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 .
Election/Restrictions
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claims 1-47, drawn to a window well apparatus, classified in E04.
II. Claim 48-49, drawn to a method of manufacturing a window well, classified in B29C70/42.
The inventions are independent or distinct, each from the other because:
Inventions I and II are related as apparatus and product made. The inventions in this relationship are distinct if either or both of the following can be shown: (1) that the apparatus as claimed is not an obvious apparatus for making the product and the apparatus can be used for making a materially different product or (2) that the product as claimed can be made by another and materially different apparatus (MPEP § 806.05(g)). In this case the method of heating up a mold and pressing it. This method could be used to produce any other plastic products such as plastic bats, plastic cups, or just any other plastic article.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
The inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification.
The inventions have acquired a separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent subject matter.
The inventions require a different field of search (for example, searching different classification/subclasses or electronic resources. Or employing different search queries);
The prior art applicable to one invention would not likely be applicable to another invention.
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of an invention to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected invention.
The election of an invention may be made with or without traverse. To reserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
During a telephone conversation with Matthew Todd on 7/20/2026 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of group I, claims 1-47. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claims 48-49 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
The examiner has required restriction between product or apparatus claims and process claims. Where applicant elects claims directed to the product/apparatus, and all product/apparatus claims are subsequently found allowable, withdrawn process claims that include all the limitations of the allowable product/apparatus claims should be considered for rejoinder. All claims directed to a nonelected process invention must include all the limitations of an allowable product/apparatus claim for that process invention to be rejoined.
In the event of rejoinder, the requirement for restriction between the product/apparatus claims and the rejoined process claims will be withdrawn, and the rejoined process claims will be fully examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. Thus, to be allowable, the rejoined claims must meet all criteria for patentability including the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 101, 102, 103 and 112. Until all claims to the elected product/apparatus are found allowable, an otherwise proper restriction requirement between product/apparatus claims and process claims may be maintained. Withdrawn process claims that are not commensurate in scope with an allowable product/apparatus claim will not be rejoined. See MPEP § 821.04. Additionally, in order for rejoinder to occur, applicant is advised that the process claims should be amended during prosecution to require the limitations of the product/apparatus claims. Failure to do so may result in no rejoinder. Further, note that the prohibition against double patenting rejections of 35 U.S.C. 121 does not apply where the restriction requirement is withdrawn by the examiner before the patent issues. See MPEP § 804.01.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/02/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/10/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
In regards to claim 46, it appears “the welding” should be –welding--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4-9, 15, 31-37, 43, & 45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cook et al. (2021/0172180).
In regards to claim 1, Cook discloses a window well, comprising:
A window well (reference element 100) composed of a fiber reinforced plastic material ([0011], lines 1-4).
A body having a plurality of ribs interposed between a plurality of wall surface portions (as seen in fig. 1-2, reference element 130), each rib 130 being positioned between two different wall portions; two or more flange portions (as seen in fig. 1), wherein the two or more flange portions are located at a top of the body with a first flange portion located on one side of the body and a second flange portion located on another side of the body (as seen in fig. 1); and a top lip of the window well body, wherein the top lip includes a varying thickness (as seen in fig. 10B, reference element 1005).
In regards to claim 2, Cook discloses wherein each flange portion includes a cut-out (as seen in fig. 1, 125).
In regards to claim 4, Cook discloses wherein each rib 130 is defined by a varying height and a varying depth (pg. 1 col. 2 [0011] lines 4-6).
In regards to claim 5, Cook discloses wherein the body includes a varying wall thickness (as seen in Fig. 9B, pg. 5 col 2 [0098], lines 1-4).
In regards to claim 6, Cook discloses wherein the varying wall thickness of the body is thicker at a peak of the ribs as compared to the wall surface portions (as seen in fig. 10E, pg. 5 col 2 [0098], lines 4-7).
In regards to claim 7, Cook discloses wherein the varying wall thickness of the body is thicker near the top lip of the window well as compared to the wall surface portions (as seen in fig. 10B, pg. 6 col 1 [0100], lines 8-10).
In regards to claim 8, Cook discloses wherein a spacing between each rib 130 in the plurality of ribs 130 includes a varying vertical height and each rib 130 in the plurality of ribs 130 includes a varying depth (pg. 1 col. 2 [0011] lines, 4-6).
In regards to claim 9, Cook discloses wherein the varying vertical height is parallel to a major face of the body and the varying vertical height of the plurality of ribs includes a smaller height in a center of the body and a greater height at ends of the body (as seen in fig. 3&4, reference element 210, pg. 6, col 2 [0107] lines 1-5).
In regards to claim 15, Cook discloses wherein flanges on either side of the window well are further configured with mating portions, comprising:
top mating portions, wherein the top mating portions are located on each side of a top portion of the flanges of the body (as seen in fig. 35, near reference elements 3500 & 1800); and
bottom mating portions, wherein the bottom mating portions are located on each side of a bottom portion of the flanges of the body, the bottom mating portions being configured to mate with a second top mating portion (as seen in fig. 36, reference element 3500) at a top portion of the flange of a second window well body (as seen in fig. 32 & 38).
In regards to claim 31, Cook discloses a window well composed fiber reinforced plastic window well comprising:
a body having flanges and a plurality of ribs (as seen in fig. 2, reference element 130) interposed between a plurality of wall surface portions (as seen in fig. 1, reference element 115), each rib 130 being positioned between two different wall surface portions 115 (pg. 3 col 2 [0066], lines 1-4); wherein flanges on either side of the window well are configured with mating portions (as seen in fig. 2) comprising:
top mating portions, wherein the top mating portions are located on each side of a top portion of the flanges of the body; and bottom mating portions (as seen in fig. 35, near reference elements 3500 & 1800), wherein the bottom mating portions are located on each side of a bottom portion of the flanges of the body, the bottom mating portions being configured to mate with a second top mating portion at a top portion of the flange of a second window well body (as seen in fig. 36, reference element 3500).
In regards to claim 32, Cook discloses wherein each rib 130 is defined by a varying wall thickness (pg. 1 col. 2 [0011] lines 4-6).
In regards to claim 33, Cook discloses wherein the body includes a varying wall thickness (as seen in Fig. 9B, pg. 5 col 2 [0098], lines 1-4).
In regards to claim 34, Cook discloses wherein the varying wall thickness of the body is thicker at a peak of the ribs 130 as compared to the wall surface portions 115 (as seen in fig. 10E, pg. 5 col 2 [0098], lines 4-7).
In regards to claim 35, Cook discloses wherein the varying wall thickness of the body is thicker near a top lip of the window well as compared to the wall surface portions 115 (as seen in fig. 10B, pg. 6 col 1 [0100], lines 8-10).
In regards to claim 36, Cook discloses wherein a spacing between each rib 130 in the plurality of ribs 130 includes a varying vertical height and each rib 130 in the plurality of ribs 130 includes a varying depth (pg. 1 col. 2 [0011] lines, 4-6).
In regards to claim 37, Cook discloses wherein the varying vertical height is parallel to a major face of the body and the varying vertical height of the plurality of ribs 130 includes a smaller height in a center of the body and a greater height at ends of the body (as seen in fig. 3&4, reference element 210, pg. 6, col 2 [0107] lines 1-5).
In regards to claim 43, Cook discloses two or more flange cut-out portions (as seen in fig. 2-4, reference element 125), wherein the two or more flange cut-out portions are located at a top of the body (as seen in fig. 3&4 upper part of window well 400) with a first flange cut-out portion located on one side of the body and a second flange cut-out portion located on another side of the body (as seen in fig. 4).
