DETAILED ACTION
Application Status
Claims 1-20 are pending and have been examined in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed on 02/07/2025 and 10/27/2025 have been reviewed and considered.
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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 14 depends from claim 1 and recites many of the limitations already recited in claim 1. The duplicate limitations should be removed from clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 6, 11, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 6 claims, “the second diameter is greater than the first diameter; and/or the first diameter is greater than or equal to the thread diameter.” The phrase “A and/or B” encompasses all of: A alone, B alone, A and B together.
The specification does not adequately describe an arrangement where the first diameter is greater than or equal to the thread diameter while the second diameter is not greater than the first diameter or an arrangement where the second diameter is greater than the first diameter but the first diameter is not greater than or equal to the thread diameter.
Claim 11 claims, “a rubber material; an elastomer; a silicone; a mixture of different rubber materials; and/or a mixture of different rubber materials and a metal, a metal braiding, and/or a metal alloy.”
The phrase “A and/or B” encompasses all of the following: A alone, B alone, A and B together.
Accordingly, claim 11 as presented encompasses an outer sleeve comprising all of:
A rubber material
An elastomer
A silicone
A mixture of different rubber materials
A metal
A metal braiding
A metal alloy
The specification does not provide adequate support for an outer sleeve comprising all of the materials listed above.
Claim 15 claims, “one housing opening for fastening and/or securing the drive unit”. The phrase “A and/or B” encompasses all of: A alone, B alone, A and B together.
The specification does not adequately describe an opening that is for fastening but not securing or an opening that is for securing but not for fastening.
Claim 15 claims, “first screw holder and/or the second screw holder of the at least one fastening arrangement is removably arranged”. The phrase “A and/or B” encompasses all of: A alone, B alone, A and B together.
The specification does not adequately describe an arrangement where one screw holder is removably arranged while the other is not.
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 6, 11, and 15 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.
Claim 6 claims, “the second diameter is greater than the first diameter; and/or the first diameter is greater than or equal to the thread diameter.”
It is unclear if the applicant intends to claim an embodiment where the first diameter is greater than or equal to the thread diameter while the second diameter is not greater than the first diameter or an arrangement where the second diameter is greater than the first diameter but the first diameter is not greater than or equal to the thread diameter. For compact prosecution, “and/or” in claim 6 is interpreted to mean “and”.
Claim 11 claims, “a rubber material; an elastomer; a silicone; a mixture of different rubber materials; and/or a mixture of different rubber materials and a metal, a metal braiding, and/or a metal alloy.” The phrase “and/or” makes it is unclear if the applicant intends to claim an embodiment where the outer sleeve comprises:
One of: a rubber material; an elastomer; a silicone; a mixture of different rubber materials,
in addition to: a mixture of different rubber materials and a metal, a metal braiding, and/or a metal alloy
As presented, the claim would encompass an outer sleeve comprising all of:
A rubber material
An elastomer
A silicone
A mixture of different rubber materials
A metal
A metal braiding
A metal alloy
In the specification, the group consisting of “a mixture of different rubber materials and a metal, a metal braiding, and/or a metal alloy” is disclosed as an alternative to the group consisting of “an elastomer; a silicone; a mixture of different rubber materials” (paragraph [0021]). In accordance with paragraph [0021] claim 11 is interpreted as follows:
The fastening arrangement according to claim 10, wherein the outer sleeve is composed of: a rubber material; an elastomer; a silicone; a mixture of different rubber materials; [[and/]]or a mixture of different rubber materials and a metal, a metal braiding, [[and/]]or a metal alloy.
Claim 15 claims, “one housing opening for fastening and/or securing the drive unit”. The phrase “A and/or B” encompasses all of: A alone, B alone, A and B together. It is unclear how the housing opening could be for fastening but not securing. It is unclear how the housing opening could be for securing but not fastening. For the purpose of compact prosecution claim 15 is interpreted to require an opening for fastening and securing the drive unit.
Claim 15 claims, depends from claim 1 and claims, “at least one fastener”. It is unclear if the applicant intends to claim at least one fastener in addition to the step screw claimed in claim 1. For compact prosecution, the at least one fastener is interpreted to be the step screw of claim 1.
Claim 15 claims, “first screw holder and/or the second screw holder of the at least one fastening arrangement is removably arranged”.
It is unclear if the applicant intends to encompass an embodiment in which only one screw holder is removable.
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, 4-5, 7, 9-15, and 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwenk (US 20230278663 A1) in view of Hundt (US 20230278664 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Schwenk discloses: A fastening arrangement for a bicycle for fastening a drive unit of the bicycle to a bicycle frame of the bicycle, comprising: a step screw including a shaft (5, Fig. 1) and a head (53),the shaft including: a threaded section (54); a first unthreaded round section (see annotated figure below) arranged on the threaded section; a second unthreaded round section (see annotated figure below) arranged on the first unthreaded round section; and a circumferential shaft step (indentation in screw for O-ring 56) arranged between the first unthreaded round section and the second unthreaded round section; the head arranged on the second unthreaded round section of the shaft; a nut (51); a first screw holder including a first hollow cylindrical base body (42) and a first longitudinal bore extending through the first base body; and a second screw holder including a second hollow cylindrical base body (41) and a second longitudinal bore extending through the second base body; the first base body and the second base body insertable into two opposing housing openings of a housing of the drive unit such that:
the first base body is fixable in a rotationally and axially (see note below) secure manner on an inner circumference, which faces an opening center axis defined by the two housing openings, of a first housing opening of the two housing openings and
the second base body is fixable in a rotationally and axially (see note below) secure manner on an inner circumference, which faces the opening center axis, of a second housing opening of the two housing openings;
the step screw insertable through:
two opposing frame openings of the bicycle frame, which in an assembled state of the bicycle are aligned with the two housing openings of the drive unit,
the two housing openings,
the first longitudinal bore of the first screw holder, and
the second longitudinal bore of the second screw holder (see Fig. 2B)
wherein the nut is screwable onto the threaded section of the step screw and is tightenable such that:
the nut is supported on the bicycle frame and
the first base body is clamped (see “compressive forces”, paragraph [0086]) between the shaft step of the step screw and the bicycle frame.
The screw disclosed by Schwenk is considered a “step screw” because it comprises at least one radial step.
Regarding the “axially secure” limitations, Schwenk discloses, “it [the bolt] clamps the two sleeves 41, 42 in the axial direction of the through-bolt 5 against the second wall 32” (paragraph [0035]).
Regarding the “rotationally secure limitations”, Schwenk discloses form fit elements (41c, Fig. 9) disposed on both base bodies (see “designed identically”, paragraph [0018]) that are in positive engagement with depressions formed in the frame of the bicycle (see Fig. 12 and paragraph [0121]).
Note, regarding the first and second unthreaded round section, the examiner considers the unthreaded portion between O-ring (56) and threaded section (54) to be the “first unthreaded round section” and the unthreaded portion between O-ring (56) and head (53) to be the “second unthreaded round section”. An annotated figure is provided below to clearly point out which portions of the screw the examiner considers the first and second unthreaded round section.
PNG
media_image1.png
519
602
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Schwenk is silent in teaching that the head of the step screw is touching the bicycle frame as there is a sliding bearing bushing (71) disposed radially between the head and frame.
Hundt teaches a similar fastening arrangement comprising a screw, wherein a head (53, Fig. 2) of the screw is touching the bicycle frame (31).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Schwenk in in view of Hundt to arrive at the claimed invention. Such a person would have been motivated to make such a modification to facilitate an easier removal of the screw by allowing a user to grip an outer circumference of the screw head. Since the screw head disclosed by Hundt is not within a bore of the frame, such a modification could be made without the removal of Schwenk’s sliding bearing bushing (71).
With respect to claim 2, Schwenk in view of Hundt teaches the fastening arrangement according to claim 1, wherein the second base body (Schwenk; 41, Fig. 2a) is supported in a sliding seat (43) on the second unthreaded round section (see annotated figure above).
With respect to claim 4, Schwenk in view of Hundt teaches the fastening arrangement according to claim 1, wherein the first base body (Schwenk; 42, Fig. 2a) is supported in a sliding seat (43) on the first unthreaded round section. Note, Schwenk uses reference character (43) to refer to both the first and second sliding seats but does disclose separate sliding seats (“Each sleeve 41, 42 comprises a shank 43”, paragraph [0077]).
With respect to claim 5, Schwenk in view of Hundt teaches the fastening arrangement of claim 1, wherein the first base body and/or the second base body absorbs both axial forces (“high compressive forces by means of the sleeves 41, 42”, paragraph [0086]) and radial forces during use of the bicycle. Base bodies 41 and 42 would absorb at least radial forces exerted by the O-rings (56). Further, from Fig. 2A, it is evident that any non-axial vibrations imparted to the motor by riding the bicycle would be absorbed by the base bodies (41 and 42).
With respect to claim 7, Schwenk in view of Hundt teaches the fastening arrangement according to claim 1, wherein the shaft (Schwenk; 5, Fig. 2a) is a solid shaft.
With respect to claim 9, Schwenk in view of Hundt as modified above teaches the fastening arrangement according to claim 1, wherein the nut (Schwenk; 51, Fig. 2a) is a concentric nut.
With respect to claim 10, Schwenk in view of Hundt teaches the fastening arrangement of claim 1, wherein the first base body (Schwenk; 42, Fig. 2a) and the second base body (41) each have an outer sleeve (45) and an inner sleeve (43), the inner sleeve arranged coaxially inside of and fixed (“damping element 45 is thus designed in the form of an overmolding of the sleeve 41, 42”, paragraph [0087]) to the outer sleeve.
With respect to claim 11, Schwenk in view of Hundt as modified above teaches the fastening arrangement according to claim 10, wherein the outer sleeve (Schwenk; 45, Fig. 2a) is composed of: an elastomer (“damping element 45 is formed from an elastomer”, paragraph [0087]).
With respect to claim 12, Schwenk in view of Hundt as modified above teaches the fastening arrangement according to claim 10, wherein the inner sleeve (Schwenk; 43, Fig. 2a) includes a single outer flange (44).
With respect to claim 13, Schwenk in view of Hundt as modified teaches the fastening arrangement according to claim 10, wherein, in an assembled state of the fastening arrangement, the outer sleeve (Schwenk; 45, Fig. 2a) of the first base body (42) and/or the outer sleeve of the second base body (41) is elastically compressed (see “absorbing high compressive forces by means of the sleeves 41, 42”) along the opening center axis and is elastically widened radially with respect to the opening center axis (see “elastic deformation of the damping elements 45”, paragraph [0091]).
Note, in paragraph [0091], Schenk discloses that elastic deformation of damping element 45 creates a sealing effect between the sleeves 41/42 and the drive unit 2. Since the damping elements, sleeves, and drive unit are arranged concentrically with respect to each other, to create a seal between said elements through elastic deformation of the damping element, such deformation must be in a radial (widening) direction. Regarding the “elastically compressed” limitation, the compressive forces experienced by the outer sleeve would necessarily result in some degree of elastic compression as strain and stress have a continuous relationship.
With respect to claim 14, Schwenk in view of Hundt as modified above teaches a bicycle (Schwenk; 100, Fig. 1) comprising at least one fastening arrangement according to claim 1 (see rejection above), a drive unit (Schwenk; 2, Fig. 2a) for driving the bicycle, the drive unit including a housing (“housing”, paragraph [0004]) having two opposing housing openings that are coaxially arranged along an opening center axis, the two housing openings including a first housing opening and a second housing opening; and a bicycle frame (31/32) configured to carry the drive unit and a rider, the bicycle frame including two frame openings aligned with the two housing openings of the drive unit; the first base body (42) of the first screw holder arranged in the first housing opening and fixed in a rotationally and axially fixed manner on an inner circumference of the first housing opening (see claim 1 rejection); the second base body of the second screw holder arranged in the second housing opening and fixed in a rotationally and axially fixed manner on an inner circumference of the second housing opening (see claim 1 rejection); the step screw arranged such that
the shaft extends through the two frame openings, the two housing openings, the first longitudinal bore of the first screw holder, and the second longitudinal bore of the second screw holder (see Fig. 2a) and
the head is in contact with the bicycle frame (Hundt; see 53, Fig. 2);
wherein the first base body is supported on the first unthreaded round section; wherein the second base body is supported on the second unthreaded round section; wherein the nut is screwed onto the threaded section of the step screw such that:
the nut is supported on the bicycle frame and
the first base body is clamped between the shaft step of the step screw and the bicycle frame; and
wherein the first base body and/or the second base body is elastically compressed along the opening center axis and elastically widened radially with respect to the opening center axis (see claim 13 rejection).
With respect to claim 15, Schwenk in view of Hundt as modified above teaches a pre-assembled unit, comprising at least one fastening arrangement according to claim 1 (see rejection above); and a drive unit (Schwenk; 2, Fig. 2a) for a bicycle (100, Fig. 1), the drive unit including at least one housing opening for fastening and/or securing the drive unit via at least one fastener (5); wherein the first screw holder and/or the second screw holder of the at least one fastening arrangement is removably arranged in the at least one housing opening of the drive unit.
Regarding the “removably arranged” limitation, Schwenk discloses that the first and second screw holder (41/42) are “inserted into the through-hole of the drive unit on both sides”. The screw holders would accordingly be removable by reversing the insertion process. Further, even if Schwenk disclosed some feature that would prevent axial pullout of the screw holders, the screw holders would still be removable by destructive means.
With respect to claim 17, Schwenk in view of Hundt as modified teaches the fastening arrangement according to claim 1, wherein the nut (Schwenk; 51, Fig. 2a) includes a through-hole.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwenk (US 20230278663 A1) in view of Hundt (US 20230278664 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Danly (US 2147013 A).
With respect to claim 6, Schwenk in view of Hundt as modified above teaches the fastening arrangement according to claim 1, wherein the threaded section has a thread diameter, the first unthreaded round section has a first diameter, and the second unthreaded round section has a second diameter but is silent in teaching that the second diameter is greater than the first diameter and/or the first diameter is greater than or equal to the thread diameter.
Danly teaches a step screw comprising a threaded section (14, Fig. 4), a first unthreaded round section (15) and a second unthreaded round section (10) wherein the threaded section has a thread diameter, the first unthreaded round section has a first diameter, and the second unthreaded round section has a second diameter wherein the second diameter is greater than the first diameter and the first diameter is greater than or equal to the thread diameter. Danly further teaches that the first unthreaded round section allows for a higher degree of adjustability without any weakening of the screw (see Col. 1, LL. 9-30).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Schwenk in view of Hundt in further view of Danly to arrive at the claimed invention and to provide a higher degree of adjustability without weakening the screw as taught by Danly.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwenk (US 20230278663 A1) in view of Hundt (US 20230278664 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zhuang (CN 108092456 A).
With respect to claim 8, Schwenk in view of Hundt as modified above teaches the fastening arrangement according to claim 1 but is silent in teaching that the nut is a cap nut.
Where the only difference between the claimed device and the prior art device is a recitation of a known type of fastener in place of a different fastener, the claimed device is generally not patentable over the prior art device because the differences between the devices could be resolved with a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results (see MPEP 2143 B).
In the present instance, the claimed device differs from the prior art device by the recitation of a cap nut instead of a nut with a through-hole.
Cap nuts are known to be effective fasteners at least from Zhuang. Zhuang teaches using cap nuts (33, Fig. 1) as fasteners for electric bicycles
Since the claimed fasteners are known for their purpose from the prior art teachings, a person of ordinary skill in the art could predict that when making such a substitution, the modified device would function as originally intended.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute the nut in the prior art device for a cap nut because the claimed fasteners are known for their purpose from the prior art teachings and accordingly, such a person could predict that when making such a substitution, the modified device would function as originally intended.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwenk (US 20230278663 A1) in view of Hundt (US 20230278664 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kokkonen (US 20220144377 A1).
With respect to claim 16, Schwenk in view of Hundt as modified above teaches the fastening arrangement according to claim 1, but is silent in teaching that the shaft is hollow.
Kokkonen teaches that hollow fasteners are advantageous for weight savings (see paragraph [0053]). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Schwenk in view of Hundt in further view of Kokkonen to arrive at the claimed invention and to reduce the weight of the assembly.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwenk (US 20230278663 A1) in view of Hundt (US 20230278664 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Keller (US 0581885 A).
With respect to claim 18, Schwenk in view of Hundt as modified above teaches the fastening arrangement according to claim 1, but is silent in teaching that the nut is an eccentric nut.
Where the only difference between the claimed device and the prior art device is a recitation of a known type of fastener in place of a different fastener, the claimed device is generally not patentable over the prior art device because the differences between the devices could be resolved with a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results (see MPEP 2143 B).
In the present instance, the claimed device differs from the prior art device by the recitation of an eccentric nut instead of a nut with a through-hole.
Eccentric nuts are known to be effective fasteners at least from Keller. Keller teaches using eccentric nuts (g, Fig. 9) as fasteners for bicycles
Since the claimed fasteners are known for their purpose from the prior art teachings, a person of ordinary skill in the art could predict that when making such a substitution, the modified device would function as originally intended.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to substitute the nut in the prior art device for an eccentric nut because the claimed fasteners are known for their purpose from the prior art teachings and accordingly, such a person could predict that when making such a substitution, the modified device would function as originally intended.
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwenk (US 20230278663 A1) in view of Danly (US 2147013 A).
With respect to claim 19, Schwenk discloses: A fastening arrangement for fastening a drive unit (2, Fig. 2a) to a bicycle frame (31/32), comprising: a step screw including a shaft (5) and a head (53), the shaft including: a threaded section (54); a first unthreaded round section arranged directly adjacent to the threaded section (see annotated figure above); a second unthreaded round section arranged directly adjacent to the first unthreaded round section (see annotated figure above); and a circumferential shaft step (step for O-ring 56) between the first unthreaded round section and the second unthreaded round section; the head arranged on an end of the second unthreaded round section opposite the first unthreaded round section; a nut (51) screwable onto the threaded section of the step screw; a first screw holder including a first hollow cylindrical base body (42) and a first longitudinal bore extending through the first base body; and a second screw holder including a second hollow cylindrical base body (41) and a second longitudinal bore extending through the second base body; wherein the first base body and the second base body are insertable into two opposing housing openings of a housing of the drive unit such that
i) the first base body is fixable in a rotationally and axially secure manner on an inner circumference of a first housing opening of the two housing openings and
ii) the second base body is fixable in a rotationally and axially secure manner on an inner circumference of a second housing opening of the two housing openings; and
wherein, when the step screw is inserted through:
two opposing frame openings of the bicycle frame,
the two housing openings,
the first longitudinal bore of the first screw holder, and
the second longitudinal bore of the second screw holder;
and the nut is screwed onto the threaded section of the step screw; the first base body is supported on the first unthreaded round section of the step screw; the second base body is supported on the second unthreaded round section of the step screw; the nut is supported on the bicycle frame; and the first base body is clamped (see “compressive forces”, paragraph [0086]) between the shaft step of the step screw and the bicycle frame.
Schwenk is silent in teaching that the step is defined by the first unthreaded round section and the second unthreaded round section
Danly teaches a step screw comprising a threaded section (14, Fig. 4), a first unthreaded round section (15) and a second unthreaded round section (10) wherein the step is defined by and between the first and second unthreaded round section. Danly further teaches that the first unthreaded round section allows for a higher degree of adjustability without any weakening of the screw (see Col. 1, LL. 9-30).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Schwenk in view of Danly to arrive at the claimed invention and to provide a higher degree of adjustability without weakening the screw as taught by Danly.
With respect to claim 20, Schwenk in view of Danly as modified above teaches The fastening arrangement according to claim 19, wherein: the threaded section (Danly; 14, Fig. 4) has a thread diameter; the first unthreaded round section (15) has a first diameter that is greater than or equal to the thread diameter; and the second unthreaded round section (10) has a second diameter that is greater than the first diameter.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 3, Schwenk is the closest prior art made of record. Schwenk is silent in teaching that the second base body absorbs exclusively radial forces. In fact, Schwenk discloses that, “By absorbing high compressive forces by means of the sleeves 41, 42, impermissibly high mechanical stress on the drive unit 2 is particularly reliably avoided." Accordingly, there is no identified reason for modifying Schwenk to arrive at the claimed invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and discloses fastening arrangements for electric motors in bicycles in general.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Matthew D Lee whose telephone number is (571)272-6087. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri. (7:30 - 5:00 EST).
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, John Olszewski can be reached at (571) 272-2706. 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.
/MATTHEW D LEE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3617
/DREW J BROWN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617
Prosecution Insights