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 .
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 16 refers to “the data regarding the nose landing gear” in lines 1-2; however, claim 16 is dependent from claim 1, and neither claim previously introduces “data regarding the nose landing gear,” such that it is unclear what exactly is meant by “the data regarding the nose landing gear” in lines 1-2 of claim 16. Claim 1 does, however, previously introduce “data regarding the airplane” in line 10, and it is unclear whether the “data regarding the nose landing gear” referred to in lines 1-2 of claim 16 is intended to be the same as or different from the “data regarding the airplane” previously introduced in line 10 of claim 1. Thus, there is improper antecedent basis for the limitation in the claim.
Claim 17 depends from claim 16, such that claim 17 also includes the indefinite subject matter recited by claim 16 and is rejected for at least the same reasons that claim 16 is rejected.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 1-3, 6-9, 12-16, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0303267 to Vidal Rojas (hereinafter: “Vidal”).
With respect to claim 1, Vidal teaches a towbarless tractor (100, 200) for towing an airplane (“aircraft”) having a nose landing gear (“ground contacting structure” or “GCS”; apparent from at least Figs. 1A-1C & 10A-10C in view of at least ¶ 0009, 0019, 0030, 0141 & 0145), the towbarless tractor comprising: a chassis (e.g., via 110, 210); a body supported on the chassis (apparent from at least Figs. 9A-10C); a tractive assembly (e.g., 121, 225; apparent from at least Figs. 1A-2 & 9A-10C in view of at least ¶ 0067 & 0075); a driveline configured to drive and steer the tractive assembly (e.g., via 124 & 125 together, or via 123, 124 & 125 together, or via 122, 123, 124 & 125 together; apparent from at least Figs. 1A-2 in view of at least ¶ 0066-0067); a braking system (e.g., 126) configured to apply a brake force to the tractive assembly (apparent from at least Figs. 1A-2 in view of at least ¶ 0067-0068); a capture system (e.g., 130 & 140 together) including an actuator (e.g., 142) configured to facilitate capturing the nose landing gear within the capture system (apparent from at least Figs. 1A-1C & 7-10C in view of at least ¶ 0073); and a controller (e.g., 170; apparent from at least Figs. 1A-1C & 4 in view of at least ¶ 0059, 0065-0067 & 0069-0071) configured to: acquire data regarding the airplane (as discussed by at least ¶ 0016-0017, 0066, 0069-0070, 0096, 0098, 0100, 0105-0106, 0111-0120, 0140, 0144, 0151, 0153 & 0157-0159); and generate or modify, based on the data, at least one of (a) a steering command provided to the driveline as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear or (b) a side-shift command provided to the actuator as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear [for example, as discussed by at least ¶ 0111-0119, the computing unit 170 is structured to perform functions to generate, as the vehicle 100, 200 moves to dock with the aircraft (e.g., “as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear”) and based on a determination that the aircraft includes a type of GCS that corresponds to a type of the vehicle 100, 200 (e.g., “based on the data”), a command to turn (or to rotate) (e.g., “steering command”) the vehicle 100, 200 to align the vehicle 100, 200 with an ID tag of the aircraft to confirm an identity of the aircraft and/or retrieve a configuration of the GCS of the aircraft prior to the vehicle 100, 200 driving toward the aircraft until cm level accuracy on a distance to the ID tag is achieved; because (i) generate, based on the data, a steering command provided to the driveline as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear, (ii) generate, based on the data, a side-shift command provided to the actuator as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear, (iii) modify, based on the data, a steering command provided to the driveline as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear, and (iv) modify, based on the data, a side-shift command provided to the actuator as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives].
With respect to claim 2, Vidal teaches the towbarless tractor of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to generate or modify the steering command provided to the driveline as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear to align the capture system with the nose landing gear (as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 1).
With respect to claim 3, Vidal teaches the towbarless tractor of claim 2, wherein the controller is configured to automatically generate or modify the steering command provided to the driveline (as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 1).
With respect to claim 6, Vidal teaches the towbarless tractor of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to generate or modify the side-shift command provided to the actuator as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear to align the capture system with the nose landing gear [claim scope is not limited by claim language that suggests or makes optional but does not require steps to be performed, or by claim language that does not limit a claim to a particular structure (e.g., see: MPEP 2111.04_I), and, as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 1, the alternative “(i)” of “a controller configured to: […] generate or modify, based on the data, at least one of (a) a steering command provided to the driveline as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear or (b) a side-shift command provided to the actuator as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear” in claim 1 has been addressed by the prior art rejection, whereas “wherein the controller is configured to generate or modify the side-shift command provided to the actuator as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear to align the capture system with the nose landing gear” only further defines the alternatives “(iii)” and “(iv)” of “a controller configured to: […] generate or modify, based on the data, at least one of (a) a steering command provided to the driveline as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear or (b) a side-shift command provided to the actuator as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear,” and “wherein the controller is configured to generate or modify the side-shift command provided to the actuator as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear to align the capture system with the nose landing gear” does not necessarily further limit structure of the “towbarless tractor” of claim 1 in a case where the alternative “(i)” (or the alternative “(ii)”) is differently addressed; even so, as discussed by at least ¶ 0016-0017, 0062, 0074, 0114, 0119, 0143-0144 & 0148].
With respect to claim 7, Vidal teaches the towbarless tractor of claim 6, wherein the controller is configured to automatically generate or modify the side-shift command provided to the actuator [as discussed in detail above with respect to claims 1 and 6, the alternative “(i)” of “a controller configured to: […] generate or modify, based on the data, at least one of (a) a steering command provided to the driveline as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear or (b) a side-shift command provided to the actuator as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear” in claim 1 has been addressed by the prior art rejection, whereas “wherein the controller is configured to automatically generate or modify the side-shift command provided to the actuator” only further defines the alternatives “(iii)” and “(iv)” of “a controller configured to: […] generate or modify, based on the data, at least one of (a) a steering command provided to the driveline as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear or (b) a side-shift command provided to the actuator as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear,” and “wherein the controller is configured to automatically generate or modify the side-shift command provided to the actuator” does not necessarily further limit structure of the “towbarless tractor” of claims 1 and 6 in a case where the alternative “(i)” (or the alternative “(ii)”) is differently addressed (e.g., see: MPEP 2111.04_I, as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 6); even so, as discussed by at least ¶ 0097-0098 & 0148].
With respect to claim 8, Vidal teaches the towbarless tractor of claim 6, wherein the controller is configured to provide an indication, via a display or an operator interface, that the side-shift command is required [as discussed in detail above with respect to claims 1 and 6, the alternative “(i)” of “a controller configured to: […] generate or modify, based on the data, at least one of (a) a steering command provided to the driveline as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear or (b) a side-shift command provided to the actuator as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear” in claim 1 has been addressed by the prior art rejection, whereas “wherein the controller is configured to provide an indication, via a display or an operator interface, that the side-shift command is required” only further defines the alternatives “(iii)” and “(iv)” of “a controller configured to: […] generate or modify, based on the data, at least one of (a) a steering command provided to the driveline as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear or (b) a side-shift command provided to the actuator as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear,” and “wherein the controller is configured to provide an indication, via a display or an operator interface, that the side-shift command is required” does not necessarily further limit structure of the “towbarless tractor” of claims 1 and 6 in a case where the alternative “(i)” (or the alternative “(ii)”) is differently addressed (e.g., see: MPEP 2111.04_I, as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 6)].
With respect to claim 9, Vidal teaches the towbarless tractor of claim 8, wherein the controller is configured to automatically generate or modify the side-shift command provided to the actuator a predetermined amount of time after the indication is provided [as discussed in detail above with respect to claims 1, 6, and 8, the alternative “(i)” of “a controller configured to: […] generate or modify, based on the data, at least one of (a) a steering command provided to the driveline as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear or (b) a side-shift command provided to the actuator as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear” in claim 1 has been addressed by the prior art rejection, whereas “wherein the controller is configured to automatically generate or modify the side-shift command provided to the actuator a predetermined amount of time after the indication is provided” only further defines the alternatives “(iii)” and “(iv)” of “a controller configured to: […] generate or modify, based on the data, at least one of (a) a steering command provided to the driveline as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear or (b) a side-shift command provided to the actuator as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear,” and “wherein the controller is configured to automatically generate or modify the side-shift command provided to the actuator a predetermined amount of time after the indication is provided” does not necessarily further limit structure of the “towbarless tractor” of claims 1 and 6 in a case where the alternative “(i)” (or the alternative “(ii)”) is differently addressed (e.g., see: MPEP 2111.04_I, as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 6)].
With respect to claim 12, Vidal teaches the towbarless tractor of claim 1, further comprising a vision system (as discussed by at least ¶ 0010, 0098, 0105, 0110, 0112, 0115 & 0158), wherein the data indicates a type of aircraft of the airplane or the controller is configured to determine the type of aircraft based on the data (because the data indicates a type of aircraft of the airplane and the controller is configured to determine the type of aircraft based on the data are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives; for example, as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 1), and wherein the controller is configured to generate or modify a sensor parameter of the vision system based on the type of aircraft (as discussed by at least ¶ 0096, 0105 & 0111-0119; because generate a sensor parameter and modify a sensor parameter are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives).
With respect to claim 13, Vidal teaches the towbarless tractor of claim 12, wherein the sensor parameter is a lookahead distance defined by a sensor of the vision system (as discussed by at least ¶ 0111-0119).
With respect to claim 14, Vidal teaches the towbarless tractor of claim 1, wherein the data indicates a type of aircraft of the airplane or the controller is configured to determine the type of aircraft based on the data (because the data indicates a type of aircraft of the airplane and the controller is configured to determine the type of aircraft based on the data are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives; for example, as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 1), and wherein the controller is configured to generate or modify, based on the type of aircraft, a drive command provided to the driveline or the braking system as the towbarless tractor moves the airplane (as discussed by at least ¶ 0016-0017, 0067, 0096, 0101, 0137, 0144, 0150-0151 & 0157-0159; because generate a drive command provided to the driveline, generate a drive command provided to the braking system, modify a drive command provided to the driveline, and modify a drive command provided to the braking system are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives).
With respect to claim 15, Vidal teaches the towbarless tractor of claim 14, wherein the drive command includes a travel speed threshold of the driveline, a brake force threshold of the driveline, or a steering angle threshold of the tractive assembly (for example, as discussed by at least ¶ 0068; because the drive command includes a travel speed threshold of the driveline, the drive command includes a brake force threshold of the driveline, and the drive command includes a steering angle threshold of the tractive assembly are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives).
With respect to claim 16, Vidal teaches the towbarless tractor of claim 1, further comprising a sensor configured to acquire the data regarding the nose landing gear, wherein the controller is configured to generate or modify the at least one of the steering command or the side-shift command based on the data, and wherein the data indicates a relative positioning of the capture system relative to the nose landing gear (as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 1).
With respect to claim 18, Vidal teaches a towbarless tractor for towing an airplane having a nose landing gear, the towbarless tractor comprising: a chassis; a body supported on the chassis; a tractive assembly; a driveline configured to drive, brake, and steer the tractive assembly; a capture system including a plurality of actuators configured to facilitate capturing the nose landing gear within the capture system (as discussed in detail above with respect to at least claim 1); and a controller configured to: acquire or determine a type of aircraft of the airplane; generate or modify, based on the type of aircraft, at least one of (a) a steering command provided to the driveline as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear or (b) a side-shift command provided to at least one of the plurality of actuators as the capture system approaches the nose landing gear (as discussed in detail above with respect to at least claim 1); generate or modify, based on the type of aircraft, a capture command provided to the at least one of the plurality of actuators as the capture system captures the nose landing gear (for example, as discussed by at least ¶ 0016-0017, 0062, 0114, 0137, 0143-0144, 0151 & 0159); and generate or modify, based on the type of aircraft, a drive command provided to the driveline as the tractive assembly moves the airplane (as discussed in detail above with respect to at least claim 14).
With respect to claim 20, Vidal teaches a method for towing an airplane having a nose landing gear using a towbarless tractor, the method comprising: acquiring or determining a type of aircraft of the airplane; generating or modifying, based on the type of aircraft, at least one of (a) a steering command provided to a driveline of the towbarless tractor as the towbarless tractor approaches the nose landing gear or (b) a side-shift command provided to a first actuator of a capture system of the towbarless tractor as the towbarless tractor approaches the nose landing gear; generating or modifying, based on the type of aircraft, a capture command provided to at least one of the first actuator or a second actuator of the capture system as the towbarless tractor captures the nose landing gear; and generating or modifying, based on the type of aircraft, a drive command provided to at least one of the driveline or a brake assembly of the towbarless tractor as the towbarless tractor moves the airplane (as discussed in detail above with respect to at least claims 1 and 18; because provided to the first actuator and provided to a second actuator of the capture system are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vidal in view of DE 19808836 A1 to Kretschmann et al. (hereinafter: “Kretschmann”).
With respect to claim 4, Vidal teaches the towbarless tractor of claim 2; however, Vidal appears to lack a clear teaching as to whether the controller is configured to provide an indication, via a display or an operator interface, that a change to the steering command is required (because via a display and via an operator interface are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives).
Kretschmann teaches an analogous towbarless tractor (1) including a controller (9) configured to provide an indication, via a display (e.g., “optical warning” and/or “acoustic warning”), that a change to the steering command is required (the computer 9 warns a driver of the aircraft tractor 1 that a permissible nose wheel steering angle has been reached to indicate to the driver to correct steering of the aircraft tractor 1 to avoid exceeding a maximum permissible nose wheel steering angle to avoid damaging an aircraft).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the towbarless tractor of Vidal with the teachings of Kretschmann such that the controller is configured to provide an indication, via a display, that a change to the steering command is required to beneficially warn a human driver of the towbarless tractor to correct steering of the aircraft tractor 1 to avoid exceeding a maximum permissible nose wheel steering angle to avoid damaging an aircraft when a permissible nose wheel steering angle has been reached.
With respect to claim 5, Vidal teaches the towbarless tractor of claim 4, wherein the controller is configured to automatically generate or modify the steering command provided to the driveline a predetermined amount of time after the indication is provided (as discussed by at least ¶ 0067 of Vidal).
Claims 10, 11, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vidal in view of U.S. Patent No. 5,013,205 to Schardt (hereinafter: “Schardt”).
With respect to claim 10, Vidal teaches the towbarless tractor of claim 1; however, Vidal appears to lack a clear teaching as to whether the actuator is a bottom pivot actuator, wherein the capture system includes a cradle, a front gate assembly having a top retainer, and a top pivot actuator, wherein the bottom pivot actuator is coupled to the front gate assembly and the cradle, and wherein the top pivot actuator is coupled to the top retainer.
Schardt teaches an analogous towbarless tractor (apparent from at least Figs. 1-5) including a capture system includes a cradle (e.g., 13), a front gate assembly (e.g., 4, 14, and 15 together) having a top retainer (e.g., an upper one of gripper arms 4), a top pivot actuator (e.g., an upper one of hydraulic cylinders 16), and a bottom pivot actuator (e.g., an lower one of the hydraulic cylinders 16), wherein the bottom pivot actuator is coupled to the front gate assembly and the cradle (apparent from at least Figs. 3 & 4), and wherein the top pivot actuator is coupled to the top retainer (apparent from at least Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the towbarless tractor of Vidal with the teachings of Schardt such that the actuator is a bottom pivot actuator, wherein the capture system includes a cradle, a front gate assembly having a top retainer, and a top pivot actuator, wherein the bottom pivot actuator is coupled to the front gate assembly and the cradle, and wherein the top pivot actuator is coupled to the top retainer because the scope of Vidal is open-ended with respect to type or configuration of the capture system, and Schardt teaches a particular type or configuration of a capture system that would be usable in place of the various types or configurations of the capture systems disclosed as being usable in combination with the towbarless tractor of Vidal, and which would not be reasonably expected by one having ordinary skill in the art to destroy operability of the towbarless tractor of Vidal if substituted in place of any of the various types or configurations of the capture systems disclosed as being usable in combination with the towbarless tractor of Vidal. Therefore, such a modification would amount to a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results (e.g., see: MPEP 2143_I_B). Additionally, Schardt teaches that its capture system beneficially enables horizontal and vertical conformance, via automatic adjustment, to different nose wheel diameters of different aircraft types, thereby providing versatility with respect to the number of the aircraft types which are towable by the towbarless tractor.
With respect to claim 11, Vidal modified supra teaches the towbarless tractor of claim 10, wherein the controller is configured to acquire or determine a diameter of a wheel in the nose landing gear based on the data, and wherein the controller is configured to generate or modify a capture command provided to at least one of the bottom pivot actuator or the top pivot actuator based on the diameter of the wheel (as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 10, and as discussed by at least Col. 2, line 51 – Col. 3, line 4, Col. 3, line 65 – Col. 4, line 6 & Col. 4, lines 22-37 of Schardt in view of at least ¶ 0144 of Vidal).
With respect to claim 19, Vidal modified supra teaches the towbarless tractor of claim 18, wherein the controller is configured to: acquire or determine a diameter of a wheel in the nose landing gear based on the type of aircraft; and generate or modify the capture command provided to at least one of the plurality of actuators based on the diameter of the wheel (as discussed in detail above with respect to at least claims 11 and 18).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vidal in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0089766 to Hammonds (hereinafter: “Hammonds”).
With respect to claim 17, Vidal teaches the towbarless tractor of claim 16, wherein the controller is configured to generate or modify the side-shift command (as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 6), wherein the capture system includes a cradle (apparent from at least Figs. 9A-10C); however, Vidal appears to lack a clear teaching as to whether the actuator is a side-shift actuator coupled between the body and the cradle, and wherein the side-shift actuator is configured to selectively move the cradle laterally relative to the body.
Hammonds teaches an analogous towbarless tractor (apparent from at least Figs. 2, 3 & 13-20) including a capture system (e.g., 200) including a cradle (e.g., at least 210R, 210L, 232R & 232L together) and a side-shift actuator (e.g., 212R and/or 212L) coupled between the cradle and a body (e.g., via 100) of the towbarless tractor (apparent from at least Figs. 13-16 in view of at least ¶ 0066 & 0068), where the side-shift actuator is configured to selectively move the cradle laterally relative to the body (apparent from at least Figs. 13 & 15 in view of at least ¶ 0066 & 0068).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the towbarless tractor of Vidal with the teachings of Hammonds such that the actuator is a side-shift actuator coupled between the body and the cradle, and such that the side-shift actuator is configured to selectively move the cradle laterally relative to the body, because the scope of Vidal is open-ended with respect to type or configuration of the capture system, and Hammonds teaches a particular type or configuration of a capture system that would be usable in place of the various types or configurations of the capture systems disclosed as being usable in combination with the towbarless tractor of Vidal, and which would not be reasonably expected by one having ordinary skill in the art to destroy operability of the towbarless tractor of Vidal if substituted in place of any of the various types or configurations of the capture systems disclosed as being usable in combination with the towbarless tractor of Vidal. Therefore, such a modification would amount to a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results (e.g., see: MPEP 2143_I_B).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and is provided on the attached PTO-892 Notice of References Cited form.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN ZALESKAS whose telephone number is (571)272-5958. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM - 4:00 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, Logan Kraft can be reached at 571-270-5065. 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.
/JOHN M ZALESKAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights