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 .
Status of Claims
Applicant's response of 12/08/2025 has been acknowledged. Claims 1, 3-5, 7-13, 15-17, 19, and 20 have been amended. Claims 2, 6, 14, and 18 are canceled. No new matter has been added.
This office action considers claims 1, 3-5, 7-13, 15-17, and 19-20 pending for prosecution and are examined on their merits.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 3-5, 7-13, 15-17, and 19-20 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) that forms the basis for the rejection set forth in this Office action:
(a) NOVELTY; PRIOR ART.—A person shall be entitled to a patent unless—
(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;
Notes: when present, hyphen separated fields within the hyphens (- -) represent, for example, as (30A - Fig 2B - [0128]) = (element 30A - Figure No. 2B - Paragraph No. [0128]). For brevity, the texts “Element”, “Figure No.” and “Paragraph No.” shall be excluded, though; additional clarification notes may be added within each field. The number of fields may be fewer or more than three indicated above. The same conventions apply to Column and Sentence, for example (19:14-20) = (column19:sentences 14-20). These conventions are used throughout this document.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) that forms the basis for the rejection set forth in this Office action:
(a) NOVELTY; PRIOR ART.—A person shall be entitled to a patent unless—
(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Notes: when present, hyphen separated fields within the hyphens (- -) represent, for example, as (30A - Fig 2B - [0128]) = (element 30A - Figure No. 2B - Paragraph No. [0128]). For brevity, the texts “Element”, “Figure No.” and “Paragraph No.” shall be excluded, though; additional clarification notes may be added within each field. The number of fields may be fewer or more than three indicated above. The same conventions apply to Column and Sentence, for example (19:14-20) = (column19:sentences 14-20). These conventions are used throughout this document.
Claims 1-5, and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being
anticipated by Yuan et al. (US 20200335723 A1 – hereinafter Yuan).
Regarding independent claim 1, Yuan teaches:
(Currently Amended) An OLED (organic light emitting diode) display
panel ([[0083] – “display panel 1”), comprising:
a substrate (100 – Fig. 1 – [0041] – “substrate 100”);
a driving circuit layer (Fig. 1 annotated, see below – hereinafter ‘DCL’)
arranged on one side of the substrate (100);
a light emitting function layer (Fig. 1 annotated, see below – hereinafter ‘LEL’)
arranged on one side of the driving circuit layer (DCL) away from the substrate (100); and
PNG
media_image1.png
540
1137
media_image1.png
Greyscale
an encapsulation layer (300 – Fig. 1 – [0041] – “encapsulation layer 300”) arranged on one side of the light emitting function layer (LEL) away from the driving circuit layer (DCL)[[;]],
wherein the OLED display panel (1) comprises a display area (Fig. 3 annotated, see below – hereinafter ‘DA’) and a non-display area (Fig. 3 annotated, see below – hereinafter ‘NDA’), [[and]] wherein the encapsulation layer (300) comprises an organic layer (311 – Fig. 3 – {[0040] – “The materials of the lens layer and the first cover layer are both organic materials”} [0042] – “lenses 311” – therefore 311 is organic), and a second inorganic layer (350 – Fig. 3 – [0053] – “second cover layer 350 is an inorganic material”), the first inorganic layer (330 – Fig. 6 – [0050] – “film encapsulation layer 300 further includes a first inorganic layer 330”) is disposed between the organic layer (311) and the light emitting function layer (LEL – Fig. 3 annotated, see below shows this), the second inorganic layer (350) is disposed on one side of the organic layer (311) away from the first inorganic layer (330), and a size of a thickness of a portion of the first inorganic layer (330) in the display area (DA) is same as that of a thickness of another portion of the first inorganic layer (330) in the non-display area (NDA), a size of a thickness (Fig. 3 annotated, see below – hereinafter ‘L1’) of a portion of the second inorganic layer (350) in the display area (DA) is less than or equal to that of a thickness (Fig. 3 annotated, see below – hereinafter ‘L2’) of another portion of the second inorganic layer (350) in the non-display area (NDA),
and a size of a thickness (Fig. 3 annotated, see below – hereinafter ‘L4’) of [[part]] a portion of the organic layer (311) located in a middle area of the display area (DA) is greater than that of a thickness (Fig. 3 annotated, see below – hereinafter ‘L5’) of [[part]] another portion of the organic layer (311) located in an edge area of the display area (DA – Fig. 3 annotated, shows this), and
wherein a thickness of the organic layer (311) is consistently decreased ([0042] – “surface of the lens 311 facing away from the organic light emitting element 200 is convex”) from the middle are of the display area (DA) to the edge area of the display area (DA – Fig. 6 shows this).
PNG
media_image2.png
488
1146
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Yuan, teaches claim 1 from which claim 3 depends. Yuan further teaches
(Currently Amended) The OLED display panel according to claim 1,
wherein the display area (DA) comprises a light emitting area (Fig. 3 annotated, see above – hereinafter ‘LEA’) and a non-light emitting area (Fig. 3 annotated, see above – hereinafter ‘NLEA’), and a size of a thickness (L5) of [[part]] a portion of the organic layer (311) located in light emitting area (LEL) is greater than that of a thickness (Fig. 3 annotated, see above – hereinafter ‘L6’) of [[part]] another portion of the organic layer (311) located in the non-light emitting area (NLEL – Fig. 3 annotated shows this).
Regarding claim 4, Yuan, teaches claim 3 from which claim 4 depends. Yuan further teaches
(Currently Amended) The OLED display panel according to claim 3,
wherein a size of [[the]] a thickness of [[part] a portion of the organic layer (311) located in [[the]] a middle area (L5) of the light emitting area (LEA) is greater than that of a thickness (L6) of [[part]] other portion of the organic layer (L5) located at an edge area of the light emitting area (LEA – Fig. 3 annotated, see above, shows this).
Regarding claim 5, Yuan, teaches claim 4 from which claim 5 depends. Yuan further teaches
(Currently Amended) The OLED display panel according to claim 4,
further comprises a red sub-pixel (201 – Fig. 14 – [0081] – “red organic light emitting element 201”), a green sub-pixel (202 – Fig. 14 – [0081] – “green organic light emitting element 203”) and a blue sub-pixel (203 – Fig. 14 – [0081] – “blue organic light emitting element 203”), [[and]] wherein a shape of a portion of the organic layer (301 – Fig. 14 – [0081] – “lens 301”) at a corresponding position of the red sub-pixel (201) is different from a shape of other portion of the organic layer (302 – Fig. 14 – [0081] – “lens 302”) at a corresponding position of the green sub-pixel (202), and the shape of the other portion of the organic layer (303 – Fig. 14 – [0081] – “lens 303”) at the corresponding position of the green sub-pixel (202) is different from a shape of another portion of the organic layer at a corresponding position of the blue sub-pixel (203 – Fig. 14 shows this).
Regarding claim 7, Yuan, teaches claim 4 from which claim 7 depends. Yuan further teaches
(Currently Amended) The OLED display panel according to claim [[6]]
4, wherein a surface of the organic layer (311) in contact with the first inorganic layer (330) is planar (Fig. 3 shows this), [[and]] on one side of the organic layer (311) in contact with the second inorganic layer (350), and a height (L5) of the portion of the organic layer (311) in the middle area of the light emitting area (LEL) is greater than a height (L6) of the other portion of the organic layer (311) in the edge area of the light emitting area (LEL – Fig. 3 annotated, see below, shows this).
PNG
media_image3.png
488
1146
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Yuan, teaches claim 7 from which claim 8 depends. Yuan further teaches
(Currently Amended) The OLED display panel according to claim 7,
wherein the edge area of the light emitting area (LEL) comprises a first edge area (Fig. 3 annotated, see above – [0077] – “edge area B” – hereinafter ‘B1’) and a second edge area (Fig. 3 annotated, see above – [0077] – “edge area B” – hereinafter ‘B2’) located on both sides of the middle area (A – Fig. 3 annotated, see above – [0077] – “central area A”) of the light emitting area (LEL), the thickness of the organic layer (311) is consistently decreased from the middle area (A) of the light emitting area (LEL) to the first edge area (B1), and the thickness of the organic layer (311) is consistently decreased from the middle area (A) of the light emitting area (LEL) to the second edge area (B2 – Fig. 3 annotated shows this).
Regarding claim 9, Yuan, teaches claim 7 from which claim 9 depends. Yuan further teaches
(Currently Amended) The OLED display panel according to claim 7,
wherein the edge area of the light emitting area (LEL) comprises a third edge area, a fourth edge area, a fifth edge area and a sixth edge area located around the middle area, the thickness of the organic layer (311) is consistently decreased from the middle area of the light emitting area (LEL) to the third edge area, [[and]] the thickness of the organic layer (311) is consistently decreased from the middle area of the light emitting area (LEL) to the fourth edge area, [[and]] the thickness of the organic layer (311) is consistently decreased from the middle area of the light emitting area (LEL) to the fifth edge area, and the thickness of the organic layer (311) is consistently decreased from the middle area of the light emitting area (LEL) to the sixth edge area (Fig. 3 annotated, see below, shows this).
PNG
media_image4.png
488
1146
media_image4.png
Greyscale
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.
Notes: when present, hyphen separated fields within the hyphens (- -) represent, for example, as (30A - Fig 2B - [0128]) = (element 30A - Figure No. 2B - Paragraph No. [0128]). For brevity, the texts “Element”, “Figure No.” and “Paragraph No.” shall be excluded, though; additional clarification notes may be added within each field. The number of fields may be fewer or more than three indicated above. The same conventions apply to Column and Sentence, for example (19:14-20) = (column19:sentences 14-20). These conventions are used throughout this document.
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan in view of Ju et al. (US 20180083227 A1 – hereinafter Ju).
Regarding claim 10, Yuan teaches claim 1 from which claim 10 depends. Yuan does not expressly disclose the limitations of claim 10.
However, in an analogous art, Ju teaches
(Currently Amended) The OLED display panel according to claim [[6]] 1,
wherein a refractive index of the first inorganic layer (311 – Fig. 3 – [0062] – “at least one inorganic layer 311 and 312 and the at least one organic layer 321”) is less than a refractive index of the organic layer (321 – Fig. 3 – [0062] – “at least one inorganic layer 311 and 312 and the at least one organic layer 321”), and the refractive index of the organic layer (321) is less than a refractive index of the second inorganic layer (312 – [0062] – “at least one inorganic layer 311 and 312 and the at least one organic layer 321 may have a refractive index difference of about 0.06 or less. When the refractive index difference is relatively small, light reflection at an interfacial surface between the at least one inorganic layer 311 and 312 and the at least one organic layer 321 may be reduced or prevented. Accordingly, optical resonance in the OLED display device 101 may be reduced or prevented, and a luminance deviation due to optical resonance may be reduced or prevented” – this describes the desired concept of decreasing refractive indices in the stacked layer to maximize the light transmittance).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the refractive indices of the organic and inorganic layers structure as taught by Ju into Yuan.
An ordinary artisan would have been motivated to use the known technique of Ju in the manner set forth above to produce the predictable result of “at least one inorganic layer 311 and 312 and the at least one organic layer 321 may have a refractive index difference of about 0.06 or less. When the refractive index difference is relatively small, light reflection at an interfacial surface between the at least one inorganic layer 311 and 312 and the at least one organic layer 321 may be reduced or prevented. Accordingly, optical resonance in the OLED display device 101 may be reduced or prevented, and a luminance deviation due to optical resonance may be reduced or prevented” – this describes the desired concept of decreasing refractive indices in the stacked layer to maximize the light transmittance”). Decreasing the refractive index of the sequentially stacked layers reduces or prevents light ray reflection at the layer interface reducing or preventing optical resonance and increasing the amount of light emitted.
To do so would have merely been to apply a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), MPEP 2143 I. D.
Regarding claim 11, Yuan, as modified by Ju, teaches claim 10 from which claim 11 depends. Yuan further teaches
(Currently Amended) The OLED display panel according to claim 10,
comprising (400 – Fig. 5 – [0066] – “touch function layer 400 is formed of an inorganic material, which has a certain water-oxygen blocking effect” – this is a protective film), and the protective film (400) is disposed on one side of the second inorganic layer (340 – Fig. 5 – [0089] – “encapsulation layer 300 further includes a second inorganic layer 340”) away from the organic layer (311), and a size of a thickness of a portion of the protective film (400) in the display area (DA) is same as that of a thickness of the other portion of the protective film in the non-display area (NDA – Fig. 5 annotated, see below, shows this).
PNG
media_image5.png
501
1090
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan in view of Wakabayashi (US 20150331280 A1 – hereinafter Wakabayashi).
Regarding claim 12, Yuan teaches claim 4 from which claim 12 depends. Yuan further teaches
the light emitting area (LEL),
the edge area of the light emitting area (LEL),
the second inorganic layer (350),
the non-light emitting area (NLEL).
Yuan does not expressly disclose the other limitations of claim 12.
