DETAILED ACTION
Acknowledgements
In the reply filed March 16, 2026, the applicant amended claims 2-6, 8, 12, 14-17and 19-21.
Currently claims 2-21 are under examination.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 2, 12, and 19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 15, and 26 of U.S. Patent No. 11,939,853. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the applicant’s claims are fully encompassed by the limitations of U.S. Patent No. 11,939,853.
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 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 2-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kajita (U.S. Patent No. 10,415,562).
Regarding Claim 2, Kajita discloses a method of operating a plurality of hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150), each of the hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) including a hydraulic fracturing pump (Kajita: 152) to pump fracturing fluid into a wellhead (Kajita: 154) and an internal combustion engine (Kajita: 154) to drive the hydraulic fracturing pump (Kajita: 152), the method comprising:
Receiving, via a supervisory controller (Kajita: 160), one or more operational parameters (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37, Column 9: line 63 - Column 10: line 14) associated with pumping fracturing fluid into the wellhead (Kajita: 154), the one or more operational parameters (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37, Column 9: line 63 - Column 10: line 14) including a target flow rate, a maximum flow rate, a target pressure, or a pressure range for fracturing fluid supplied to the wellhead (Kajita: 154);
Determining, via the supervisory controller (Kajita: 160), whether the plurality of hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) have a capacity sufficient to achieve the target flow rate or the target pressure (Kajita: Column 2: lines 13-30);
Initiating operation of at least one of the plurality of hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150)(Kajita: Column 9: line 17-44);
Increasing (via throttle control) a flow rate from the at least some of the hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) according to a controlled increasing flow rate schedule toward the target flow rate or the target pressure, the controlled increasing flow rate schedule causing operation of the hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) such that a flow rate of fracturing fluid does not exceed the maximum flow rate and a fracturing fluid pressure substantially remains within the pressure range (Kajita: Column 9: lines 17-44); and
Operating the at least some hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) to maintain the target flow rate or the target pressure (via throttle control).
Regarding Claim 3, Kajita discloses the method of claim 2, wherein determining whether the plurality of hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) have a capacity sufficient to achieve the target flow rate or the target pressure comprises:
Receiving pump characteristics (Kajita: Column 9: line 63 - Column 10: line 14) for each of the plurality of hydraulic fracturing pumps (Kajita: 152)(Kajita: Column 13: lines 5-40);
Determining a total pump flow rate by combining at least one of the pump characteristics (Kajita: Column 9: line 63 - Column 10: line 14) for each of the plurality of hydraulic fracturing pumps (Kajita: 152); and
Comparing the total pump flow rate to the target flow rate, wherein the pump characteristics (Kajita: Column 9: line 63 - Column 10: line 14) comprises a minimum flow rate, a maximum flow rate, a harmonization range, or a pump condition for each of the plurality of hydraulic fracturing pumps (Kajita: 152) (Kajita: Column 13: lines 5-40); and
Determining the total pump flow rate comprises adding the maximum flow rates of each of the hydraulic fracturing pumps (Kajita: 152).
Regarding Claim 4, Kajita discloses the method of claim 2, wherein:
Increasing a flow rate from the at least some of the hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) according to the controlled increasing flow rate schedule comprises maintaining a rate of change of the flow rate provided by the at least some of the hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) below a maximum rate of change of the flow rate until the at least some of the hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) have achieved the one or more of the target flow rate or the target pressure; or
Regarding Claim 5, Kajita discloses the method of claim 2, wherein: the controlled increasing flow rate schedule dynamically varies a maximum rate of change of the flow rate based at least in part on one or more signals from one or more wellhead sensors indicative of fluid pressure at the wellhead.
Regarding Claim 6, Kajita discloses the method of claim 2, wherein: receiving one or more operational parameters (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37, Column 9: line 63 - Column 10: line 14) associated with pumping fracturing fluid into a wellhead (Kajita: 154) comprises receiving a target pressure for fracturing fluid supplied to the wellhead (Kajita: 154); and when it has been determined that the target pressure has not been achieved, the method further comprises:
Determining whether a maximum total flow rate has been achieved; and
One of:
When the maximum total flow rate has been achieved, maintaining the maximum total flow rate; or
When the maximum total flow rate has not been achieved, increasing flow rates of the at least some hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) to achieve the maximum total flow rate (Column 13: lines 5-40).
Regarding Claim 7, Kajita discloses the method of claim 6, wherein one or more of:
(1) when the maximum total flow rate has not been achieved, the method further comprises maintaining a fluid pressure at the wellhead (Kajita: 154) within a pressure differential of the fluid pressure by one of increasing the total flow rate to increase the fluid pressure at the wellhead (Kajita: 154) to be within the pressure differential; or
Decreasing the total flow rate to decrease the fluid pressure at the wellhead (Kajita: 154) to be within the pressure differential; or (2) receiving the one or more operational parameters (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37, Column 9: line 63 - Column 10: line 14) associated with pumping fracturing fluid into a wellhead (Kajita: 154) comprises receiving a maximum flow rate (Kajita: Column 13: lines 5-40); and
Increasing the flow rate from the at least some of the hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) comprises maintaining the flow rate from the at least some of the hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) below the maximum flow rate (Kajita: Column 13: lines 5-40).
Regarding Claim 8, Kajita discloses the method of claim 2, further comprising: receiving, via the supervisory controller (Kajita: 160), one or more signals (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37) indicative of a maximum fluid pressure at the wellhead (Kajita: 154);
Monitoring fluid pressure at the wellhead (Kajita: 154); and
When the fluid pressure at the wellhead (Kajita: 154) increases to within an upper range of the maximum fluid pressure;
Generating one or more signals (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37) indicative of the fluid pressure being within the upper range of the maximum fluid pressure;
Reducing a rate of change of the flow rate provided by the at least some of the hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150); or
Reducing the target flow rate (Kajita: Column 13: lines 5-40).
Regarding Claim 9, Kajita discloses the method of claim 8, wherein following reducing the target flow rate, when the fluid pressure at the wellhead (Kajita: 154) falls below a lower range of the maximum fluid pressure, the method further comprises increasing the flow rate provided by the at least some of the hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) until the fluid pressure at the wellhead (Kajita: 154) returns to within the upper range of the maximum fluid pressure (Kajita: Column 13: lines 5-40).
Regarding Claim 10, Kajita discloses the method of claim 2, wherein the method comprises a first mode of operation, and the method further comprises:
Receiving, via the supervisory controller (Kajita: 160), one or more signals (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37) indicative of ceasing the first mode of operation; and
Causing the at least some hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) to continue to operate at flow rates substantially the same as flow rates at a time of receipt of the one or more signals (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37) indicative of ceasing the first mode of operation.
Regarding Claim 11, Kajita discloses the method of claim 2, further comprising:
Receiving one or more signals (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37) indicative of a pressure associated with an output of each of the hydraulic fracturing pumps (Kajita: 152) of the at least some hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150); and
Controlling operation of each of the at least some hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) based at least in part on the one or more signals (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37) indicative of the pressure associated with the output of each of the hydraulic fracturing pumps (Kajita: 152).
