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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement(s) submitted June 13, 2025 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 3, 7-9, 11-15, and 17-19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 3, lines 3-4 recite “the distance of an operating point of the interstage anti-surge controller” however “the distance” lacks proper antecedent basis.
Claim 3, lines 4-5 recite “the operating point of the high-pressure com pressor section” and “the operating point” lacks proper antecedent basis, and “com pressor” should be a single word with the space deleted.
Claim 7, line 2 has a large space between “further” and “comprising” which should be a single space.
Claim 7, line 10 recites “up stream” which is a single word and the space in the middle should be deleted.
Claim 8, line 5 recites “the operating point of the high-pressure compressor section” and “the operating point” lacks proper antecedent basis.
Claim 9, line 4 recites “com pressor” which is a single word and the space in the middle should be deleted.
Claim 9, lines 5-6 recite “the operating point of the high-pressure compressor section” and “the operating point” lacks proper antecedent basis.
Claim 11, line 19 recites “con troller” which is a single word and the space in the middle should be deleted.
Claim 12, line 3 recites ““the distance of an operating point of the low-pressure compressor section” which lacks proper antecedent basis.
Claim 12, lines 4-5 recite “con troller is modified as a function of a distance of the operating point of the high pressure compressor section”, and “con troller” should be a single word and “the operating point” lacks proper antecedent basis.
Claim 13, line 14 recites “the master anti-surge valve” which lacks proper antecedent basis.
Claim 13, line 15 recites “the further interstage anti-surge controller” which lacks proper antecedent basis.
Claim 14, line 3 recites “the distance of an operating point of the intermediate-pressure compressor” and “the distance” lacks proper antecedent basis.
Claim 15, line 10 recites “the interstage anti-surge line” which should be changed to “the at least one interstage anti-surge line” to be consistent with line 7.
Claim 17, line 3 recites “the distance of an operating point of the compressor section” and “the distance” lacks proper antecedent basis.
Claim 17, line 4 recites “section, at the discharge side whereof” and the comma should be deleted and the word “whereof” appears to be a typo which should recite “thereof”.
Claim 18, lines 3-4 recite “between at least two adjacent compressor sections an intercooler adapted to cause interstage condensation” and a comma should be added after “sections” to clarify the grammar.
Claim 19, lines 3-4 recite “the distance of an operating point of the compressor section, at the discharge side whereof” and “the distance” lacks proper antecedent basis, the comma after “section” should be deleted, and the word “whereof” appears to be a typo which should be “thereof”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 13 and 15-19 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 13, line 14 recites “a master anti-surge controller” however claim 13 depends from claim 11, which previously introduced “a master anti-surge controller”. It is unclear whether claim 13 is the same feature or a separate feature.
Claim 14 depends from claim 13 and contains its limitations, and therefore is rejected for the same reason.
Claim 15, line 3 introduces “at least two adjacent compressor sections” however line 2 previously introduced “a plurality of compressor sections” and it is unclear whether the “at least two” is part of the plurality or a separate feature.
Claim 15, lines 7-8 recite “two sequentially arranged compressor sections” which raises the same issue.
Claim 15, line 15 recites “the most downstream compressor section” and it is unclear whether this is part of the plurality, the at least two, or the “two sequentially arranged” compressor sections.
Claims 16 and 17 depend from claim 15 and contain its limitations, and therefore are rejected for the same reason.
Claim 16, lines 3-5 recite “a set point of the interstage anti-surge controller is modified as a function of an operating point of the most downstream compressor section” which raises multiple issues. Claim 16 depends from claim 15 which previously introduced “a set point”, “a function”, and “an operating point”. If these are the same feature, then the word “a” should be changed to “the”. Also, “the most downstream compressor section” raises the same issue as claim 15.
Claim 17, line 2 recites “a set point” which was previously introduced in claim 15 and it is unclear whether the feature in claim 17 is a separate feature or an additional feature.
Claim 17, line 6 recites “the most downstream compressor section” raises the same issue as claim 15.
Claim 18, line 3 recites “at least two adjacent compressor sections” however line 2 previously introduced “a plurality of compressor sections” and it is unclear whether the “at least two” is part of the plurality or a separate feature.
Claim 18, lines 7-8 recite “two sequentially arranged compressor sections” which raises the same issue.
Claim 18, line 15 recites “the most downstream compressor section” and it is unclear whether this is part of the plurality, the at least two, or the “two sequentially arranged” compressor sections.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 11-14, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 11 recites a method for controlling a compressor system, the method comprising: controlling a master anti-surge valve through a master anti-surge controller; controlling an interstage anti-surge valve through an interstage anti-surge controller; and adapting a set point of the interstage anti-surge controller as a function of an operating condition of a high-pressure compressor section when a flowrate through the high-pressure compressor section drops below a pre-set value.
The broadest reasonable interpretation of the steps of “controlling” includes merely sending signals from the controllers to the valves. Sending a signal is considered data transmission, and receiving or transmitting data over a network is considered a well-understood, routine, conventional activity, which is an insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP §2106.05(d) II for further clarification).
The step of “adapting a set point” of the controller is either a mathematical concept, which is an abstract idea (see MPEP §2106.04(a) for further clarification) or a mental process, which is also an abstract idea (see MPEP §2106.04(a) for further clarification). The examiner notes that limitations which require a computer may still be considered a mental process (see MPEP §2106.04(a)(2) III C for further clarification).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim does not include a practical application of the abstract idea. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional features are all well known in the art of compressor systems, such as: a low-pressure compressor, a high-pressure compressor, an intercooler, an interstage liquid/gas separator, a master anti-surge line having a master anti-surge valve, and an interstage anti-surge line having an interstage anti-surge valve.
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 is similarly directed to a method for controlling a compressor system, the method comprising: controlling a master anti-surge valve through a master anti-surge controller; controlling an interstage anti-surge valve through an interstage anti-surge controller; and adapting a set point of the interstage anti-surge controller as a function of an operating condition of the most downstream compressor section when a flowrate through the most downstream compressor section drops below a pre-set value. As stated above, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the steps of “controlling” includes merely sending signals from the controllers to the valves.
The step of “adapting a set point” of the controller is either a mathematical concept or a mental process, both of which are abstract ideas.
If claims 11 and 18 were amended to clearly include a step regarding “opening” or “closing” one of the valves, then there would be a clear practical application of the abstract ideas.
Regarding claim 12, the claim depends from claim 11 and further defines the step of adapting the set point, which does not cure the deficiencies of claim 11. Therefore, claim 12 is rejected for the same reason.
Regarding claim 13, the claim depends from claim 11 and adds steps regarding controlling the master anti-surge valve through the master anti-surge controller and adapting a set point of a further interstage anti-surge controller as a function of the operating condition of the high-pressure compressor section when the flowrate through the high-pressure compressor section drops below a pre-set value. As explained above, the “controlling” step is an abstract idea under the broadest reasonable interpretation. The “adapting a set point” step is also considered an abstract idea. Therefore, claim 13 is rejected for the same reason.
Regarding claim 14, the claim depends from claim 13 and adds the step of modifying the set point of the further interstage anti-surge controller, which is also either a mathematical concept or a mental process – both of which are abstract ideas. Therefore, claim 14 is rejected for the same reason.
Regarding claim 19, the method depends from claim 18 and further defines the step of adapting the set point by adding a step of modifying the set point, which is also either a mathematical concept or a mental process – both of which are abstract ideas. Therefore, claim 19 is rejected for the same reason.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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(s) 1-6, 11, 12, and 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 101440026 to Yu et al (provided by applicant with IDS filed June 13, 2025, a machine translation will be referred to herein) in view of US 9,181,361 to Blood et al and in further view of CN 114876849 to Zhou et al (a machine translation will be referred to herein).
In Reference to Claims 1, 2, 11, 15, 16, and 18
Yu teaches:
A compressor system comprising:
a process gas path (1) having a gas inlet (1a) and a gas outlet (portion of line leading to loading position L, right side of Figure 1);
between the gas inlet and the gas outlet, along the process gas path:
a low-pressure compressor section (2a) having: a low-pressure suction side (left side in Figure 1), fluidly coupled to the gas inlet, and a low-pressure discharge side (right side in Figure 1); and
a high-pressure compressor section (2c) having: a high-pressure suction side (left side in Figure 1); and a high-pressure discharge side (right side in Figure 1) fluidly coupled to the gas outlet;
an intercooler (7a), between the low-pressure compressor section and the high-pressure compressor section;
a master anti-surge line (4c) having: an inlet (line connecting to top of 3c in Figure 1) fluidly coupled to the process gas path downstream of the high-pressure discharge side; and an outlet (end of line 4c connected to tank 5, see Figure 1) fluidly coupled to the process gas path upstream of the low-pressure suction side; wherein a master anti-surge valve (3c) is arranged in the master anti-surge line;
an interstage anti-surge line (4a) having an inlet (line connecting to top of 3a in Figure 1) fluidly coupled to the process gas path downstream of the low-pressure discharge side and upstream of the high-pressure suction side, and an outlet (end of line 4a connected to tank 5, see Figure 1) fluidly coupled to the process gas path upstream of the low pressure suction side;
wherein an interstage anti-surge valve (3a) is arranged in the inter stage anti-surge line; wherein: the interstage anti-surge valve is functionally connected to an interstage anti-surge controller (control unit, not shown, see paragraph 24);
the master anti-surge valve is functionally connected to a master anti-surge controller (control unit, not shown, see paragraph 24) (see paragraph 20-22 and Figure 1).
Regarding claim 11, the method comprises the steps of controlling the master anti-surge valve through the master anti-surge controller and controlling the interstage anti-surge valve through the interstage anti-surge controller.
Regarding claim 15, the low and high pressure compressor sections are “a plurality of compressor sections” which are placed in sequence, and the high pressure compressor section is the most downstream compressor section (see annotated Figure 1).
Regarding claim 18, the method comprises the steps of controlling the master anti-surge valve through the master anti-surge controller and controlling the interstage anti-surge valve through the interstage anti-surge controller.
PNG
media_image1.png
682
1431
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Yu fails to teach:
An interstage liquid/gas separator between the intercooler and the high-pressure compressor section; and the interstage anti-surge controller and the master anti-surge controller are functionally inter-related such that under some conditions a set point of the interstage anti-surge controller is modified/adapted as a function of an operating point/operating condition of the high-pressure/most downstream compressor section when a flowrate through the high-pressure/most downstream compressor section drops below a pre-set value.
Blood teaches:
A compressor system (405) comprising a low pressure compressor section (407), a high-pressure compressor section (425), an intercooler (130) between the low-pressure compressor section and the high-pressure compressor section, and an interstage liquid/gas separator (132) between the intercooler and the high-pressure compressor section (see column 19, lines 15-49 and Figure 4).
Zhou teaches:
A compression system comprising a low pressure compressor section (see annotated Figure 1), a high pressure compressor system (see annotated Figure 1), a master anti-surge line (line having master anti-surge valve, see annotated Figure 1) having a master anti-surge valve (see annotated Figure 1) and an interstage anti-surge line (line having interstage anti-surge valve, see annotated Figure 1) having an anti-surge valve (see annotated Figure 1), wherein the interstage anti-surge controller and the master anti-surge controller are functionally inter-related such that under some conditions a set point of the interstage anti-surge controller is modified as a function of an operating point of the high-pressure compressor section (see Figure 1).
The interstage anti-surge control valve is made up of an anti-surge adjustment module (41), a pressure adjustment module (42), a selection module (43), a first rate control module (44), and a second rate control module (45). The anti-surge adjustment module (41) and pressure adjustment module (42) feed adjustment commands to the selection module (43). The first rate control module (44) outputs a signal for a target pressure signal (SP2’) to the pressure adjustment module (42). The selection module (43) feeds an output signal to the second rate control module (45), and the second rate control module outputs a signal to the interstage anti-surge valve (see paragraph 85). Thus, the signal for controlling the interstage anti-surge valve is a function of the pressure set point.
Zhou teaches the pressure (P2) at the outlet side of the low pressure compressor affects the pressure (P3) at the inlet side of the high pressure compressor. Further, the pressure regulation modules (42, 52) are used to control the pressure of the first and second compressor sections (paragraph 109). The pressure regulation modules are subcomponents of the interstage anti-surge controller and the master anti-surge controller, respectively (see annotated Figure 1).
When the pressure of the high pressure compressor is above a pre-set value (SP4), a signal (frequency converter frequency) is altered to change the speed of the compressor (paragraph 107 explains a situation where the pressure is less than a target signal SP4, so the unit speed is increased, and states “and vice versa, the frequency converter frequency is decreased to reduce the unit speed”. The decrease in speed would occur when the pressure exceeds a pre-set target value.).
It is well known in the art of compressor systems that pressure and flow rate are inversely related. A high pressure corresponds with a low flow rate, and vice versa, a low pressure corresponds with a high flow rate. Thus, a pressure exceeding a pre-set value corresponds with a flowrate dropping below a pre-set value.
Zhou further teaches the pressures of the high-pressure compressor section and the low-pressure compressor section may be adjusted simultaneously with the pressure of the high pressure compressor section being adjusted at a high-rate and the pressure of the low pressure compressor section being adjusted at a low rate (paragraph 110) in order to avoid having an unwanted influence on the pressure of the high pressure compressor.
Therefore, the interstage anti-surge controller and master surge controller are functionally inter-related such that under some conditions a set point of the interstage anti-surge controller is modified indirectly as a function of an operating point/condition (pressure above a pre-set value) of the high-pressure compressor section which occurs when a flowrate through the high-pressure compressor section drops below a pre-set value.
PNG
media_image2.png
750
1066
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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 compressor system and method of Yu by adding a liquid/gas separate as taught by Blood for the purpose of being able to recover at least a portion of the condensed fluid (column 19, lines 32-33 of Blood).
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 compressor system and method of Yu by configuring the interstage and master anti-surge controllers to be inter-related such that a set point of the inter-stage anti-surge controller is modified as a function of an operating point/condition of the high-pressure/most downstream compressor section when the flowrate through the high-pressure/most downstream compressor section drops below a pre-set value as taught by Zhou for the purpose of being able to further control the pressure and flow rate of the high-pressure/most downstream compressor section.
In Reference to Claims 3, 12, 17, and 19#
Yu as modified by Blood and Zhou teaches:
The compressor system of claim 2, the method of claim 11, the method of claim 15, and the method of claim 19, wherein the interstage anti-surge controller and the master anti-surge controller are adapted to modify a set point of the interstage anti-surge controller such that a distance of an operating point of the low-pressure compressor section from a surge line of the interstage anti-surge controller is modified as a function of a distance of an operating point of the high-pressure compressor section from a surge line of the master anti-surge controller.
Zhou teaches the anti-surge valve affects the margin of the operating point from the anti-surge adjustment line (paragraph 86). Thus, modifying the set point of the interstage anti-surge controller also modifies a distance (the margin) of the operating point of the low pressure compressor section from the surge line, and is indirectly a function of a distance of the operating point of the high-pressure/most downstream compressor section from a surge line.
In Reference to Claim 4#
Yu as modified by Blood and Zhou teaches:
The compressor system of claim 1, wherein the inlet of the interstage anti-surge line is fluidly coupled to the process gas path downstream of the interstage liquid/gas separator.
The interstage anti-surge valve of Yu is at the inlet of a recycle line (the interstage anti-surge line). Figure 4 of Blood shows a recycle line (417) for the low-pressure compressor (407) which is downstream of the liquid/gas separator (132). When modifying the compressor system of Yu with the teachings of Blood, the liquid/gas separator would be at the inlet of interstage anti-surge line, and the interstage anti-surge valve would be downstream of the liquid/gas separator.
In Reference to Claim 5#
Yu as modified by Blood and Zhou teaches:
The compressor system of claim 1, comprising the master anti-surge line.
Blood further teaches a high-pressure gas cooler (145) adapted to cool compressed gas delivered by a high-pressure discharge side (outlet of high-pressure compressor 425) downstream of the high-pressure compressor section (425). The high-pressure gas cooler is upstream of a recycle line (423) (see Figure 4).
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 compressor system of Yu as modified by Blood and Zhou by adding a high-pressure gas cooler as taught by Blood for the purpose of controlling the temperature of the working fluid.
The master anti-surge valve of Yu is at the inlet of a recycle line (the master anti-surge line). When modifying the compressor system of Yu with the teachings of Blood, the high-pressure gas cooler would be at the inlet of master anti-surge line, and the inlet of the master anti-surge line would be fluidly coupled to the process gas path downstream of the high-pressure gas cooler.
In Reference to Claim 6#
Yu as modified by Blood and Zhou teaches:
The compressor system of claim 5, comprising the high pressure gas cooler. Blood further teaches a high-pressure gas condenser (147) arranged downstream of the high-pressure gas cooler and adapted to condense cooled high-pressure gas exiting the high-pressure gas cooler at least partly. The high-pressure gas condenser is a liquid/gas separator which leads condensed fluid to a recycle line (423) back to the inlet side of the high-pressure compressor section (425) (see Figure 4).
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 compressor system of Yu as modified by Blood and Zhou by adding a high-pressure gas condenser as taught by Blood for the purpose of being able to recycle the condensed fluid.
Claim(s) 7-10, 13, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR 101440026 to Yu et al as modified by US 9,181,361 to Blood et al and CN 114876849 to Zhou et al (a machine translation will be referred to herein), as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and in further view of case law.
In Reference to Claims 7 and 13#
Yu as modified by Blood and Zhou teaches:
The compressor system of claim 1 and method of claim 11, further comprising:
at least one intermediate-pressure compressor section (2b of Yu) having an intermediate pressure suction side (left side in Figure 1 of Yu) and an intermediate-pressure discharge side (right side in Figure 1 of Yu), positioned between the liquid/gas separator and the high-pressure compressor section;
a further intercooler (7b of Yu), fluidly coupled to the intermediate-pressure discharge side;
a further interstage anti-surge line (4b of Yu) having an inlet (top end of valve 3b of Yu) fluidly coupled to the process gas path downstream of the intermediate-pressure discharge side and upstream of the high-pressure suction side, and an outlet (end of line 4b connecting to tank 5 of Yu) fluidly coupled to the process gas path upstream of the low-pressure suction side; wherein
a further interstage anti-surge valve (3b of Yu) is arranged in the further interstage anti-surge line.
Yu as modified by Blood and Zhou fails to teach:
The further intercooler is coupled to a further interstage liquid/gas separator.
The Court has held that the mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced (In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960), see MPEP §2144.04 VI B for further clarification).
In In re Harza the claims were directed to a water seal where the seal has a “web” which comprises a plurality of “ribs” projecting outward from each side of the web. The prior art disclosed a water stop which was in the shape of a plus sign (+). Although the reference did not disclose the plurality of ribs, the Court found that the duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.
In the instant case, the compressor system of Yu as modified by Blood and Zhou comprises an interstage liquid/gas separator downstream of the low pressure compressor section, and an intermediate pressure compressor section. Blood teaches liquid/gas separators downstream of each compressor which collect the condensed working fluid and recycle it.
There is a reasonable expectation of success when adding a liquid/gas separator downstream of the intermediate pressure compressor section, because the condensed gas pressurized by this compressor can be collected and recycled.
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 compressor system and method of Yu as modified by Blood and Zhou by adding a liquid/gas separator between the further intercooler and the high-pressure compressor section in view of case law for the purpose of being able to recycle the condensed working fluid.
In Reference to Claims 8-10 and 14#
Yu as modified by Blood, Zhou, and case law teaches:
The compressor system of claim 7 and the method of claim 13, wherein: the further interstage anti-surge valve is functionally connected to a further interstage anti-surge controller (control unit, not shown, see paragraph 24 of Yu);
further wherein the further interstage anti-surge controller and the master anti-surge controller are functionally inter-related such that under some conditions, such as when a flowrate through the high-pressure compressor section is lower than a pre-set value, a set point of the further interstage anti-surge controller is modified as a function of the operating point of the high-pressure compressor section; and
the step of adapting the set point of the further interstage anti-surge controller comprises the step of modifying the set point of the further interstage anti-surge controller such that the distance of the operating point of the intermediate-pressure compressor section from a surge line of the further interstage anti-surge controller is modified as a function of the distance of the operating point of the high-pressure compressor section from the surge line of the master anti-surge controller.
When modifying the compressor system of Yu with the teachings of Zhou, a relationship between the intermediate-pressure compressor section and high-pressure compressor section would also exist. The pressure at the outlet side of the low-pressure compressor section controls the pressure at the inlet side of the intermediate-pressure compressor section, and the pressure at the outlet side of the intermediate-pressure compressor section controls the pressure at the inlet side of the high-pressure compressor section. The pressures at each compressor are still inversely related to the flowrates, and control the distances (surge margins) of the operating points of the respective compressors relative to their surge lines. The set point of the further interstage anti-surge controller is indirectly a function the operating point of the high-pressure compressor.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 6,332,336 to Mirsky teaches a compressor system comprising a plurality of compressors and anti-surge valves. US 6,164,901 to Blotenberg teaches a compressor system comprising a plurality of compressors and anti-surge valves.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON GREGORY DAVIS whose telephone number is (571)270-3289. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 8:00-5:00, F: 8:00-12:00.
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, Nathan Wiehe can be reached at (571) 272-8648. 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.
/JASON G DAVIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
/NATHANIEL E WIEHE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights