DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Pub. No.: US 2022/0099031 A1 (Miller) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Miller in view of Pub. No.: US 2006/0101804 A1 (Stretton).
Regarding claim 1, Miller discloses (see figs. 1-4) a turbine engine 10 comprising: an engine core 44 defining (see par. 25) a compressor section 26, a combustion section 30, and a turbine section 34; an inner cowl 76 circumscribing (see fig. 4) at least a portion of the engine core 44 and radially spaced (see fig. 1) from the engine core 44 to define an inner cowl space (at 54 in fig. 1); an outer cowl 82 circumscribing (see fig. 4) at least a portion of the inner cowl 76 and spaced from (see fig. 4) the inner cowl (see fig. 4); a fairing (98 in figs. 1-2; see par. 103 pointing out that this structure is a fairing) extending radially between the inner cowl and the outer cowl having at least a hollow portion (at 90 in fig. 2); an accessory gearbox 90 (see fig. 4) having a first portion 94 defined by a single arm (the term “single arm” is interpreted as having a special definition, MPEP 2173.01 I., as discussed in applicant par. 106 (and par. 118): “a single arm 451. That is, the first portion 444 of the AGB 1 390 includes only one arm; the single arm 451. The single arm 451 arcs about the core casing 46 or the turbine engine axis of rotation 12 in a single direction from the second portion 446”; this appears to be a “clear and intentional” explanation of the instant term as discussed in the instant MPEP section, in addition “the best source for determining the meaning of a claim term is the specification - the greatest clarity is obtained when the specification serves as a glossary for the claim terms”, MPEP 2173.01 I.; regarding Miller structures 130,132 can be a single arm; such structures span arc lengths 150,170; when arc length 150 is as shown in annotated figure below then the single arm 130,132 fits the special definition above wherein the single arm 130,132 is shown in shading in the annotated figure below; one of ordinary skill would understand from viewing annotated fig. 4 below, that the width W of the fairing 98 (reference character 98 is shown in fig. 2 wherein fig. 4 is a cross section of the engine 10 shown in fig. 2, see par. 12) is such that the width W accommodates the annotated arc length 150 such that the shaded single arm single arm 130,132 arcs about the core casing 46 or the turbine engine axis of rotation 12 in a single direction from the second portion 96 or in other words that the annotated width W is at least twice the arc length Rθ wherein R is the radius as shown in annotated figure below or in other words the width W is 2Rθ, given that “drawings must be evaluated for what they reasonably disclose and suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art”, In re Aslanian, 590 F.2d 911, 200 USPQ 500 (CCPA 1979), MPEP 2125 I.) located in the inner cowl space and a second portion 96, extending from the first portion 94 located in the hollow portion of the fairing (see figs. 2 and 4 and annotated figure below); a first accessory device (one or more of interfaces 142a,142b,162a,162b wherein such interfaces can include accessories, see par. 63) located in the inner cowl space and operably coupled (see fig. 4 and pars. 63 and 69) to the first portion 94 of the accessory gearbox 90; a second accessory device (one of interfaces 172a,172b wherein such interfaces can include accessories, see par. 63) located in the hollow portion of the fairing 98 and operably coupled (see fig. 4 and pars. 63 and 69) to the second portion 96 of the accessory gearbox 90.
PNG
media_image1.png
677
872
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (arc length 150 can be 1% of the circumference of the core casing 46, see par. 57; therefore arc 150 can be 1% of 360 degrees or in other words 3.6 degrees)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (strut 98 that is a fairing; see figs. 1-2 and claim 11)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (first circumferential end)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (W)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (R)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (θ)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (boundary)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (upper fairing)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (inner cowl space)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (first drive axis)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
It is noted that in the scenario wherein one of ordinary skill would not understand from viewing fig. 4 that the width W of the fairing to be 2Rθ or in other words 2R(3.6°) or in other words 2R(.063) = .13R, then it can be said that Miller does not disclose the single arm 130,132 per the special definition such that the width W of the fairing is not shown to be at least 0.13R, because for example, a scale is provided regarding the arc length as discussed above for example in the annotated figure above, however, the other portions of the drawing are not labeled as being drawn to scale.
