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 Objections
Claims 3 and 4 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 3 contains the term “the plurality of features” which fails to have antecedent basis. The examiner believes this to be a typo and that the applicant intended to claim “the plurality of detected features” and the claim will be treated as such. Claim 4 inherits this objection. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 12 and 22 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 12 contains the term “the live feed” which fails to have antecedent basis. The examiner believes this to be a typo and that the applicant intended to claim “the live view” and the claim will be treated as such. Claim 22 inherits this objection and is also objected to for substantially the same reason. Appropriate correction is required.
The objection to Claims 13 and 14 for the limitation “further comprising determining the region of interest based on at least one marker of interest in the image based” is withdrawn in light of the amendment to at least Claim 13.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claims 1 – 3, 6 – 11, 13, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koo et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2020/0326536).
Regarding Claim 1, Koo et al. teach a method comprising:
in response to capturing image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56) representing a live view (Paragraph 35) by a camera (Figure 1, Element 50. Paragraph 55) of a wearable display (Figure 1, Element 100. Paragraph 45), defining, by a first processor of the wearable display (Figure 1, Element 100. Paragraph 45), a set of boundaries (Figure 10, Elements 1030 and 1040. Paragraphs 146 - 147) in the live view (Paragraph 35) based on a plurality of detected features (Seen in Figure 10) in the live view (Paragraph 35);
selecting, by a first processor of the wearable display (Figure 1, Element 100. Paragraph 45), a portion (Figure 10, Element 1030. Paragraphs 146 - 147) of the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56) based on the set of boundaries (Figure 10, Elements 1030 and 1040. Paragraphs 146 - 147), wherein the portion (Figure 10, Element 1030. Paragraphs 146 - 147) of the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56) is less than (Seen in Figure 10) an entirety of the image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56); and
sending, to a second processor (Element not shown, but is the processor of the external device. Paragraphs 221 - 223) external to the wearable display (Figure 1, Element 100. Paragraph 45), the selected portion (Figure 10, Element 1030. Paragraphs 146 - 147) of the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56) for processing, wherein sending the selected portion (Figure 10, Element 1030. Paragraphs 146 - 147) of the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56) includes omitting (Seen in Figure 10. Paragraph 147) one or more unselected portions of the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of the heads-up display of Koo et al. with the external processer of Koo et al. The motivation to modify the teaching Koo et al. with the teachings of Koo et al. is reduce power consumption, as taught by Koo et al. (Paragraphs 245 and 252).
Regarding Claim 2, Koo et al. teach the method of claim 1 (See Above), wherein the set of boundaries (Figure 10, Elements 1030 and 1040. Paragraphs 146 - 147) indicates a region of interest (Paragraph 56) in the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56).
Regarding Claim 3, Koo et al. teach the method of claim 2 (See Above), further comprising: sending, to the second processor (Element not shown, but is the processor of the external device. Paragraphs 221 - 223), position data (Paragraph 147) of each feature of the plurality of features (Seen in Figure 10).
Regarding Claim 6, Koo et al. teach the method of claim 1 (See Above), further comprising selecting the plurality of detected features (Seen in Figure 10) based on a type of application (Paragraph 200) being executed by the first processor.
Regarding Claim 7, Koo et al. teach the method of claim 1 (See Above), further comprising selecting the plurality of detected features (Seen in Figure 10) based on a type of location (Figure 19, Element 1915. Paragraph 209) the wearable display (Figure 1, Element 100. Paragraph 45) is currently in.
Regarding Claim 8, Koo et al. teach the method of claim 1 (See Above), further comprising selecting the plurality of detected features (Seen in Figure 10) based on a distance (Paragraph 143) between a detected feature of the plurality of detected features (Seen in Figure 10) and the camera (Figure 1, Element 50. Paragraph 55).
Regarding Claim 9, Koo et al. teach the method of claim 1 (See Above), further comprising selecting the plurality of detected features (Seen in Figure 10) based on an area of focus (Figure 1, Element 50. Paragraph 56) in the live view (Paragraph 35).
Regarding Claim 10, Koo et al. teach the method of claim 9 (See Above), wherein the area of focus (Figure 1, Element 50. Paragraph 56) is based on a determination of a user gazing at a given region (Figure 1, Element 50. Paragraph 56) corresponding to an area of the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56).
Regarding Claim 13, Koo et al. teach the method of claim 1 (See Above), further comprising selecting the plurality of detected features (Seen in Figure 10) based on at least one marker of interest (Figure 1, Element 50. Paragraph 56) in the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56).
Regarding Claim 16, Koo et al. teach the method of claim 2 (See Above), wherein the sending the selected portion (Figure 10, Element 1030. Paragraphs 146 - 147) of the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56) further comprises:
forming an altered second portion (Figure 13, Element 1340. Paragraphs 146 - 147) by altering a second portion (Figure 13, Element not labeled, but is the potion of 1310 that is not 1320. Paragraphs 146 - 147) of the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56) corresponding to a portion (Figure 10, Element 1030. Paragraphs 146 - 147) of the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56) outside the set of boundaries (Figure 10, Elements 1030 and 1040. Paragraphs 146 - 147); and
sending data representing the altered second portion (Figure 13, Element 1340. Paragraphs 146 - 147) of the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56) to the second processor (Element not shown, but is the processor of the external device. Paragraphs 221 - 223).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koo et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2020/0326536) in view of Stauber et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2020/0111267).
Regarding Claim 4, Koo et al. teach the method of claim 3 (See Above). Koo et al. is silent with regards to wherein the defining the boundary comprises: defining a bounding box around an object in the captured image data.
Stauber et al. teach wherein the defining the boundary comprises: defining a bounding box around an object in the captured image data (Figure 2. Paragraph 38. Stauber et al. teaches bounding boxes around the first, second, and third object.).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of the heads-up display of Koo et al. and the external processer of Koo et al. with the bounding boxes of Stauber et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Koo et al. with the teachings of Stauber et al. is to create a higher-accuracy location of a bounding box that contains multiple objects, as taught by Stauber et al. (Paragraph 37).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koo et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2020/0326536) in view of Lee et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2019/0331914)
Regarding Claim 5, Koo et al. teach the method of claim 1 (See Above). Koo et al. is silent with regards to further comprising selecting the plurality of detected features based on a voice query.
Lee et al. teach further comprising selecting the plurality of detected features based on a voice query (Figures 8A and 8B. Paragraph 202).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of the heads-up display of Koo et al. and the external processer of Koo et al. with the audio inputs of Lee et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Koo et al. with the teachings of Lee et al. is to create a region of interest based on audio input, as taught by Lee et al. (Paragraph 8).
Claims 12 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koo et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2020/0326536) in view of Jones et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2017/0200296).
Regarding Claim 12, Koo et al. teach the method of claim 2 (See Above). Koo et al. teach live view (Paragraph 35) being the captured image data.
Koo et al. is silent with regards to further comprising selecting the plurality of detected features based on a presence of text in a region of the captured image data.
Jones et al. teach further comprising selecting the plurality of detected features based on a presence of text in a region of the captured image data (Figure 2C, Element 60. Paragraph 120).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of the heads-up display of Koo et al. and the external processer of Koo et al. with the language element of Jones et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Koo et al. with the teachings of Jones et al. is to enhance textual based content on the display system, as taught by Jones et al. (Paragraph 8).
Regarding Claim 22, Koo et al. in view of Jones et al. teach the method of claim 2 (See Above). Koo et al. teach live view (Paragraph 35) being the captured image data.
Koo et al. is silent with regards to further comprising selecting the plurality of detected features based on a legibility of the text in a region of the captured image data.
Jones et al. teach further comprising selecting the plurality of detected features based on a legibility of the text in a region of the captured image data (Figure 3A – 3D, Element not labeled, but is the vision defect area. Paragraph 124).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of the heads-up display of Koo et al. and the external processer of Koo et al. with the language element of Jones et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Koo et al. with the teachings of Jones et al. is to enhance textual based content on the display system, as taught by Jones et al. (Paragraph 8).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koo et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2020/0326536) in view of Kumar et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2016/0091975).
Regarding Claim 14, Koo et al. teach the method of claim 13 (See Above). Koo et al. is silent with regards to wherein the at least one marker of interest comprises one or more human fingers in a predefined orientation in the captured image data.
Kumar et al. teach wherein the at least one marker of interest comprises one or more human fingers in a predefined orientation in the captured image data (Paragraph 41).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of the heads-up display of Koo et al. and the external processer of Koo et al. with the gesture input of Kumar et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Koo et al. with the teachings of Kumar et al. is to perform an action based on a hand gesture in the region of interest, as taught by Kumar et al. (Paragraph 5).
Claims 17 – 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koo et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2020/0326536) in view of Cajigas et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2013/0120224).
Regarding Claim 17, Koo et al. teach a wearable display (Figure 1, Element 100. Paragraph 45), comprising:
a camera (Figure 1, Element 50. Paragraph 55);
the controller configured to:
in response to the camera (Figure 1, Element 50. Paragraph 55) capturing image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56) representing a live view (Paragraph 35) of the wearable display (Figure 1, Element 100. Paragraph 45), define a set of boundaries (Figure 10, Elements 1030 and 1040. Paragraphs 146 - 147) in the live view (Paragraph 35) based on a plurality of detected features (Seen in Figure 10) in the live view (Paragraph 35);
select a portion (Figure 10, Element 1030. Paragraphs 146 - 147) of the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56) based on the set of boundaries (Figure 10, Elements 1030 and 1040. Paragraphs 146 - 147), wherein the portion (Figure 10, Element 1030. Paragraphs 146 - 147) of the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56) is less than an entirety of the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56); and
send, to a processor (Element not shown, but is the processor of the external device. Paragraphs 221 - 223) external to the wearable display (Figure 1, Element 100. Paragraph 45), the selected portion (Figure 10, Element 1030. Paragraphs 146 - 147) of the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56) for processing, wherein sending the selected portion (Figure 10, Element 1030. Paragraphs 146 - 147) of the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56) includes omitting (Seen in Figure 10. Paragraph 147) one or more unselected portions of the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of the heads-up display of Koo et al. with the external processer of Koo et al. The motivation to modify the teaching Koo et al. with the teachings of Koo et al. is reduce power consumption, as taught by Koo et al. (Paragraphs 245 and 252).
Koo et al. is silent with regards to a light engine to emit a display light; a display optic to receive the display light and direct the display light towards a user of the wearable display to form a display image; and a controller in communication with the camera and the light engine.
Cajigas et al. teach a light engine (Figure 2A, Element 125. Paragraph 42) to emit a display light (Figure 2A, Element not shown, but is the image light. Paragraph 43); a display optic (Figure 2A, Element 124. Paragraph 43) to receive the display light (Figure 2A, Element not shown, but is the image light. Paragraph 43), and direct the display light (Figure 2A, Element not shown, but is the image light. Paragraph 43) towards a user (Figure 2A, Element 140. Paragraph 43) of the wearable display (Figure 2A, Element 2. Paragraph 41) to form a display image (Figure 2A, Element not shown, but is the image light. Paragraph 43); and a controller (Figure 2A, Element 136. Paragraph 42) in communication with the camera (Figure 2A, Element 113. Paragraph 42) and the light engine (Figure 2A, Element 125. Paragraph 42).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of the heads-up display of Koo et al. and the external processer of Koo et al. with the display circuitry of Cajigas et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Koo et al. with the teachings of Cajigas et al. is to provide a flexible head mounted display that is capable of recalibrating the camera and the display, as taught by Cajigas et al. (Paragraph 2).
Regarding Claim 18, Koo et al. in view of Cajigas et al. teach the wearable display (Figure 1, Element 100. Paragraph 45) of claim 17 (See Above). Koo et al. teach wherein the controller is to:
determine an application (Paragraph 200) being executed by the controller; and
select the plurality of detected features (Seen in Figure 10) based on a type of the application (Paragraph 200).
Regarding Claim 19, Koo et al. in view of Cajigas et al. teach the wearable display (Figure 1, Element 100. Paragraph 45) of claim 17 (See Above). Koo et al. teach wherein the controller is to:
determine a location (Figure 19, Element 1915. Paragraph 209) of the wearable display (Figure 1, Element 100. Paragraph 45); and
select the plurality of detected features (Seen in Figure 10) based on a type of the location (Figure 19, Element 1915. Paragraph 209).
Claims 20 – 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koo et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2020/0326536) in view of Stauber et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2020/0111267) in view of Cajigas et al. (U.S. PG Pub 2013/0120224).
Regarding Claim 20, Koo et al. teach a wearable display (Figure 1, Element 100. Paragraph 45), comprising:
a camera (Figure 1, Element 50. Paragraph 55);
the controller to:
in response to the camera (Figure 1, Element 50. Paragraph 55) capturing image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56) representing a live view (Paragraph 35) of the wearable display (Figure 1, Element 100. Paragraph 45), define a set of boundaries (Figure 10, Elements 1030 and 1040. Paragraphs 146 - 147) in the live view (Paragraph 35) based on a plurality of detected features (Seen in Figure 10) in the live view (Paragraph 35);
select a portion (Figure 10, Element 1030. Paragraphs 146 - 147) of the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56) based on a set of boundaries (Figure 10, Elements 1030 and 1040. Paragraphs 146 - 147); and
send, to a processor (Element not shown, but is the processor of the external device. Paragraphs 221 - 223) external to the wearable display (Figure 1, Element 100. Paragraph 45), the selected portion (Figure 10, Element 1030. Paragraphs 146 - 147) of the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56) external for processing, wherein sending the selected portion (Figure 10, Element 1030. Paragraphs 146 - 147) of the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56) includes omitting (Seen in Figure 10. Paragraph 147) one or more unselected portions of the captured image data (Figure 1, Element 10. Paragraph 56).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of the heads-up display of Koo et al. with the external processer of Koo et al. The motivation to modify the teaching Koo et al. with the teachings of Koo et al. is reduce power consumption, as taught by Koo et al. (Paragraphs 245 and 252).
Koo et al. is silent with regards to a light engine to emit a display light; a display optic to receive the display light and direct the display light towards a user of the wearable display to form a display image; a controller in communication with the camera and the light engine; and the set of boundaries being two or more bounding boxes.
Cajigas et al. teach a light engine (Figure 2A, Element 125. Paragraph 42) to emit a display light (Figure 2A, Element not shown, but is the image light. Paragraph 43); a display optic (Figure 2A, Element 124. Paragraph 43) to receive the display light (Figure 2A, Element not shown, but is the image light. Paragraph 43), and direct the display light (Figure 2A, Element not shown, but is the image light. Paragraph 43) towards a user (Figure 2A, Element 140. Paragraph 43) of the wearable display (Figure 2A, Element 2. Paragraph 41) to form a display image (Figure 2A, Element not shown, but is the image light. Paragraph 43); and a controller (Figure 2A, Element 136. Paragraph 42) in communication with the camera (Figure 2A, Element 113. Paragraph 42) and the light engine (Figure 2A, Element 125. Paragraph 42).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of the heads-up display of Koo et al. and the external processer of Koo et al. with the display circuitry of Cajigas et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Koo et al. with the teachings of Cajigas et al. is to provide a flexible head mounted display that is capable of recalibrating the camera and the display, as taught by Cajigas et al. (Paragraph 2).
Stauber et al. teach the set of boundaries being two or more bounding boxes (Figure 2. Paragraph 38. Stauber et al. teaches bounding boxes around the first, second, and third object.).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of the heads-up display of Koo et al., the external processer of Koo et al., and the display circuitry of Cajigas et al. with the bounding boxes of Stauber et al. The motivation to modify the teachings of Koo et al. and Cajigas et al. with the teachings of Stauber et al. is to create a higher-accuracy location of a bounding box that contains multiple objects, as taught by Stauber et al. (Paragraph 37).
Regarding Claim 21, Koo et al. in view of Cajigas et al. in view of Stauber et al. teach the wearable display (Figure 1, Element 100. Paragraph 45) of claim 17 (See Above). Koo et al. teach wherein the controller is to: select the plurality of detected features (Seen in Figure 10) based on an area of focus (Figure 1, Element 50. Paragraph 56) in the live view (Paragraph 35) associated with a user of the wearable display (Figure 1, Element 100. Paragraph 45).
Response to Arguments
Regarding the first argument, in which the applicant asserts that Koo et al. fails to teach at least “in response to capturing image data representing a live view by a camera of a wearable display, defining, by a first processor of the wearable display, a set of boundaries in the live view based on a plurality of detected features in the live view” of at least amended Claim 1. The applicant argues that Koo et al. does not define a set of boundaries in a live view based on a plurality of detected features, but instead teaches a region of interest based detected features. The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant’s assertion.
The instant application states “Furthermore, in some examples, determining the region of interest may include defining at least a portion of the region of interest in the image by defining a boundary associated with a feature of interest in the image. In some examples, the feature of interest may include one or more entities in the image such as objects, persons, faces, QR Codes, or other visual features or properties of the image. Moreover, in some examples, such a boundary may demarcate the feature of interest. In some examples, the boundary may capture only the feature of interest. Furthermore, in some examples, the boundary may capture the feature of interest and additional features or regions of the image. In some examples, an image recognition module may be used to detect the feature of interest or to define the boundary associated with the feature of interest. In addition, in some examples, the image recognition module may include a trained machine learning model, a neural network, and the like. In some examples the image recognition module may be implemented in software, hardware, or a combination of software and hardware (Paragraphs 48 – 49. Emphasis Added).”
Koo et al. discloses “The SI depth sensor according to an embodiment of the disclosure may include a first camera and a second camera. At this time, the first camera and the second camera may capture a real space in different directions at different positions. For example, the first camera may capture the real space in a first direction at a first position to obtain a first image 1010, and the second camera may capture the real space in a second direction at a second position to obtain a second image 1020. In this case, when a difference image between the first image 1010 and the second image 1020 is used, depth information of a whole real space may be obtained. Meanwhile, the electronic device 100 according to an embodiment of the disclosure may determine an ROI of the whole space by using eye information of both eyes of a user. The electronic device 100 may obtain the eye information of both eyes by using an eye tracking sensor, and may obtain 2D location information of a gaze point based on the eye information of both eyes. For example, when the gaze point of the user of the electronic device 100 is a first point, the electronic device 100 may determine a preset region with respect to the first point as the ROI. A first region 1015 of FIG. 10 represents a region corresponding to the ROI in the first image 1010, and a second region 1025 represents a region corresponding to the ROI in the second image 1020. Accordingly, the electronic device 100 may calculate depth information with respect to the ROI by calculating only the difference image between an image of the first region 1015 and images 1030 and 1040 of the second region 1025 (Paragraphs 145 – 146. Emphasis Added).”
PNG
media_image1.png
524
522
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The above portions of Koo et al. have made it clear that Koo et al. is capturing the entirety of the space and then using the user’s gaze in order to select a portion of the entirety of the space. Therefore, given the applicant’s own definition a boundary box in Paragraphs 48 and 49 (recited above) of the instant Specification. The Office is unmoved by the applicant’s assertion and the rejection is maintained.
All other arguments are held moot in light of the above rejection and/or the response to the first argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Davami (U.S. PG Pub 2018/0157045) and Ollila (U.S. PG Pub 2019/0260981) disclose an HMD that determines a point or region of interest (Paragraph 56) in the forward field of view that can be implemented on a server external to the HMD.
Ollila (U.S. PG Pub 2019/0260981) disclose heads up displays where portions of the image are displayed based on the region of interest (Paragraph 56).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW B SCHNIREL whose telephone number is (571)270-7690. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10 - 6 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, William Boddie can be reached at 571-272-0666. 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.
/A.B.S/Examiner, Art Unit 2625
/WILLIAM BODDIE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2625
Prosecution Insights