In regards to claim 45, Cook discloses a method of stacking attaching a first window well segment and a second window well segment, the method comprising:
providing a first window well segment (as seen in fig. 35, reference element 400), wherein the first window well segment 400 includes flanges on either side of the first window well segment 400 (as seen in fig. 31), such flanges being configured with mating portions comprising:
top mating portions, wherein the top mating portions are located on each side of a top portion of the flanges of a body of the first window well segment 400 (as seen in fig. 31); and providing a second window well segment (as seen in fig. 35, reference element 1800), wherein the second window well segment 1800 includes flanges on either side of the second window well segment 1800 (as seen in fig. 31), such flanges being configured with mating portions comprising:
bottom mating portions, wherein the bottom mating portions are located on side of a bottom portion of the flanges of a body of the second window well segment 1800 (as seen in fig. 32), the bottom mating portions of the second window well segment 1800 being configured to mate with the top mating portions of the first window well segment 400 (as seen in fig. 32); mating the top mating portions on the first window well segment 400 with the bottom mating portions on the second window well segment 1800 (as seen in fig. 32); and joining the first window well segment 400 to the second window well segment 1800 (as seen in fig. 32).
The examiner also wants to note that Cook further teaches that multiple types of modular inserts can be attached to the first window well segment 400 either on the bottom or the top (pg. 10, col 2 [0165], lines 1-11).
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.
Claim 3, 28, 29, & 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cook et at. (2021/0172180) in view of Skaggs (7802402).
In regards to claim 3, Cook discloses the claimed invention, however, Cook does not disclose the lip having a plurality of corrugations.
Skaggs teaches of having a plurality of ridges and grooves along the upper surface to allow corresponding members to be attached above or below (as seen in Fig. 2-3, col 6 lines 42-46).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Skaggs’ corrugated connecting means into Cook’s invention, because the corrugated connecting means will provide a secure connection between adjacent sections and prevent them from shifting in a horizontal direction when subjected to the horizontal forces from the adjacent ground. Further, the corrugated connection means will also help to prevent water from passing through the joints between adjacent sections.
In regards to claim 28, Cook in view of Skaggs discloses the claimed invention (as mentioned in previously rejected claim 3).
In regards to claim 29, Cook in view of Skaggs discloses the claimed invention wherein, the corrugations represent areas of varying thickness within the top lip of the window well, the corrugations being formed in an exterior facing surface of the window well, an opposite interior facing surface of the top lip of the window well-being substantially smooth.
Cook also teaches that the lip has varying lip thickness (as seen in fig. 10B) with the opposite interior face being smooth (as seen in fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the location of the corrugations to the exterior of the lip due to the lip already having a varying thickness and allow the lip to flex for a proper seal with the additional modular inserts 1800 or 3500.
In regards to claim 44, Cook in view of Skaggs discloses the claimed invention (as previously mentioned in rejected claim 3).
Claim 10,11, 14, 17, 24, 25, 38, 39 & 42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cook et at. (2021/0172180) in view of Iver (DE 102016117895).
In regards to claim 10, Cook discloses the claimed invention, however Cook does not disclose one or more pairs of rib gussets, wherein each pair of rib gussets is associated with and extends from a given rib.
Iver teaches of using one or more pairs of gussets (as seen in fig. 2, reference element 27) to reinforce the ribs (as seen in fig. 2, reference element 19a) to increase the rigidity of the ribs 19a (as seen in fig. 2). Iver further teaches that that each gusset is associated with and extends from a given rib (pg. 8 [0047], lines 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the choice of design to include gussets being utilized that are associated with and extend from the ribs to increase stability, reduce buckling of the ribs, and easy use of stacking. One of ordinary skill would apply these gussets to more than one rib when more than a single rib is present.
In regards to claim 11, Cook in view of Iver disclose the claim invention. Cook in view of Iver further teaches wherein the associated rib 19a is located between a first gusset 27 in the pair of gussets 27 and a second gusset 27 in the pair of gussets 27 (as seen in Iver’s fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the structure integrity of the rib by including a first and second gusset on either side of the rib to increase the stiffness, durability, and lifespan.
In regards to claim 14, Cook in view of Iver disclose the claimed invention. However, Cook in view of Iver doesn’t disclose a pair of integrated forklift supports, wherein the integrated forklift supports are located so as to extend from a lower most rib of the window well, towards a bottom of the window well body, the integrated forklift supports being positioned at opposing ends of an exterior front face of the body.
