DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Chinese Application No. 202411979568.2, filed on December 31, 2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Office acknowledges receipt of the Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) submitted by the applicant on October 17, 2025. The IDS has been reviewed in accordance with 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98, and the examiner has noted the citations provided.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show the features of claim 15 as described in the specification. Claim 15 recites wherein the first center axis and the second center axis do not intersect with each other. The only support for the feature is in the specification which states at para [0018] that in other embodiments, the first center axis 311 and the second center axis 321 do not intersect each other and they are within different planes, and that such an arrangement produces constraint in more directions with respect to the screw bolt and thereby improves anti-loosening performance. No figure shows that arrangement. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 8, 14 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
With regards to claim 8, the phrase "wherein the seat body has a cross-sectional shape of cuboid, cylindrical, or prismatic" renders the claim indefinite because the cross-sectional shape is a two-dimensional figure. “Cuboid, cylindrical, or prismatic” describe three-dimensional solids. It cannot be determined from the claim whether applicant intends that the seat body itself is a cuboid, a cylinder, or a prism, or that the shape of the seat body in cross-section is rectangular, circular, or a polygonal. Paragraph [0013] of the specification repeats the same language verbatim. Applicant is suggested to recite either --wherein the seat body is a cuboid, a cylinder, or a prism-- or --wherein the seat body has a cross-sectional shape of a rectangle, circle, or a polygon--.
With regards to claim 14, “the connection portion” and “the outer sleeve portion” lack antecedent basis. Claim 14 depends from claim 12, which depends from claim 1. Neither claim recites these features.
With regards to claim 18, the phrase “wherein a plurality of stripes is provided on an inner wall of the oblique hole, and one end of the plurality of stripes is connected to one of the screw threads” is indefinite. The term “stripes” is not a recognized structural term in the fastener art, and the specification does not recite whether the stripes 322 project from the inner wall, are recessed into it, or are surface markings on it. Applicant is suggested to change to --a plurality of ribs projecting from an inner wall of the oblique hole-- or a plurality of grooves recessed in an inner wall of the oblique hole--.
With regards to claim 19, the term “the seat body” lacks antecedent basis. Claim 19 depends from claim 6, which depends from claim 5, which depends on claim 1. None of claims 1, 5, or 6 recites this feature. Applicant is suggested to amend claim 19 to depend from claim 7 which introduces the seat body.
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, 3-8, 10, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lefevre (FR-2941504-A1 as cited by applicant) in view of Camloc (DE-29604057-U1).
With regards to claim 1, Lefevre discloses a reinforcement quick nut comprising a nut main body (the nut formed of gripping shaft 1 and tilting base 2 as shown in Fig. 1), wherein the nut main body comprises a first surface and a second surface opposite to each other (the transverse bearing face 8 of the tilting base and the opposed free end face of the gripping shaft), the nut main body defines a threaded hole extending through the first surface and the second surface (tapping 3 together with bore 4, which Lefevre states from a common lumen traversing the nut) and screw threads provided on the inner wall of the threaded hole (thread portions 7). Lefevre further discloses that the threaded hole comprises a straight hole and an oblique hole connected to the straight hole (tapping 3 and smooth bore 4), that the straight hole defines a first center axis perpendicular to the first surface (axis 5, which Lefevre states coincides substantially with the longitudinal main and central axis of the nut and is therefore normal to the transverse bearing face 8), and that the oblique hole defines a second center axis inclined relative to the first center axis (axis 6, expressly inclined relative to axis 5).
However, Lefevre fails to disclose “in a direction of the first center axis, a height of the straight hole is greater than 30 millimeters.” Lefevre gives nut heights (h) of 9, 12, 15 and 18 mm for nominal tapping diameters of (M) 6-12 mm (page 4, ln 17 of the original FR2941504A document).
Camloc discloses the length of the straight threaded bore 3 being at least twice the thread diameter GD in Fig. 1 to obtain a sufficient number of engaging threads on the threaded nut while preserving the ability to push the nut onto the bolt in the inclined position (paras [0012] and [0044]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to lengthen the through hole 3 of Lefevre along the first center axis greater than 30 mm, as taught by Camloc, because the length of the through hole would be a design choice in order to increase the number of engaging threads on the threaded nut while maintaining the possibility of inserting the threaded nut. The length hole being twice the thread diameter is the minimum optimal value and would be obvious for one of ordinary skill to optimize that variable. MPEP 2144.05(II)(A).
With regards to claim 3, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc discloses the reinforcement quick nut of claim 1 as set forth above. Lefevre further discloses wherein an included angle between the first center axis and the second center axis is in a range from 12-15 degrees (the axis of the tapping and the axis of the bore form an angle between 7-20 degrees, page 4, last paragraph of the English machine translation).
