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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 06/26/2026 has been entered. Claims 21-42 are pending in this application.
Claims 21, 26, 30, and 38 have been amended. Claims 29 and 39 are cancelled. Claim 42 is new.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 21, 30, and 38 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 (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.
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 21-23, 28, 30-33, 35, and 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peter L. Chu (US 20120320143 A1) (hereinafter Chu) in view of Michael James Taylor (US 7113201 B1) (hereinafter Taylor):
Regarding claim 21, Chu teaches a method comprising ([0006] teaches a method for automated video conferencing):
capturing, by a primary camera in an environment, a video stream of the environment ([0033], and [0044] teach a camera capturing a video stream of the video conference environment);
capturing, in the environment by a plurality of microphones, sound from a speaker ([0033]- [0034] teach a plurality of microphones capturing audio of the speaking participant in the environment);
determining, by a processing unit from the sound captured by the plurality of microphones, direction information that indicates a position of the speaker in the environment ([0035], [0040], and [0075] teach the processing unit determining from the microphone audio the direction and location of the speaking participant);
selecting, by the processing unit based on the pose information ([0031], [0047], and [0070] teach the control module selecting the camera based on how the speaking participant is facing) and the direction information, a secondary camera in the environment ([0026], [0072], and [0069] teach incorporating the audio derived speaker information into the camera selection and selecting another of the multiple cameras in the room); and
capturing, by the secondary camera, video of the environment for transmission to a far end ([0046], and [0058] teach the captured video from the selected camera being transmitted as output to the far-end).
Chu does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Taylor teaches determining, by the processing unit from an image in the video stream, a facial pose of the speaker ([Col 3: lines 6- 10], [Col 6: lines 61- 67]- [Col 7: lines 1- 2], and [Col 7: lines 28- 33] teach the processing unit determining the three dimensional orientation of the participant's head from a frame of the camera's video), based on the direction information ([Col 9: lines 36- 39], [Col 9: lines 42- 47], [Col 9: lines 51- 55], and [Col 19: lines 26- 33] teach determining the head orientation of only the speaking participant identified from the sound direction); and
determining, by the processing unit from the facial pose, pose information that indicates a direction in which the speaker is looking ([Col 8: lines 9- 14], [Col 8: lines 26- 30], and [Col 8: lines 33- 37] teach deriving from the head orientation a viewing ray defining where the participant is looking).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the Videoconference camera system and method as disclosed by Chu to add the teachings of Taylor as disclosed above to improve the camera selection for the best view of the speaker. (Taylor [Col 10: lines 61- 63]).
Regarding claim 22, Chu in view of Taylor teach the method of claim 21. Chu further teaches wherein the environment is a room ([0026] teaches the video conference environment being a video conference room).
Regarding claim 23, Chu in view of Taylor teach the method of claim 21. Chu further teaches selecting in the environment, by the processing unit, a camera that provides a view of the face of the speaker ([0046], and [0067] teach the control module selecting the camera directed at and most likely framing the face of the current speaking participant).
Regarding claim 28, Chu in view of Taylor teach the method of claim 21. Chu further teaches performing, by the processing unit on audio from each microphone in the plurality of microphones, sound source localization ([0051], [0035], and [0075] teach processing the audio of each of the microphones to determine the location and direction of the speaking participant).
Chu does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Taylor teaches to determine a particular individual who is speaking ([Col 9: lines 42- 54] teach determining which particular participant is the speaker from the direction from which the speech is coming).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the Videoconference camera system and method as disclosed by Chu to add the teachings of Taylor as disclosed above to improve the camera selection for the best view of the speaker. (Taylor [Col 10: lines 61- 63]).
Regarding claim 30, Chu teaches a system comprising ([0006] teaches a video conferencing apparatus for automated video conferencing):
a plurality of cameras in an environment, ([0026] teaches multiple cameras disposed about the room) one of the cameras being a primary camera to capture a video stream of the environment ([0033], and [0044] teach a camera capturing a video stream of the video conference environment);
a plurality of microphones in the environment, the microphones are to capture sound in the environment ([0033], and [0034] teach a plurality of microphones capturing audio in the video conference environment); and
a processing unit to ([0044] teaches a processing unit processing the captured audio and video):
determine, in response to the sound from a speaker in the environment, direction information that indicates a position of the speaker in the environment ([0035], [0075], and [0040] teach determining from the microphone audio the direction and location of the speaker),
select, from the plurality of cameras based on a score calculated using the pose information ([0066], [0067], and [0070] teach calculating a face weighting for each camera reflecting the direction the speaker is facing and selecting the camera by comparing the weightings) the direction information ([0069], and [0072] teach incorporating the audio derived indication of the speaking participant into the comparison used for camera selection), a secondary camera to capture video of the environment for transmission to a far end ([0046], and [0058] teach the captured video from the selected camera being transmitted as output to the far-end).
Chu does not explicitly teach the following limitations; However, in an analogous art, Taylor teaches determine, from an image in the video stream, a facial pose of the speaker ([Col 6: lines 61- 67]- [Col 7: lines 1- 2], [Col 3: lines 6- 9], and [Col 19: lines 31- 33] teach determining from a frame of the camera image data the three dimensional orientation of the speaking participant's head), determine, from the facial pose, pose information that indicates a direction in which the speaker is looking ([Col 8: lines 33- 36], [Col 8: lines 26- 30], and [Col 8: lines 9- 12] teach deriving from the head orientation of viewing redefining where the participant is looking), and
locations of each camera of the plurality of secondary cameras ([Col 11: lines 3- 7], [Col 5: lines 27- 32], [Col 12: lines 13- 20], and [Col 13: lines 20- 25] teach reading the calibrated three dimensional position of each camera and using it to calculate a view quality value for each camera).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the Videoconference camera system and method as disclosed by Chu to add the teachings of Taylor as disclosed above to improve the camera selection for the best view of the speaker. (Taylor [Col 10: lines 61- 63]).
Regarding claim 31, Chu in view of Taylor teach the system of claim 30. Chu further teaches wherein the environment is a room ([0026] teaches the video conference environment being a video conference room).
Regarding claim 32, Chu in view of Taylor teach the system of claim 30. Chu further teaches wherein the primary camera comprises the processing unit ([0035], and [0082] teach the audio/ video processing controllers being incorporated into the camera units or handled locally by the camera module).
Regarding claim 33, Chu in view of Taylor teach the system of claim 30. Chu further teaches wherein the processing unit is to select a camera in the environment that provides a view of a face of the speaker ([0046], and [0067] teach the control module selecting the camera directed at and most likely framing the face of the current speaker).
Regarding claim 35, Chu in view of Taylor teach the system of claim 30. Chu further teaches wherein the processing unit is to perform, on audio from each microphone of the plurality of microphones, sound source localization ([0035], [0051], and [0075] teach processing the audio of each of the microphones to determine the location and direction of the speaking participant),
Chu does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Taylor teaches to determine a particular individual who is speaking ([Col 9: lines 42- 55] teach determining which particular participant is the speaker from the direction from which the speech is coming).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the Videoconference camera system and method as disclosed by Chu to add the teachings of Taylor as disclosed above to improve the camera selection for the best view of the speaker. (Taylor [Col 10: lines 61- 63]).
Regarding claim 41, Chu in view of Taylor teach the method of claim 21. Chu further teaches wherein an additional secondary camera is physically closer to the speaker as compared to the secondary camera ([0074] teaches another one of the cameras being closer to the speaker than the camera selected to frame that participant).
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peter L. Chu (US 20120320143 A1) (hereinafter Chu) in view of Michael James Taylor (US 7113201 B1) (hereinafter Taylor) and further in view of Jinwei Feng (US 20110285809 A1) (hereinafter Feng):
Regarding claim 24, Chu in view of Taylor teach the method of claim 2; however, do not explicitly teach selecting in the environment, by the processing unit in an absence of the sound, a camera that provides facial views of attendees in the environment.
However, in an analogous art, Feng teaches selecting in the environment, by the processing unit in an absence of the sound, a camera ([0043], and [0101] teach the endpoint selecting the room view camera when no participant is speaking) that provides facial views of attendees in the environment ([0039], [0143], and [0165] teach the room view camera including all participants in facial recognition being used to frame the participants).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the Videoconference camera system and method as disclosed by Chu in view of Taylor to further add the teachings of Feng as disclosed above to improve speaker detection and framing (Feng [0185]).
Claims 25, and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peter L. Chu (US 20120320143 A1) (hereinafter Chu) in view of Michael James Taylor (US 7113201 B1) (hereinafter Taylor) and further in view of Andrew F. Kurtz (US 20080297587 A1) (hereinafter Kurtz):
Regarding claim 25, Chu in view of Taylor teaches the method of claim 21; however, do not explicitly teach selecting, by the processing unit, the secondary camera in an absence of attendees in the environment.
However, in an analogous art, Kurtz teaches selecting, by the processing unit, the secondary camera ([0049], and [0075] teach selecting the WFOV or NFOV image capture device for the subsequent video capture) in an absence of attendees in the environment ([0075] teaches the camera capture change being made when the only local user leaves the local environment).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the Videoconference camera system and method as disclosed by Chu in view of Taylor to further add the teachings of Kurtz as disclosed above to improve selection of the cameras based on the presence or absence of attendees in the environment (Kurtz [0075]).
Regarding claim 34, Chu in view of Taylor teaches the system of claim 30; however, do not explicitly teach wherein the processing unit is to select, in an absence of absence of attendees in the environment, the secondary camera.
However, in an analogous art, Kurtz teaches wherein the processing unit is to select ([0075], and [0049] teach the device selecting the WFOV or NFOV image capture device for the subsequent video capture), in an absence of absence of attendees in the environment ([0075] teaches the camera capture change being made when the only local user leaves the local environment), the secondary camera ([0075], and [0049] teach the selected image capture device being one of the separate WFOV and NFOV image capture devices).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the Videoconference camera system and method as disclosed by Chu in view of Taylor to further add the teachings of Kurtz as disclosed above to improve selection of the cameras based on the presence or absence of attendees in the environment (Kurtz [0075]).
Claims 26-27, and 36-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peter L. Chu (US 20120320143 A1) (hereinafter Chu) in view of Michael James Taylor (US 7113201 B1) (hereinafter Taylor) and further in view of Xing Wang (US 20190026538 A1) (hereinafter Wang):
Regarding claim 26, Chu in view of Taylor teaches the method of claim 21. Chu further teaches implementing, by the primary camera an image in the video stream to be processed ([0061] teaches the camera video signals being input for face recognition processing).
Chu does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Wang teaches by a machine learning model ([0151], and [0187] teach a multi-task CNN processing the captured video images) to generate a plurality of facial keypoints ([0131], and [0151] teach the CNN outputting the locations of five facial landmark points of the detected face) for individual face and pose detection ([0085], [0009], and [0151] teach the facial landmark locations being used to detect each face and decide the pose of each face).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the Videoconference camera system and method as disclosed by Chu in view of Taylor to further add the teachings of Wang as disclosed above to improve face detection efficiency and performance (Wang [0063]).
Regarding claim 27, Chu in view of Taylor teaches the method of claim 21. Chu further teaches implementing, by the secondary camera ([0061] teaches the video signals from each of the where is being input for face recognition processing).
Chu does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Wang teaches for individual face and pose detection, machine learning based on neural networks ([0151], [0003], and [0187] teach a convolutional neural network performing joint face detection and head-pose estimation on the captured video images).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the Videoconference camera system and method as disclosed by Chu in view of Taylor to further add the teachings of Wang as disclosed above to improve face detection efficiency and performance (Wang [0063]).
Regarding claim 36, Chu in view of Taylor teaches the system of claim 30. Chu further teaches wherein the primary camera is to implement ([0061], and [0035] teach the camera video signals being processed for face recognition by controllers that may be incorporated into the camera units).
Chu does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Wang teaches for individual face and pose detection, machine learning based on neural networks ([0003], [0151], and [0187] teach a convolutional neural network performing joint face detection and head pose estimation on the captured video images).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the Videoconference camera system and method as disclosed by Chu in view of Taylor to further add the teachings of Wang as disclosed above to improve face detection efficiency and performance (Wang [0063]).
Regarding claim 37, Chu in view of Taylor teaches the system of claim 30. Chu further teaches wherein the secondary camera is to implement ([0035], and [0061] teach the video signals from each of the cameras being processed for face recognition by controllers that may be incorporated into the camera units).
Chu does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Wang teaches for individual face and pose detection, machine learning based on neural networks ([0003], [0151], and [0187] teach a convolutional neural network performing joint face detection and head pose estimation on the captured video images).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the Videoconference camera system and method as disclosed by Chu in view of Taylor to further add the teachings of Wang as disclosed above to improve face detection efficiency and performance (Wang [0063]).
Regarding claim 38, Chu teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that, when executed by a processing unit, cause the processing unit to ([0006], and [0091] teaches a non-transitory programmable storage device storing program instructions executed by a programmable control device to perform the process steps):
determine, from sound captured in an environment by a plurality of microphones, direction information that indicates a position of a speaker in the environment ([0035]- [0034], and [0075] teach determining from the audio picked up by the plural microphones the direction and location of the speaking participant);
select from a plurality of cameras, based on a score calculated using the pose information, ([0066]- [0067], and [0070] teach calculating a face weightings for each camera reflecting the direction the speaker is facing and selecting the camera by comparing the weightings) the direction information ([0069], and [0072] teach incorporating the audio derived indication of the speaking participant into the comparison used for camera selection), a secondary camera for transmitting video of the environment for to a far end ([0046], and [0058] teach the captured video from the selected camera being transmitted as output to the far- end).
Chu does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Taylor teaches determine, from an image in a video stream of the environment captured by a primary camera, a facial pose of a speaker in the environment ([Col 6: lines 61- 67]- [Col 7: lines 1- 2], [Col 3: lines 6- 9], and [Col 19: lines 31- 33] teach determining from a frame of the camera image data the three dimensional orientation of the speaking participant's head)) to a region of the image corresponding to the speaker as identified using the direction information ([Col 9: lines 42- 48], [Col 19: lines 26- 32], and [Col 6: lines 63- 67] - [Col 7: lines 1- 2] teach identifying the speaking participant from the speech direction and processing the image data of only the speaking participant's head);
determine, from the facial pose, pose information that indicates a direction in which the speaker is looking ([Col 8: lines 33- 36], [Col 8: lines 26- 30], and [Col 8: lines 9- 12] teach deriving from the head orientation of viewing redefining where the participant is looking); and
locations of each camera of the plurality of secondary cameras, ([Col 11: lines 3- 7], [Col 5: lines 27- 32], [Col 12: lines 13- 20], and [Col 13: lines 20- 25] teach reading the calibrated three dimensional position of each camera and using it to calculate a view quality value for each camera).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the Videoconference camera system and method as disclosed by Chu to add the teachings of Taylor as disclosed above to improve the camera selection for the best view of the speaker. (Taylor [Col 10: lines 61- 63]).
Taylor does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Wang teaches by applying a machine learning model ([0003], [0014], and [0187] teach generating head -pose estimations by applying A convolutional neural network machine learning model to the image data).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the Videoconference camera system and method as disclosed by Chu in view of Taylor to further add the teachings of Wang as disclosed above to improve face detection efficiency and performance (Wang [0063]).
Claim 40 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peter L. Chu (US 20120320143 A1) (hereinafter Chu) in view of Michael James Taylor (US 7113201 B1) (hereinafter Taylor) and further in view of Josh Watson (US 20120293606 A1) (hereinafter Watson):
Regarding claim 40, Chu in view of Taylor teach the method of claim 21. Taylor further teaches detecting, by the processing unit, a plurality of faces in the image in the video stream ([Col 3: lines 6- 9], [Col 6: lines 63- 67], and [Col 4: lines 49- 50] teach locating the head features of each of the participants in the camera image data);
determining, by the processing unit, the speaker using the direction information and the detected faces ([Col 9: lines 42- 55] teach determining the speaker from the speech direction and the positions of the participant's heads).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the Videoconference camera system and method as disclosed by Chu to add the teachings of Taylor as disclosed above to improve the camera selection for the best view of the speaker. (Taylor [Col 10: lines 61- 63]).
Taylor does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Watson teaches wherein a field of view (FOV) of the primary camera includes the secondary camera ([0034]- [0036] teach a 360° camera providing a panoramic view of the whole room in which the other cameras are located)
detecting, by the processing unit, a visibility of the speaker in the video of the environment ([0029], [0038], and [0050] teach determining which cameras can see the active speaker and whether the view is unobstructed); and
in response to the visibility of the speaker being adequate, transmitting the video of the environment to the far end ([0034], [0038], and [0051] teach selecting the camera that can see the event for the remote feed to remote participants).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the Videoconference camera system and method as disclosed by Chu in view of Taylor to further add the teachings of Watson as disclosed above to improve the selection of the optimal view for remote participants (Watson [0012]).
Claim 42 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Peter L. Chu (US 20120320143 A1) (hereinafter Chu) in view of Michael James Taylor (US 7113201 B1) (hereinafter Taylor) in view of Xing Wang (US 20190026538 A1) (hereinafter Wang), and further in view of John Noble (US 20190164310 A1) (hereinafter Noble):
Regarding claim 42, Chu in view of Taylor and Wang teach the non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 38. Chu further teaches wherein the instructions further cause the processing unit to ([0091] teaches the process steps being performed by a programmable control device executing stored instructions):
determine, from sound captured in an environment by the plurality of microphones of the primary camera ([0034], and [0072] teach the microphone array on the camera capturing the audio used to determine which person is speaking);
determine for each secondary camera of the plurality of cameras a score ([0066], and [0061] teach calculating a face waiting for each of the cameras); and
select the secondary camera as being the camera having the highest score. ([0067], and [0070] teach selecting the camera whose face waiting indicates the highest good).
Taylor further teaches wherein the pose information is first pose information ([Col 8: lines 33- 36] teaches the viewing ray derived from the head orientation as the pose information);
determine, using the primary camera, a plurality of faces in the image from the video stream ([Col 3: lines 6- 9], [Col 6: lines 62- 66], and [Col 4: lines 49- 20] teach locating the head features of each of the participants in the camera image data);
the direction information that identifies the speaker among the plurality of faces in the image of the video stream ([Col 9: lines 42- 55] teach identifying the speaker from the speech direction among the participants heads in the image frame).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the Videoconference camera system and method as disclosed by Chu to add the teachings of Taylor as disclosed above to improve the camera selection for the best view of the speaker. (Taylor [Col 10: lines 61- 63]).
Taylor does not explicitly teach the following limitations; however, in an analogous art, Noble teaches determine, using the primary camera, locations of a plurality of secondary cameras in the environment ([0065], [0081], and [0018] teach capturing an image of the scene including each camera and performing shape recognition on the image to automatically recognize the position of each camera relative to one of the cameras).
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the Videoconference camera system and method as disclosed by Chu in view of Taylor and Wang to further add the teachings of Noble as disclosed above to improve the efficiency and accuracy of determining relative position and orientation of cameras in a multi-camera system (Noble [0090]).
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 MAHMOUD KAMAL ABOUZAHRA whose telephone number is (703)756-1694. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM.
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, Jamie Atala can be reached at (571) 272-7384. 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.
/MAHMOUD KAMAL ABOUZAHRA/Examiner, Art Unit 2486
/JAMIE J ATALA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2486
Prosecution Insights