Cook in view of Iver further teaches that there is a row of stiffeners that are located on top and bottom of a rib to allow for additional structural stiffness, durability, and precise alignment for stackability (as seen in Iver’s fig. 2, pg. 8 [0048], lines 1-4 of Iver’s translation). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the amount and location of these stiffeners to the lower most rib of the window well to give the lower most rib additional stiffness, durability, and rigidity based on performance of transit from warehouse to warehouse.
In regards to claim 17, Cook in view of Iver disclose the basic claimed invention including the limitations of claim 17. The limitations were previously addressed in the rejection of claim 14.
In regards to claim 24, Cook in view of Iver disclose one or more pairs of rib gussets 27 (as seen in Iver’s fig. 2), wherein each pair of rib gussets 27 is associated with and extends from a given rib (pg. 8 [0047], lines 1-2).
In regards to claim 25, Cook in view of Iver disclose wherein the associated rib 19a is located between a first gusset 27 in the pair of gussets 27 and a second gusset 27 in the pair of gussets (as seen in Iver’s fig. 2).
In regards to claim 38, Cook in view of Iver disclose one or more pairs of rib gussets 27 (as seen in Iver’s fig. 2), wherein each pair of rib gussets is associated with and extends from a given rib (pg. 8 [0047], lines 1-2).
In regards to claim 39, Cook in view of Iver disclose wherein the associated rib 19a is located between a first gusset 27 in the pair of gussets 27 and a second gusset 27 in the pair of gussets 27 (as seen in Iver’s fig. 2).
In regards to claim 42, Cook in view of Iver disclose the basic claimed invention including the limitations of claim 42. The limitations were previously addressed above in the rejection of claim 14.
Claim 12, 26 & 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cook et at. (2021/0172180) in view of Watkins (7549256).
In regards to claim 12, Cook discloses the claimed invention, however does not specifically disclose one or more additional ribs located at a bottom flat portion of the body, wherein the one or more additional ribs run parallel to the plurality of ribs.
Watkins teaches of having one or more additional rib located at a bottom flat portion of the body and runs parallel to the plurality of ribs (as seen in fig. 9 & 10, reference element 22A & 22).
It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include these additional ribs 22 at the bottom of the flat portion to allow additional window wells to be properly stacked with ease, and allow the rib 22 to breathe by expanding and compressing with ease. One of ordinary skill would also have these run parallel to the plurality ribs 22 for easier manufacturing costs, ease of installation, and for aesthetic purposes.
In regards to claim 26, Cook in view of Watkins disclose one or more additional ribs 22 located at a bottom portion of the body, wherein the additional ribs 22 run parallel to the plurality of ribs 22 (as seen in fig. 9 & 10, reference element 22A & 22).
In regards to claim 40, Cook in view of Watkins discloses one or more additional ribs 22 located at a bottom portion of the body, wherein the additional ribs 22 run parallel to the plurality of ribs 22 (as seen in fig. 9 & 10, reference element 22A & 22).
Claim 13, 16, 18-23, 27, 30 & 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cook et at. (2021/0172180) in view of George (2008/0010911).
In regards to claim 13, Cook discloses the claimed invention, however, Cook doesn’t further disclose a plurality of integrated stacking protruding members, wherein each integrated stacking protruding member is located on a side of the body located between sets of adjacent ribs 130, the integrated stacking protruding members extending from a flange of the window well.
George teaches of a plurality of integrated protruding members that are located on a side of the body between sets of adjacent ribs, and extend from a flange of the window well (as seen in Fig. 2 & 10, reference elements 108).
It would be obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include these protruding members on each side of the flanges to help guide and stabilize the window wells when large amounts are being stacked for storage or transportation.
In regards to claim 16, Cook in view of George discloses a window well comprising:
A fiber reinforced plastic material, a body having a plurality of ribs interposed between a plurality of wall surface portions, each rib (Cook’s reference element 130) being positioned between two different wall surface portions (as seen in Cook’s fig. 1-2); and a plurality of integrated stacking protruding members (George’s reference element 108), wherein each of the integrated stacking protruding members 108 is located on a side of the body located between sets of adjacent ribs 130, the integrated stacking protruding members 108 extending from a flange of the window well.
