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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07 July 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The following addresses applicant’s remarks/amendments dated 07 July 2026.
The amendment is sufficient to overcome the claim rejections under 35 USC 112(d).
Claims 1, 2, 4, 16, 17, 20, 21, and 22 were amended. Claim 15 was cancelled. No new claims were added. Therefore, claims 1-2, 4-14, and 16-28 are currently pending in the current application and are addressed below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 20, and 21 and 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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 4-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the optical prism-based beam splitter" in line 3 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 5-14 are rejected due to dependency.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2, 16-17, and 19-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chong, US 20190317199 A1 (“Chong”) in view of Maimone, US 20200064633 A1 (“Maimone”).
Regarding claims 1 and 20, Chong discloses A vehicle comprising a light detection and ranging (LiDAR) scanning system (Paragraph [0058]) and A light detection and ranging (LiDAR) scanning system (Fig. 9, LIDAR sensing system 900, Paragraph [0085]), comprising:
a light source providing a light beam (Fig. 9, light source 902, Paragraph [0085]);
a collimation lens optically coupled to the light source to form a collimated light beam based on the light beam (Fig. 9, collimated lens 907, Paragraph [0085]); and
an optical beam splitter configured to output a plurality of output light beams based on the collimated light beam (Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0085]), wherein:
the optical beam splitter is configured to have a geometry such that two neighboring output light beams of the plurality of output light beams have a non-zero inter beam angle (Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0086]),
the optical beam splitter is configured to receive the collimated light beam at, and output the plurality of output light beams from, a first facet of the optical beam splitter (Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0086]),
the optical beam splitter comprises a diffractive optical element (DOE)- based beam splitter (Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0085]: “wavelength dispersive element 908 may be a diffraction grating, grating coupler, etc”),
[…], and
the optical characteristics comprise one or more of transmission, reflection, and diffraction characteristics (Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0085]).
Chong does not teach: optical characteristics of the optical beam splitter are configured to facilitate forming the plurality of output light beams with substantially equal light intensity.
However, Maimone teaches a waveguide image replicator that receives a light beam and splits the beam into multiple output beams. Maimone specifically teaches a prism waveguide with a diffraction grating on one side of the prism, where the grating structures have a spatially varying diffraction efficiency for equating optical intensity of output beams (Fig. 2E, waveguide image replicator 200E, diffraction grating 271, diffraction grating 274, Paragraph [0046]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Chong’s wavelength dispersive element by using grating structures that have a spatially varying diffraction efficiency, which is disclosed by Maimone. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve the uniformity of output beams, as suggested by Maimone (Paragraph [0046]).
Regarding claim 2, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone, discloses the system of claim 1.
Chong, as modified in view of Maimone, does not teach: wherein the optical beam splitter further comprises an optical prism-based beam splitter.
However, Maimone teaches a waveguide image replicator that receives a light beam and splits the beam into multiple output beams. Maimone specifically teaches a prism waveguide with a diffraction grating on one side of the prism and a rear surface that reflect all internal light (Fig. 2E, waveguide image replicator 200E, diffraction grating 271, diffraction grating 274, glass plate 240E, rear surface 272, Paragraph [0046]). The diffraction efficiency of the diffraction grating is varied to allow multiple formation of uniform beams (Paragraph [0046]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Chong’s wavelength dispersive element by adding a glass plate and varying the diffraction efficiency of the diffraction grating, which is disclosed by Maimone. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to propagate light beams through the glass plate, yielding more output beams for a 2D grid of multiple beams, as suggested by Maimone (Paragraph [0046]).
Regarding claim 16, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone, discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the DOE-based beam splitter is a 1-dimensional beam splitter configured to form the plurality of output light beams with substantially equal light intensity based on the collimated light beam (Chong, Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0085]; Maimone, Fig. 2E, diffraction grating 271, Paragraph [0046]: vary diffraction efficiency).
Regarding claim 17, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone, discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the DOE-based beam splitter comprises micro- or nano- structures disposed on an optical plate, the micro- or nano-structures facilitate splitting the collimated light beam and directing the output light beams with substantially equal light intensity at a plurality of different transmission angles (Chong, Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908; Maimone, Fig. 2E, diffraction grating 271, diffraction grating 274, Paragraph [0046]: vary diffraction efficiency).
Regarding claim 19, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone, discloses the system of claim 1, further comprising:
a collection lens disposed to receive and redirect return light generated based on the plurality of output light beams (Chong, Fig.9, projection device 950, Paragraph [0086]: projection device 950 may be a lens);
a plurality of receiver channels optically coupled to the collection lens, wherein each of the receiver channels is optically aligned based on a transmission angle of a corresponding output light beam (Chong, Fig. 9, detector 906, Paragraph [0086]); and
a plurality of detector assemblies optically coupled to the plurality of receiver channels, wherein each of the receiver channels directs redirected return light to a detector assembly of the plurality of detector assemblies (Chong, Fig. 9, detector 906, Paragraph [0086]).
Claim 21 is a method claim corresponding to apparatus claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 22, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone, discloses the method of claim 21.
Chong, as modified in view of Maimone, does not teach: wherein outputting the plurality of transmission light beams based on the collimated light beam comprises:
forming, based on the collimated light beam, a first transmission light beam of the plurality of transmission light beams and a first internal beam by a first portion of a plurality portions of the first facet of the optical beam splitter, the first portion having a first optical coating, and
forming, based on the first internal beam, a second transmission light beam of the plurality of transmission light beams and a second internal beam by a second portion of the plurality portions of the first facet, the second portion having a second optical coating.
However, Maimone teaches a waveguide image replicator that receives a light beam and splits the beam into multiple output beams. Maimone specifically teaches a prism waveguide with a diffraction grating on one side of the prism and a rear surface that reflect all internal light (Fig. 2E, waveguide image replicator 200E, diffraction grating 271, glass plate 240E, rear surface 272, Paragraph [0046]). The diffraction grating partially transmits and reflects light beams internally in the prism such that a plurality of transmission light beams are output. The diffraction efficiency of the diffraction grating coating the first facet of the prism is varied to allow multiple formation of uniform beams (Paragraph [0046]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Chong’s wavelength dispersive element by adding a glass plate and varying the diffraction efficiency of the diffraction grating, which is disclosed by Maimone. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to propagate light beams through the glass plate, yielding more output beams for a 2D grid of multiple beams, as suggested by Maimone (Paragraph [0046]).
Regarding claim 23, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone, discloses the method of claim 22, wherein the first optical coating and the second optical coating are partial reflection coatings, the first optical coating and the second optical coating having one or more different optical characteristics (Chong, Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0085]; Maimone, Fig. 2E, diffraction grating 271, glass plate 240E, Paragraph [0046]: vary diffraction efficiency).
Regarding claim 24, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone, discloses the method of claim 22, further comprising:
forming, based on the second internal beam, a third transmission light beam of the plurality of transmission light beams and a third internal beam by a third portion of the plurality portions of the first facet, the third portion having a third optical coating (Chong, Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0085]; Maimone, Fig. 2E, diffraction grating 271, glass plate 240E, Paragraph [0046]), and
forming, based on the third internal beam, a fourth transmission light beam of the plurality of transmission light beams by a fourth portion of the plurality portions of the first facet, the fourth portion having a fourth optical coating (Chong, Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0085]; Maimone, Fig. 2E, diffraction grating 271, glass plate 240E, Paragraph [0046]).
Regarding claim 25, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone, discloses the method of claim 24, wherein the third optical coating is a partial reflection coating (Chong, Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0085]; Maimone, Fig. 2E, diffraction grating 271, glass plate 240E, Paragraph [0046]: vary diffraction efficiency).
Chong, as modified in view of Maimone, does not teach: and wherein the fourth optical coating is an anti-reflection coating.
However, Maimone teaches the last beam exiting the beam splitter at an AR coated exit location (Fig. 2A, second beam 102, exit location 212, Paragraph [0042])
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the beam splitting optical component disclosed by Chong, as modified in view of Maimone, by adding an AR coated exit on the surface, which is disclosed by Maimone. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to lessen optical losses, as suggested by Maimone (Paragraph [0042]).
Regarding claim 26, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone, discloses the method of claim 24, wherein the third optical coating has one or more optical characteristics that is different from the first optical coating or the second optical coating (Chong, Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0085]; Maimone, Fig. 2E, diffraction grating 271, glass plate 240E, Paragraph [0046]: vary diffraction efficiency).
Claims 4-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chong in view of Maimone in further view of Laycock, US 20170192242 A1 (“Laycock”).
Regarding claim 4, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone, discloses the system of claim 1.
Chong, as modified in view of Maimone, does not teach: wherein the non-zero inter beam angle is formed by configuring the first facet and a second facet of the optical prism-based beam splitter as opposing facets with an angular offset from each other
However, Maimone teaches a waveguide image replicator that receives a light beam and splits the beam into multiple output beams. Maimone specifically teaches a prism waveguide with a diffraction grating on one side of the prism and a rear surface that reflect all internal light (Fig. 2E, waveguide image replicator 200E, diffraction grating 271, glass plate 240E, rear surface 272, Paragraph [0046]). The diffraction efficiency of the diffraction grating is varied to allow multiple formation of uniform beams (Paragraph [0046]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Chong’s wavelength dispersive element by adding a glass plate and varying the diffraction efficiency of the diffraction grating, which is disclosed by Maimone. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to propagate light beams through the glass plate, yielding more output beams for a 2D grid of multiple beams, as suggested by Maimone (Paragraph [0046]).
In addition, Laycock teaches a beamsplitter with a portion where the front and rear planar surfaces extend in a non-parallel arrangement. The angular displacement of the front and rear planar surface of the second portion causes an angular deviation in the outgoing beam. (Fig. 1, second portion 120, front and rear planar surface 121, 122, output beams 20a and 20b, Paragraph [0037], Paragraph [0040]). Laycock also teaches the incident beam of radiation into the beamsplitter being a collimated laser beam, but is silent on a collimation lens (Fig. 1, incident beam 10, Paragraph [0035]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Chong’s wavelength dispersive element by adding a prism behind the dispersive element and offsetting the front and rear surfaces by an angle to cause an angular deviation in the outgoing beams, which is disclosed by Laycock. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to have improved stability and fine control over the angular deviation of beams of radiation, as suggested by Laycock (Paragraph [0048]).
Regarding claim 5, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone and Laycock, discloses the system of claim 4, wherein the first facet is configured to receive the collimated light beam at a beam incident angle, the first facet being disposed with one or more partial reflection coatings (Chong, Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0085]).
Regarding claim 6, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone and Laycock, discloses the system of claim 5, wherein the second facet being disposed with a high reflection coating facilitating reflection of substantially all of one or more internal beams (Maimone, rear surface 272, Paragraph [0046]), the one or more internal beams being formed inside the optical prism-based beam splitter based on the collimated light beam (Maimone, rear surface 272, Paragraph [0046]; Chong, Fig. 9, collimated lens 907, Paragraph [0085]).
Regarding claim 7, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone and Laycock, discloses the system of claim 5, wherein a plurality of portions of the first facet are disposed with a plurality of optical coatings, and wherein at least two of the plurality of optical coatings have different optical characteristics (Chong, Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0085]; Maimone, Fig. 2E, diffraction grating 271, glass plate 240E, Paragraph [0046]).
Regarding claim 8, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone and Laycock, discloses the system of claim 7, wherein the plurality of portions of the first facet comprises consecutive portions, each of the plurality of portions of the first facet being disposed with a respective optical coating configured to facilitate forming the output light beams with substantially equal light intensity (Chong, Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0085]; Maimone, Fig. 2E, diffraction grating 271, glass plate 240E, Paragraph [0046]).
Regarding claim 9, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone and Laycock, discloses the system of claim 4, wherein a portion of the first facet or another facet is disposed with an anti-reflection coating for receiving the collimated light beam (Chong, Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0085]; Maimone, Fig. 2E, diffraction grating 271, glass plate 240E, Paragraph [0046]);
wherein one or more other portions of the first facet are disposed with a high-reflection coating for subsequent reflections of one or more internal beams (Maimone, Fig. 2E, rear surface 272, glass plate 240E, Paragraph [0046]), and
wherein the second facet is disposed with one or more partial reflection coatings facilitating transmission in part, and reflection in part, of the one or more internal beams, the one or more internal beams being formed inside the optical prism-based beam splitter based on the collimated light beam (Chong, Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0085]; Maimone, Fig. 2E, diffraction grating 271, glass plate 240E, Paragraph [0046]).
Regarding claim 10, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone and Laycock, discloses the system of claim 9, wherein a plurality of portions of the second facet are disposed with a plurality of optical coatings, transmission and reflection characteristics of the plurality of optical coatings are configured to form the output light beams with substantially equal light intensity (Chong, Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0085]; Maimone, Fig. 2E, diffraction grating 271, glass plate 240E, Paragraph [0046]: vary diffraction efficiency).
Regarding claim 11, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone and Laycock, discloses the system of claim 9, wherein a plurality of portions of the second facet comprises consecutive portions, each of the plurality of portions of the second facet being disposed with a respective optical coating configured to facilitate forming the output light beams with substantially equal light intensity (Chong, Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0085]; Maimone, Fig. 2E, diffraction grating 271, glass plate 240E, Paragraph [0046]: vary diffraction efficiency).
Regarding claim 12, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone and Laycock, discloses the system of claim 4, wherein a plurality portions of the first facet comprises a first portion having a first optical coating and a second portion having a second optical coating (Chong, Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0085]; Maimone, Fig. 2E, diffraction grating 271, glass plate 240E, Paragraph [0046]: vary diffraction efficiency),
wherein the first optical coating facilitates forming, based on the collimated light beam, a first output light beam of the plurality of output light beams and a first internal beam (Chong, Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0085]; Maimone, Fig. 2E, diffraction grating 271, glass plate 240E, Paragraph [0046]: vary diffraction efficiency), and
wherein the second optical coating facilitates forming, based on the first internal beam, a second output light beam of the plurality of output light beams- (Chong, Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0085]; Maimone, Fig. 2E, diffraction grating 271, glass plate 240E, Paragraph [0046]: vary diffraction efficiency).
Regarding claim 13, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone and Laycock, discloses the system of claim 4, wherein dimensions of a plurality of portions of the first facet are based on one or more of a beam size, an incident beam angle, an inter beam angle, and optical coating characteristics (Chong, Fig. 9, wavelength dispersive element 908, Paragraph [0085]; Maimone, Fig. 2E, diffraction grating 271, glass plate 240E, Paragraph [0046]: vary diffraction efficiency).
Regarding claim 14, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone and Laycock, discloses the system of claim 4.
Chong, as modified in view of Maimone and Laycock: wherein a third facet and a fourth facet of the optical prism-based beam splitter form a chamfered corner.
However, Maimone teaches a waveguide image replicator that has a slanted side surface (Fig. 2B, side surface 291, Paragraph [0043])
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the beam splitter disclosed by Chong, as modified in view of Maimone and Laycock, by adding a slanted side, which is disclosed by Maimone. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to reduce reflection of the incoming beam, as suggested by Maimone (Paragraph [0043]).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chong in view of Maimone in further view of Statz et al., US 8599381 B2 (“Statz”).
Regarding claim 18, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone, discloses the system of claim 1.
Chong, as modified in view of Maimone, does not teach: wherein the two neighboring output light beams of the plurality of output light beams have the non-zero inter beam angle between about 0.5 degrees and 2.5 degrees.
However, Statz teaches a beamsplitter that introduces a deflection angle of 0.25 – 5 degrees between the outgoing light (Fig. 5A, beamsplitter 310, two angularly offset optical beams 315 and 325, Col. 7 lines 50-63).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the wavelength dispersive element disclosed by Chong, as modified in view of Maimone, by adding an angular offset between the outgoing beams, which is disclosed by Statz. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to modify the effective thickness of a single optical element for each beam, as suggested by Statz (Abstract).
Claims 27 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chong in view of Maimone in further view of Kirillov, US 20210103034 A1 (“Kirillov”).
Regarding claim 27, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone, discloses the method of claim 21.
Chong, as modified in view of Maimone, does not teach: steering, by a steering mechanism, the plurality of transmission light beams in one or more directions to a field-of-view (FOV),
and directing, by the steering mechanism, return light formed based on one or more of the plurality of transmission light beams.
However, Kirillov teaches a coaxial LIDAR system where a MEMs mirror directs both the transmitted and reflected light signals (Fig. 2B, MEMs mirror 12, Paragraph [0036])
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Chong and Maimone’s LIDAR system by using the scanning mirror to direct both the transmitted and reflected light, which is disclosed by Kirillov. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to improve dynamic range at short distances, as suggested by Kirillov (Paragraph [0058]).
Regarding claim 28, Chong, as modified in view of Maimone and Kirillov, discloses the method of claim 27, further comprising:
receiving, by a collection lens, the return light (Chong, Fig.9, projection device 950, Paragraph [0086]: projection device 950 may be a lens) directed by the steering mechanism (Kirillov, Fig. 2B, MEMs mirror 12, Paragraph [0036]);
redirecting, by the collection lens, the return light to a plurality of receiver channels optically coupled to the collection lens , wherein each of the receiver channels is optically aligned based on a transmission angle of a corresponding transmission light beam (Chong, Fig. 9, detector 906, Paragraph [0086]); and
delivering, by the plurality of receiver channels, the redirected return light to one or more of a plurality of detector assemblies optically coupled to the plurality of receiver channels (Chong, Fig. 9, detector 906, Paragraph [0086]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yao US 20190257927 A1 discloses a LIDAR system that uses a diffraction grating to split a collimated light beam into multiple beams with a non-zero inter beam angle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RACHEL N NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5405. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 5:30 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, Yuqing Xiao can be reached at (571) 270-3603. 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.
/RACHEL NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/YUQING XIAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights