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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 5, 10, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon, M. Y., et al., US 20180128603 A1 (hereinafter Jeon) , in view of US4641972A (hereinafter Halioua), and further in view of JP 2015203603 A (hereinafter Shinya).
Regarding claim 1, Jeon teaches an apparatus for determining a first three-dimensional shape of an object located on a reference plane, comprising: “a first light source configured to irradiate one or more first pattern lights to the object” (fig. 6 element 110a, para [0069-71]); “one or more first image sensors configured to capture one or more first reflected lights generated by reflecting the one or more first pattern lights from the object” (fig. 6 element 120a, para [0069-71]); “a second light source configured to sequentially irradiate one or more second pattern lights having one phase range” (fig. 6 element 110b, para [0069-71]); a beam splitter and one or more lenses configured to change optical paths of the one or more second pattern lights (fig. 4 beam splitter is 150, fig. 1 lens is 118) “so that a beam of light corresponding to a respective phase of the phase range overlap and arrive simultaneously at each point of a partial region of an upper surface of the object (this is explained in para [0065-66]), “thereby resulting in lights having an average light amount of the one or more second pattern lights arriving at each point of the partial region” (this limitation is shown in fig. 4 based on fig. 2 of the instant application; para [0065-66], para [0047-48] in Jeon implies that Jeon teaches this limitation; the arrangement of Jeon, as shown in fig. 4 and fig. 6, which is very identical to fig. 2 of the instant application indicates that Jeon discloses this limitation); “a second image sensor configured to capture one or more second reflected lights generated by reflecting the one or more second pattern lights from the partial region” (fig. 6 element 120b, para [0069-71]); and “a processor that is electrically connected to the first light source, the one or more first image sensors, the second light source and the second image sensor” (fig. 6 element 130, para [0069-71]), and that is configured to: “determine a second three-dimensional shape of the object based on each of phase changes of the one or more first reflected lights from the one or more first pattern lights” (this is the image obtained by element 120b from element 110a, para [0071]); “derive a phase value of each of the one or more second reflected lights from average light amount values inputted for the respective pixels of the second image sensor” (para [0047]).
Jeon fails to teach determine an angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on the phase value of each of the one or more second reflected lights; and determine the first three-dimensional shape of the object by overriding an angle indicated by the upper surface of the object within the second three-dimensional shape with the angle of the upper surface of the object.
Halioua, from the same field of endeavor as Jeon, teaches determine the height of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on the phase value of each of the one or more second reflected lights (fig. 7, fig. 8B; note that the height of the object is related to the angle, see JP2015203603A fig. 7); and “determine the first three-dimensional shape of the object by overriding a height indicated by the upper surface of the object within the second three-dimensional shape with the height of the upper surface of the object” (this is equivalent to calibrating the measurement to obtain accurate result; col 9 lines 53-59).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Halioua to Jeon to have determine the height of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on the phase value of each of the one or more second reflected lights and determine the first three-dimensional shape of the object by overriding a height indicated by the upper surface of the object within the second three-dimensional shape with the height of the upper surface of the object in order to obtain the surface height with high accuracy (col 1 lines 62-65).
Jeon, when modified by Halioua, does not explicitly teach determine an angle of the upper surface of the object.
Shinya, from the same field of endeavor as Jeon, teaches determine the height of the upper surface of the object using an angle (fig. 7, p. 6 para 7). It is obvious for an ordinary skill in the arts to apply Shinya’s device to try to determine the angle of the upper surface of the object based from the computed height of Halioua in the device of Jeon in order to determine the angle of the upper surface of object 10 with high accuracy.
Regarding claim 4, Jeon teaches the apparatus of Claim 1, wherein each of the one or more first image sensors is disposed above the reference plane to capture each of the one or more first reflected lights traveling along different optical axes from the object (this is shown in figs. 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 5, Jeon teaches the apparatus of Claim 1, wherein the second image sensor is disposed to face the object at a position vertically above a region on the reference plane where the object is located (this is shown in figs. 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 10, Jeon teaches “the apparatus of Claim 1, wherein each of the one or more first pattern lights is a pattern light generated by phase-shifting a pattern light having a pattern in a first direction or a second direction perpendicular to the first direction by an integer multiple of a preset phase interval, and wherein each of the one or more second pattern lights is a pattern light generated by phase-shifting a pattern light having a pattern in the first direction or the second direction by an integer multiple of a preset phase interval” (this entire limitation is described in para [0036]).
Regarding claim 11, Jeon teaches a method for determining a first three-dimensional shape of an object located on a reference plane, comprising: sequentially irradiating, by a first light source, one or more first pattern lights to the object (fig. 6 element 110a, para [0069-71]); capturing, by one or more first image sensors, one or more first reflected lights generated by reflecting the one or more first pattern lights from the object (fig. 6 element 120a, para [0069-71]); sequentially irradiating, by a second light source, one or more second pattern lights having one phase range (fig. 6 element 110b, para [0069-71]); changing, by a beam splitter and one or more lenses (fig. 4 beam splitter is 150, fig. 1 lens is 118), optical paths of the one or more second pattern lights so that a beam of light corresponding to a respective phase of the phase range overlap and arrive simultaneously at each point of a partial region of an upper surface of the object (this is explained in para [0065-66]), thereby resulting in lights having an average light amount of the one or more second pattern lights arriving at each point of the partial region (this limitation is shown in fig. 4 based on fig. 2 of the instant application; para [0065-66], para [0047-48] in Jeon implies that Jeon teaches this limitation; the arrangement of Jeon, as shown in fig. 4 and fig. 6, which is very identical to fig. 2 of the instant application indicates that Jeon discloses this limitation); capturing, by a second image sensor, one or more second reflected lights generated by reflecting the one or more second pattern lights from the partial region (fig. 6 element 120b, para [0069-71]); determining, by a processor, a second three-dimensional shape of the object based on each of phase changes of the one or more first reflected lights from the one or more first pattern lights (this is the image obtained by element 120b from element 110a, para [0071]); deriving, by the processor, a phase value of each of the one or more second reflected lights from average light amount values inputted for the respective pixels of the second image sensor (para [0047]).
Jeon fails to teach determining, by the processor, an angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on the phase value of each of the one or more second reflected lights; and determining, by the processor, the first three-dimensional shape of the object by overriding an angle indicated by the upper surface of the object within the second three-dimensional shape with the angle of the upper surface of the object.
Halioua, from the same field of endeavor as Jeon, teaches determining, by the processor, a height of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on the phase value of each of the one or more second reflected lights (fig. 7, fig. 8B; note that the height of the object is related to the angle, see JP2015203603A fig. 7); and determining, by the processor, the first three-dimensional shape of the object by overriding the height indicated by the upper surface of the object within the second three-dimensional shape with the height of the upper surface of the object (this is equivalent to calibrating the measurement to obtain accurate result; col 9 lines 53-59).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Halioua to Jeon to have determining, by the processor, a height of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on the phase value of each of the one or more second reflected lights; and determining, by the processor, the first three-dimensional shape of the object by overriding the height indicated by the upper surface of the object within the second three-dimensional shape with the height of the upper surface of the object in order to obtain the surface height with high accuracy (col 1 lines 62-65).
Jeon, when modified by Halioua, does not explicitly teach determine an angle of the upper surface of the object.
Shinya, from the same field of endeavor as Jeon, teaches determine the height of the upper surface of the object using an angle (fig. 7, p. 6 para 7). It is obvious for an ordinary skill in the arts to apply Shinya’s device to try to determine the angle of the upper surface of the object based from the computed height of Halioua in the device of Jeon in order to determine the angle of the upper surface of object 10 with high accuracy.
Claim(s) 3, 6, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon, in view of Halioua and Shinya, as applied to claim(s) 1 and 11 and further in view of US 20180313643 A1 (hereinafter Odaira).
Regarding claim 3, Jeon does not teach the apparatus of Claim 1, further comprising: a memory configured to store reference information indicating a relationship between the angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane and the each light amount value of the one or more second reflected lights, wherein the processor is further configured to determine the angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on the each light amount value of the one or more second reflected lights and the reference information.
Odaira, from the same field of endeavor as Jeon, teaches the apparatus of Claim 1, further comprising: a memory configured to store reference information indicating a relationship between the angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane and the each light amount value of the one or more second reflected lights, wherein the processor is further configured to determine the angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on the each light amount value of the one or more second reflected lights and the reference information (para [0173] reference information are in the lookup table).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Odaira to Jeon to have the apparatus of Claim 1, further comprising: a memory configured to store reference information indicating a relationship between the angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane and the each light amount value of the one or more second reflected lights, wherein the processor is further configured to determine the angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on the each light amount value of the one or more second reflected lights and the reference information in order to speed up the measurement process (para [0173] last sentence).
Regarding claim 6, Jeon teaches the apparatus of Claim 1, wherein the one or more first image sensors are further configured to capture the one or more second reflected lights (figs. 1-2 sensors 120a capture the second reflected light).
Jeon fails to teach wherein the processor is further configured to determine the angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on the one or more second reflected lights captured by the one or more first image sensors and the second image sensor.
Odaira, from the same field of endeavor as Jeon, teaches wherein the processor is further configured to determine the angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on the one or more second reflected lights captured by the one or more first image sensors and the second image sensor (para [0173]; this limitation corresponds to the lookup table).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Odaira to Jeon to have wherein the processor is further configured to determine the angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on the one or more second reflected lights captured by the one or more first image sensors and the second image sensor in order to speed up the measurement process (para [0173] last sentence).
Regarding claim 13, Jeon teaches the method of Claim 11, further comprising: irradiating, by the second light source, a monochromatic light (para [0053] last sentence); “changing, by the beam splitter and the one or more lenses, an optical path of the monochromatic light so that the monochromatic light arrives at the upper surface of the object” (fig. 4 shows beam splitter 150 and the lens is inside 110a); and “capturing, by the second image sensor, a fourth reflected light generated by reflecting the monochromatic light from the upper surface of the object” (fig. 2 shows four light sources 110a).
Jeon fails to teach wherein the determining the second three-dimensional shape of the object includes determining the second three-dimensional shape of the object based on each of the phase changes of the one or more first reflected lights from the one or more first pattern lights and a change in a light amount of the fourth reflected light from the monochromatic light.
Odaira, from the same field of endeavor as Jeon, teaches “wherein the determining the second three-dimensional shape of the object includes determining the second three-dimensional shape of the object based on each of the phase changes of the one or more first reflected lights from the one or more first pattern lights and a change in a light amount of the fourth reflected light from the monochromatic light” (this limitation is discussed in para [0162-0173], lookup table).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Odaira to Jeon to have wherein the determining the second three-dimensional shape of the object includes determining the second three-dimensional shape of the object based on each of the phase changes of the one or more first reflected lights from the one or more first pattern lights and a change in a light amount of the fourth reflected light from the monochromatic light in order to optimize the accuracy of the measurement of the inclination and shape of the sample (para [0001]).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon, in view of Halioua and Shinya, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Mizumura, M., et al., JP 2009202223 A (hereinafter Mizumura), and further in view of Yu, L-P., et al., US 20130278723 A1 (hereinafter Yu).
Regarding claim 7, Jeon teaches the apparatus of Claim 1, further comprising:
one or more third light sources (figs. 1, 2 shows third light sources 110a) configured to irradiate one or more monochromatic lights from above the reference plane toward the object at one or more angles with respect to the reference plane (para [0053] last sentence); and a third image sensor configured to capture one or more third reflected lights generated by reflecting the one or more monochromatic lights from the object (figs. 1, 2 shows third image sensor 120a),
wherein the beam splitter is further configured to change optical paths of the one or more third reflected lights so that the one or more third reflected lights traveling from the object arrive at the third image sensor (fig. 4 shows beam splitter 150).
Jeon does not teach wherein the processor is further configured to determine a second three-dimensional shape of the object based on each of light amount changes of the one or more third reflected lights from the one or more monochromatic lights and each of phase changes of the one or more first reflected lights from the one or more first pattern lights.
Odaira, from the same field of endeavor as Jeon, teaches wherein the processor is further configured to determine a second three-dimensional shape of the object (para [0162-0173], this is pertaining to the lookup table).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Odaira to Jeon to have wherein the processor is further configured to determine a second three-dimensional shape of the object in order to speed up the measurement process (para [0173] last sentence).
Jeon, when modified by Odaira, fails to teach based on each of light amount changes of the one or more third reflected lights from the one or more monochromatic lights and each of phase changes of the one or more first reflected lights from the one or more first pattern lights.
Mizumura teaches based on each of light amount changes of the one or more third reflected lights from the one or more monochromatic lights (p. 1 para [0007] lines 4-6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Mizumura to Jeon, when modified by Odaira, to have based on each of light amount changes of the one or more third reflected lights from the one or more monochromatic lights in order to improve the accuracy of the measurement (para [0001]).
Jeon, when modified by Odaira and Mizumura, fails to teach each of phase changes of the one or more first reflected lights from the one or more first pattern lights.
Yu teaches each of phase changes of the one or more first reflected lights from the one or more first pattern lights (para [0017] col 2 lines 5-8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Yu to Jeon, when modified by Odaira and Mizumura , to have each of phase changes of the one or more first reflected lights from the one or more first pattern lights in order to avoid measurement ambiguity (para [0055]).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon, in view of Halioua and Shinya, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Yu, and further in view of Mizumura.
Regarding claim 8, Jeon teaches the apparatus of Claim 1, wherein the second light source is further configured to irradiate a monochromatic light (para [0053] last sentence),
wherein the beam splitter and the one or more lenses are further configured to change an optical path of the monochromatic light so that the monochromatic light arrives at the upper surface of the object (figs. 1-2 shows lenses 118 and fig. 4 shows the beam splitter 150; para [0035-36]), wherein the second image sensor is further configured to capture a fourth reflected light generated by reflecting the monochromatic light from the upper surface of the object (fig. 2 has four light sources 110a).
Jeon does not teach wherein the processor is further configured to determine the second three-dimensional shape of the object based on each of the phase changes of the one or more first reflected lights from the one or more first pattern lights and a change in a light amount of the fourth reflected light from the monochromatic light.
Odaira, from the same field of endeavor as Jeon, teaches wherein the processor is further configured to determine the second three-dimensional shape of the object (para [0162-0173], this is pertaining to the lookup table).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Odaira to Jeon to have wherein the processor is further configured to determine the second three-dimensional shape of the object in order to speed up the measurement process (para [0173] last sentence).
Jeon, when modified by Odaira, fails to teach based on each of the phase changes of the one or more first reflected lights from the one or more first pattern lights and a change in a light amount of the fourth reflected light from the monochromatic light.
Yu teaches based on each of the phase changes of the one or more first reflected lights from the one or more first pattern lights (para [0017] col 2 lines 5-8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Yu to Jeon, when modified by Odaira, to have based on each of the phase changes of the one or more first reflected lights from the one or more first pattern lights in order to avoid measurement ambiguity (para [0055]).
Jeon, when modified by Odaira and Yu, fails to teach a change in a light amount of the fourth reflected light from the monochromatic light.
Mizumura teaches a change in a light amount of the fourth reflected light from the monochromatic light (p. 1 para [0007] lines 4-6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Mizumura to Jeon, when modified by Odaira and Yu, to have a change in a light amount of the fourth reflected light from the monochromatic light in order to improve the accuracy of the measurement (para [0001]).
Claim(s) 9, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon, in view of Halioua, Shinya, Odaira, as applied to claim(s) 1, 11 above, in view of Yamada, T., US 20120069353 A1 (hereinafter Tomoaki).
Regarding claim 9, Jeon does not teach the apparatus of Claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to: determine whether the upper surface of the object is a mirror surface; upon the determination that the upper surface is not a mirror surface: determine the second three-dimensional shape as the first three-dimensional shape of the object; and upon the determination that the upper surface is a mirror surface: determine an angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on each light amount value of the one or more second reflected lights; and determine the first three-dimensional shape of the object by correcting the upper surface of the object indicated by the second three-dimensional shape based on the angle of the upper surface of the object.
Odaira, from the same field of endeavor as Jeon, teaches determine an angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on each light amount value of the one or more second reflected lights (para [0354]); and determine the first three-dimensional shape of the object by correcting the upper surface of the object indicated by the second three-dimensional shape based on the angle of the upper surface of the object (fig. 28, para [0352]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Odaira to Jeon to have determine an angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on each light amount value of the one or more second reflected lights; and determine the first three-dimensional shape of the object by correcting the upper surface of the object indicated by the second three-dimensional shape based on the angle of the upper surface of the object in order to precisely obtain the shape of the sample (para [0354]).
Jeon, when modified by Odaira, fails to teach wherein the processor is further configured to: determine whether the upper surface of the object is a mirror surface; upon the determination that the upper surface is not a mirror surface: determine the second three-dimensional shape as the first three-dimensional shape of the object.
Tomoaki, from the same field of endeavor as Jeon, teaches wherein the processor is further configured to: determine whether the upper surface of the object is a mirror surface (fig. 2 S2, para [0034]); upon the determination that the upper surface is not a mirror surface: determine the second three-dimensional shape as the first three-dimensional shape of the object (para [0049, 0051]; configured to measure profile of object 2 automatically after adjusting inclination); and upon the determination that the upper surface mirror surface: determine an angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on each light amount value of the one or more second reflected lights (para [0037], fig. 2 S3, measuring when object surface is a mirror plane)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Tomoaki to Jeon, when modified by Odaira, to have wherein the processor is further configured to: determine whether the upper surface of the object is a mirror surface; upon the determination that the upper surface is not a mirror surface: determine the second three-dimensional shape as the first three-dimensional shape of the object; and upon the determination that the upper surface mirror surface: determine an angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on each light amount value of the one or more second reflected lights in order to increase precision (para [0050]).
Regarding claim 14, Jeon does not teach the method of Claim 11, wherein the determining the first three-dimensional shape of the object includes: determining whether the upper surface of the object is a mirror surface; upon the determination that the upper surface is not a mirror surface: determining the second three-dimensional shape as the first three-dimensional shape of the object; and upon the determination that the upper surface is a mirror surface: determining an angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on each light amount value of the one or more second reflected lights; and determining the first three-dimensional shape of the object by correcting the upper surface of the object indicated by the second three-dimensional shape based on the angle of the upper surface of the object.
Odaira, from the same field of endeavor as Jeon, teaches determining an angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on each light amount value of the one or more second reflected lights (fig. 28, para [0352], shape of sample is calculated from amount of tilt); and determining the first three-dimensional shape of the object by correcting the upper surface of the object indicated by the second three-dimensional shape based on the angle of the upper surface of the object (fig. 28, para [0352], shape of sample is calculated from amount of tilt).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Odaira to Jeon to have determining an angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on each light amount value of the one or more second reflected lights; and determining the first three-dimensional shape of the object by correcting the upper surface of the object indicated by the second three-dimensional shape based on the angle of the upper surface of the object in order to increase the precision of the measurement (para [0354]).
Jeon, when modified by Odaira, does not disclose wherein the determining the first three-dimensional shape of the object includes: determining whether the upper surface of the object is a mirror surface; upon the determination that the upper surface is not a mirror surface: determining the second three-dimensional shape as the first three-dimensional shape of the object; and upon the determination that the upper surface is a mirror surface: determining an angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on each light amount value of the one or more second reflected lights.
Tomoaki, from the same field of endeavor as Jeon, teaches wherein the determining the first three-dimensional shape of the object includes: determining whether the upper surface of the object is a mirror surface (fig. 2 S2, para [0034]); upon the determination that the upper surface is not a mirror surface: determining the second three-dimensional shape as the first three-dimensional shape of the object (para [0049, 0051] configured to measure profile of object 2 automatically after adjusting inclination); and upon the determination that the upper surface is a mirror surface: determining an angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on each light amount value of the one or more second reflected lights (fig. 2 Step S3, para [0037], measuring when object surface is a mirror plane).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the teaching of Tomoaki to Jeon, when modified by Odaira, to have wherein the determining the first three-dimensional shape of the object includes: determining whether the upper surface of the object is a mirror surface; upon the determination that the upper surface is not a mirror surface: determining the second three-dimensional shape as the first three-dimensional shape of the object; and upon the determination that the upper surface is a mirror surface: determining an angle of the upper surface of the object with respect to the reference plane based on each light amount value of the one or more second reflected lights in order to increase precision (para [0050]).
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 ROBERTO FABIAN JR whose telephone number is (571)272-3632. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (8-12, 1-5).
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, Kara Geisel can be reached at 571-272-2416. 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.
/ROBERTO FABIAN JR/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/Kara E. Geisel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877