However, in an analogous art, Wakabayashi teaches
(Currently Amended) The OLED display panel according to claim 4,
wherein and a size of a thickness (Fig. 3 annotated, see below – hereinafter ‘LM’) [[part]] the other portion of the second inorganic layer (11 – Fig. 3 – [0071] – “substrate 11 is formed of an inorganic material with optical transmissivity”) located in the middle area of the light emitting area is less than a size of a thickness (Fig. 3 annotated, see below – hereinafter ‘LE’) of [[part]] the other portion of the second inorganic layer (11) located at the edge area of the light emitting area, and the size of the thickness (11) of [[part]] the other portion of the second inorganic layer located at the edge area of the light emitting area is less than that of a thickness (Fig. 3 annotated, see below – hereinafter ‘LO’) of [[part] another portion of the second inorganic layer (11) located in the non-light emitting area.
PNG
media_image6.png
727
1022
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the size of the second inorganic layer structure as taught by Wakabayashi into Yuan.
An ordinary artisan would have been motivated to use the known technique of Wakabayashi in the manner set forth above to produce the predictable result of [0009] – “an electro-optical device, an electro-optical device, and an electronic apparatus which can increase utilization efficiency of light and can suppress reduction of lifespan or display quality” by protecting the device structure.
To do so would have merely been to apply a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results, KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007), MPEP 2143 I. D.
Claims 13, and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yuan in view of Ahmed et al. (US 20190326558 A1 – hereinafter Ahmed).
Regarding independent claim 13, Yuan teaches:
(Currently Amended) An OLED (organic light emitting diode) display
device ([0005] – “display device”), comprising an OLED display panel ([[0083] – “display panel 1”) and an electronic component; wherein the OLED display panel (1) comprises:
a substrate (100 – Fig. 1 – [0041] – “substrate 100”);
a driving circuit layer (Fig. 1 annotated, see below – hereinafter ‘DCL’)
arranged on one side of the substrate (100);
a light emitting function layer (Fig. 1 annotated, see below – hereinafter ‘LEL’)
arranged on one side of the driving circuit layer (DCL) away from the substrate (100); and
PNG
media_image1.png
540
1137
media_image1.png
Greyscale
an encapsulation layer (300 – Fig. 1 – [0041] – “encapsulation layer 300”) arranged on one side of the light emitting function layer (LEL) away from the driving circuit layer (DCL)[[;]] ,
wherein the OLED display panel (1) comprises a display area (Fig. 3 annotated, see below – hereinafter ‘DA’) and a non-display area (Fig. 3 annotated, see below – hereinafter ‘NDA’), [[and]] wherein the encapsulation layer (300) comprises a first inorganic layer (330 – Fig. 6 – [0050] – “film encapsulation layer 300 further includes a first inorganic layer 330”), an organic layer (311 – Fig. 3 – {[0040] – “The materials of the lens layer and the first cover layer are both organic materials”} [0042] – “lenses 311” – therefore 311 is organic), and a second inorganic layer (350 – Fig. 3 – [0053] – “second cover layer 350 is an inorganic material”), the first inorganic layer (330) is disposed between the organic layer (311) and the light emitting function layer (LEL), the second inorganic layer (350) is disposed on one side of the organic layer (311) away from the first inorganic layer (330), and a size of a thickness of a portion of the first inorganic layer (330) in the display area (DA) is same as that of a thickness of another portion of the first inorganic layer (330) in the non-display area (NDA), a size of a thickness (Fig. 3 annotated, see below – hereinafter ‘L1’) of a portion of the second inorganic layer (350) in the display area (yuan (DA) is less than or equal to that of a thickness (Fig. 3 annotated, see below – hereinafter ‘L2’) of another portion of the second inorganic layer (350) in the non-display area (NDA),
and a size of a thickness (Fig. 3 annotated, see below – hereinafter ‘L4’) of [[part]] a portion of the organic layer (311) located in a middle area of the display area (DA) is greater than that of a thickness (Fig. 3 annotated, see below – hereinafter ‘L5’) of [[part]] a portion of the organic layer (311) located in an edge area of the display area (DA), and
wherein a thickness of the organic layer (311) is consistently decreased ([0042] – “surface of the lens 311 facing away from the organic light emitting element 200 is convex”) from the middle are of the display area (DA) to the edge area of the display area (DA – Fig. 6 shows this).
PNG
media_image3.png
488
1146
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Yuan does not expressly disclose the other limitations of claim 13.
However, in an analogous art, Ahmed teaches
an electronic component ([0032] – “the OLED layer 120 includes the various electronic components, semiconductor devices, and/or logic elements to control the activation and illumination intensity of each pixels included in the OLED layer 120”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the electronic component as taught by Ahmed into Yuan.
An ordinary artisan would have been motivated to use the known technique of Ahmed in the manner set forth above to produce the predictable result [0032] – “to control the activation and illumination intensity of each pixels included in the OLED layer 120.”
Regarding claim 15, Yuan, as modified by Ahmed, teaches claim 13 from which claim 15 depends. Yuan further teaches
(Currently Amended) The OLED display panel according to claim 13,
wherein the display area (DA) comprises a light emitting area (Fig. 3 annotated, see above – hereinafter ‘LEA’) and a non-light emitting area (Fig. 3 annotated, see above – hereinafter ‘NLEA’), and a size of a thickness (L5) of [[part]] a portion of the organic layer (311) located in light emitting area (LEL) is greater than that of a thickness (Fig. 3 annotated, see above – hereinafter ‘L6’) of [[part]] another portion of the organic layer (311) located in the non-light emitting area (NLEL – Fig. 3 annotated shows this).
Regarding claim 16, Yuan, as modified by Ahmed, teaches claim 15 from which claim 16 depends. Yuan further teaches
(Currently Amended) The OLED display panel according to claim 15,
wherein a size of [[the]] a thickness of [[part] a portion of the organic layer (311) located in [[the]] a middle area (L5) of the light emitting area (LEA) is greater than that of a thickness (L6) of [[part]] other portion of the organic layer (L5) located at an edge area of the light emitting area (LEA – Fig. 3 annotated, see above, shows this).
Regarding claim 17, Yuan, as modified by Ahmed, teaches claim 16 from which claim 17 depends. Yuan further teaches
(Currently Amended) The OLED display panel according to claim 16,
further comprises a red sub-pixel (201 – Fig. 14 – [0081] – “red organic light emitting element 201”), a green sub-pixel (202 – Fig. 14 – [0081] – “green organic light emitting element 203”) and a blue sub-pixel (203 – Fig. 14 – [0081] – “blue organic light emitting element 203”), [[and]] wherein a shape of a portion of the organic layer (301 – Fig. 14 – [0081] – “lens 301”) at a corresponding position of the red sub-pixel (201) is different from a shape of other portion of the organic layer (302 – Fig. 14 – [0081] – “lens 302”) at a corresponding position of the green sub-pixel (202), and the shape of the other portion of the organic layer (303 – Fig. 14 – [0081] – “lens 303”) at the corresponding position of the green sub-pixel (202) is different from a shape of another portion of the organic layer at a corresponding position of the blue sub-pixel (203 – Fig. 14 shows this).
Regarding claim 19, Yuan, as modified by Ahmed, teaches claim 16 from which claim 19 depends. Yuan further teaches
(Currently Amended) The OLED display panel according to claim
[[18]] 16, wherein a surface of the organic layer (311) in contact with the first inorganic layer (330) is planar (Fig. 3 shows this), [[and]] on one side of the organic layer (311) in contact with the second inorganic layer (350), and a height (L5) of the portion of the organic layer (311) in the middle area of the light emitting area (LEL) is greater than a height (L6) of the other portion of the organic layer (311) in the edge area of the light emitting area (LEL – Fig. 3 annotated, see below, shows this).
PNG
media_image3.png
488
1146
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 20, Yuan, as modified by Ahmed, teaches claim 19 from which claim 20 depends. Yuan further teaches
(Currently Amended) The OLED display panel according to claim 19,
wherein the edge area of the light emitting area (LEL) comprises a first edge area (Fig. 3 annotated, see above – [0077] – “edge area B” – hereinafter ‘B1’) and a second edge area (Fig. 3 annotated, see above – [0077] – “edge area B” – hereinafter ‘B2’) located on both sides of the middle area (A – Fig. 3 annotated, see above – [0077] – “central area A”) of the light emitting area (LEL), the thickness of the organic layer (311) is consistently decreased from the middle area (A) of the light emitting area (LEL) to the first edge area (B1), and the thickness of the organic layer (311) is consistently decreased from the middle area (A) of the light emitting area (LEL) to the second edge area (B2 – Fig. 3 annotated shows this).
Pertinent Art
For the benefits of the Applicant, US 20230172001 A1 is cited on the record as being pertinent to significant disclosure through some but not all claimed features of the defined invention. This reference fail to disclose “an encapsulation layer.”
Conclusion
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 GARY ABEL whose telephone number is (571) 272-0246. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm (Eastern).
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, CHAD M DICKE can be reached at (571) 270-7996. 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 ttps://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.
/GRA/
Examiner, Art Unit 2897
/CHAD M DICKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2897