While Miller discloses the general conditions of the claimed invention, Miller does not expressly disclose that the width W of the fairing is at least 0.13R.
The presence of a known result-effective variable would be a motivation for a person of ordinary skill in the art to experiment to reach another workable product or process. See KSR; MPEP 2144.05(II)(B). A particular parameter is a result-effective variable when the variable is known to achieve a recognized result. See In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 620, 195 USPQ 6,8 (CCPA 1977).
Here, Stretton teaches in the abstract and figs. 3 and 3a that the width (see annotated figure below) of fairing 26 enclosing accessory gearbox portions 28 is a result effective variable. For example the width of such fairing must be sufficient to accommodate the accessories 36 driven the accessory gearbox. However if the width (see annotated figure below) is too great then there is excessive blockage of the airflow flowing through the bypass duct 22 such blockage reducing the thrust (see par. 28, middle) of the gas turbine engine. Therefore, an ordinary skilled worker would recognize that the width of the fairing is a result-effective variable that controls the amount of room for accessories and drag created by the fairing. Thus, the width of the fairing being 0.13R is found to be an obvious optimization of the prior art obtainable by an ordinary skilled worker through routine experimentation.
[AltContent: textbox (width of fairing 26)]
PNG
media_image3.png
173
346
media_image3.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (blockage of airflow in bypass duct)][AltContent: arrow]
Therefore, since the general conditions of the claim, i.e. the width of the fairing, were disclosed in the prior art by Miller, it is not inventive to discover the optimum workable range by routine experimentation, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Miller’s invention to include wherein the width of the fairing is at least 0.13R in order to accommodate sufficient room for engine driven accessories while preventing excessive drag as suggested and taught by Stretton in the abstract and par. 43 and par. 48, top. It has been held “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation”, In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). This optimization is reasonable given the knowledge of one of ordinary skill regarding single arms relating to accessory gearboxes as pointed out in the pertinent prior art infra.
Regarding claim 2, Miller discloses, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton teach, the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Miller further discloses (see fig. 4) the first accessory device (162a or 162b) includes at least one of a variable frequency generator, a hydraulic pump (see par. 63, bottom), and a starter.
Regarding claim 4, Miller discloses, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton teach, the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Miller further discloses (see fig. 4) wherein the second accessory device 172b is a lubrication pump (see par. 63, bottom).
Regarding claim 5, Miller discloses, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton teach, the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Miller further discloses (see figs. 1, 2 and 4) wherein the fairing 98 includes a transition region (at location 172b in fig. 4; this is a transition from a radially middle portion of the fairing to a radially outward portion of the fairing), and wherein the lubrication pump 172b is at least partially located in the transition region of the fairing.
Regarding claim 6, Miller discloses, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton teach, the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Miller further discloses (see figs. 1, 2 and 4) the fairing 98 includes a transition region (at location 172b in fig. 4; this is a transition from a radially middle portion of the fairing to a radially outward portion of the fairing), and wherein the second portion 96 of the accessory gearbox 90 couples to the second accessory device 172b within the transition region of the fairing 98.
Regarding claim 7, Miller discloses, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton teach, the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Miller further discloses (see figs. 1, 2 and 4) one or more shafts (see par. 68) coupling the engine core 44 to the accessory gearbox 90.
Regarding claim 8, Miller discloses, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton teach, the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Miller further discloses (see annotated fig. above) wherein the single arm 130,132 includes an arm length (150,170 as discussed in the annotated text; the arm length being the shaded portion in annotated figure above) measured along a centerline 150,170 extending from a first circumferential end (see annotated figure above) to a second circumferential end (at 154 in fig. 4).
