor data from a number of sensors associated with an aircraft. A determination is made as to whether the sensor data exceeds predefined thresholds indicating the fire event within the aircraft. In response to determining that the sensor data exceeds the predefined thresholds indicating the fire event, the technologies determine a location of the fire event within the aircraft based on the sensor data and depower components of the aircraft associated with the fire event. The technologies then initiate a fire suppressant mechanism within the aircraft directed to the location of the fire event. The localization module 108 utilizes triangulation of the relevant fire and smoke related sensors 104 to determine the source position of the fire. In another embodiment, the localization module 108 utilizes suitable correlation methods of the sensor data collected by the relevant and smoke related sensors 104 to determine the source position of the fire. In an illustrative example, the cross correlation function between continuous measurements of two sensors placed along the direction of smoke propagation can provide estimates of the time delay and direction of the smoke as it moves between the first and second sensor. Assuming a constant speed of smoke propagation, which is reasonable along an air duct, for example, this idea can be extended to multiple sensors placed in a distributed manner in the duct. Each pair of sensors can give an estimate of the direction and vector component of smoke propagation speed along the line between the two sensors. Through interpolation of the magnitude and direction of those vectors, the location of the source of the smoke can be determined).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the automated fire and smoke detection, isolation, and recovery of Gershzohn into Honjo in order to provide Honjo’s optical light sensor/source setup inside Gershzohn’s enclosed power distribution/electrical module in order to detect localized electrical overheating, arcing, or smoke early and automatically trigger power isolation before catastrophic fire occurs.
As to claim 3, Honjo further discloses:
a. wherein the predetermined action comprises transmitting an alert indicating detection of light by the first light sensor from the first light source falling below the predetermined light threshold level read on ¶ 0048 ¶ 0071, (hazard detection system 105 can monitor environmental conditions associated with enclosure 100 and alarm occupants when an environmental condition exceeds a predetermined threshold. The monitored conditions can include, for example, smoke, heat, humidity, carbon monoxide, radon, methane and other gasses. Optical scattering and obscuration detection techniques may use infrared light emitting diodes (LEDs) and photodiodes. When smoke and/or other matter (e.g., water vapor) enters a smoke chamber, the light emitted by the LED(s) is scattered, which enables the photodiodes to detect the light. If no smoke or other matter (e.g., water vapor) is in the smoke chamber, then the photodiodes are not be able to detect the light being emitted by the LED(s)).
As to claim 4, Honjo further discloses:
a. wherein the enclosed module comprises a power distribution unit including a power input interface and one or more power output interfaces read on ¶ 0047, (Hazard detection system 105 can be battery powered, line powered, or line powered with a battery backup. Hazard detection system 105 can include one or more processors, multiple sensors, non-volatile storage, and other circuitry to provide desired safety monitoring and user interface features. Some user interface features may only be available in line powered embodiments due to physical limitations and power constraints).
As to claim 5, Honjo further discloses:
a. wherein the enclosed module further comprises a circuit board coupled to the first light sensor and the plurality of electrical components read on ¶ 0060, (Hazard detection system 205 can use a bifurcated processor circuit topology for handling the features of system 205. Both system processor 210 and safety processor 230 can exist on the same circuit board within system 205, but perform different tasks).
As to claim 6, Honjo further discloses:
a. wherein the circuit board further comprises: a first side coupled to the first light source, the first light sensor, and a first set of electrical components; and a second side opposite the first side, the second side coupled to a second light source, a second light sensor, and a second set of electrical components read on ¶ 0059 & ¶ 0062, (FIG. 2 shows an illustrative block diagram of hazard detection system 205 being used in an illustrative enclosure 200 in accordance with some embodiments. FIG. 2 also shows optional hazard detection system 207 and router 222. Hazard detection systems 205 and 207 can be similar to hazard detection systems 105 and 107 in FIG. 1, enclosure 200 can be similar to enclosure 100 in FIG. 1, and router 222 can be similar to router 122 in FIG. 1. hazard detection units (for example: more advanced user interface and communications functions; various computationally-intensive algorithms to sense patterns in user behavior or patterns in ambient conditions; algorithms for governing, for example, the brightness of an LED night light as a function of ambient brightness levels; algorithms for governing, for example, the sound level of an onboard speaker for home intercom functionality; algorithms for governing).
