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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Claims status
In the amendment filed on November 24, 2025, claims 1-7, 10-11, 15 and 17 have been amended. Therefore, claims 1-20 are currently pending for examination.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 7-16 of U.S. Patent No. 10,535,271 (reference application) respectively. Claims 1-15 are generally broader than the respective claims 7-16 of U.S. Patent No. 10,535,2. Broader claims in a later application constitute obvious double patenting of narrow claims in an issued patent. See In re Van Ornum and Stang, 214, USPQ 761, 766, and 767 (CCPA) (the court sustained an obvious double patenting rejection of generic claims in a continuation application over narrower species claims in an issued patent); In re Vogel, 164 USPQ 619, 622, and 623 (CCPA 1970) (generic application claim specifying "meat" is obvious double patenting of narrow patent claim specifying "pork").
Reference application claim 9 corresponds to instant claim 1,
reference application claim 9 corresponds to instant claim 2,
reference application claim 10 corresponds to instant claim 3,
reference application claim 11 corresponds to instant claim 4,
reference application claim 12 corresponds to instant claim 5,
reference application claim 7 corresponds to instant claim 6,
reference application claim 14 corresponds to instant claim 7,
reference application claim 15 corresponds to instant claim 8,
reference application claim 16 corresponds to instant claim 9,
reference application claim 14 corresponds to instant claim 10,
reference application claim 14 corresponds to instant claim 11,
reference application claim 14 corresponds to instant claim 12,
reference application claim 14 corresponds to instant claim 13,
reference application claim 8 corresponds to instant claim 14,
reference application claim 13 corresponds to instant claim 15.
Claim 16 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 10,535,271 (reference application) in view of Williams et al. (Williams: US 2018/0259976 A1).
Regarding Claim 16, claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 10,535,271 does not explicitly disclose wherein the detecting of the one or more objects is performed using a LIDAR sensor of the physical marker.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Williams teaches a boarding zone where passengers may join with a vehicle or leave a vehicle safely (Fig. 10 and Par 265) and a passenger has entered a boarding zone outer geo zone and their presence may be either detected by one or more passenger identification systems or they may announce their presence through interaction with at least one kiosk or other boarding zone passenger management system (Fig. 10 and Par 372) and further teaches wherein the detecting of the one or more objects is performed using a LIDAR sensor of the physical marker (Par 161, area controllers 104 may be connected with one or more sensors or sensor arrays associated with the associated particular geographic or functional area, such as … LIDAR sensors positioned to observe some or all of roadway segment … in order to determine one or more aspects of the roadway segment and/or vehicles travelling on that segment and Par 389, area controllers are part of the boarding zone management systems i.e. of the physical marker).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Williams in order to determine the vehicles travelling (Williams: Par 161).
Claims 17-20 are is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 10,535,271 (reference application) in view of Zhang et al. (Zhang: US 20180286003 A1).
Regarding Claims 17-20, Zhang teaches the claimed subject matter as set forth below in the prior art rejections. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Zhang in order to provide a better user experience (Zhang: para 52).
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 7-12 of U.S. Patent No. 10,854,085 (reference application) respectively. Claims 1-20 are generally broader than the respective claims 7-12 in U.S. Patent No. 10,854,085. Broader claims in a later application constitute obvious double patenting of narrow claims in an issued patent. See In re Van Ornum and Stang, 214, USPQ 761, 766, and 767 (CCPA) (the court sustained an obvious double patenting rejection of generic claims in a continuation application over narrower species claims in an issued patent); In re Vogel, 164 USPQ 619, 622, and 623 (CCPA 1970) (generic application claim specifying "meat" is obvious double patenting of narrow patent claim specifying "pork").
Reference application claim 9 corresponds to instant claim 1,
reference application claim 9 corresponds to instant claim 2,
reference application claim 10 corresponds to instant claim 4,
reference application claim 7 corresponds to instant claim 6,
reference application claim 12 corresponds to instant claim 7,
reference application claim 12 corresponds to instant claim 8,
reference application claim 12 corresponds to instant claim 9,
reference application claim 12 corresponds to instant claim 10,
reference application claim 12 corresponds to instant claim 11,
reference application claim 12 corresponds to instant claim 12,
reference application claim 12 corresponds to instant claim 13,
reference application claim 8 corresponds to instant claim 14,
reference application claim 11 corresponds to instant claim 15.
Claim 3 is are is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 10,854,085 (reference application) in view of Bae et al. (Bae: KR20100066328A, see the attached machine translation)
Regarding Claim 3, Bae teaches the claimed subject matter as set forth below in the prior art rejections. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Bae in order to provide a better user experience (Bae: page 8 lines 494-495; allowing passengers to check when and which vehicle will arrive and whether the conveniences they want are available).
Claim 16 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 10,854,085 (reference application) in view of Williams et al. (Williams: US 2018/0259976 A1).
Regarding Claim 16, claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 10,854,085 does not explicitly disclose wherein the detecting of the one or more objects is performed using a LIDAR sensor of the physical marker.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Williams teaches a boarding zone where passengers may join with a vehicle or leave a vehicle safely (Fig. 10 and Par 265) and a passenger has entered a boarding zone outer geo zone and their presence may be either detected by one or more passenger identification systems or they may announce their presence through interaction with at least one kiosk or other boarding zone passenger management system (Fig. 10 and Par 372) and further teaches wherein the detecting of the one or more objects is performed using a LIDAR sensor of the physical marker (Par 161, area controllers 104 may be connected with one or more sensors or sensor arrays associated with the associated particular geographic or functional area, such as … LIDAR sensors positioned to observe some or all of roadway segment … in order to determine one or more aspects of the roadway segment and/or vehicles travelling on that segment and Par 389, area controllers are part of the boarding zone management systems i.e. of the physical marker).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Williams in order to determine the vehicles travelling (Williams: Par 161).
Claims 5 and 17-20 are is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 10,854,085 (reference application) in view of Zhang et al. (Zhang: US 20180286003 A1).
Regarding Claims 5 and 17-20, Zhang teaches the claimed subject matter as set forth below in the prior art rejections. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Zhang in order to provide a better user experience (Zhang: para 52).
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 3, 5 and 17-20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 3, 5, 17 and 18 recite “the stopping area” without proper antecedent basis in the claims.
Claims 19-20 are also rejected since they depend from the rejected claim 18.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-5, 14 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bae et al. (Bae: KR20100066328A, see the attached machine translation) in view of Zhang et al. (Zhang: US 20180286003 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Bae teaches a method of facilitating passenger trips for vehicles, the method comprising:
receiving, by one or more processors of a physical marker, an assignment indication indicating that a passenger is assigned to the physical marker for a trip (Fig. 1, 101 and page 3 lines 139-144; a relay device (101) including a short-range communication means installed on a platform, which receives a vehicle calling request and information about the individual passenger when a passenger requests to call a vehicle from a portable terminal (100) carried by the passenger i.e. The passenger is transmitting to the relay device/marker that he/she has assigned himself/herself to this particular relay to request to the call center to send a vehicle for his/her trip);
detecting, by the one or more processors, one or more objects in an environment of the physical marker, the one or more objects including one or more vehicles or pedestrians (Page 5 lines 200-210; short-range communication means installed in the relay device (101) uses the USN method ... The USN method is a network configured to wirelessly collect information detected by various sensors. … since it is necessary to recognize that a passenger is making a call request, a USN method is used to recognize the passenger's call request signal (i.e., communicate with a portable terminal (100)). And Page 6 lines 312-318; Since a short-range communication means is used, the distance difference between the passenger and the platform will be included in the line of sight, and therefore, instead of measuring GPS information for the portable terminal (100) of a moving passenger and utilizing it as location information, the location information of the platform, which is fixed and whose location can be fixedly stored in the control center (102), can be transmitted instead. i.e. the relay station detects/recognizes the requesting passenger in line of sight and a moving passenger is a pedestrian); and
sending, by the one or more processors, information including the detected one or more objects to a remote dispatching server computing device in order to enable the remote dispatching server computing device to dispatch one of the autonomous vehicles for the trip (Fig. 1, control center 102 and Fig. 3, S2 and page 3 lines 144-154: retransmits the request, and when dispatching a vehicle is completed and vehicle information and a result of the call request are received, transmits the dispatch completion information and vehicle information to the portable terminal (100) carried by the passenger who made the vehicle calling request. Also included is a control center (102) that receives a vehicle call request of a passenger and information about an individual passenger transmitted from a relay device (101), transmits the passenger information and the vehicle call request of the passenger to a vehicle and Fig. 2 and Page 6 lines 318-Page 7 lines1 ).
Bae does not explicitly disclose the vehicles dispatched for trips are autonomous.
However, the preceding limitations are known in the art of transportation services. Zhang teaches a method for generating status information associated with a transportation service request (para 2) and further teaches the vehicles dispatched for trips are autonomous (para 23; The service vehicles can include taxi cars and private cars which have been connected to the online hailing platform. It is contemplated that the service vehicles can also be autonomous vehicles. ).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide autonomous vehicles in order to reduce the cost for a human driver for a ride service.
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Bae and Zhang teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising, sending, by the one or more processors, the information to an autonomous vehicle assigned to the passenger (Bae: page 4 lines 205-210: . When a vehicle summons request is received, information about the passenger is transmitted, which may include information about the passenger's location or special characteristics.).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Bae and Zhang teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the information indicates that the stopping area is available for an autonomous vehicle (Bae: page 8 lines 469-475: location information of a platform that is fixed and whose location can be fixedly stored in the control center (102) can be transmitted).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Bae and Zhang teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising providing, by the one or more processors, one or both of a visual or an audible notification at the physical marker indicating the information (Bae: page 4 lines 177-181: The above-mentioned dedicated portable calling device has only a display section and a call button to display vehicle information corresponding to the call progress status and call result, etc., so that passengers can easily obtain call and result information, and thus can provide a convenient service and Zhang: para 32, The status information can be displayed to the passengers, allowing the passengers to have enough information to assess the current traffic condition. And Zhang, para 35, audio signal ).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Bae and Zhang teaches the method of claim 4, wherein the information includes an autonomous vehicle approaching the stopping area (Zhang: para 32, The status information can be displayed to the passengers, allowing the passengers to have enough information to assess the current traffic condition and para 34, the estimated time determined by status determination unit 108 may be directly transmitted to the passenger. In some embodiments, status determination unit 108 can determine a range that the estimated time belongs to and determine a waiting time to be displayed to a passenger according to the range. For example, as for an estimated waiting time of 1 minute 30 seconds, status determination unit 108 can determine the estimated waiting time belongs to a range of “1-2 minutes,” ).
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of Bae and Zhang teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising sending data generated by one or more sensors of the physical marker to an autonomous vehicle (Bae: page 3 lines 144-154: Also included is a control center (102) that receives a vehicle call request of a passenger and information about an individual passenger transmitted from a relay device (101), transmits the passenger information and the vehicle call request of the passenger to a vehicle and page 5 lines 199-205; The short-range communication means installed in the relay device (101) uses the USN method in the embodiment of the present invention, as mentioned above. The USN method is a network configured to wirelessly collect information detected by various sensors. The types of sensors can be diverse, including temperature, acceleration, location information, pressure, fingerprints, and gas).
Regarding Claim 17, the combination of Bae and Zhang teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising using the information to arrange a queue of the autonomous vehicles without requiring the autonomous vehicles to form a line at the stopping area (Zhang: Fig. 3 and para 29, available vehicles form a vehicle queue 302. Queue 300 and vehicle queue 302 may be first in first out (FIFO). That is, a vehicle in queue 302 (e.g., vehicle 2042) will be assigned to passenger 2022 first. See also para 33-34, the wait times indicates that the queue of available vehicles is remote i.e. not at the stopping area).
Regarding Claim 18, the combination of Bae and Zhang teaches the method of claim 17, wherein arranging the queue includes sending another indication to a given one of the autonomous vehicle when that given one should come and stop at the stopping area (Zhang: para 29, Queue 300 and vehicle queue 302 may be first in first out (FIFO). That is, a vehicle in queue 302 (e.g., vehicle 2042) will be assigned to passenger 2022 first. And Bae: page 6 lines 293-306; the vehicle (at least one of 103a, 103b, 103c) that has received the vehicle call request and passenger information and page 7 lines 405-408; at the same time, the control center (102) performs steps (S8, S9) of dispatching and issuing commands to one vehicle (one of 103a, 103b, 103c) among the dispatch approved vehicles (one or more of 103a, 103b, 103c) to be dispatched ).
Regarding Claim 19, the combination of Bae and Zhang teaches the method of claim 18, wherein the other indication is sent to the given one based on a location of the given one relative to the physical marker (Zhang: para 24, Passengers 2022, 2024, 2026, and 2028 within area 200 also have requested transportation service to device 100 but have not assigned a vehicle yet. Communication interface 102 of device 100 further receives vehicle information of service vehicles 204, 2042, 2044, and 2046, which are operating in area 200. And Bae: Page 6 lines 303-315; the vehicle (at least one of 103a, 103b, 103c) that has received the vehicle call request and passenger information determines whether to approve the vehicle call request based on the passenger information and responds to the control center (102). In another embodiment of the present invention, the relay device (101) may transmit the location information of the platform where the relay device is installed to the control center (102) instead of the location information of the passenger among the passenger information mentioned above. ).
Regarding Claim 20, the combination of Bae and Zhang teaches the method of claim 18, wherein the other indication is sent to the given one based on when the given one was assigned to a particular passenger (Zhang: para 29, Queue 300 and vehicle queue 302 may be first in first out (FIFO). That is, a vehicle in queue 302 (e.g., vehicle 2042) will be assigned to passenger 2022 first And Bae: page 6 lines 293-306; the vehicle (at least one of 103a, 103b, 103c) that has received the vehicle call request and passenger information and page 7 lines 405-408; at the same time, the control center (102) performs steps (S8, S9) of dispatching and issuing commands to one vehicle (one of 103a, 103b, 103c) among the dispatch approved vehicles (one or more of 103a, 103b, 103c) to be dispatched).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bae in view of Zhang further in view of Schmier et al. (Schmier: US 2002/0099500A1).
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of Bae and Zhang teaches the method of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose receiving location information indicating a location of an autonomous vehicle assigned to a user of a client computing device; and providing one or both of a visual or an audible notification at the physical marker indicating a status of the autonomous vehicle based on the received location information.
However, Schmier teaches a system for notifying passengers waiting for vehicles of the status of the vehicles, including the arrival times of vehicles at stops (abstract) and further teaches receiving location information indicating a location of an vehicle assigned to a user of a client computing device (Par 66-67 and Par 21); and providing one or both of a visual or an audible notification at the physical marker indicating a status of the vehicle based on the received location information (Fig. 1, display 30 at stop 20 and Par 68, Current transit data table of Predicted Arrival Times and Par 69-71).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Schmier in order to notifying a passenger waiting for a vehicle of the arrival time of the vehicle at a transportation stop.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bae in view of Zhang further in view of Williams et al. (Williams: US 2018/0259976 A1).
Regarding Claim 16, the combination of Bae and Zhang teaches the method of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the detecting of the one or more objects is performed using a LIDAR sensor of the physical marker.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Williams teaches a boarding zone where passengers may join with a vehicle or leave a vehicle safely (Fig. 10 and Par 265) and a passenger has entered a boarding zone outer geo zone and their presence may be either detected by one or more passenger identification systems or they may announce their presence through interaction with at least one kiosk or other boarding zone passenger management system (Fig. 10 and Par 372) and further teaches wherein the detecting of the one or more objects is performed using a LIDAR sensor of the physical marker (Par 161, area controllers 104 may be connected with one or more sensors or sensor arrays associated with the associated particular geographic or functional area, such as … LIDAR sensors positioned to observe some or all of roadway segment … in order to determine one or more aspects of the roadway segment and/or vehicles travelling on that segment and Par 389, area controllers are part of the boarding zone management systems i.e. of the physical marker).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Williams in order to determine the vehicles travelling (Williams: Par 161).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on November 24, 2025 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of new grounds of rejections.
Bae teaches the amended limitation detecting, by the one or more processors, one or more objects in an environment of the physical marker, the one or more objects including one or more vehicles or pedestrians (Page 5 lines 200-210; short-range communication means installed in the relay device (101) uses the USN method ... The USN method is a network configured to wirelessly collect information detected by various sensors. … since it is necessary to recognize that a passenger is making a call request, a USN method is used to recognize the passenger's call request signal (i.e., communicate with a portable terminal (100)). And Page 6 lines 312-318; Since a short-range communication means is used, the distance difference between the passenger and the platform will be included in the line of sight, and therefore, instead of measuring GPS information for the portable terminal (100) of a moving passenger and utilizing it as location information, the location information of the platform, which is fixed and whose location can be fixedly stored in the control center (102), can be transmitted instead. i.e. the relay station detects/recognizes the requesting passenger in line of sight and a moving passenger is a pedestrian);
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nay Tun whose telephone number is (571)270-7939. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thurs from 9:00-5:00.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's Supervisor, Steven Lim can be reached on (571) 270-1210. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Nay Tun/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2688