Regarding Claim 12, Kajita discloses a hydraulic fracturing control assembly to operate a plurality of hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150), each of the hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) including a hydraulic fracturing pump (Kajita: 152) to pump fracturing fluid into a wellhead (Kajita: 154) and an internal combustion engine (Kajita: 154) to drive the hydraulic fracturing pump (Kajita: 152), the hydraulic fracturing control assembly comprising:
An input device (Kajita: 168) configured to facilitate communication of:
Operational parameters (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37, Column 9: line 63 - Column 10: line 14) to a supervisory controller (Kajita: 160), the one or more operational parameters (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37, Column 9: line 63 - Column 10: line 14) including a target flow rate, a maximum flow rate (Kajita: Column 13: lines 5-40), a target pressure, or a pressure range for fracturing fluid supplied to the wellhead (Kajita: 154);
One or more sensors (Kajita: 203, 204, 207, 209, 211) configured to generate one or more sensor signals (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37) indicative of a flow rate of fracturing fluid or a pressure associated with fracturing fluid; and a supervisory controller (Kajita: 160) in communication with the plurality of hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150), the input device (Kajita: 168), or the one or more sensors (Kajita: 203, 204, 207, 209, 211), the supervisory controller (Kajita: 160) being configured to:
Receive one or more operational parameters (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37, Column 9: line 63 - Column 10: line 14) associated with pumping fracturing fluid into a wellhead (Kajita: 154), the one or more operational parameters (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37, Column 9: line 63 - Column 10: line 14) including a target flow rate or a target pressure for fracturing fluid supplied to the wellhead (Kajita: 154);
Determine whether the plurality of hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) have a capacity sufficient to achieve the target flow rate or the target pressure; and
Increase a flow rate from at least some of the hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) according to a controlled increasing flow rate schedule toward the target flow rate or the target pressure, the controlled increasing flow rate schedule causing operation of the hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) such that a flow rate of fracturing fluid does not exceed the maximum flow rate (Kajita: Column 13: lines 5-40) and a fracturing fluid pressure substantially remains within the pressure range (Kajita: Column 13: lines 5-40).
Regarding Claim 13, Kajita discloses the hydraulic fracturing control assembly of claim 12, wherein:
The hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) comprise a plurality of hydraulic fracturing pumps (Kajita: 152), each of the plurality of hydraulic fracturing pumps (Kajita: 152) being associated with one of the plurality of hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150); and the supervisory controller (Kajita: 160) is configured to:
Receive pump characteristics (Kajita: Column 9: line 63 - Column 10: line 14) for each of the plurality of hydraulic fracturing pumps (Kajita: 152);
Determine a total pump flow rate based at least partially on at least one of the pump characteristics (Kajita: Column 9: line 63 - Column 10: line 14) for each of the plurality of hydraulic fracturing pumps (Kajita: 152); and compare the total pump flow rate to the target flow rate (Kajita: Column 13: lines 5-40)..
Regarding Claim 14, Kajita discloses the hydraulic fracturing control assembly of claim 13, wherein:
The pump characteristics (Kajita: Column 9: line 63 - Column 10: line 14) comprises a minimum flow rate, a maximum flow rate (Kajita: Column 13: lines 5-40), a harmonization range, or a pump condition for each of the plurality of hydraulic fracturing pumps (Kajita: 152); and
The supervisory controller (Kajita: 160) is configured to add the maximum flow rate (Kajita: Column 13: lines 5-40)s of each of the hydraulic fracturing pumps (Kajita: 152) to determine the total pump flow rate.
Regarding Claim 15, Kajita discloses the hydraulic fracturing control assembly of claim 12, wherein the supervisory controller (Kajita: 160) is configured to:
Maintain a rate of change of the flow rate provided by the at least some of the hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) below a maximum rate of change of the flow rate until the at least some of the hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) have achieved the one or more of the target flow rate or the target pressure; and
Change the maximum rate of change of the flow rate as a total flow rate increases to achieve the target flow rate or the target pressure to determine the maximum rate of change of the flow rate.
Regarding Claim 16, Kajita discloses the hydraulic fracturing system of claim 15, wherein the supervisory controller (Kajita: 160) is configured to:
The one or more sensors (Kajita: 203, 204, 207, 209, 211) include one or more wellhead sensors (Kajita: 203, 204, 207, 209, 211) configured to generate one or more signals (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37) indicative of fluid flow rate or fluid pressure at the wellhead (Kajita: 154), and the supervisory controller (Kajita: 160) is configured to:receive one or more signals (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37) indicative fluid flow rate or fluid pressure at the wellhead (Kajita: 154); and
Determine the maximum rate of change of the flow rate based at least in part on the one or more signals (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37) indicative of the fluid flow rate of fluid pressure at the wellhead (Kajita: 154).
Regarding Claim 17, Kajita discloses the hydraulic fracturing control assembly of claim 12, wherein the supervisory controller (Kajita: 160) is further configured to: determine whether a well screen-out (Kajita: Column 18: lines 13-24) or an over-pressure condition exists based at least in part on the receiving the one more signals indicative of one or more of the flow rate of fracturing fluid or the pressure associated with fracturing fluid; and
When one or more of a well screen-out (Kajita: Column 18: lines 13-24) or an over-pressure condition exists, the supervisory controller (Kajita: 160) is configured to one or more of:
Generate one or more signals (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37) indicative of the one or more of the well screen-out (Kajita: Column 18: lines 13-24) or the over-pressure condition; or
Cease increasing of the flow rate from the at least some of the hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) (Kajita: Column 18: lines 13-24).
Regarding Claim 18, Kajita discloses the hydraulic fracturing control assembly of claim 17, wherein:
The one or more operational parameters (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37, Column 9: line 63 - Column 10: line 14) associated with pumping fracturing fluid into a wellhead (Kajita: 154) comprises a target pressure for fracturing fluid supplied to the wellhead (Kajita: 154); and when it has been determined that the target pressure has not been achieved, the supervisory controller (Kajita: 160) is further configured to:
Determine whether a maximum total flow rate has been achieved; and
One of:
When the maximum total flow rate has been achieved, maintain the maximum total flow rate; or
When the maximum total flow rate has not been achieved, one or more of:
Increase flow rates of the at least some hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) to achieve the maximum total flow rate;
Maintain a fluid pressure at the wellhead (Kajita: 154) within a pressure differential of the fluid pressure by one of increasing the total flow rate to increase the fluid pressure at the wellhead (Kajita: 154) to be within the pressure differential or decreasing the total flow rate to decrease the fluid pressure at the wellhead (Kajita: 154) to be within the pressure differential (Kajita: Column 13: lines 5-40).
Regarding Claim 19, Kajita discloses a hydraulic fracturing system comprising: a plurality of hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150), each of the hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) comprising:
A hydraulic fracturing pump (Kajita: 152) to pump fracturing fluid into a wellhead (Kajita: 154);
A gas turbine engine (Kajita: 154) mechanically linked to the hydraulic fracturing pump (Kajita: 152);
One or more sensors (Kajita: 203, 204, 207, 209, 211) configured to generate one or more sensor signals (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37) indicative of a flow rate of fracturing fluid or a pressure associated with fracturing fluid; and
A supervisory controller (Kajita: 160) in communication with the plurality of hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) and the one or more sensors (Kajita: 203, 204, 207, 209, 211), the supervisory controller (Kajita: 160) being configured to:
Receive pump characteristics (Kajita: Column 9: line 63 - Column 10: line 14) for each of the plurality of hydraulic fracturing pumps (Kajita: 152), wherein the plurality of pump characteristics (Kajita: Column 9: line 63 - Column 10: line 14) comprises a minimum flow rate, a maximum flow rate (Kajita: Column 13: lines 5-40), a harmonization range, or a pump condition for each of the hydraulic fracturing pumps (Kajita: 152);
Receive one or more operational parameters (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37, Column 9: line 63 - Column 10: line 14) associated with pumping fracturing fluid into a wellhead (Kajita: 154), the one or more operational parameters (Kajita: Column 7: lines 21-37, Column 9: line 63 - Column 10: line 14) including a target flow rate or a target pressure for fracturing fluid supplied to the wellhead (Kajita: 154);
Determine whether the plurality of hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) have a capacity sufficient to achieve the target flow rate or the target pressure; and
Increase a flow rate from a first subset of the hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) according to a controlled increasing flow rate schedule toward the target flow rate or the target pressure, the controlled increasing flow rate schedule causing operation of the hydraulic fracturing units (Kajita: 150) such that a flow rate of fracturing fluid does not exceed the maximum flow rate (Kajita: Column 13: lines 5-40) and a fracturing fluid pressure substantially remains within a preset pressure range; wherein
The first subset of the hydraulic fracturing units includes two or more hydraulic fracturing units.
Regarding Claim 20, Kajita discloses the hydraulic fracturing system of claim 19, wherein the supervisory controller (Kajita: 160) is configured to:
Determine a total pump flow rate based at least partially on at least one of the pump characteristics (Kajita: Column 9: line 63 - Column 10: line 14) for each of the plurality of hydraulic fracturing pumps (Kajita: 152); and compare the total pump flow rate to the target flow rate.
Regarding Claim 21, Kajita discloses the hydraulic fracturing system of claim 20, wherein:
The supervisory controller (Kajita: 160) is configured to add the maximum flow rates (Kajita: Column 13: lines 5-40) of each of the hydraulic fracturing pumps (Kajita: 152) to determine the total pump flow rate.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed March 16, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 2, 12, and 19, the applicant argues that Kajita does not disclose increasing a flow rate from the at least some of the hydraulic fracturing units according to a controlled increasing flow rate schedule or that the flow rate is controlled according to any specific operating parameters. The applicant points to the cited location within the disclosure of Kajita (Column 9: lines 17-44) to show a lack of a controlled increasing flow rate schedule being used to purposes of increasing a flow rate.
The examiner respectfully submits that the process of having the flow rate increase in a controlled manner after receiving an input/control signal from the control center (160) to commence a sequence in which the electrical power is increased to adjust the speed and the torque of the prime mover, which in turn increases the pumping speed and fluid flow rate of the pump unit and maximum pressure generated, may be considered to be a “controlled increasing flow rate schedule”. The examiner further respectfully submits that while the cited portion of Kajita does not discuss sensor inputs to define parameter limits for increasing a flow rate, the paragraphs immediately following at least the cited portion (Column 9: line 45 – Column 11: line 19) discuss, at length, various sensors, inputs, processes, and coded instructions that may further be considered to be an increasing flow rate schedule.
Regarding claim 16, the applicant argues that Kajita does not disclose how the controllers for pump unit 200 do not meet the limitation that requires that the controllers receive or send signals “indictive of the fluid flow rate or fluid pressure at the wellhead” since the pump unit 200 is displaced from the wellhead.
The examiner respectfully submits that the while the pump unit is displaced from the wellhead, the claim, in its current form, merely requires that sensors be indicative of a pressure at the wellhead, which a pressure sensor, disposed at the outlet of a fluid pump leading to said wellhead is capable of performing.
Regarding claim 19, the applicant argues that Kajita does not disclose a gas turbine.
The examiner respectfully submits that while Kajita does not specifically label a gas turbine engine as an option for a prime mover, Kajita does disclose “another prime mover operable to drive or otherwise rotate a drive shaft” which, as gas turbines are old and very well known in the art to function as prime movers operable to drive or otherwise rotate a drive shaft in fracturing operations (U.S. Pub. No. 2015/0068754: Paragraph [0038]) (U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0146951: Paragraph [0032]) may be assumed to at least describe a gas turbine operating as a prime mover.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS S WOOD whose telephone number is (571)270-5954. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday 8:30 AM - 7:00 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nicole A Coy can be reached at (571) - 272 - 5405. 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.
DOUGLAS S. WOOD
Examiner
Art Unit 3672
/DOUGLAS S WOOD/Examiner, Art Unit 3672
/Nicole Coy/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3672
Prosecution Insights