As to claim 7, Honjo further discloses:
a. wherein: the first light source is mounted in a first area of the circuit board; a second light source is mounted in a second area of the circuit board and emits light in sequence relative to the first light source; and the first light sensor detects light emitted by each of the first light source and the second light source read on ¶ 0059 & ¶ 0062, (FIG. 2 shows an illustrative block diagram of hazard detection system 205 being used in an illustrative enclosure 200 in accordance with some embodiments. FIG. 2 also shows optional hazard detection system 207 and router 222. Hazard detection systems 205 and 207 can be similar to hazard detection systems 105 and 107 in FIG. 1, enclosure 200 can be similar to enclosure 100 in FIG. 1, and router 222 can be similar to router 122 in FIG. 1. hazard detection units (for example: more advanced user interface and communications functions; various computationally-intensive algorithms to sense patterns in user behavior or patterns in ambient conditions; algorithms for governing, for example, the brightness of an LED night light as a function of ambient brightness levels; algorithms for governing, for example, the sound level of an onboard speaker for home intercom functionality; algorithms for governing).
As to claim 8, Honjo further discloses:
a. wherein the control circuit is configured to: compare a first light level emitted by the first light source to a predetermined light threshold level associated with the first light source; compare a second light level emitted by the second light source to a predetermined light threshold level associated with the second light source; and triangulate a location of smoke, soot, or particulates in the enclosed module based on the first light level emitted by the first light source and based on the second light level emitted by the second light source read on ¶ 0157 – ¶ 0158, (the instruction can include a silence alarm command. The instruction can include other data that may be used by hazard detection system. This other data may include location data. Location data may include GPS data or it can include a proprietary location scheme that identifies where within a structure the device is located. The proprietary location scheme may leverage the device's ability to communicate with all the wireless devices within a structure, thereby enabling the device to triangulate its position within the structure. The device may update its position on a periodic basis. The location information may be used by the system receiving the instruction to verify that the device is in a location that satisfies certain requirements before it executes any commands that are associated with the instruction). Gershzohn also teaches spatial triangulation of smoke/fire within a compartment read on ¶ 0025, (the localization module 108 utilizes triangulation of the relevant fire and smoke related sensors 104 to determine the source position of the fire. In another embodiment, the localization module 108 utilizes suitable correlation methods of the sensor data collected by the relevant and smoke related sensors 104 to determine the source position of the fire. In an illustrative example, the cross correlation function between continuous measurements of two sensors placed along the direction of smoke propagation can provide estimates of the time delay and direction of the smoke as it moves between the first and second sensor. Assuming a constant speed of smoke propagation, which is reasonable along an air duct, for example, this idea can be extended to multiple sensors placed in a distributed manner in the duct. Each pair of sensors can give an estimate of the direction and vector component of smoke propagation speed along the line between the two sensors. Through interpolation of the magnitude and direction of those vectors, the location of the source of the smoke can be determined).
As to claim 9, Honjo further discloses:
a. a second light sensor detecting light emitted by each of the first light source and the second light source, the control circuit configured to triangulate the location of smoke, soot, or particulates in the enclosed module based on light received by both the first light sensor and the second light sensor read on ¶ 0157, (the instruction can include other data that may be used by hazard detection system. This other data may include location data. Location data may include GPS data or it can include a proprietary location scheme that identifies where within a structure the device is located. The proprietary location scheme may leverage the device's ability to communicate with all the wireless devices within a structure, thereby enabling the device to triangulate its position within the structure. The device may update its position on a periodic basis).
As to claim 10, Honjo further discloses:
a. wherein the control circuit is configured to trigger the predetermined action when detected light falls below the predetermined light threshold level for any length of time or as measured over a predetermined length of time read on ¶ 0089 & ¶ 0098, (single-criteria conditions may compare one input to one threshold. For example, a simple condition can be a comparison between a sensor data value and a threshold. If the sensor data value equals or exceeds the threshold, the state change transition may be executed. In contrast, a multi-criteria condition can be a comparison of one or more inputs to one or more thresholds. For example, a multi-criteria condition can be a comparison between a first sensor value and a first threshold and a comparison between a second sensor value and a second threshold. Alarm thresholds 433 can store the alarming thresholds in a memory (e.g., Flash memory) that is accessible by sensor state machines 432. As discussed above, sensor state machines 432 can compare monitored sensor data values against alarm thresholds 433 that may be stored within safety processor 430 to determine whether a hazard event exists, and upon determining that the hazard event exists, may cause the alarm to sound. Each sensor (e.g., smoke sensor, CO sensor, and heat sensor) may have one or more alarm thresholds).
As to claim 11, Honjo further discloses:
a. wherein the control circuit is configured to trigger the predetermined action when an average value of detected light falls below the predetermined light threshold level read on ¶ 0088 & ¶ 0089, (the sensor state machines can be responsible for controlling relatively basic hazard detection system functions and the system state machines can be responsible for controlling relatively advanced hazard detection system functions. In managing detection of a hazard, each sensor state machine and each system state machine can transition among any one of its states based on sensor data 302, hush events 304, and transition conditions 306. A hush event can be a user initiated command to hush, for example, a sounding alarm or pre-alarm voice instruction. The conditions can define thresholds that may be compared against any one or more of the following inputs: sensor data values, time clocks, and user interaction events (e.g., hush events). State change transitions can be governed by relatively simple conditions (e.g., single-criteria conditions), or relatively complex conditions (e.g., multi-criteria conditions). Single-criteria conditions may compare one input to one threshold. For example, a simple condition can be a comparison between a sensor data value and a threshold. If the sensor data value equals or exceeds the threshold, the state change transition may be executed. In contrast, a multi-criteria condition can be a comparison of one or more inputs to one or more thresholds. For example, a multi-criteria condition can be a comparison between a first sensor value and a first threshold and a comparison between a second sensor value and a second threshold.
As to claim 13, Honjo further discloses:
a. wherein the first light source comprises an LED or a laser read on ¶ 0096, ( FIG. 4 shows an illustrative schematic of hazard detection system 400 according to an embodiment and shows, among other things, signal paths among various components, state machines, and illustrative modules being executed by different processors. System 400 can include system processor 402, safety processor 430, ultrasonic sensors 421, ALS sensor 422, humidity sensor 423, smoke sensor 424, CO sensor 425, temperatures sensors 426, and PIR sensor 427, button 440, LED(s) 442, alarm 444, speaker 446, fabric network communications module 450, and fabric network communications circuitry 460).
As to claim 14, Honjo further discloses:
a. wherein the predetermined light threshold level is determined relative to a baseline light level measured at the first light sensor from pulses emitted by the first light source without smoke, soot, or particulates in the enclosed module read on ¶ 0081, (As shown, system 300 can include sensor data 302, hush detection events 304, transition conditions 306, threshold adjustment parameter 307, multi-criteria state machines 310, clock 312, other states 320, alarming states 330, pre-alarming states 340, alarm 350, display 352, and speaker 354. Also shown are several communication links 370, each of which may have unidirectional or bidirectional data and/or signal communications capabilities. Multi-criteria state machines 310 can control alarming states 330, pre-alarming states 340, and all other state machine states 320 based on sensor data 302, hush detection events 304, transition conditions 306, clock 312, and other criteria, and alarming and pre-alarming states 330 and 340 can control the output of alarm 350, display 352, and speaker 354. Alarming states 330 can include multiple alarming states (e.g., one for each hazard, such as smoke alarming state 331, CO alarming state 332, and heat alarming state 333) and pre-alarming states 340 can include multiple pre-alarming states (e.g., one or more for each hazard, such as smoke pre-alarming state 341 and CO pre-alarming state 342. Other states can include, for example, idling states, monitoring states, alarm hushing states, pre-alarm hushing states, post-alarm states, holding states, and alarm monitoring states).
As to claim 15, the claim is interpreted and rejected as to claim 1.
As to claim 17, the claim is interpreted and rejected as to claim 3.
As to claim 18, the claim is interpreted and rejected as to claim 7.
As to claim 19, the claim is interpreted and rejected as to claim 8.
As to claim 20, the claim is interpreted and rejected as to claim 10.
5. Claims 2 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Honjo in view of Gershzohn in view of Wilging (US 20170011608 A1).
As to claim 2, Honjo does not explicitly recite wherein a switch coupled to the enclosed module, the switch electrically coupling the enclosed module to a power source in a first closed position and electrically uncoupling the enclosed module to the power source in a second open position; wherein the control circuit is operatively coupled to switch, the predetermined action comprising triggering the switch to the second open position to electrically uncouple the enclosed module from the power source upon light detected by the first light sensor from the first light source being at least partially obstructed and falling below the predetermined light threshold level.
However, Wilging in pairing a smoke detector based audio system cures this deficiency by teaching that it may be beneficial wherein:
a. a switch coupled to the enclosed module, the switch electrically coupling the enclosed module to a power source in a first closed position and electrically uncoupling the enclosed module to the power source in a second open position; wherein the control circuit is operatively coupled to switch, the predetermined action comprising triggering the switch to the second open position to electrically uncouple the enclosed module from the power source upon light detected by the first light sensor from the first light source being at least partially obstructed and falling below the predetermined light threshold level read on ¶ 0102, (within the enclosure and coupled to the power supply selector switch, the smoke detector circuit receiving power from the power supply under normal operations and receiving power from the battery back-up power source when power from the power supply is not available; a speaker circuit driving a).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the wireless audio system using smoke detectors with integrated audio systems paired for mobile device output of Wilging into Honjo in view of Gershzohn in order to provide emergency power in the event of a power supply failure.
As to claim 16, the claim is interpreted and rejected as to claim 2.
6. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Honjo in view of Gershzohn and further in view of Ludt (US 4021792 A).
As to claim 12, Honjo does not explicitly recite wherein the control circuit is configured to signal an alert when the first light sensor fails to respond to light emitted by the first light source over a predetermined length of time indicating non-functioning of the first light sensor.
However, Ludt in detecting the presence of smoke or other solids in suspension in a gas by means of optical measurement cures this deficiency by teaching that it may be beneficial wherein:
a. the control circuit is configured to signal an alert when the first light sensor fails to respond to light emitted by the first light source over a predetermined length of time indicating non-functioning of the first light sensor read on Col. 9, Lines 1-10, (an alarm means for producing an alarm signal when the electrical response from first light detection means 32 indicates the existence of a predetermined amount of light scattered from the main beam within smoke chamber 14; and (3) a fail-safe means for producing a fail-safe signal when light source means 30 fails to generate light wherein the fail-safe signal is a distinguishable signal from the alarm signal).
Therefore, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the notification systems and methods with notifications based upon prior stop locations of Ludt into Honjo in view of Gershzohn in order to provide a fail-safe function by generating a fail-safe signal which is distinguishable from the smoke alarm signal.
Response to Arguments
7. Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection that was necessitated by Applicant's amendment.
Applicant’s arguments filed in response to the outstanding non-final Office Action have been fully considered.
In the Remarks, Applicant argues that independent claims 1 and 15 are patentable over Honjo (US 2016/0232778) because Honjo is directed to a hazard detection system deployed in a building enclosure (e.g., a single-family dwelling, apartment, or room) and does not teach or suggest an "enclosed power distribution module comprising a plurality of electrical components" having an integrated first light source, first light sensor, and control circuit inside the power distribution module.
The Examiner agrees in part. The 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) rejection of claims 1, 3-11, 13-15, and 17-20 over Honjo alone has been withdrawn in view of the claim amendments adding the specific limitation of an "enclosed power distribution module."
However, Applicant's arguments are unpersuasive to establish patentability of claims 1-20 over the prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 103. While Honjo does not explicitly recite housing the optical sensor assembly inside an enclosed power distribution module, secondary reference Gershzohn (US 2011/0240798) previously cited of record explicitly teaches fire event detection and localized component depowering within enclosed electrical/power compartments. As set forth below, combining Honjo with Gershzohn renders the subject matter of independent claims 1 and 15 (and their dependent claims) obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art.
Accordingly, the rejections are maintained and made FINAL under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Citation of pertinent Prior Arts
8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
i. Turner (US 20260064109 A1) discloses in system may comprise a neural network trained to predict mechanical damage to field-deployed industrial equipment with a main or supplementary function to transfer heat change phase, or drive/limit a reaction. The neural network may be trained using an idealized geometry. A processor may receive process input data from the equipment and may provide the data to the trained neural network. The processor may generate a prediction of mechanical damage using the trained neural network and the process input data. The process input data may comprise temperature data collected during operation. A scanning device may generate a digital twin of at least a portion of the equipment through scanning and ultrasonic testing. A monitoring module may monitor processes through a control system to collect the process input data. The neural network may comprise a convolutional neural network configured to calculate damage using a surrogate model,
ii. Monroe (US 20030067542 A1) discloses in security and surveillance system for aircraft on the ground incorporates a plurality of strategically spaced sensors including video imaging generators, audio sensors, motion detectors, and fire and smoke detectors for monitoring critical components and critical areas of both the interior and the exterior of the a commercial transport such as an aircraft. The system is a comprehensive multi-media safety, tracking and/or surveillance system, which provides both visual and/or audio information as well as critical data such as location, direction, intrusion, fire and/or smoke detection and/or status of environmental conditions and/or asset systems status. The collected information is analyzed and prioritized according to type of event, location and nature of required response for automatically dispatching the proper response. The captured data and images are transmitted to a ground based security station for display on a monitor and may be recorded on a "black box" recorder as well as on a ground based recording system, and
iii. Kaufman (US 20250384750 A1) discloses in an in-vehicle monitoring and tracking system for rental vehicles that detects smoking events within a vehicle cabin and logs these events with associated location data. The system employs specialized detection algorithms to accurately identify various types of smoke while minimizing false positives. Additional functionality includes accident detection through rapid deceleration monitoring, and animal presence detection through acoustic sensing. When events are detected, the system can either store the information for later retrieval or transmit real-time notifications with precise location data to rental company servers, enabling prompt response to policy violations and facilitating vehicle recovery after accidents.
Conclusion
9. 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 Fekadeselassie Girma whose telephone number is (571) 270-5886. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Friday, 8:30 – 5:00. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph H. Feild can be reached on (571) 272-4090. 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.
/Fekadeselassie Girma/
Primary Examiner Art Unit 2689
Prosecution Insights