With regards to claim 4, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc discloses the reinforcement quick nut of claim 3 as set forth above. Lefevre further discloses wherein an included angle between the first center axis, and the second center axis is 13.5 degrees (the axis of the tapping and the axis of the bore form an angle between 7-20 degrees, page 4, last paragraph of the English machine translation).
With regards to claim 5, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc discloses the reinforcement quick nut of claim 1 as set forth above, including a straight hole and an oblique hole each having an inner diameter. Lefevre discloses how the two holes are related and that the diameter of the smooth bore exceeds the nominal diameter of the tapping by at least 2 millimeters and preferably by at least 4 millimeters (page 2, first paragraph of the English machine translation).
However, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc fails to disclose an inner diameter of the straight hole is in a range from 18 millimeters to 22 millimeters, and an inner diameter of the oblique hole is in a range from 12 millimeters to 16 millimeters.
For the straight hole, Camloc teaches that the threaded bore should be at least twice as long as the thread is wide. Claim 1 above requires that the bore to be more than 30 millimeters long. A bore at 30 millimeters long and at least twice its own width must be more than 15 millimeters wide. For the oblique hole, making part of a known device larger or smaller than another part is a design choice.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the oblique hole of Lefevre narrower that the straight hole, within the recited range, because the size selections for the oblique hole would be an ordinary design choice. MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A).
With regards to claim 6, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc discloses the reinforcement quick nut of claim 5 as set forth above. Claim 6 recites an inner diameter of the straight hole of 20 millimeters and an inner diameter of the oblique hole of 14 millimeters. Those values are the midpoints of the ranges recited in claim 5 and lie within them.
With regards to claim 7, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc discloses the reinforcement quick nut according to claim 1 as set forth above. Lefevre further discloses a seat body tilting base 2, which Lefevre states extends radially projecting from the gripping shaft 1 and is delimited axially by a bearing face 8.
The combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc fails to disclose that the seat body comprises an outer sleeve portion and a connected portion, the outer sleeve portion is disposed around an outer side of the connection portion, the connection portion is provided with a through hole, and the nut main body extends through the through hole.
Camloc discloses a seat body with threaded clamping nut 2 having a shaft section 9 and, at or near one end of the shaft section, a radially widened retaining flange 6 for flat bearing on the object to be clamped as shown in Figs. 1-3. The shaft section 9 is the nut main body and passes through the central opening of the flange, which is considered the connection portion. The radially outer rim of the flange, which Camloc states is non-circular form and carries ribs 7 on its outer surface, lies around the outer side of that central region and is considered to be the outer sleeve portion.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Lefevre’s tilting base 2 with the radially retaining flange of Camloc, in which the nut main body passes through a central opening in the flange and the outer rim of the flange surrounds that opening, in order to obtain a larger and more stable bearing area against the workpiece and outer rim. Enlarging and modifying Lefevre’s base not Camloc’s flange is the combination of prior arts elements according to known method to yield predictable results and the simple substitution one known seat for another, MPEP 2143(I)(A-B).
With regards to claim 8, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc discloses the reinforcement quick nut according to claim 7 as set forth above. Lefevre’s seat body or tilting base 2 has a circular cross-section and meets the cylindrical alternative. Lefevre states that the tilting base 2 has a peripheral face 10 of circular cross-section, which Lefevre distinguishes form the hexagonal peripheral face 9 of the gripping shaft 1 (page 4, third paragraph of the English machine translation).
With regards to claim 10, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc discloses the reinforcement quick nut according to claim 8 as set forth above. Lefevre discloses the first surface which is the free end face at the top of the gripping shaft 1 and a second surface is the bearing face 8 as shown in Fig. 1.
With regards to claim 17, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc discloses the reinforcement quick nut of claim 1 as set forth above. Lefevre further discloses that the nut main body has a cross-sectional shape of a regular hexagonal (the gripping shaft 9 has a peripheral face 9 of the hexagonal cross section, which Lefevre states permits the nut to be tightened with a standard wrench, page 6, second paragraph of the English machine translation).
With regards to claim 19, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc discloses the reinforcement quick nut according to claim 7 as set forth above. Camloc discloses that the threading clamping nut may be produced in one piece with the retaining flange and stating that with a suitable choice of material the nut can be manufactured integrally with a retaining flange (para [0018] of the English machine translation).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lefevre (FR-2941504-A1 as cited by applicant) in view of Camloc (DE-29604057-U1) and further in view of FED-STD-H28/21B.
With regards to claim 2, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc discloses the reinforcement quick nut according to claim 1 as set forth above. Lefevre further discloses that the screw threads are formed on an inner wall of the straight hole (the thread portions 7 being formed in the tapping 3, page 5, last paragraph of English machine translations).
However, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc fails to discloses that a pitch of the screw threads is in a range from 1.6 millimeters to 2.0 millimeters.
Lefevre does disclose working embodiments having nominal tapping diameters (M) of 6-12 mm in table on page 6, ln 17 of the original FR2941504A1 document. FED-STD-H28/21B establishes that the standard coarse pitch for a nominal diameter of 12 mm is 1.75 mm in Table XXI.1, listed page 12. This pitch falls within the claimed range.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the tapping at the standard coarse pitch for the selected nominal diameters in order to permit the nut to be used with commercially available threaded rod of that size. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because Lefevre states that the nut is mounted on a threaded rod of nominal diameter equal to the nominal diameter of its tapping, which requires that the two share a pitch, and adopting the standard for that pitch is the use of a known technique to achieve a predictable result. MPEP 2143(I)(C-D).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lefevre (FR-2941504-A1 as cited by applicant) in view of Camloc (DE-29604057-U1) and further in view of Lanham et al. (US-6357981-B1).
With regards to claim 9, Lefevre in view of Camloc discloses the reinforcement quick nut of claim 7 as set forth above. Camloc further discloses that a plurality of grip features is formed on the side of the outer sleeve portion away from the nut main body. Camloc states that the radially widened retaining flange 6 is provided on its outer surface with means 7 for improving grip, in the form of ribs (para [0050] of the English machine translation).
However, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc fails to disclose an extending direction of each of the plurality of anti-slip grooves is parallel to the first center axis.
Lanham discloses grooves on the outer surface of a nut extending parallel to its longitudinal axis. Lanham describes a fastener 10 in the form of a nut having an elongated body 25 with a longitudinal axis, the outer surface of which carries spaced splines 27 separated by longitudinal grooves 29, the grooves extending from the end 30 of the body through a circumferential ridge 31 and the splines extending substantially the entire distance between end 30 and the should 32 on the that ridge.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to orient the ribs 7 of Camloc’s retaining flange, and the grooves defined between them, parallel to the first center axis, as taught by Lanham, in order to transmit tightening torque between the mounting tool and the nut without slipping.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lefevre (FR-2941504-A1 as cited by applicant) in view of Camloc (DE-29604057-U1) and further in view of Ross (US-5019079-A1).
With regards to claim 11, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc discloses the reinforcement quick nut of claim 10 as set forth above. However, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc fails to disclose the two notches are formed at an end of the nut main body adjacent to the first surface, and the two notches are arranged symmetrically. Lefevre discloses the hexagonal peripheral face 9 of the gripping shaft 1 as the means of turning the nut.
Ross discloses two recesses 21 and 23 (two notches) as shown in Figs. 1-3 at an end face of a nut extending a short longitudinal distance on opposite sides of the bore, which receives a drive tool that is rotated to drive the threaded member (col 2, lns 57-68).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form two notches at the end of the gripping shaft of Lefevre adjacent the first surface, on opposite sides of the tapping and therefore symmetrically, as taught by Ross, in order to allow the nut to be turned by a wrench.
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lefevre (FR-2941504-A1 as cited by applicant) in view of Camloc (DE-29604057-U1) and further in view of Masuda (WO-2006004084-A1).
With regards to claim 12, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc discloses the reinforcement quick nut according to claim 1 as set forth above. However, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc fails to disclose wherein the reinforcement quick nut is made of bearing steel.
Matsuda discloses a fastening nut 2 made of bearing steel (para [0056]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to for the reinforcement quick nut of Lefevre in view of Camloc from bearing steel, as taught by Masuda, in order to obtain a nut capable of sustaining the tightening and clamping forces for which Lefevre states its nut is intended. This is simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(B).
With regards to claim 13, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc and further in view of Matsuda discloses the reinforcement quick nut according to claim 11 as set forth above. Bearing steel is an alloy. Furthermore, Matsuda discloses that the nut may be made of metals and alloys (para [0056]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lefevre (FR-2941504-A1 as cited by applicant) in view of Camloc (DE-29604057-U1) and Masuda (WO-2006004084-A1) and further in view of Russo (US-5120169-A).
With regards to claim 14, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc and Masuda discloses the reinforcement quick nut according to claim 12 as set forth above.
However, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc and Masuda fails to disclose at least one of the connection portions and the outer sleeve portion is made of rubber or silicone. Camloc states that its threaded clamping nut and retaining flange are preferably of plastic.
Russo discloses a flanged tubular sleeve of rubber which receives a threaded fastener. Russo describes a blind fastener comprising a busing 10 having a flange 16 at one end, the bushing being made from neoprene, EPDM, nitrile or Buna N, which is inserted into a hole 12 in a thin-walled member 14 with the flange 16 butting against the outer surface of that member. A machine screw 20 extend through the bushing and threadedly received in a stamped opening 22 of a metal end cap 24 fitted over the reduced diameter end portion 26 of the bushing. Russo further discloses that the blind fastener comprising a bushing of neoprene having a flange at one end with a nut received within the bushing bore, and that tightening the screw expands the bushing to create a strong leakproof fastening. Therefore, Russo discloses that the tubular sleeve and the flange are made of rubber.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form at least one of the connection portion and the outer sleeve portion of the seat body of Lefevre in view of Camloc from rubber, as taught by Russo, while retaining the bearing steel of Masuda for the nut main body, in order to obtain a fastener that seals the mounting hole and tolerates vibration. This is a simple substitution of one known material for another to obtain predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(B).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lefevre (FR-2941504-A1 as cited by applicant) in view of Camloc (DE-29604057-U1) and further in view of Shimodaira (EP-1054171-A2).
With regards to claim 15, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc discloses the reinforcement quick nut according to claim 1 as set forth above. The combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc fails to disclose where the first center axis and the second center axis do not intersect with each other.
Shimodaira discloses a nut in which the smooth sliding portion and the threaded portion of the bolt opening are laterally offset from one another so that their axes do not intersect (as shown in Figs. 1a and 1b, nut 10 with insertion opening 11 having a large part-circular portion 12 whose inner wall is a plain surface against which the outer perimeter of a bolt 50 can slide, and s small part-circular portion 13 whose inner wall is formed a threaded surface 16 engageable with the projecting threads of the bolt 50, Figs. 1a-3b, para [0025]-[0028]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to offset the axis, as taught by Shimodaira, of Levre’s bore 4 laterally from the axis of the tapping 3, so that the two axes are skew and do not intersect, in order to place the clearance created by the bore on the side of the tapping from which the rod is inserted, while leaving the thread portions 7 on the opposite side unoccupied over the full length of the bore.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lefevre (FR-2941504-A1) in view of Camloc (DE-29604057-U1) and further in view of Hughes (GB-2402965-A).
With regards to claim 16, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc discloses the reinforcement quick nut according to claim 1 as set forth above. However, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc fails to disclose that a quantity of the screw threads is 11 to 15 in a length of 13.7 millimeters in the straight hole. Lefevre discloses that the nut height is chosen so that the tapping has at least seven threads and preferably at least nine, and does not disclose a pitch.
Hughes discloses a pitch of 1.15 millimeters (page 5, lns 25-31) and with a length of 13.7 millimeters of threaded bore, give a result of approximately 11.9 thread turns (13.7 inch divided by 1.15 millimeters pitch = 11.9) which falls within the claim range of 11 to 15 screw threads.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the tapping 3 of Lefevre at the 1.15 millimeters pitch disclosed by Hughes, so that a length of 13.7 millimeters of the straight hole carries between 11 and 15 screw threads, in order to control the thread portions to disengage from the threaded rod.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lefevre (FR-2941504-A1 as cited by applicant) in view of Camloc (DE-29604057-U1) and further in view of Nilsen et al. (US-6908272-B1).
With regards to claim 18, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc discloses the reinforcement of claim 1 as set forth above including the oblique hole and screw threads. However, the combination of Lefevre in view of Camloc fails to disclose a plurality of stripes is provided on an inner wall of the oblique wall, and one end of the each of the plurality of stripes is connected to one of the screw threads. Lefevre discloses bore 4 as the oblique or smooth wall.
Nilsen et al. disclose a row of elongated features on the wall of the unthreaded hole of a nut. Nilsen’s nut has a threaded region and an unthreaded counterbore leading to it, and around those opening forms alternating peaks and valleys or elongated features 601 or stripes spaced evenly apart as shown in Fig. 6B. The elongated features or raised bumps or peaks or stripes 601 preferably have rounded, or otherwise curved, external surfaces (col 9, lns 14-32).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form a plurality of elongated features or stripes on the wall of the oblique hole of Lefevre, running along that hole to where it meets the tapping, so that one end of each feature meets a screw thread in order to provide alignment feedback to the user. Nilsen et al. disclose that the elongated features cause the nut to vibrate, and the strength of the vibration tells the operator how far out of line the bolt is. Little or no vibration means the bolt is in alignment and the larger the misalignment, the stronger the vibration (col 2, lns 5-13).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
DE-102009021597-A1, US-5073073-A1 to Kazino, US-20230285793-A1 to Gresser et al., CN-103742503-B to Su, and US-3878757-A to Puklus disclose two bore nuts in general.
GB-2402965-A to Hughes a nut having surfaces that are parallel and perpendicular to the nut body.
US-2261537-A1 to Zamarra discloses a nut having threads on the normal axis.
US-9945176-B2 to Flannery discloses a slide nut with release bore.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LONG BAO NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7350. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9-5:30 pm ET).
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, Kristina R Fulton can be reached at 571-272-7376. 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.
/L.B.N./Examiner, Art Unit 3675 /KRISTINA R FULTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675