Regarding claim 9, Miller discloses, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton teach, the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Miller further discloses (see annotated fig. above) the arm length (150,170 as discussed in the annotated text; the arm length being the shaded portion in annotated figure above) of the single arm 130,132 is in a range from 1% to 80% of a circumference of an engine casing of the engine core 44, wherein the circumference of the engine casing 46 is measured at an outer surface (at 46 in fig. 4) of the engine casing 46. The circumference of the engine casing is 360 degrees. When looking at the annotated figure above it can be seen that the shaded portion is greater than 1% of the engine casing 46 and less than 50% of the engine casing. It is noted that length 170 may be “between 1% and 60% the circumference of the engine core 44 or the core casing 46” (par. 62).
Regarding claim 10, Miller discloses, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton teach, the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Miller further discloses (see annotated fig. above) the arm length (150,170 as discussed in the annotated text; the arm length being the shaded portion) of the single arm is in a range from 5% to 60% of a circumference of an engine casing of the engine core 44, wherein the circumference of the engine casing 46 is measured at an outer surface (at 46 in fig. 4) of the engine casing 46. The circumference of the engine casing is 360 degrees. When looking at the annotated figure above it can be seen that the shaded portion is greater than 5% of the engine casing 46 and less than 50% of the engine casing. It is noted that length 170 may be “between 1% and 60% the circumference of the engine core 44 or the core casing 46” (par. 62).
Regarding claim 11, Miller discloses an upper fairing (see annotate figure above; see par. 47 pointing out that this upper strut may be configured as a strut similar to lower strut fairing 98 and that the accessory gearbox 90 can be located at the upper strut and thus such upper strut can also be a fairing, see par. 103) wherein the single arm (shaded portion regarding 130,132 in annotated figure above) of the first portion 94 (see fig. 4) is located (see annotated figure above) between (i.e., circumferentially between) the upper fairing (see annotated figure above) and a boundary (see annotated figure above) defined by a portion of the inner cowl 76 at an intersection of the inner cowl space (at 54 in fig. 1 and also see annotated figure above) and the hollow portion (at 90 in fig. 2; also the hollow portion is the location of the second portion 96 in fig. 4).
Regarding claim 12, Miller discloses, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton teach, the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Miller further discloses (see fig. 4) the first accessory device (162a or 162b) is one or more of a variable frequency generator, a hydraulic pump (see par. 63, bottom), and a starter.
Regarding claim 13, Miller discloses, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton teach, the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Miller further discloses (see fig. 4) wherein the second accessory device 172b is a lubrication pump (see par. 63, bottom).
Regarding claim 14, Miller discloses, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton teach, the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Miller further discloses (see figs. 1,2 and 4) wherein the fairing 98 includes a transition region (at location 172b; this is a transition from a radially middle portion of the fairing to a radially outward portion of the fairing), and wherein the lubrication pump 172b is at least partially located in the transition region of the fairing.
Regarding claim 15, Miller discloses, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton teach, the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Miller further discloses (see figs. 1, 2 and 4) wherein the second portion 96 of the accessory gearbox 90 couples to the second accessory device 172b within the transition region (at location 172b; this is a transition from a radially middle portion of the fairing to a radially outward portion of the fairing) of the fairing 98.
Regarding claim 16, Miller discloses, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton teach, the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Miller further discloses (see fig. 4) the first portion 94 or the first accessory device (interfaces 142a,142b,162a,162b wherein such interfaces can include accessories, see par. 63) defines a first drive axis and a first angle is measured at an intersection of the first drive axis and a first line parallel to a turbine engine axis 12 (see figs. 1 and 4) of rotation, and wherein the first angle is greater than zero (e.g. accessory 162a, such as a fuel pump or an alternator, is mounted at an end of the first portion 94 at location 154; a first drive axis comprises a shaft driving the instant accessory 162b or a shaft of the instant accessory 162b and such shaft must extend from the location 154; such a driving shaft or a driven shaft could not be parallel to engine axis 12 in fig. 1 or be parallel with a line parallel to the engine axis of rotation 12; evidence of a shaft driving an accessory is shown in Stretton fig. 3 between accessory gearbox 28 and a respective accessory 36; thus an example of the first drive axis is shown in annotated figure above).