In regards to claim 18, Cook in view of George disclose the claimed invention. Cook further teaches that each rib is defined by a varying height and a varying depth (Cook’s pg. 1 col. 2 [0011] lines 4-6).
In regards to claim 19, Cook in view of George disclose wherein the body includes a varying wall thickness (as seen in Cook’s Fig. 10E).
In regards to claim 20, Cook in view of George disclose wherein the varying wall thickness of the body is thicker at a peak of the ribs as compared to the wall surface portions (as seen in Cook’s fig. 10E).
In regards to claim 21, Cook in view of George disclose wherein the varying wall thickness of the body is thicker near a top lip of the window well as compared to the wall surface portions (as seen in Cook’s fig. 10B).
In regards to claim 22, Cook in view of George disclose wherein a spacing between each rib in the plurality of ribs includes a varying vertical height and each rib in the plurality of ribs includes a varying depth (Cook’s pg. 1 col. 2 [0011] lines, 4-6).
In regards to claim 23, Cook in view of George wherein the varying vertical height is parallel to a major face of the body and the varying vertical height of the plurality of ribs includes a smaller height in a center of the body and a greater height at ends of the body (as seen in Cook’s fig. 3&4, reference element 210, pg. 6, col 2 [0107] lines 1-5).
In regards to claim 27, Cook in view of George disclose two or more flange cut-out portions (as seen in Cook’s fig. 2-4, reference element 125), wherein the two or more flange cut-out portions 125 are located at a top of the body (as seen in Cook’s fig. 3&4 upper part of window well 400) with a first flange cut-out portion 125 located on one side of the body (as seen in Cook’s fig. 4 upper part of window well 400) and a second flange cut-out portion located on another side of the body (as seen in Cook’s fig. 4).
In regards to claim 30, Cook in view of George disclose wherein flanges on either side of the window well are further configured with mating portions, comprising:
top mating portions, wherein the top mating portions are located on each side of a top portion of the flanges of the body (as seen in Cook’s fig. 35, near reference element 3500); and
bottom mating portions, wherein the bottom mating portions are located on each side of a bottom portion of the flanges of the body, the bottom mating portions being configured to mate with a second top mating portion 3705 (as seen in Cook’s fig. 38) at a top portion of the flange of a second window well body (as seen in Cook’s fig. 32 & 38).
In regards to claim 41, Cook in view of George discloses a plurality of integrated stacking protruding members, wherein each integrated stacking protruding member is located on a side of the body located between sets of adjacent ribs, the integrated stacking protruding members extending from a flange of the window well (as seen in George’s Fig. 2 & 10, reference elements 104, 108, & 112).
Claim 46 & 47 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cook et at. (2021/0172180) in view of Dauman (2021/0086011).
In regards to claim 46, Cook discloses the claimed invention of fastening the first window well segment to the second window well segment with a fastener (pg. 9 col 1 [0143], lines 7-10) but does not disclose of an addition of welding.
Dauman teaches of securing a first and second well side (as seen in fig. 3M, reference elements 221a & 221b) to the building by welding (as seen in fig. 3K, pg. 3 col 2 [0034] lines, 21-26). This way all sides of the egress well (as seen in fig. 3L, reference element 208) is securely sealed without any possible leaks of soil, or water.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one having ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to weld portions of the window well along with fasteners together for greater connections to increase the stiffness, rigidity, and durability of the window well.
In regards to claim 47, Cook in view of Dauman discloses the claimed invention, however, Cook and Dauman does not disclose wherein the welding is ultrasonic welding, however, Daumen does teach of welding a window well to a building based off the material of the window well.
Therefore, It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the type of welding dependent on what material, in this case ultrasonic welding, is being used to ensure the best practice of solidifying the portions together without sacrificing the window well stiffness, or material properties when combined.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GARRETT C PATTERSON whose telephone number is (571)270-1558. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7.30am-5pm.
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, Brian Glessner can be reached at (571) 272-6754. 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.
/GARRETT CHRISTOPHER PATTERSON/Examiner, Art Unit 3633
/BRENT W HERRING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3633
Prosecution Insights