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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “a rotation number acquisition unit configured to acquire a rotation number of at least one motor that is driven by one winding of a plurality of windings which is used selectively …” has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use the term “configured” coupled with functional language “a rotation number acquisition unit configured to acquire a rotation number of at least one motor that is driven by one winding of a plurality of windings which is used selectively …” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the term “configured” is not preceded by a structural modifier.
The following table shows that all three prongs of the 3-prong analysis are met and the limitation invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (See MPEP 2181(I) for details):
The 3-Prong Analysis for Claim Limitation : “a rotation number acquisition unit configured to acquire a rotation number of at least one motor that is driven by one winding of a plurality of windings which is used selectively …”
Met
Prong A
Explicit recitation of “means” or equivalent term
YES
Prong B
Functional recitation of " a rotation number acquisition unit configured to acquire a rotation number of at least one motor that is driven by one winding of a plurality of windings which is used selectively …"
YES
Prong C
No structure that performs the function
YES
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “an output value acquisition unit configured to acquire a output value of the at least one motor…” has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use the term “configured” coupled with functional language “an output value acquisition unit configured to acquire a output value of the at least one motor …” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the term “configured” is not preceded by a structural modifier.
The following table shows that all three prongs of the 3-prong analysis are met and the limitation invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (See MPEP 2181(I) for details):
The 3-Prong Analysis for Claim Limitation : “an output value acquisition unit configured to acquire a output value of the at least one motor …”
Met
Prong A
Explicit recitation of “means” or equivalent term
YES
Prong B
Functional recitation of " an output value acquisition unit configured to acquire a output value of the at least one motor …"
YES
Prong C
No structure that performs the function
YES
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “a winding identification unit configured to identify the one winding being used…” has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use the term “configured” coupled with functional language “a winding identification unit configured to identify the one winding being used …” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the term “configured” is not preceded by a structural modifier.
The following table shows that all three prongs of the 3-prong analysis are met and the limitation invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (See MPEP 2181(I) for details):
The 3-Prong Analysis for Claim Limitation : “a winding identification unit configured to identify the one winding being used …”
Met
Prong A
Explicit recitation of “means” or equivalent term
YES
Prong B
Functional recitation of " a winding identification unit configured to identify the one winding being used …"
YES
Prong C
No structure that performs the function
YES
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “a load characteristic acquisition unit configured to acquire load characteristic information of the one winding identified by the winding identification unit for the at least one motor…” has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use the term “configured” coupled with functional language “a load characteristic acquisition unit configured to acquire load characteristic information of the one winding identified by the winding identification unit for the at least one motor …” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the term “configured” is not preceded by a structural modifier.
The following table shows that all three prongs of the 3-prong analysis are met and the limitation invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (See MPEP 2181(I) for details):
The 3-Prong Analysis for Claim Limitation : “a load characteristic acquisition unit configured to acquire load characteristic information of the one winding identified by the winding identification unit for the at least one motor …”
Met
Prong A
Explicit recitation of “means” or equivalent term
YES
Prong B
Functional recitation of " a load characteristic acquisition unit configured to acquire load characteristic information of the one winding identified by the winding identification unit for the at least one motor …"
YES
Prong C
No structure that performs the function
YES
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “a graph display unit configured to plot a marker indicating a combination of the rotation number and the output value in a graph area with one axis representing the rotation number and another axis representing the output value…” has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use the term “configured” coupled with functional language “a graph display unit configured to plot a marker indicating a combination of the rotation number and the output value in a graph area with one axis representing the rotation number and another axis representing the output value…” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the term “configured” is not preceded by a structural modifier.
The following table shows that all three prongs of the 3-prong analysis are met and the limitation invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (See MPEP 2181(I) for details):
The 3-Prong Analysis for Claim Limitation : “a graph display unit configured to plot a marker indicating a combination of the rotation number and the output value in a graph area with one axis representing the rotation number and another axis representing the output value…”
Met
Prong A
Explicit recitation of “means” or equivalent term
YES
Prong B
Functional recitation of " a graph display unit configured to plot a marker indicating a combination of the rotation number and the output value in a graph area with one axis representing the rotation number and another axis representing the output value…"
YES
Prong C
No structure that performs the function
YES
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “a graph area setting unit configured to divide, …, the graph area into a plurality of load zones with different load levels for expected combinations of the rotation number and the output value…” has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use the term “configured” coupled with functional language “a graph area setting unit configured to divide, …, the graph area into a plurality of load zones with different load levels for expected combinations of the rotation number and the output value …” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the term “configured” is not preceded by a structural modifier.
The following table shows that all three prongs of the 3-prong analysis are met and the limitation invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (See MPEP 2181(I) for details):
The 3-Prong Analysis for Claim Limitation : “a graph area setting unit configured to divide, …, the graph area into a plurality of load zones with different load levels for expected combinations of the rotation number and the output value …”
Met
Prong A
Explicit recitation of “means” or equivalent term
YES
Prong B
Functional recitation of " a graph area setting unit configured to divide, …, the graph area into a plurality of load zones with different load levels for expected combinations of the rotation number and the output value …"
YES
Prong C
No structure that performs the function
YES
Regarding claim 1, the limitation “a plotting unit configured to plot the marker in the graph area…” has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use the term “configured” coupled with functional language “a plotting unit configured to plot the marker in the graph area…” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the term “configured” is not preceded by a structural modifier.
The following table shows that all three prongs of the 3-prong analysis are met and the limitation invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (See MPEP 2181(I) for details):
The 3-Prong Analysis for Claim Limitation : “a plotting unit configured to plot the marker in the graph area …”
Met
Prong A
Explicit recitation of “means” or equivalent term
YES
Prong B
Functional recitation of " a plotting unit configured to plot the marker in the graph area …"
YES
Prong C
No structure that performs the function
YES
Regarding claim 2, the limitation “a program acquisition unit configured to acquire an operation program containing a plurality of blocks that specify operations of the at least one motor…” has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use the term “configured” coupled with functional language “a program acquisition unit configured to acquire an operation program containing a plurality of blocks that specify operations of the at least one motor …” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the term “configured” is not preceded by a structural modifier.
The following table shows that all three prongs of the 3-prong analysis are met and the limitation invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (See MPEP 2181(I) for details):
The 3-Prong Analysis for Claim Limitation : “a program acquisition unit configured to acquire an operation program containing a plurality of blocks that specify operations of the at least one motor …”
Met
Prong A
Explicit recitation of “means” or equivalent term
YES
Prong B
Functional recitation of " a program acquisition unit configured to acquire an operation program containing a plurality of blocks that specify operations of the at least one motor …"
YES
Prong C
No structure that performs the function
YES
Regarding claim 2, the limitation “an operational information storing unit configured to store operational information containing the load characteristic information, the rotation number, and the output value associated with the blocks…” has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use the term “configured” coupled with functional language “an operational information storing unit configured to store operational information containing the load characteristic information, the rotation number, and the output value associated with the blocks …” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the term “configured” is not preceded by a structural modifier.
The following table shows that all three prongs of the 3-prong analysis are met and the limitation invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (See MPEP 2181(I) for details):
The 3-Prong Analysis for Claim Limitation : “an operational information storing unit configured to store operational information containing the load characteristic information, the rotation number, and the output value associated with the blocks …”
Met
Prong A
Explicit recitation of “means” or equivalent term
YES
Prong B
Functional recitation of " an operational information storing unit configured to store operational information containing the load characteristic information, the rotation number, and the output value associated with the blocks …"
YES
Prong C
No structure that performs the function
YES
Regarding claim 3, the limitation “an operational information selection unit configured to select a set of operational information to be plotted …” has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use the term “configured” coupled with functional language “an operational information selection unit configured to select a set of operational information to be plotted…” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the term “configured” is not preceded by a structural modifier.
The following table shows that all three prongs of the 3-prong analysis are met and the limitation invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (See MPEP 2181(I) for details):
The 3-Prong Analysis for Claim Limitation : “an operational information selection unit configured to select a set of operational information to be plotted …”
Met
Prong A
Explicit recitation of “means” or equivalent term
YES
Prong B
Functional recitation of " an operational information selection unit configured to select a set of operational information to be plotted …"
YES
Prong C
No structure that performs the function
YES
Regarding claim 4, the limitation “an external operational information acquisition unit configured to acquire the operational information from an external source…” has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses/they use the term “configured” coupled with functional language “an external operational information acquisition unit configured to acquire the operational information from an external source …” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the term “configured” is not preceded by a structural modifier.
The following table shows that all three prongs of the 3-prong analysis are met and the limitation invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (See MPEP 2181(I) for details):
The 3-Prong Analysis for Claim Limitation : “an external operational information acquisition unit configured to acquire the operational information from an external source …”
Met
Prong A
Explicit recitation of “means” or equivalent term
YES
Prong B
Functional recitation of " an external operational information acquisition unit configured to acquire the operational information from an external source …"
YES
Prong C
No structure that performs the function
YES
If Applicant does not intend to have the claim limitation(s) treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 , sixth paragraph, applicant may amend the claim(s) so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, or present a sufficient showing that the claim recites/recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance With 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
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 1-4 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 1 recites the limitation “a rotation number acquisition unit configured to acquire a rotation number of at least one motor that is driven by one winding of a plurality of windings which is used selectively …”;. The term “configured to acquire” renders the claim indefinite as the claim does not define sufficient structure to achieve the function of acquiring a rotation number of at least one motor that is driven by one winding of a plurality of windings which is used selectively; the original specification does not provide clarification as to what structure performs the particular functions of this claim, and one of ordinary skill in the art could interpret so many structures that can perform the particular function of acquiring a rotation number of at least one motor that is driven by one winding of a plurality of windings which is used selectively. Thus, for these reasons, the phrase “configured to acquire” renders claim 1 indefinite.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “an output value acquisition unit configured to acquire a output value of the at least one motor …”;. The term “configured to acquire” renders the claim indefinite as the claim does not define sufficient structure to achieve the function of acquiring a output value of the at least one motor; the original specification does not provide clarification as to what structure performs the particular functions of this claim, and one of ordinary skill in the art could interpret so many structures that can perform the particular function of acquiring a output value of the at least one motor. Thus, for these reasons, the phrase “configured to acquire” renders claim 1 indefinite.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a winding identification unit configured to identify the one winding being used …”;. The term “configured to identify” renders the claim indefinite as the claim does not define sufficient structure to achieve the function of identifying the one winding being used; the original specification does not provide clarification as to what structure performs the particular functions of this claim, and one of ordinary skill in the art could interpret so many structures that can perform the particular function of identifying the one winding being used. Thus, for these reasons, the phrase “configured to identify” renders claim 1 indefinite.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a load characteristic acquisition unit configured to acquire load characteristic information of the one winding identified by the winding identification unit for the at least one motor …”;. The term “configured to acquire” renders the claim indefinite as the claim does not define sufficient structure to achieve the function of acquiring load characteristic information of the one winding identified by the winding identification unit for the at least one motor; the original specification does not provide clarification as to what structure performs the particular functions of this claim, and one of ordinary skill in the art could interpret so many structures that can perform the particular function of acquiring load characteristic information of the one winding identified by the winding identification unit for the at least one motor. Thus, for these reasons, the phrase “configured to acquire” renders claim 1 indefinite.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a graph display unit configured to plot a marker indicating a combination of the rotation number and the output value in a graph area with one axis representing the rotation number and another axis representing the output value…”;. The term “configured to plot” renders the claim indefinite as the claim does not define sufficient structure to achieve the function of plotting a marker indicating a combination of the rotation number and the output value in a graph area with one axis representing the rotation number and another axis representing the output value; the original specification does not provide clarification as to what structure performs the particular functions of this claim, and one of ordinary skill in the art could interpret so many structures that can perform the particular function of plotting a marker indicating a combination of the rotation number and the output value in a graph area with one axis representing the rotation number and another axis representing the output value. Thus, for these reasons, the phrase “configured to plot” renders claim 1 indefinite.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a graph area setting unit configured to divide, …, the graph area into a plurality of load zones with different load levels for expected combinations of the rotation number and the output value …”;. The term “configured to divide” renders the claim indefinite as the claim does not define sufficient structure to achieve the function of dividing, …, the graph area into a plurality of load zones with different load levels for expected combinations of the rotation number and the output value; the original specification does not provide clarification as to what structure performs the particular functions of this claim, and one of ordinary skill in the art could interpret so many structures that can perform the particular function of dividing, …, the graph area into a plurality of load zones with different load levels for expected combinations of the rotation number and the output value. Thus, for these reasons, the phrase “configured to divide” renders claim 1 indefinite.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “a plotting unit configured to plot the marker in the graph area …”;. The term “configured to divide” renders the claim indefinite as the claim does not define sufficient structure to achieve the function plotting the marker in the graph area; the original specification does not provide clarification as to what structure performs the particular functions of this claim, and one of ordinary skill in the art could interpret so many structures that can perform the particular function of plotting the marker in the graph area. Thus, for these reasons, the phrase “configured to plotting” renders claim 1 indefinite.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “a program acquisition unit configured to acquire an operation program containing a plurality of blocks that specify operations of the at least one motor …”;. The term “configured to acquire” renders the claim indefinite as the claim does not define sufficient structure to achieve the function acquiring an operation program containing a plurality of blocks that specify operations of the at least one motor; the original specification does not provide clarification as to what structure performs the particular functions of this claim, and one of ordinary skill in the art could interpret so many structures that can perform the particular function of acquiring an operation program containing a plurality of blocks that specify operations of the at least one motor. Thus, for these reasons, the phrase “configured to acquire” renders claim 2 indefinite.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “an operational information storing unit configured to store operational information containing the load characteristic information, the rotation number, and the output value associated with the blocks …”;. The term “configured to store” renders the claim indefinite as the claim does not define sufficient structure to achieve the function storing operational information containing the load characteristic information, the rotation number, and the output value associated with the blocks; the original specification does not provide clarification as to what structure performs the particular functions of this claim, and one of ordinary skill in the art could interpret so many structures that can perform the particular function of storing operational information containing the load characteristic information, the rotation number, and the output value associated with the blocks. Thus, for these reasons, the phrase “configured to store” renders claim 2 indefinite.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “an operational information selection unit configured to select a set of operational information to be plotted…”;. The term “configured to select” renders the claim indefinite as the claim does not define sufficient structure to achieve the function selecting a set of operational information to be plotted; the original specification does not provide clarification as to what structure performs the particular functions of this claim, and one of ordinary skill in the art could interpret so many structures that can perform the particular function of selecting a set of operational information to be plotted. Thus, for these reasons, the phrase “configured to select” renders claim 3 indefinite.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “an external operational information acquisition unit configured to acquire the operational information from an external source …”;. The term “configured to acquire” renders the claim indefinite as the claim does not define sufficient structure to achieve the function acquiring the operational information from an external source; the original specification does not provide clarification as to what structure performs the particular functions of this claim, and one of ordinary skill in the art could interpret so many structures that can perform the particular function of acquiring the operational information from an external source. Thus, for these reasons, the phrase “configured to acquire” renders claim 4 indefinite.
Claims 2-4 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph for being dependent on claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 1, the prior art does not teach or suggest, in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 1,
“… a graph display unit configured to plot a marker indicating a combination of the rotation number and the output value in a graph area with one axis representing the rotation number and another axis representing the output value, wherein the graph display unit has a graph area setting unit configured to divide, based on the load characteristic information, the graph area into a plurality of load zones with different load levels for expected combinations of the rotation number and the output value, and display the plurality of load zones in a distinguishable manner …”
Claims 2-4 would also be allowable due to their dependence on claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 11121658 B2; Ashida; Jumpei is a Motor control apparatus, image forming apparatus, and control method of motor control apparatus.
US 11378943 B2; Kumano; Shintaro et al. is an Information processing device, information processing method, and program.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARL F.R. TCHATCHOUANG whose telephone number is (571)272-3991. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00am -5:00am.
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, Huy Phan can be reached at 571-272-7924. 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.
/CARL F.R. TCHATCHOUANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/ALVARO E FORTICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights