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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) were/was submitted on 10/31/2025. The information disclosure statement(s) have/has been considered by the examiner.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY on 05/03/2023.
Status of Application
Claims 1-19 are pending.
Claims 1-10 are amended.
No claims are withdrawn from consideration.
No claims are cancelled.
No claims are added.
Claim 1 is an independent claim.
Claims 1-19 will be examined.
This Non-Final Office action is in response to the “ Claim Amendments” dated 10/31/2025.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the missing text must clearly label the plurality of numbered boxes, not representing well-known icons, shown in FIG.2 and must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Examiners Note: All drawings must conform to 37 CFR 1.84(p)(3) drawing standards which includes the numbers, and letters must measure at least .32 cm. (1/8 inch) in height.
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) X is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over STENDER et al., US 20150175138, herein further known as Stender, in view of HACKL et al., US 20030122417, herein further known as Hackl.
Claim(s) 1-11, 14, 16, and 18, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by.
Regarding claim 1, Stender discloses operating an anti-lock braking system (¶¶ [0003-0004], [0007-0011], [0024], [0030-0031]) of a service brake (¶¶ [0003], [0024-0028], electro-pneumatic brakes) in relation to an axle (¶¶ [0004-0005], [0009-0014], [0024]) in order to brake a wheel of the axle (¶¶ [0010], [0012], [0024], [0028-0031]) of a vehicle (¶ [0009], a drawbar trailer) recording an input variable external to the axle (¶¶ [0004], [0010], [0024], rotational speed of wheels, [0007], [0013], lateral acceleration); ascertaining a control variable relating to the axle and/or relating to the wheel of the axle on the basis of the input variable external to the axle (¶¶ [0004], [0009], [0024], control of ABS function, [0007],roll stability support, [0030-0033], stability function); and outputting a control signal for changing a braking variable of the service brake (¶¶ [0013], [0024], [0030], [0033] transmit signals to modulator to control an anti-lock ABS function, control the brake pressure), taking into account the control variable relating to the axle and/or relating to the wheel of the axle (¶¶ [0004], [0009], [0024]).
Furthermore, Hackl teaches operating an anti-lock braking system (¶¶ [0002-0003], [0006], [0079], [0081], [0089], [0104]), of a service brake (¶ [0002]) in relation to an axle (¶¶ [0008], [0012], [0032-0034], [0079-0080], [0083-0088], [0104]) in order to brake a wheel (¶¶ [0001-0014], [0079-0080], [0083-0086]) of the axle of a vehicle (¶¶ [0008], [0012], [0032-0034], [0079-0080], [0083-0088], [0104]) recording an input variable external to the axle (¶¶ [0010], [0043], yaw rate of the vehicle, [0048], [0054], friction coefficients) ascertaining a control variable relating to the axle and/or relating to the wheel of the axle on the basis of the input variable external to the axle (¶¶ [0002-0003], [0006], [0037], [0043] control of ABS function); and outputting a control signal for changing a braking variable of the service brake (¶¶ [0039], output signals, taking into account the control variable relating to the axle and/or relating to the wheel of the axle [0089], signal indicating interventions to yawing moment).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate into Stender the operating an anti-lock braking system of a service brake in relation to an axle in order to brake a wheel of the axle of a vehicle recording an input variable external to the axle; ascertaining a control variable relating to the axle and/or relating to the wheel of the axle on the basis of the input variable external to the axle; and outputting a control signal for changing a braking variable of the service brake, taking into account the control variable relating to the axle and/or relating to the wheel of the axle as taught by Hackl.
One would be motivated to modify Stender in view of Hackl for the reasons stated in Hackl paragraph [0005], more robust methods and systems that increase the driving safety.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Stender and Hackl disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Stender discloses further the control signal comprises a trigger signal for activating an ABS control by the anti-lock braking system (¶¶ [0013], [0024], [0030], transmit signals to modulator to control an anti-lock ABS function, control the brake pressure), a selection signal for selecting a control strategy for the anti-lock braking system, and/or an input signal for determining the change to the braking variable (¶¶ [0030], during risk of turning over…stability function of modulator are triggered).
Furthermore, Hackl teaches the control signal comprises a trigger signal for activating an ABS control by the anti-lock braking system (¶¶ [0013], [0024], [0030], transmit signals to modulator to control an anti-lock ABS function, control the brake pressure), a selection signal for selecting a control strategy for the anti-lock braking system, and/or an input signal for determining the change to the braking variable (¶¶ [0085], filters, [0089], selector 50 is provided for processing signal).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate into Stender the control signal comprises a trigger signal for activating an ABS control by the anti-lock braking system, a selection signal for selecting a control strategy for the anti-lock braking system, and/or an input signal for determining the change to the braking variable as taught by Hackl.
One would be motivated to modify Stender in view of Hackl for the reasons stated in Hackl paragraph [0005], more robust methods and systems that increase the driving safety.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Stender and Hackl disclose all elements of claim 2 above.
Stender discloses further the control signal is output such that the change to the braking variable (¶¶ [0030-0031], during risk of turning over…stability function of modulator are triggered, stability function RSS) takes place alternatively or in addition to an ABS control by the anti-lock braking system or alternately therewith (¶¶ [0024], control an anti-lock ABS function, [0031], carrying out the anti-lock ABS function, it has both ABS and RSS functionalities).
Furthermore, Hackl teaches the control signal is output such that the change to the braking variable (¶ [0089], anti-lock braking system (ABS), signal indicating interventions) takes place alternatively or in addition to an ABS control by the anti-lock braking system or alternately therewith (¶¶ [0002], [0085-0086], parameters may be selected, [0104], anti-lock (braking) system (ABS) integrated in the electronic stability program (FDR or ESP), and claim 11, device for operating a vehicle has a selector 50…).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate into Stender the control signal is output such that the change to the braking variable takes place alternatively or in addition to an ABS control by the anti-lock braking system or alternately therewith as taught by Hackl.
One would be motivated to modify Stender in view of Hackl for the reasons stated in Hackl paragraph [0005], more robust methods and systems that increase the driving safety.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Stender and Hackl disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Stender discloses the control signal is output to change the braking variable and an ABS control by the anti-lock braking system (¶¶ [0013], [0024], [0030]).
However, Stender does not explicitly state change to the braking variable and an ABS control are superimposed.
Hackl teaches change to the braking variable and an ABS control are superimposed (¶ [0104], the anti-lock (braking) system (ABS) integrated in the electronic stability program (FDR or ESP), may superimpose the yawing moment compensation interventions (i.e. variable braking), which results in a shorter braking distance).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate into Stender the change to the braking variable and an ABS control are superimposed as taught by Hackl.
One would be motivated to modify Stender in view of Hackl for the reasons stated in Hackl paragraph [0005], more robust methods and systems that increase the driving safety.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Stender and Hackl disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Stender disclose further the input variable external to the axle comprises a vehicle dynamics variable and/or sensor data of a vehicle dynamics control (¶¶ [0013], avoid turning over (e.g. yaw), [0030], lateral acceleration sensor… to fulfill the stability function (RSS), risk of turning over (e.g. yaw)).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Stender and Hackl disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Stender discloses further input variable external to the axle comprises operating data of the vehicle, environment variable relating to an environment of the vehicle, and/or a driving situation (¶ [0009], a drawbar trailer) (¶¶ [0006], behavior of the traction engine, (i.e. operating data of the vehicle) [0007], [0030], situations in which the towed vehicle threatens to turn over (i.e. driving situation).
Furthermore, Hackl teaches input variable external to the axle comprises operating data of the vehicle, environment variable relating to an environment of the vehicle, and/or a driving situation (¶¶ [0048-0055], different friction coefficients on different vehicle sides (i.e. environment variable), transversal acceleration of the vehicle, (i.e. operating data of the vehicle) [0054], [0071-0074], braking on curves… changing lanes while braking, (i.e. environment variable, driving situation), [0088], transversal acceleration b.sub.y and the speed of the vehicle are also advantageously considered).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate into Stender the input variable external to the axle comprises operating data of the vehicle, environment variable relating to an environment of the vehicle, and/or a driving situation as taught by Hackl.
One would be motivated to modify Stender in view of Hackl for the reasons stated in Hackl paragraph [0005], more robust methods and systems that increase the driving safety.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Stender and Hackl disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Stender discloses further non-transitory computer-readable medium, comprising commands which , when the commands are executed by a computer, cause the computer to carry out the method as claimed in claim 1 (¶ [0030], modulators 11, 12 with software module, to carry out the stability function).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Stender and Hackl disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Stender discloses further a control unit for a vehicle (¶ [0009], a drawbar trailer) wherein the control unit is designed to carry out the method (100) as claimed in claim 1 (¶ [0024], modulators 11, 12 control an anti-lock ABS function, wherein the trailer is a vehicle).
Furthermore, Hackl teaches a control unit for a vehicle (¶¶ [0001], [0006], [0010], [0021-0022], [0081]).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate into Stender the control unit for a vehicle as taught by Hackl.
One would be motivated to modify Stender in view of Hackl for the reasons stated in Hackl paragraph [0005], more robust methods and systems that increase the driving safety.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Stender and Hackl disclose all elements of claim 9 above.
Stender discloses further a vehicle (¶ [0009], a drawbar trailer) comprising a service brake (¶¶ [0003], [0024-0028], electro-pneumatic brakes) having an anti-lock braking system and the control unit (¶ [0024], modulators 11, 12 control an anti-lock ABS function).
Furthermore, Hackl teaches a vehicle (¶¶ [0001], [0006], [0010], [0021-0022], [0081]) comprising a service brake (¶ [0002]) having an anti-lock braking system (¶¶ [0002-0007], [0079-0081], [0089], [0104]) and the control unit (¶¶ [0002], electrical controls of braking systems [0006]).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate into Stender the vehicle as taught by Hackl.
One would be motivated to modify Stender in view of Hackl for the reasons stated in Hackl paragraph [0005], more robust methods and systems that increase the driving safety.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Stender and Hackl disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Furthermore, regarding claim 11, all limitations have been examined with respect to the methods in claim 3. The method/steps taught/disclosed in claim 11 can clearly perform the methods of claim 3. Therefore, claim 11 is rejected under the same rationale as claim 3 above.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Stender and Hackl disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Stender discloses further the axle is a rear axle (¶¶ [0014], [0024], [0028-0033]).
Furthermore, Hackl teaches the axle is a rear axle (¶¶ [0012], [0027], [0033-0034]).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate into Stender the axle is a rear axle as taught by Hackl.
One would be motivated to modify Stender in view of Hackl for the reasons stated in Hackl paragraph [0005], more robust methods and systems that increase the driving safety.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Stender and Hackl disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
However, Stender does not explicitly state the wheel and/or the axle are controlled by the ABS depending on information, data or variables which are not dependent, or are only indirectly dependent, on the control of the wheel and/or the axle.
Hackl teaches the wheel and/or the axle are controlled by the ABS depending on information, data or variables which are not dependent, or are only indirectly dependent, on the control of the wheel and/or the axle (¶¶ [0006], anti-lock (braking) system (ABS)compensate for the yawing, [0043], yaw rate compensated for by the ABS control cycles [0104], yawing moment reductions (GMA) to be considered by the anti-lock (braking) system (ABS)) .
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate into Stender the wheel and/or the axle are controlled by the ABS depending on information, data or variables which are not dependent, or are only indirectly dependent, on the control of the wheel and/or the axle as taught by Hackl.
One would be motivated to modify Stender in view of Hackl for the reasons stated in Hackl paragraph [0005], more robust methods and systems that increase the driving safety.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Stender and Hackl disclose all elements of claim 5 above.
Stender discloses further vehicle dynamics variable and/or sensor data relate to information, data or variables of a further wheel of a further axle, wherein the further axle is different from the axle having the wheel to be braked (¶ [0033-0034], see also FIG 2, wherein there are two axles and the modulator functions can be “reversed” from one axle to the other).
Claim(s) 7, 12-13, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Stender and Hackl, further in view of LU, US 20070106442, herein further known as Lu.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Stender and Hackl disclose all elements of claim 6 above.
Stender discloses further the control variable relating to the axle and/or relating to the wheel of the axle comprises a (¶¶ [0004], [0010] [0024]).
Furthermore, Hackl teaches a predicted slip threshold (¶ [0010], setpoint slip values for the wheels), a (¶ [0054], high coefficients of friction), and/or a predicted normal force between the wheel and the ground.
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate into Stender the predicted slip threshold as taught by Hackl.
One would be motivated to modify Stender in view of Hackl for the reasons stated in Hackl paragraph [0005], more robust methods and systems that increase the driving safety.
Furthermore, Lu teaches a predicted friction coefficient (¶¶ [0008], prediction of a surface mu (coefficient of friction, .mu.).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate into Stender the predicted friction coefficient as taught by Lu.
One would be motivated to modify Stender in view of Lu for the reasons stated in Lu paragraph [0003], more robust methods and systems with increased opportunities for achieving control performances using the information and the control strategies which were previously reserved for spacecraft and aircraft as well as achieve high control performance and high accuracy/precision dynamics control.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Stender and Hackl disclose all elements of claim 5 above.
Stender discloses further dynamics sensor data (¶ [0030], lateral acceleration sensor), and wheel speed (¶¶ [0004], [0010] [0024]).
However, Stender does not explicitly state the vehicle dynamics variable of the vehicle dynamics control comprises: a yaw rate, a pitch rate, an axle load of a wheel external to the axle, a normal force acting between a further wheel of a further axle and the ground, and/or a friction coefficient between the further wheel of the further axle and the ground.
Hackl teaches the vehicle dynamics variable (¶ [0071], vehicle dynamics are taken into consideration) and/or sensor data of the vehicle dynamics control comprises: a yaw rate (¶¶ [0010], [0043], yaw rate of the vehicle), a friction coefficient between the further wheel of the further axle and the ground (¶¶ [0048-0055], different friction coefficients).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate into Stender the vehicle dynamics variable and/or sensor data of the vehicle dynamics control comprises: a yaw rate and friction coefficient between the further wheel of the further axle and the ground as taught by Hackl.
One would be motivated to modify Stender in view of Hackl for the reasons stated in Hackl paragraph [0005], more robust methods and systems that increase the driving safety.
Furthermore, Lu teaches vehicle dynamics variable of the vehicle dynamics control comprises: a yaw rate (¶¶ [0025], angular rates of the car body… omega..sub.z for the yaw rate, [0031], yaw rate sensor 38 generating a yaw rate signal), a pitch rate (¶¶ [0025], angular rates of the car body… omega..sub.y for the pitch rate, [0031], pitch rate sensor 37, generating a pitch rate signal), an axle load of a wheel external to the axle (¶¶ [0057], term axle/wheel load), a normal force acting between a further wheel of a further axle and the ground (¶¶ [0025], determine normal forces on the wheels), and/or a friction coefficient between the further wheel of the further axle and the ground (¶¶ [0008], prediction of a surface mu (coefficient of friction, .mu., [0079], road surface friction level).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate into Stender the vehicle dynamics variable of the vehicle dynamics control comprises: a yaw rate, a pitch rate, an axle load of a wheel external to the axle, a normal force acting between a further wheel of a further axle and the ground, and/or a friction coefficient between the further wheel of the further axle and the ground as taught by Lu.
One would be motivated to modify Stender in view of Lu for the reasons stated in Lu paragraph [0003], more robust methods and systems with increased opportunities for achieving control performances using the information and the control strategies which were previously reserved for spacecraft and aircraft as well as achieve high control performance and high accuracy/precision dynamics control.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Stender and Hackl disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
Stender discloses further control variable relating to the axle and/or relating to the wheel of the axle (¶¶ [0004-0005], [0009-0014], [0024]).
However, Stender does not explicitly state a predicted wheel speed, a predicted slip threshold, a predicted friction coefficient, and/or a predicted normal force between the wheel and the ground.
Lu teaches a predicted friction coefficient (¶¶ [0008], prediction of a surface mu (coefficient of friction, .mu.).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate into Stender the predicted friction coefficient as taught by Lu.
One would be motivated to modify Stender in view of Lu for the reasons stated in Lu paragraph [0003], more robust methods and systems with increased opportunities for achieving control performances using the information and the control strategies which were previously reserved for spacecraft and aircraft as well as achieve high control performance and high accuracy/precision dynamics control.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Stender and Hackl disclose all elements of claim 6 above.
Stender discloses further the environment variable characterizes properties of the ground or roadway (¶ [0056], vehicle navigates a band in the roadway too rapidly, (e.g. in response to road curvature or lane change)).
Furthermore, Hackl teaches the environment variable characterizes properties of the ground or roadway (¶ [0054], yawing moment compensation when braking on curves and changing lanes while braking on high coefficients of friction).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate into Stender the environment variable characterizes properties of the ground or roadway as taught by Hackl.
One would be motivated to modify Stender in view of Hackl for the reasons stated in Hackl paragraph [0005], more robust methods and systems that increase the driving safety.
Furthermore, Lu teaches the environment variable characterizes properties of the ground or roadway (¶¶ [0008], prediction of a surface mu (coefficient of friction, .mu.), [0037], road profile, surface condition determination, [0051-0052], road bank angle).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate into Stender the environment variable characterizes properties of the ground or roadway as taught by Lu.
One would be motivated to modify Stender in view of Lu for the reasons stated in Lu paragraph [0003], more robust methods and systems with increased opportunities for achieving control performances using the information and the control strategies which were previously reserved for spacecraft and aircraft as well as achieve high control performance and high accuracy/precision dynamics control.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Stender and Hackl, further in view of ERBAN, US 20170267106, herein further known as Erban.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Stender and Hackl disclose all elements of claim 1 above.
However, Stender does not explicitly state the braking variable is a variable determining a braking torque of the wheel and/or the wheels of the axle which may be applied to the service brake as a result of the control signal.
Erban teaches the braking variable is a variable determining a braking torque of the wheel and/or the wheels of the axle which may be applied to the service brake as a result of the control signal (¶ [0041], variable M.sub.final is determinable… in consideration of at least one determined hydraulic minimum braking torque M.sub.hyd of at least one wheel).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate into Stender the braking variable is a variable determining a braking torque of the wheel and/or the wheels of the axle which may be applied to the service brake as a result of the control signal as taught by Erban.
One would be motivated to modify Stender in view of Erban for the reasons stated in Erban paragraph [0006], more robust methods and systems so that a sufficiently high hydraulic minimum braking torque safely remains, without exceeding a total braking torque requested by a driver for a required safe ABS regulation.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Stender and Hackl, further in view of GRIMM et al., US 20160133130, herein further known as Grimm.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Stender and Hackl disclose all elements of claim 2 above.
However, Stender does not explicitly state the ABS has not been activated prior to the trigger signal.
Grimm teaches the ABS has not been activated prior to the trigger signal (¶ [0081], see also FIG. 9, wherein the decision box 804 is Y/N to activate).
It would have been obvious to person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention, with a reasonable expectation of success, to incorporate into Stender the ABS has not been activated prior to the trigger signal as taught by Grimm.
One would be motivated to modify Stender in view of Grimm for the reasons stated in Grimm paragraph [0056], more robust methods and systems wherein drivers can benefit from the information contained in the accurate, timely and relevant safety-related advisories thereby avoiding dangerous situations which would have occurred.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record attached PTO 892 form, and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure as described below. WANKE et al., US 20060273657, discloses driving stability control (DSC) influencing the driving behavior of a vehicle by means of predeterminable pressures in individual wheel brakes and includes brake slip control (ABS) which is to prevent locking of individual wheels, and the electronic brake force distribution system (EBD), which controls the ratio of the brake forces between the front and the rear axle of the vehicle; and a yaw torque control system (YTC), which ensures stable driving conditions during travel in a curve.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Terry Buse whose telephone number is (313)446-6647. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8-5 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Scott Browne can be reached at (571) 270-0151. 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.
/TERRY C BUSE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3666
Prosecution Insights