Regarding claim 17, Miller discloses, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton teach, the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Miller further discloses (see fig. 4) wherein the second portion 96 or the second accessory device (one of interfaces 172a,172b wherein such interfaces can include accessories, see par. 63) defines a second drive axis and a second angle is measured at the intersection of the second drive axis and a second line perpendicular to the turbine engine axis of rotation, and wherein the second angle is greater than zero (e.g. accessory 172a, such as a fuel pump or an alternator, is mounted on the second portion at location 172b; a second drive axis comprises a shaft driving the instant accessory or a shaft of the instant accessory and such shaft must extend from the location 172b; an angle between a line perpendicular with engine axis 12 and the second drive axis has to be greater than zero; for example a line perpendicular to engine axis 12 is line at 174; a second drive axis can be the axis of the instant shaft such axis going out of the page in fig. 4; evidence of a shaft driving an accessory is shown in Stretton fig. 3 between accessory gearbox 28 and a respective accessory 36).
Regarding claim 19, Miller discloses, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton teach, the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Miller further discloses (see fig. 4) the single arm (shaded portion regarding 130,132 in annotated figure above) is a C-shape (see annotated figure above; this is similar to applicant C-shape single arm 451 in applicant fig. 5, see par. 106, bottom; applicant C-shape is C-shaped in the sense that it occupies a circumferential portion of inner cowl space 81 in applicant fig. 5) that circumferentially extends about the engine core 44 in a single direction (clockwise) from an intersection (at location “boundary” in annotated figure above) of the hollow portion (at 90 in fig. 2) and the inner cowl space (at 54 in fig. 1; also see annotated figure above).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 3 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miller in view of US 2016/0201789 A1 (Duong), or in the alternative over Miller in view of Stretton as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Duong.
Regarding claim 3, Miller discloses, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton teach, the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Miller further discloses wherein the first accessory device (one or more of interfaces 142a,142b,162a,162b wherein such interfaces can include accessories, see par. 63) is a set of first accessory devices (one or more of interfaces 142a,142b,162a,162b wherein such interfaces can include accessories, see par. 63) that include a generator (see par. 63) and a hydraulic pump (see par. 63). Miller does not disclose the generator is a variable frequency generator and a starter.
Duong teaches a gas turbine 20 (see fig. 1) further teaches a variable frequency generator and a starter. These are accessory devices (see par. 4, middle) on an accessory gearbox 100 (see fig. 1) located in an inner cowl space (“the space between the core nacelle and engine core”, see par. 3).
Regarding the variable frequency generator, It is further noted that “when a patent claims a structure already known in the prior art that is altered by the mere substitution of one element for another known in the field, the combination must do more than yield a predictable result.” KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 at 1395 (U.S. 2007) (MPEP 2143 I.B.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to substitute variable frequency generator of Duong for the generator of Miller, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton, for the purpose of substituting one known element for another in order to provide the expected result of providing a source of electricity to the engine and/or aircraft of the combination.
Regarding the starter, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Miller, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton, with a stater as taught by Duong in order to facilitate starting the gas turbine engine of the combination.
Regarding claim 20, Miller discloses, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton teach, the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Miller further discloses a set of fuel accessories (fuel pump and fuel control, see par. 63) are coupled (to the accessory gearbox 90), and wherein the set of fuel accessories includes at least one of a fuel pump (see par. 63) or a fuel heat exchanger. Miller does not disclose a fuel plate coupled to the accessory gearbox.
Duong teaches a gas turbine 20 (see fig. 1) further teaches (see figs. 2 and 3B) a fuel plate 200 coupled to an accessory gearbox 100 (adapter plate 200 can be used to mount a fuel pump to the accessory gearbox 100, see par. 22).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to provide Miller, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton, with a fuel plate coupled to the accessory gearbox in order to facilitate reducing the inventory of spare parts and the need for multiple dissimilar components (see par. 3). The fuel control of the combination is coupled to the fuel plate by way of both of the fuel accessories being coupled to gearbox 90 disclosed by Miller in fig. 4. For example, in Duong fig. 3B the accessory coupled to plate 155 is coupled to fuel plate 200 by way of portion 72 of accessory gearbox 100.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miller in view of US 2019/0218978 A1 (Edwards), or in the alternative over Miller in view of Stretton as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Edwards.
Regarding claim 18, Miller discloses, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton teach, the current invention as claimed and discussed above. Miller does not disclose the second angle is in a range of 5° to 30°.
The presence of a known result-effective variable would be a motivation for a person of ordinary skill in the art to experiment to reach another workable product or process. See KSR; MPEP 2144.05(II)(B). A particular parameter is a result-effective variable when the variable is known to achieve a recognized result. See In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 620, 195 USPQ 6,8 (CCPA 1977).
Here Edwards teaches an accessory gearbox 28 and an accessory 48A that defines a drive axis (axis of shaft 72A) an angle (called beta, β, for purposes of this discussion; see annotated figure below) measured at the intersection of the drive axis 72A and a line at Z perpendicular to the turbine engine axis 11 (see fig. 1). The angle alpha (α) in fig. 3 is from 120° to 160° (see par. 66, top). Therefore the angle β, between plane Z (i.e. vertical plane Z that includes the engine axis 11 in fig. 1; see par. 69, top) and plane X is from 60° to 80° or other suitable angle (see par. 66, middle). When viewing fig. 3 one of ordinary skill would understand that if the angle β is too big accessory 48A would protrude against core nacelle 52 and if angle β is too small (1) the accessory 48A becomes too close to source of heat namely the core engine casing 50 (that in this scenario has a heat shield 78) and (2) the dimensions of the accessory become more limited because the amount of “space” shown in annotated figure below is reduced. Therefore, an ordinary skilled worker would recognize that the claimed second angle is a result-effective variable that controls the amount of space to include accessories in the allocated space regarding the accessory gearbox (see par. 66, bottom) as well as the thermal management and size of the accessories. Thus, the claimed the second angle is in a range of 5° to 30° is found to be an obvious optimization of the prior art obtainable by an ordinary skilled worker through routine experimentation.
Therefore, since the general conditions of the claim, i.e. an angle between second drive axis and the second line as discussed in the claim 17 analysis below, were disclosed in the prior art by Miller or alternatively Miller in view of Stretton, it is not inventive to discover the optimum workable range by routine experimentation, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Miller’s, or in the alternative Miller in view of Stretton’s, invention to include wherein the second angle is in a range of 5° to 30° in order to provide the second accessory be allocated in the space regarding the accessory gearbox (i.e., the space provided by the hollow space of the fairing) as well as optimizing the thermal management and size of the accessories. It has been held “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation”, In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
PNG
media_image5.png
304
309
media_image5.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: textbox (β)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arc][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (space)][AltContent: arrow]
This results in the second drive axis of the second accessory device being at the angle β as shown in annotated figure below. This permits the axial length of the hollow portion of fairing 98 and the axial length of the fairing to be reduced that can reduce weight and improve fuel efficiency.
PNG
media_image7.png
680
864
media_image7.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (examiner annotated second accessory device)][AltContent: arc][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: rect][AltContent: textbox (β)][AltContent: arrow]
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
fuel pump mounting plate: US 6357220;
knowledge of one of ordinary skill regarding single arms relating to accessory gearboxes: US 20210404386 (single arm of accessory gearbox 19 in fig. 3).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARC J AMAR whose telephone number is (571)272-9948. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-6:00.
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, Devon Kramer can be reached at (571) 272-7118. 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.
/MARC AMAR/Examiner, Art Unit 3741
/DEVON C KRAMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3741