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 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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carriero et al. (US 11896076) in view of Basa et al. (US 20200329816).
Regarding Claim 1, Carriero et al. teaches an article of footwear (10), comprising: an upper (12) comprising a knitted component (50) and including: a first knit zone (Z1) in a heel region of the upper, the first knit zone having a first knit density (fig. 1 shows the first knit zone (z1) in the heel region (24), wherein the first knit zone would clearly have a first knit density)); and a second knit zone (Z2) integrally knit with the first knit zone and in a midfoot region of the upper, wherein the second knit zone has a second knit density (fig. 1 shows the second knit zone (Z2) being integrally knit with the first knit zone (Z1) and in a midfoot region (22), and clearly having a second knit density).
Carriero et al. does not teach wherein the second knit density is greater than the first knit density.
Attention is drawn to Basa et al., which teaches an analogous article of footwear. Basa et al. teaches an article of footwear (100), comprising: an upper (102) comprising a knitted component and including: a first knit zone, the first knit zone having a first knit density; and a second knit zone integrally knit with the first knit zone, the second knit zone having a second knit density that is greater than the first knit density (paragraph [0043] teaches “certain areas or portions of the upper 102 may have a different stitch density than other portions, such as the throat area 112 and/or the collar 116. For example, certain portions of the upper 102 may have a half-gauge stitch density or less-than a half-gauge stitch density, while the collar 116 and/or throat area 112 may have a greater stitch density,” wherein the first zone is considered the area knit in half gauge and the second knit zone is considered the area not knit in half gauge and therein having a higher knit density).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Carriero et al. to include the teachings of Basa et al. such that the second knit density is greater than the first knit density so as to allow greater breathability in the lower density zones (paragraph [0045], “The relatively lower density knit structure provided by the half-gauge knitting technique may therefore provide a lightweight, breathable upper.”), especially as Carriero et al. teaches “The various zones Z1 and Z2 or parts of the zones of the unitary knit structure 16 may be knitted of yarns comprising different materials or having other different properties,” (col. 10 ll. 60-62)) but does not explicitly teach the first and second zones having different densities.
Regarding Claim 2, Carriero et al. teaches all of the limitations of the article of footwear of Claim 1, as discussed in the rejections above. Carriero et al. further teaches wherein the first knit zone (z1) extends from the midfoot region on a lateral side of the upper, through the heel region, and to the midfoot region on a medial side of the upper (figs. 1, 2 and 4 show the first knit zone (z1) extending from the midfoot region on a lateral side through the heel region, and to the midfoot region on a medial side).
Regarding Claim 3, Carriero et al. teaches all of the limitations of the article of footwear of Claim 2, as discussed in the rejection above. Carriero et al. further teaches a sole structure (14) secured to the upper (12) (fig. 1 shows the sole structure (14) secured to the upper (12)), wherein the first knit zone (Z1) extends continuously from a collar (30) to a biteline wherein the sole structure meets the upper (fig. 1 shows the first knit zone (Z1) extending continuously from a collar (30) to a biteline where the sole (14) meets the upper (12)).
Regarding Claim 4, Carriero et al. teaches all of the limitations of the article of footwear of Claim 1, as discussed in the rejections above. Carriero et al. further teaches wherein the second knit zone (Z2) is also within a forefoot region of the upper (fig. 1 shows the second knit zone (Z2) is within the forefoot of the upper).
Regarding Claim 5, Carriero et al. teaches all of the limitations of the article of footwear of Claim 4, as discussed in the rejections above. Carriero et al. further teaches wherein the second knit zone (Z2) extends continuously from the midfoot region on a medial side of the upper, through the forefoot region, and to the midfoot region on a lateral side of the upper (annotated fig. 3 shows the second knit zone (Z2) extending continuously from the midfoot on the medial side, through the forefoot region, to the midfoot on the lateral side).
Regarding Claim 6, Carriero et al. teaches all of the limitations of the article of footwear of Claim 1, as discussed in the rejections above.
Carriero et al. does not teach wherein the first knit density is no more than half of the second knit density.
Attention is drawn to Basa et al., which teaches an analogous article of footwear. Basa et al. teaches an article of footwear (100), comprising: an upper (102) comprising a knitted component and including: a first knit zone, the first knit zone having a first knit density; and a second knit zone integrally knit with the first knit zone, the second knit zone having a second knit density that is greater than the first knit density (paragraph [0043] teaches “certain areas or portions of the upper 102 may have a different stitch density than other portions, such as the throat area 112 and/or the collar 116. For example, certain portions of the upper 102 may have a half-gauge stitch density or less-than a half-gauge stitch density, while the collar 116 and/or throat area 112 may have a greater stitch density,” wherein the first zone is considered the area knit in half gauge and the second knit zone is considered the area not knit in half gauge and therein having a higher knit density). Basa et al. further teaches wherein the first knit density is no more than half of the second knit density (paragraph [0043] teaches “certain areas or portions of the upper 102 may have a different stitch density than other portions, such as the throat area 112 and/or the collar 116. For example, certain portions of the upper 102 may have a half-gauge stitch density or less-than a half-gauge stitch density, while the collar 116 and/or throat area 112 may have a greater stitch density. For example, the collar 116 and/or the throat area 112 knit from the third yarn 160 may be formed as a double jersey knit structure on both beds of a double bed knitting machine,” therein the first zone is clearly no more than half of the density of the second zone).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Carriero et al. to include the teachings of Basa et al. such that the first knit density is no more than half of the second knit density so as to allow greater breathability in the lower density zones (paragraph [0045], “The relatively lower density knit structure provided by the half-gauge knitting technique may therefore provide a lightweight, breathable upper.”), especially as Carriero et al. teaches “The various zones Z1 and Z2 or parts of the zones of the unitary knit structure 16 may be knitted of yarns comprising different materials or having other different properties,” (col. 10 ll. 60-62)) but does not explicitly teach the first and second zones having different densities.
Regarding Claim 7, Carriero et al. teaches all of the limitations of the article of footwear of Claim 1, as discussed in the rejections above. Carriero et al. further teaches wherein the knitted component (50) comprises a single layer knit construction in the first knit zone and the second knit zone (fig. 11 shows the knitted component (50) comprising a single layer knit construction in the first (Z1) and second (Z2) knit zones).
Regarding Claim 8, Carriero et al. teaches all of the limitations of the article of footwear of Claim 1, as discussed in the rejections above.
Carriero et al. does not teach wherein the first knit zone comprises a course of a first yarn comprising a tenacity of at least 5 grams per denier.
Attention is drawn to Basa et al., which teaches an analogous article of footwear. Basa et al. teaches an article of footwear (100), comprising: an upper (102) comprising a knitted component and including: a first knit zone, the first knit zone having a first knit density; and a second knit zone integrally knit with the first knit zone, the second knit zone having a second knit density that is greater than the first knit density (paragraph [0043] teaches “certain areas or portions of the upper 102 may have a different stitch density than other portions, such as the throat area 112 and/or the collar 116. For example, certain portions of the upper 102 may have a half-gauge stitch density or less-than a half-gauge stitch density, while the collar 116 and/or throat area 112 may have a greater stitch density,” wherein the first zone is considered the area knit in half gauge and the second knit zone is considered the area not knit in half gauge and therein having a higher knit density). Basa et al. further teaches wherein the first knit zone comprises a course of a first yarn comprising a tenacity of at least 5 grams per denier (paragraph [0014] teaches “At least a portion of the knitted component may include a half-gauge knit or lesser gauge knit formed from alternating courses of a first monofilament and a second multifilament yarn having a tenacity of at least about 5 g per denier or greater.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Carriero et al. to include the teachings of Basa et al. such that the first knit zone comprises a course of a first yarn comprising a tenacity of at least 5 grams per denier so as to allow the upper to have enhanced strength, abrasion resistance and/or moisture resistance (paragraph [0023]).
Regarding Claim 9, Carriero et al. teaches all of the limitations of the article of footwear of Claim 8, as discussed in the rejections above.
Carriero et al. does not teach wherein, in at least the first knit zone, the first yarn is plated with a second yarn having a lower melting temperature than the first yarn.
Attention is drawn to Basa et al., which teaches an analogous article of footwear. Basa et al. teaches an article of footwear (100), comprising: an upper (102) comprising a knitted component and including: a first knit zone, the first knit zone having a first knit density; and a second knit zone integrally knit with the first knit zone, the second knit zone having a second knit density that is greater than the first knit density (paragraph [0043] teaches “certain areas or portions of the upper 102 may have a different stitch density than other portions, such as the throat area 112 and/or the collar 116. For example, certain portions of the upper 102 may have a half-gauge stitch density or less-than a half-gauge stitch density, while the collar 116 and/or throat area 112 may have a greater stitch density,” wherein the first zone is considered the area knit in half gauge and the second knit zone is considered the area not knit in half gauge and therein having a higher knit density), and wherein the first knit zone comprises a course of a first yarn comprising a tenacity of at least 5 grams per denier (paragraph [0014] teaches “At least a portion of the knitted component may include a half-gauge knit or lesser gauge knit formed from alternating courses of a first monofilament and a second multifilament yarn having a tenacity of at least about 5 g per denier or greater.”). Basa et al. further teaches wherein in at least the first knit zone, the first yarn is plated with a second yarn having a lower melting temperature than the first yarn (paragraph [0024] teaches “The monofilament strand 150 may be a 0.20 mm monofilament that is a co-extruded yarn with a nylon core and a TPU sheath,” wherein the Nylon is considered to be the first yarn and the TPU is considered to be the second yarn, wherein TPU has a lower melting temp than Nylon).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Carriero et al. to include the teachings of Basa et al. such that in at least the first knit zone, the first yarn is plated with a second yarn having a lower melting temperature than the first yarn so as to allow the upper to be shaped without losing the structural integrity of the yarn.
Regarding Claim 10, Carriero et al. teaches all of the limitations of the article of footwear of Claim 1, as discussed in the rejections above. Carriero et al. further teaches wherein the first knit zone (Z1) comprises a mesh structure having integrally knit openings (col. 14 ll. 39-40, “The knit outer face layer 50 has a mesh pattern including yarns 51 defining first knitted-in holes 60”).
Carriero does not explicitly teach the knit openings having a width of at least two wales. However, the width of the wales is a results effective variable. The knit openings must be wide enough to provide sufficient breathability, but narrow enough to maintain structural integrity of the material. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to create the invention of the prior art with the knit openings having a width of at least two wales since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). In the present invention, one would have been motivated to optimize the breathability and structural integrity of the knit material.
Regarding Claim 11, Carriero et al. teaches an article of footwear (10), comprising: a sole structure (14); and an upper (12) secured to the sole structure (fig. 1 show the sole structure (14) secured to the upper (12)), the upper comprising a composite structure (16) extending underfoot and secured to the sole structure (fig. 1 shows the upper (12) comprising a composite structure (16) extending underfoot and being secured to the sole structure (14); col. 16 ll. 4-10 teaches “the sole structure 14 is directly secured to the outer surface 56 of the knit outer face layer 50. For example, a portion of the outer face layer 50 bordering the outer perimeter 59 becomes a lower extent of the footwear upper 12 when incorporated into the article of footwear 10 and may be directly bonded to the midsole 45 during molding of the midsole 45,”), the composite structure comprising: a knit mesh component (50) on an outer-facing surface of the composite structure and having a plurality of integrally knit openings (60) (col. 14 ll. 39-40, “The knit outer face layer 50 has a mesh pattern including yarns 51 defining first knitted-in holes 60”); and a film layer (70) on an inner-facing surface of the composite structure, the film layer extending partially to the outer-facing surface of the composite structure, wherein the sole structure is bonded to the knit mesh component and the film layer of the composite structure (figs. 1 and 2 show the film layer (70) being on an inner facing surface of the composite structure where the film layer is sandwiched between the sole structure and the knit mesh component and extending to the outer facing surface of the composite structure and the sole structure being bonded to the knit mesh component (50) and the film layer (70)).
