DETAILED ACTION
This action is in reply to the amendments and arguments filed October 14th, 2025. Claims 1-17 are currently pending.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 1-4, 6, 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over previously cited of record Zhang et al. (US Pub. No. 20190316908 A1), herein after Zhang, and further in view of previously cited of record Fukuzaki et al. (US Pub. No. 20130104137 A1), herein after Fukuzaki.
Regarding claim 1, Zhang teaches [a]n observation control device that is applicable to a plurality of detection devices mounted in a spacecraft to perform observation, the device comprising: a non-transitory computer-readable memory configured to store a program; and a processor configured to execute the program and control the observation control device to (Zhang: Para. 0038 and 0066; teaching a master control system that is a computer programmed to monitor a state of a satellite image processing device with memory to store the program code): receive, at the observation control device, detection information detected by each of the detection devices (Zhang: Para. 0044; teaching that the satellite image processing device receives images captured by the satellite); determine whether or not normal observation is feasible in each of the detection devices (Zhang: Para. 0044; teaching that the operation state of the satellite image processing device is monitored for whether it is working properly), and wherein the processor is further configured to control the observation control device to: set the adjusted searching cycle and/or the tracking cycle for the detection devices capable of performing target searching and/or target tracking, and cause the observation to be executed (Zhang: Para. 0046 and 0047; teaching that the master control management module determines and adjusts priorities of the tasks and schedules of said tasks of the satellite image processing devices, and Para. 0053; teaching executing the tasks of the satellite according to the priorities of the tasks).
Zhang does not explicitly teach adjust an assignment state of a target searching function and/or a target tracking function for each of the detection devices within the detection devices mounted in the spacecraft, when it is determined that normal observation is not feasible in at least one of the detection devices however this feature is well known in the art as evidenced by Zhang which teaches a switching command that is sent by the master control management module that causes a backup machine to take the place of a satellite image processing device when an abnormality occurs (Zhang: Para. 0065 and 0066) and wherein adjustment of the assignment state of the target searching function and/or the target tracking function means that a searching cycle and/or a tracking cycle are/is adjusted for at least one detection device of the detection devices capable of performing target searching and/or target tracking (Zhang: Para. 0046 and 0047; teaching that the master control management module determines and adjusts priorities [searching and tracking cycle] of the tasks of the satellite image processing devices) for the benefit of ensuring normal operations when something goes wrong.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the filing of the application to include in the satellite image processing device monitoring from Zhang with a function to have working satellite image processing devices cover for the functions of a satellite image processing device that is malfunctioning, for the benefit of ensuring normal operations when something goes wrong.
Zhang is silent to wherein the searching cycle is a time from when the detecting device searches for a target within a predetermined range to when the detecting device starts searching for the target again; wherein the tracking cycle is a time from when the detecting device performs detection of the target to when the detecting device performs detection of the target again.
In a similar field, Fukuzaki teaches wherein the searching cycle is a time from when the detecting device searches for a target within a predetermined range to when the detecting device starts searching for the target again; wherein the tracking cycle is a time from when the detecting device performs detection of the target to when the detecting device performs detection of the target again (Fukuzaki: Para. 0091-0093, teaching a task period during which a task is scheduled to occur and after the period elapses the task period is reset and the task is performed again) for the benefit of identifying trends and changes in an area over time.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the filing of the application to modify the scheduling of tasks from Zhang to have the tasks repeat over a period of time, as taught by Fukuzaki, for the benefit of identifying trends and changes in an area over time.
Regarding claim 2, Zhang and Fukuzaki remain as applied in claim 1, and Zhang goes on to further teach [t]he observation control device according to claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to control the observation control device to determine whether or not normal observation is feasible, based on at least one of whether or not an abnormality has occurred in each of the detection devices and whether or not a function overflow has occurred in each of the detection devices (Zhang: Para. 0066; teaching that the master control management module monitors for abnormalities in the state of the satellite image processing device, and Para. 0043; teaching general software debugging to be contemplated as part of the prioritization of tasks, such debugging may include fault-tolerance emergency processing).
Regarding claim 3, Zhang and Fukuzaki remain as applied in claim 2, and Fukuzaki goes on to further teach [t]he observation control device according to claim 2, wherein the function overflow is determined based on at least one of a tracking target number, the tracking cycle, and a distance between tracking objects (Fukuzaki: Para. 0170-0173; teaching that task cycles that are allowed to continue on for too much time run the risk of having a stack overflow).
Regarding claim 4, Zhang and Fukuzaki remain as applied in claim 1, and Zhang goes on to further teach [t]he observation control device according to claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to control the observation control device to adjust a detection cycle of target searching and/or target tracking for each of the detection devices to adjust the assignment state (Zhang: Para. 0046 and 0047; teaching that the master control management module determines and adjusts priorities [detection cycle] of the tasks of the satellite image processing devices).
Regarding claim 6, Zhang and Fukuzaki remain as applied in claim 1, and Zhang goes on to further teach [t]he observation control device according to claim 1, wherein in a case where it is determined that normal observation is not feasible in at least one of the detection devices, the processor is further configured to control the observation control device to determine, when there is no target under tracking, whether or not there is a need to perform target tracking, and to assign the target searching function to each of the detection devices when there is no need to perform target tracking, and to assign each of the target searching function and the target tracking function to each of the detection devices when there is a need to perform target tracking (Zhang: Para. 0059; teaching working segments where the satellite image processing device enters a working state where it needs to perform searching and tracking functions as well as resting segments where there has been determined that there is no need for the satellite image processing device to perform the searching and tracking of the satellite image processing device so the system has the device enters a standby state, the two states being switchable as needed).
Regarding claim 14, Zhang and Fukuzaki remain as applied in claim 1, and Zhang goes on to further teach [a]n observation system comprising: a plurality of detection devices; and the observation control device according to claim 1 (Zhang: Para. 0065; teaching that the master control management module controls multiple satellite image processing devices).
Regarding claim 15, Zhang and Fukuzaki remain as applied in claim 14, and Zhang goes on to further teach [a] spacecraft comprising: the observation system according to claim 14 (Zhang: Para. 0041; teaching that the system of Zhang is meant to be installed in a satellite).
Regarding claim 16, Zhang teaches [a]n observation control method that is applicable to a plurality of detection devices mounted in a spacecraft to perform observation, the method comprising (Zhang: Para. 0038; teaching a method executed by a master control system that monitors a state of a satellite image processing device): a step of receiving detection information detected by each of the detection devices (Zhang: Para. 0044; teaching that the satellite image processing device receives images captured by the satellite); a step of determining whether or not normal observation is feasible in each of the detection devices (Zhang: Para. 0044; teaching that the operation state of the satellite image processing device is monitored for whether it is working properly), and wherein the processor is further configured to control the observation control device to: set the adjusted searching cycle and/or the tracking cycle for the detection devices capable of performing target searching and/or target tracking, and cause the observation to be executed (Zhang: Para. 0046 and 0047; teaching that the master control management module determines and adjusts priorities of the tasks and schedules of said tasks of the satellite image processing devices, and Para. 0053; teaching executing the tasks of the satellite according to the priorities of the tasks).
Zhang does not explicitly teach a step of adjusting an assignment state of a target searching function and/or a target tracking function for each of the detection devices within the detection devices mounted in the spacecraft, based on a determination that normal observation is not feasible in at least one of the detection devices however this feature is well known in the art as evidenced by Zhang which teaches a switching command that is sent by the master control management module that causes a backup machine to take the place of a satellite image processing device when an abnormality occurs (Zhang: Para. 0065 and 0066), and wherein adjustment of the assignment state of the target searching function and/or the target tracking function means that a searching cycle and/or a tracking cycle are/is adjusted for at least one detection device of the detection devices capable of performing target searching and/or target tracking (Zhang: Para. 0046 and 0047; teaching that the master control management module determines and adjusts priorities [searching and tracking cycle] of the tasks of the satellite image processing devices) for the benefit of ensuring normal operations when something goes wrong.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the filing of the application to include in the satellite image processing device monitoring from Zhang with a function to have working satellite image processing devices cover for the functions of a satellite image processing device that is malfunctioning, for the benefit of ensuring normal operations when something goes wrong.
Zhang is silent to wherein the searching cycle is a time from when the detecting device searches for a target within a predetermined range to when the detecting device starts searching for the target again, and wherein the tracking cycle is a time from when the detecting device performs detection of the target to when the detecting device performs detection of the target again.
In a similar field, Fukuzaki teaches wherein the searching cycle is a time from when the detecting device searches for a target within a predetermined range to when the detecting device starts searching for the target again, and wherein the tracking cycle is a time from when the detecting device performs detection of the target to when the detecting device performs detection of the target again (Fukuzaki: Para. 0091-0093, teaching a task period during which a task is scheduled to occur and after the period elapses the task period is reset and the task is performed again) for the benefit of identifying trends and changes in an area over time.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the filing of the application to modify the scheduling of tasks from Zhang to have the tasks repeat over a period of time, as taught by Fukuzaki, for the benefit of identifying trends and changes in an area over time.
Regarding claim 17, Zhang teaches [a] non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing an observation control program that is applicable to a plurality of detection devices mounted in a spacecraft to perform observation, the program causing a computer to execute (Zhang: Para. 0038 and 0066; teaching a master control system that is a computer programmed to monitor a state of a satellite image processing device with memory to store the program code): a process of receiving detection information detected by each of the detection devices (Zhang: Para. 0044; teaching that the satellite image processing device receives images captured by the satellite); a process of determining whether or not normal observation is feasible in each of the detection devices (Zhang: Para. 0044; teaching that the operation state of the satellite image processing device is monitored for whether it is working properly).
Zhang does not explicitly teach a process of adjusting an assignment state of a target searching function and/or a target tracking function for each of the detection devices within the detection devices mounted in the spacecraft, when it is determined that normal observation is not feasible in at least one of the detection devices, however this feature is well known in the art as evidenced by Zhang which teaches a switching command that is sent by the master control management module that causes a backup machine to take the place of a satellite image processing device when an abnormality occurs (Zhang: Para. 0065 and 0066) and wherein adjustment of the assignment state of the target searching function and/or the target tracking function means that a searching cycle and/or a tracking cycle are/is adjusted for at least one detection device of the detection devices capable of performing target searching and/or target tracking (Zhang: Para. 0046 and 0047; teaching that the master control management module determines and adjusts priorities [searching and tracking cycle] of the tasks of the satellite image processing devices) for the benefit of ensuring normal operations when something goes wrong.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the filing of the application to include in the satellite image processing device monitoring from Zhang with a function to have working satellite image processing devices cover for the functions of a satellite image processing device that is malfunctioning, for the benefit of ensuring normal operations when something goes wrong.
Zhang is silent to wherein the searching cycle is a time from when the detecting device searches for a target within a predetermined range to when the detecting device starts searching for the target again, and wherein the tracking cycle is a time from when the detecting device performs detection for the target to when the detecting device performs detection of the target again.
In a similar field, Fukuzaki teaches wherein the searching cycle is a time from when the detecting device searches for a target within a predetermined range to when the detecting device starts searching for the target again, and wherein the tracking cycle is a time from when the detecting device performs detection for the target to when the detecting device performs detection of the target again (Fukuzaki: Para. 0091-0093, teaching a task period during which a task is scheduled to occur and after the period elapses the task period is reset and the task is performed again) for the benefit of identifying trends and changes in an area over time.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the filing of the application to modify the scheduling of tasks from Zhang to have the tasks repeat over a period of time, as taught by Fukuzaki, for the benefit of identifying trends and changes in an area over time.
Claims 5 and 7-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Zhang in view of Fukuzaki as applied to claims 1 and 6 above, and further in view of previously cited of record Korb et al. (US Pub. No. 20150371431 A1), herein after Korb.
Regarding claim 5, Zhang and Fukuzaki remain as applied in claim 1, and Zhang goes on to further teach [t]he observation control device according to claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to control the observation control device to acquire observation information... and adjusts the assignment state based on the observation information (Zhang: Para. 0055; teaching that the regions for working and resting are adjusted by information of the region).
They are silent to the observation control device acquires observation information outside an observable range of the detection device.
In a similar field, Korb teaches [t]he observation control device according to claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to control the observation control device to acquire observation information outside an observable range of the detection device, and adjusts the assignment state based on the observation information (Korb: Para. 0257; teaching the use of a rules-based-analysis of an auto-tagging and auto-tracking functions for moving targets that are within and those outside a range of interest or the range of the possible) for the benefit of correction errors in the searching and tracking of an observation satellite.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the filing of the application to modify the division of working and resting segments from Zhang in view of Fukuzaki to incorporate information that is outside the possible range of detection, as taught by Korb, for the benefit of correction errors in the searching and tracking of an observation satellite.
Regarding claim 7, Zhang and Fukuzaki remain as applied in claim 6, however they are silent to [t]he observation control device according to claim 6, wherein when there is a need to perform target tracking, the processor is further configured to control the observation control device to assign each of the target searching function and the target tracking function to each of the detection devices with target searching prioritized over target tracking.
In a similar field, Korb teaches [t]he observation control device according to claim 6, wherein when there is a need to perform target tracking, the processor is further configured to control the observation control device to assign each of the target searching function and the target tracking function to each of the detection devices with target searching prioritized over target tracking (Korb: Para. 0070 and 0257; teaching that when an observation satellite is performing observation of an area to track targets, the satellite first searches for targets then tracks any detected and identified targets) for the benefit of keeping track of multiple detected targets.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the filing of the application to modify the prioritizing of the operations of the satellite image processing device from Zhang in view of Fukuzaki to prioritize searching for targets first before tracking them, as taught by Korb, for the benefit of keeping track of multiple detected targets.
Regarding claim 8, Zhang and Fukuzaki remain as applied in claim 6, however they are silent to [t]he observation control device according to claim 6, wherein when there is the target under tracking, the processor is further configured to control the observation control device to determine whether or not information of the target under tracking is required, and when the information of the target under tracking is not required, the processor is further configured to control the observation control device to assign each of the target searching function and the target tracking function to each of the detection devices.
In a similar field, Korb teaches [t]he observation control device according to claim 6, wherein when there is the target under tracking, the processor is further configured to control the observation control device to determine whether or not information of the target under tracking is required, and when the information of the target under tracking is not required, the processor is further configured to control the observation control device to assign each of the target searching function and the target tracking function to each of the detection devices (examiner interprets that limitation amounts to that there is no need to possess the information of a target thus the system changes it operations accordingly) (Korb: Para. 0146 and 0068; teaching a satellite observation system that determines if an area does not need to be observed because it does not have any activity is being observed and if not then the system excludes that area from observation) for the benefit of prioritizing areas that are of interest.
It would have been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s claimed invention to modify the prioritizing of the working segments of the satellite image processing device from Zhang in view of Fukuzaki to deprioritize areas where observation is not required due to lack of activity, as taught by Korb, for the benefit of prioritizing areas that are of interest.
Regarding claim 9, Zhang, Fukuzaki, and Korb remain as applied in claim 8, and Korb goes on to further teach [t]he observation control device according to claim 8, wherein when the information of the target under tracking is not required, the processor is further configured to control the observation control device to assign each of the target searching function and the target tracking function to each of the detection devices with target searching prioritized over target tracking (Korb: Para. 0257; teaching that searching for a target occurs before tracking the target).
Regarding claim 10, Zhang, Fukuzaki, and Korb remain as applied in claim 8, and Korb goes on to further teach [t]he observation control device according to claim 8, wherein when the information of the target is required, the processor is further configured to control the observation control device to determine whether or not the tracking cycle for tracking the target needs to be changed for each of the detection devices in which normal observation is feasible, and when the tracking cycle needs to be changed, to determine whether or not there is a need to perform target searching (Korb: Para. 0070; teaching that the spacecraft is able to identify targets which implies a requirement of information of the target, and Para. 0110; teaching that the sampling rate over temporal domains of the imaging of the surface is configurable as needed by the satellite system), and the processor is further configured to control the observation control device to assign the target tracking function to each of the detection devices when there is no need to perform target searching, and to assign each of the target searching function and the target tracking function to each of the detection devices when there is a need to perform target searching (Korb: Para. 0146 and 0068; teaching a satellite observation system that determines if an area does not need to be observed because it does not have any activity is being observed and if not then the system excludes that area from observation).
Regarding claim 11, Zhang, Fukuzaki, and Korb remain as applied in claim 8, and Korb goes on to further teach [t]he observation control device according to claim 8, wherein when there is a need to perform target searching, the processor is further configured to control the observation control device to assign each of the target searching function and the target tracking function to each of the detection devices with target tracking prioritized over target searching (Korb: Para. 0257; teaching that target tracking for a found target takes precedent over searching for targets in the background that are determined to be static).
Regarding claim 12, Zhang, Fukuzaki, and Korb remain as applied in claim 10, and Zhang goes on to further teach [t]he observation control device according to claim 10, wherein when the tracking cycle does not need to be changed, the processor is further configured to control the observation control device to determine whether or not there is a need to perform target searching (Zhang: Para. 0047; teaching prioritization of tasks such as when to perform the searching and tracking of targets based on the commands received by the system, which implies that a lack of a command to change operation would not cause a change in task priorities), and to assign the target tracking function to each of the detection devices when there is no need to perform target searching, and to assign each of the target searching function and the target tracking function to each of the detection devices when there is a need to perform target searching (Zhang: Para. 0059; teaching that the system assigns working segments where the satellite image processing devices are operated to work normally as needed and the system also assigns resting segments where operations of the satellite image processing devices are not needed thus operating them in a standby mode).
Regarding claim 13, Zhang, Fukuzaki, and Korb remain as applied in claim 12, and Korb goes on to further teach [t]he observation control device according to claim 12, wherein when there is a need to perform target searching, the processor is further configured to control the observation control device to assign each of the target searching function and the target tracking function to each of the detection devices with target tracking prioritized over target searching (Korb: Para. 0257; teaching that target tracking for a found target takes precedent over searching for targets in the background that are determined to be static).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed October 14th, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s amendments filed October 14th, 2025, with respect to the 101 rejections of claims 1-16 has rendered the 101 rejections of claims 1-16 moot. Therefore, the 101 rejections of claims 1-16 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments, see pages 17-22, filed October 14th, 2025 against the 103 rejections of claims 1-17 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant contends (see page 17 line 21 through page 18 line 9, filed October 14th, 2025) that Zhang is deficient in teaching adjusting the assignment states of the detection devices to cover for the detection device whose normal operations are not feasible as Zhang teaches switching the operations of the remote-sensing satellite image processing device to a backup device that is not in operation until it is switched for the faulty remote-sensing satellite image processing device rather than having other remote-sensing satellite image processing devices compensate the faulty remote-sensing satellite image processing device. The examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner notes that the BRI of the claimed invention currently reads on having one or more detection device taking over the tasks of a detection device which is not capable of performing normal operations, there is currently no positive recitation that all of the detection devices must already be in operation before they are reassigned to compensate for the faulty detection device. As such, the BRI of the claimed invention reads on having a backup device that is currently on standby take over operations of a detection device which was deemed incapable of performing normal operations.
Applicant contends (see page 18 line 10 through page 19 line 6, filed October 14th, 2025) that the prior art of Fukuzaki is non-analogous to the claimed invention as Fukuzaki is directed towards “a general task scheduling arrangement that merely teaches resetting or re-executing a task period” while the claimed invention adjusts the searching cycle and/or tracking cycle. The examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's argument that the task scheduling that has a task be scheduled to occur repeatedly after a previous iteration of a task is completed is nonanalogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, the claimed rejection is a 103 combination of Zhang, which teaches the searching cycle and/or the tracking cycle being scheduled as part of the task priorities of the satellite (Zhang: Para. 0046 and 0047) while the prior art of Fukuzaki is brought in to teach that, when scheduling tasks for a system, the tasks can be repeatedly scheduled to occur after a task period has elapsed (Fukuzaki: Para. 0091-0093). Therefore, the combination of Zhang in view of Fukuzaki would render obvious having the scheduling of the searching/tracking cycles of Zhang to repeat each time after they complete a task period. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Applicant contends (see page 19 line 10 through page 20 line 13, filed October 14th, 2025) that the current amendments more positively recite both the “searching cycle” and the “tracking cycle” to distinguish over the prior art of Fukuzaki as per the examiner’s suggestion from the interview conducted September 4th, 2025. The examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner notes that what the examiner was referring to during the interview conducted September 4th, 2025 was with regards to how the BRI of the claimed invention requires only the searching cycle or the tracking cycle to be taught by the prior art of record due to the numerous recitations of the phrase “and/or” throughout the claimed invention. The examiner notes that the current amendments of record does not address the examiner’s concern regarding this as the current amendments at issue merely more specifically define the searching cycle and tracking cycle without requiring that both be required for the claimed invention. The examiner further notes that what was meant during the interview was that removing the phrasing of “the searching cycle and/or the tracking cycle” in favor of “the searching cycle and the tracking cycle” would help to narrow and clarify the scope of the claimed invention which, in turn, could advance prosecution towards rendering the invention distinct from the prior art of Zhang. The examiner notes, however, that the prior art of Korb teaches in paragraph 0070 “For example, in still further embodiments, the present disclosure may be used detect [search function], identify, and/or track objects [track function], such as in facial or object recognition systems. One exemplary application is to detect [search function] and track [track function] moving objects using multiple images, where each target is detected and tagged among the moving objects using its unique, measured spectroradiometric target signature”, thus such an amendment might not lead to an allowable application on its own.
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 Aaron K McCullers whose telephone number is (571)272-3523. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, Roughly 9 AM - 6 PM ET.
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, Angela Ortiz can be reached on (571) 272-1206. 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.K.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ANGELA Y ORTIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663