Carriero et al. does not teach the film layer being a thermoplastic film layer.
Attention is drawn to Basa et al., which teaches an analogous article of footwear. Basa et al. teaches an article of footwear (100), comprising: an upper (102) comprising a knitted component and including: a first knit zone, the first knit zone having a first knit density; and a second knit zone integrally knit with the first knit zone, the second knit zone having a second knit density that is different than the first knit density (paragraph [0043] teaches “certain areas or portions of the upper 102 may have a different stitch density than other portions, such as the throat area 112 and/or the collar 116. For example, certain portions of the upper 102 may have a half-gauge stitch density or less-than a half-gauge stitch density, while the collar 116 and/or throat area 112 may have a greater stitch density,” wherein the first zone is considered the area knit in half gauge and the second knit zone is considered the area not knit in half gauge and therein having a higher knit density). Basa et al. further teaches a thermoplastic film layer (152) at least partially encapsulating a portion of the knitted component (paragraph [0034] teaches “a skin layer 152 including a second thermoplastic polymer material, may be applied onto at least a portion of the knitted component 132”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Carriero et al. to include the teachings of Basa et al. such that the film is a thermoplastic film so as to the upper to be manipulated into a shape (paragraph [0034] “a skin layer 152 including a second thermoplastic polymer material, may be applied onto at least a portion of the knitted component 132 at desired and/or needed locations when the knitted component 132 is manipulated substantially into its wearable shape.”).
Regarding Claim 12, Carriero et al. teaches all of the limitations of the article of footwear of Claim 11, as discussed in the rejections above. Carriero et al. further teaches wherein the composite structure (16) extends continuously through a forefoot region, a midfoot region, and a heel region of the upper (fig. 2 shows the composite structure (16) extending continuously through a forefoot, midfoot, and heel region of the upper).
Regarding Claim 13, Carriero et al. teaches all of the limitations of the article of footwear of Claim 12, as discussed in the rejections above. Carriero et al. further teaches a biteline where the sole structure meets the upper, and wherein the composite structure (16) extends above the biteline in at least part of the forefoot region (fig. 2 shows the composite structure (16) extending above the biteline in the forefoot region) and maintains below the biteline in the midfoot region and the heel region (col. 16 ll. 4-10 teaches “the sole structure 14 is directly secured to the outer surface 56 of the knit outer face layer 50. For example, a portion of the outer face layer 50 bordering the outer perimeter 59 becomes a lower extent of the footwear upper 12 when incorporated into the article of footwear 10 and may be directly bonded to the midsole 45 during molding of the midsole 45,” therein the composite structure (16) which includes portion (50) clearly maintains below the biteline in the midfoot and heel regions).
Regarding Claim 14, Carriero et al. teaches all of the limitations of the article of footwear of Claim 11, as discussed in the rejections above. Carriero et al. further teaches wherein the upper comprises an integrally knitted component (50) comprising a first knit zone (Z1) having a first knit density (fig. 1 shows the first knit zone (z1), wherein the first knit zone would clearly have a first knit density) and a second knit zone (Z2) having a second knit density (fig. 1 shows the second knit zone (z2), wherein the second knit zone would clearly have a second knit density), wherein the composite structure (16) comprises a portion of the integrally knitted component in the first knit zone and a portion of the integrally knitted component in the second knit zone, wherein the integrally knitted component in at least one of the first knit zone or the second knit zone comprises the knit mesh component of the composite structure (fig. 1 shows the composite structure (16) comprising a portion of the integrally knitted component (50) in the first and second knit zones, the first and second knit zones comprising the mesh, as taught in col. 14 ll. 39-40: “The knit outer face layer 50 has a mesh pattern including yarns 51 defining first knitted-in holes 60”).
Carriero et al. does not teach wherein the second knit density is greater than the first knit density.
Attention is drawn to Basa et al., which teaches an analogous article of footwear. Basa et al. teaches an article of footwear (100), comprising: an upper (102) comprising a knitted component and including: a first knit zone, the first knit zone having a first knit density; and a second knit zone integrally knit with the first knit zone, the second knit zone having a second knit density that is greater than the first knit density (paragraph [0043] teaches “certain areas or portions of the upper 102 may have a different stitch density than other portions, such as the throat area 112 and/or the collar 116. For example, certain portions of the upper 102 may have a half-gauge stitch density or less-than a half-gauge stitch density, while the collar 116 and/or throat area 112 may have a greater stitch density,” wherein the first zone is considered the area knit in half gauge and the second knit zone is considered the area not knit in half gauge and therein having a higher knit density).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Carriero et al. to include the teachings of Basa et al. such that the second knit density is greater than the first knit density so as to allow greater breathability in the lower density zones (paragraph [0045], “The relatively lower density knit structure provided by the half-gauge knitting technique may therefore provide a lightweight, breathable upper.”), especially as Carriero et al. teaches “The various zones Z1 and Z2 or parts of the zones of the unitary knit structure 16 may be knitted of yarns comprising different materials or having other different properties,” (col. 10 ll. 60-62)) but does not explicitly teach the first and second zones having different densities.
Regarding Claim 15, Carriero et al. teaches all of the limitations of the article of footwear of Claim 14, as discussed in the rejections above. Carriero et al. further teaches wherein the first knit zone (Z1) extends around a heel region of the upper (figs. 1, 2, and 4 show the first knit zone (Z1) extending around a heel region) and the second knit zone abuts the first knit zone (fig. 1 shows the second knit zone (Z2) abutting the first knit zone (Z1)).
Regarding Claim 16, Carriero et al. teaches an article of footwear (10), comprising: an upper (12) comprising a knitted component (50) and including: a first knit zone (Z1) in a heel region of the upper, the first knit zone having a first knit density (fig. 1 shows the first knit zone (z1) in the heel region (24), wherein the first knit zone would clearly have a first knit density); a second knit zone (Z2) integrally knit with the first knit zone and in a midfoot region of the upper, the second knit zone having a second knit density (fig. 1 shows the second knit zone (Z2) being integrally knit with the first knit zone (Z1) and in a midfoot region (22), and clearly having a second knit density); and a first boundary (see annotated Fig.) between the first knit zone and the second knit zone on a medial side of the upper and a second boundary (see annotated Fig.) between the first knit zone and the second knit zone on a lateral side of the upper, wherein the first boundary is closer to a heel end of the upper than the second boundary (annotated fig. 4 shows the first and second boundaries on the medial and lateral sides, respectively, the first boundary being closer to a heel end than the second boundary).
Carriero does not teach wherein the second knit density is different than the first knit density.
Attention is drawn to Basa et al., which teaches an analogous article of footwear. Basa et al. teaches an article of footwear (100), comprising: an upper (102) comprising a knitted component and including: a first knit zone, the first knit zone having a first knit density; and a second knit zone integrally knit with the first knit zone, the second knit zone having a second knit density that is different than the first knit density (paragraph [0043] teaches “certain areas or portions of the upper 102 may have a different stitch density than other portions, such as the throat area 112 and/or the collar 116. For example, certain portions of the upper 102 may have a half-gauge stitch density or less-than a half-gauge stitch density, while the collar 116 and/or throat area 112 may have a greater stitch density,” wherein the first zone is considered the area knit in half gauge and the second knit zone is considered the area not knit in half gauge and therein having a higher knit density).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Carriero et al. to include the teachings of Basa et al. such that the second knit density is different than the first knit density so as to allow greater breathability in the lower density zones (paragraph [0045], “The relatively lower density knit structure provided by the half-gauge knitting technique may therefore provide a lightweight, breathable upper.”), especially as Carriero et al. teaches “The various zones Z1 and Z2 or parts of the zones of the unitary knit structure 16 may be knitted of yarns comprising different materials or having other different properties,” (col. 10 ll. 60-62)) but does not explicitly teach the first and second zones having different densities.
Regarding Claim 17, Carriero et al. teaches all of the limitations of the article of footwear of Claim 11, as discussed in the rejections above. Carriero et al. further teaches a sole structure (14) secured to the upper, a biteline being where the upper meets the sole structure (fig. 1 shows a sole structure (14) secured to the upper (12) and a biteline clearly being formed where the upper meets the sole structure).
Regarding Claim 18, Carriero et al. teaches all of the limitations of the article of footwear of Claim 17, as discussed in the rejections above. Carriero et al. further teaches wherein the first boundary forms a first angle (see annotated Fig.) with the biteline along the second knit zone, and the second boundary forms a second angle (see annotated Fig.) with the biteline along the second knit zone, the first angle being less than the second angle (annotated figs. 1 and 2 show the first and second angles being formed with the biteline and the first angle (around 90 degrees) being less than the second angle (clearly greater than 90 degrees).
Regarding Claim 19, Carriero et al. teaches all of the limitations of the article of footwear of Claim 17, as discussed in the rejections above. Carriero et al. further teaches wherein the first boundary (see annotated Fig.) and the second boundary (see annotated Fig.) both extend continuously from the biteline to an eyestay area (36) of the upper (figs. 1 and 2 show the first and second boundaries extending continuously from the biteline to an eyestay area (36)).
Regarding Claim 20, Carriero et al. teaches all of the limitations of the article of footwear of Claim 11, as discussed in the rejections above. Carriero et al. further teaches a composite structure (16) extending underfoot (col. 16 ll. 4-10 teaches “the sole structure 14 is directly secured to the outer surface 56 of the knit outer face layer 50. For example, a portion of the outer face layer 50 bordering the outer perimeter 59 becomes a lower extent of the footwear upper 12 when incorporated into the article of footwear 10 and may be directly bonded to the midsole 45 during molding of the midsole 45,” therein the composite structure, which includes portion (50) would clearly extend underfoot) and comprising a film layer (70) at least partially encapsulating a portion of the knitted component in the first knit zone and a portion of the knitted component in the second knit zone (figs. 1 and 2 show the film layer (70) encapsulating a portion of the knitted component in the first (Z1) and second (Z2) knit zones).
Carriero does not teach wherein the film is a thermoplastic film.
Attention is drawn to Basa et al., which teaches an analogous article of footwear. Basa et al. teaches an article of footwear (100), comprising: an upper (102) comprising a knitted component and including: a first knit zone, the first knit zone having a first knit density; and a second knit zone integrally knit with the first knit zone, the second knit zone having a second knit density that is different than the first knit density (paragraph [0043] teaches “certain areas or portions of the upper 102 may have a different stitch density than other portions, such as the throat area 112 and/or the collar 116. For example, certain portions of the upper 102 may have a half-gauge stitch density or less-than a half-gauge stitch density, while the collar 116 and/or throat area 112 may have a greater stitch density,” wherein the first zone is considered the area knit in half gauge and the second knit zone is considered the area not knit in half gauge and therein having a higher knit density). Basa et al. further teaches a thermoplastic film layer (152) at least partially encapsulating a portion of the knitted component (paragraph [0034] teaches “a skin layer 152 including a second thermoplastic polymer material, may be applied onto at least a portion of the knitted component 132”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Carriero et al. to include the teachings of Basa et al. such that the film is a thermoplastic film so as to the upper to be manipulated into a shape (paragraph [0034] “a skin layer 152 including a second thermoplastic polymer material, may be applied onto at least a portion of the knitted component 132 at desired and/or needed locations when the knitted component 132 is manipulated substantially into its wearable shape.”).
PNG
media_image1.png
523
770
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
502
764
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
884
659
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HALEY A SMITH whose telephone number is (571)272-6597. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Khoa Huynh can be reached at (571)272-4888. 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.
/HALEY A SMITH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights