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 .
This office action is in response to amendments filed September 23, 2025.
Claims 1, 3, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and 24 have been amended.
Claim 13 has been canceled.
Claim 25 has been added.
Claims 1-8, 10-12, 14, 16-20, and 23-25 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-8, 10-12, 14, 16-20, and 23-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 1, 14, and 24, the claims recite “processing multiple images to create a digital model of the chest asymmetry” and “determining using the digital model of the chest asymmetry and by the computing system a differential digital model”; however, creating a model of chest asymmetry and using the created model of chest asymmetry to determine a differential model is not supported by the instant specification. Instead, the instant specification supports processing multiple images to create a digital model of a subject (i.e., not a model of chest asymmetry) and determining using the created model a differential model (i.e., a model of chest asymmetry) “FIG. 5 is an example flow diagram illustrating a process for image processing in which the digital model is created ... The user device (or a networked computer system) determines a digital model from the images captured by the camera device (in box 502) ... The determination of asymmetries present in the digital model results in a differential digital model (in box 514)” (page 9 lines 28-29, page 10 lines 4-5, and page 11 lines 27-28). As such, the claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
Regarding claims 2-8, 10-12, 16-20, 23, and 25, the claims depend on independent claims 1, 14, and 24, and do not address written description issue presented the parent claims. As such, the claims are similarly rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
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 1-8, 10-12, 14, 16-20, and 23-25 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.
Regarding claims 1, 14, and 24, the claims recite “processing multiple images to create a digital model of the chest asymmetry” and “determining using the digital model of the chest asymmetry and by the computing system a differential digital model”; however, as noted above creating a model of chest asymmetry and using the created model of chest asymmetry to determine a differential model is not supported by the instant specification. Instead, the instant specification supports processing multiple images to create a digital model of a subject (i.e., not a model of chest asymmetry) and determining using the created model a differential model (i.e., a model of chest asymmetry) “FIG. 5 is an example flow diagram illustrating a process for image processing in which the digital model is created ... The user device (or a networked computer system) determines a digital model from the images captured by the camera device (in box 502) ... The determination of asymmetries present in the digital model results in a differential digital model (in box 514)” (page 9 lines 28-29, page 10 lines 4-5, and page 11 lines 27-28). It is unclear if the claims should be interpreted as written or as supported by the instant specification. As such, the claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite. For the purposes of examination the limitation is interpreted as “processing multiple images to create a digital model of the subject” and “determining using the digital model and by the computing system a differential digital model”.
Regarding claims 2-8, 10-12, 16-20, 23, and 25, the claims depend on independent claims 1, 14, and 24, and do not address indefiniteness presented the parent claims. As such, the claims are similarly rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-6, 10-12, 14, 16-20, and 23-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aggarwal et al. (US Publication 20170190121A1) in further view of Trangmar et al. (US Publication 20200060356A1) and Eaton et al. (US Publication 20030208269A1).
Regarding claim 1, Aggarwal teaches a method comprising:
receiving, by a computing system, multiple digital images of … a subject … wherein each digital image of the multiple digital images is separated by a time interval from a sequential digital image of the multiple digital images (FIG. 3 is a flowchart illustrating a process for acquiring images of the user ... In step 308, the mobile device camera captures body part image data ... In step 314, the application software determines if more images are required ... the user is once again expected to orient the mobile device correctly to capture an acceptable image … FIG. 10 is a flowchart illustrating a process for API access at a number of steps in wearable generation ... In step 1002, the system obtains image or video data of a part of a living body ... step 1002 refers to obtaining the video or images through mobile application software 42 ... The mobile application software 42 has an ... connection to the processing server 24)([0039], [0041], [0043], [0080], and [0082]; Figure 3 – an exemplary embodiment of capturing multiple images in sequential order is shown. The examiner notes there are processing steps (e.g., providing instructions) between capturing of sequential images; consequently, images are separated by a time interval);
processing, by the computing system, the multiple digital images to create a digital model … (In step 1004, the processing server 24 uses the input ... to generate a digital body model)([0084]); and
creating, based on the model and using an additive manufacturing process, one or more components of a garment for the subject … (In step 1008, the 3D wearable model is transmitted to a 3D printer 26 for printing)([0089]).
Aggarwal differs from the claim in that Aggarwal fails to teach the images received are of a torso of the subject that has a chest asymmetry and creating components to reduce an appearance of the chest asymmetry. However, receiving images of a torso of a subject that has a chest asymmetry and creating components to reduce an appearance of the chest asymmetry is taught by Trangmar (Customized volumetric cups are also contemplated ... Such customized sizing may be useful for users having anatomical variances or irregularities ... a user may have their anatomy scanned (510) ... A digital profile of a user may then be rendered (625) … a digital profile of a breast may be of a breast removed by a mastectomy procedure … digital profile may be utilized … to produce a restorative volume piece (e.g., prosthetic) or pieces (627), which may be manufactured to fill the negative volume ... Image capture of the particular user's anatomy enables three dimensional modeling of the user's anatomy)([0009], [0051], and [0052]; filling negative volume reduces appearance of chest asymmetry). The examiner notes Aggarwal and Trangmar teach a method for manufacturing customized clothing. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Aggarwal to include the receiving and the creating of Trangmar such that the method receives images of a torso of a subject that has a chest asymmetry and creates components to reduce an appearance of the chest asymmetry. One would be motivated to make such a combination to provide the advantage of psychological normalizing anatomical asymmetry ([0096]; Trangmar).
The combination of Aggarwal-Trangmar fails to teach determining a differential model using the model of a subject. However, determining a differential model using a model of a subject is taught by Eaton (the patent's chest may be scanned in an area that includes the surgical site ... graphical imaging software application may be used to form a computer model of the scanned areas ... a “model” refers to a physical or graphical representation of an object ... a reflection transformation may be applied to the breast computer model to form a mirror image of the breast computer model ... if the patient's right breast was scanned, the reflection transformation may create a left breast that is an exact duplicate … The breast model and surgical site model may be combined ... models may be combined with scans of the patient's surgical sites to form two custom prosthesis computer models ... model of a breast prosthesis may be used to control rapid prototyping system 208)([0045], [0046], [0047], and [0048]; model of subject (e.g., scanned right breast) is used to determine other models (e.g., a left breast)). The examiner notes Aggarwal, Trangmar, and Eaton teach a method for manufacturing customized clothing. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Aggarwal-Trangmar to include the determining of Eaton such that the method determines models using a model of a subject. One would be motivated to make such a combination to provide the advantage of creating customize prosthesis ([0005]; Eaton).
Regarding claim 2, Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton teach the method of claim 1, further comprising assembling the garment including the one or more components (Aggarwal - In step 1010, where there are a number of separately printed components of the wearable, these components are assembled)([0090]).
Regarding claim 3, Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton teach the method of claim 1, wherein the chest asymmetry is a breast asymmetry (Trangmar - wearers who have undergone breast augmentation, lumpectomy, mastectomy, reconstructive surgery, or any other operation rendered to the breast capable of altering breast volume)([0032]; a breast operation (e.g., mastectomy) results in breast/chest asymmetry).
Regarding claim 4, Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton teach the method of claim 1, wherein the garment is a bra, a swimsuit, a blouse, a lingerie, an athletic wear, a protective sportswear, or a gown (Aggarwal - Wearable examples previously mentioned include ... bras)([0033]).
Regarding claim 5, Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton teach the method of claim 1, wherein the multiple digital images of the torso of the subject includes three or more digital images at differing angles between the torso of the subject and a camera that captures the three or more digital images (Aggarwal - FIG. 4 is a flowchart illustrating a process by which the mobile device interacts with the user to acquire images of the user ... multiple images may be requested ... five photos of image data ... e.g., two images of the top ... two of the inner side ... pass around the body part capturing image data)([0033] and [0045]).
Regarding claim 6, Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton teach the method of claim 1, wherein the processing is preformed using machine learning model (Aggarwal - FIG. 12 is a flowchart illustrating wearable generation including concurrent computer vision and machine learning processes)([0098]).
Regarding claim 10, Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton teach the method of claim 1, wherein the processing includes morphological image processing to extract image components representing anatomical components of the subject (Aggarwal - In steps 1204 and 1206, the system attempts to detect a body part in the subject images. This is performed both through computer vision and machine learning)([0100]).
Regarding claim 11, Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton teach the method of claim 1, wherein the digital model is a digital three-dimensional model (Aggarwal - In In step 1220, the extracted data points are assembled into usable data for 3-D model generation or tessellation file generation)([0106]).
Regarding claim 12, Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton teach the method of claim 1, wherein the processing includes body identification that selects data from the model (Aggarwal - In steps 1210 and 1212, the system performs image segmentation using computer vision and machine learning. Prior observations and models ... influence the machine learning operation)([0104]).
Regarding claim 14, Aggarwal teaches a system for customized bra component manufacturing, the system comprising:
a digital camera (FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating a system for the generation of customized 3D printed wearables 20 ... a mobile processing device that includes a digital camera)([0023]);
a computing system (Processor 32B operates processing server 24)([0028]); and
an additive manufacturing process comprising a three-dimensional printer (Numerous models of 3D printer 26 may be used by the invented system)([0031]),
wherein the computing system is configured to:
receive multiple digital images of … a subject … wherein the multiple digital images are captured by the digital camera, and each digital image of the multiple digital images is separated by a time interval from a sequential digital image of the multiple digital images (FIG. 3 is a flowchart illustrating a process for acquiring images of the user ... In step 308, the mobile device camera captures body part image data ... In step 314, the application software determines if more images are required ... the user is once again expected to orient the mobile device correctly to capture an acceptable image … FIG. 10 is a flowchart illustrating a process for API access at a number of steps in wearable generation ... In step 1002, the system obtains image or video data of a part of a living body ... step 1002 refers to obtaining the video or images through mobile application software 42 ... The mobile application software 42 has an ... connection to the processing server 24)([0039], [0041], [0043], [0080], and [0082]; Figure 3 – an exemplary embodiment of capturing multiple images in sequential order is shown. The examiner notes there are processing steps (e.g., providing instructions) between capturing of sequential images; consequently, images are separated by a time interval); and
process the multiple digital images to create a digital model … (In step 1004, the processing server 24 uses the input ... to generate a digital body model)([0084]); and
wherein the additive manufacturing process is configured to create, based on the model, one or more components of a garment for the subject (In step 1008, the 3D wearable model is transmitted to a 3D printer 26 for printing)([0089]).
Aggarwal differs from the claim in that Aggarwal fails to teach the images received are of a torso of the subject that has a chest asymmetry and creating components to reduce an appearance of the chest asymmetry. However, receiving images of a torso of a subject that has a chest asymmetry and creating components to reduce an appearance of the chest asymmetry is taught by Trangmar (Customized volumetric cups are also contemplated ... Such customized sizing may be useful for users having anatomical variances or irregularities ... a user may have their anatomy scanned (510) ... A digital profile of a user may then be rendered (625) … a digital profile of a breast may be of a breast removed by a mastectomy procedure … digital profile may be utilized … to produce a restorative volume piece (e.g., prosthetic) or pieces (627), which may be manufactured to fill the negative volume ... Image capture of the particular user's anatomy enables three dimensional modeling of the user's anatomy)([0009], [0051], and [0052]; filling negative volume reduces appearance of chest asymmetry). The examiner notes Aggarwal and Trangmar teach a system for manufacturing customized clothing. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Aggarwal to include the receiving and the creating of Trangmar such that the system receives images of a torso of a subject that has chest asymmetry and creates components to reduce an appearance of the chest asymmetry. One would be motivated to make such a combination to provide the advantage of psychological normalizing anatomical asymmetry ([0096]; Trangmar).
The combination of Aggarwal-Trangmar fails to teach determining a differential model using the model of a subject. However, determining a differential model using a model of a subject is taught by Eaton (the patent's chest may be scanned in an area that includes the surgical site ... graphical imaging software application may be used to form a computer model of the scanned areas ... a “model” refers to a physical or graphical representation of an object ... a reflection transformation may be applied to the breast computer model to form a mirror image of the breast computer model ... if the patient's right breast was scanned, the reflection transformation may create a left breast that is an exact duplicate … The breast model and surgical site model may be combined ... models may be combined with scans of the patient's surgical sites to form two custom prosthesis computer models ... model of a breast prosthesis may be used to control rapid prototyping system 208)([0045], [0046], [0047], and [0048]; model of subject (e.g., scanned right breast) is used to determine other models (e.g., a left breast)). The examiner notes Aggarwal, Trangmar, and Eaton teach a system for manufacturing customized clothing. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Aggarwal to include the determining of Eaton such that the system determines models using a model of a subject. One would be motivated to make such a combination to provide the advantage of creating customize prosthesis ([0005]; Eaton).
Regarding claim 16, Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton teach the system of claim 14, wherein the chest asymmetry is a breast asymmetry (Trangmar - wearers who have undergone breast augmentation, lumpectomy, mastectomy, reconstructive surgery, or any other operation rendered to the breast capable of altering breast volume)([0032]; a breast operation (e.g., mastectomy) results in breast/chest asymmetry).
Regarding claim 17, Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton teach the system of claim 14, wherein the garment is a bra, a swimsuit, a blouse, a lingerie, an athletic wear, a protective sportswear, or a gown (Aggarwal - Wearable examples previously mentioned include ... bras)([0033]).
Regarding claim 18, Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton teach the system of claim 14, wherein the differential digital model is a digital three-dimensional model (Eaton - Methods of forming computer models of three dimensional objects are disclosed)([0032]).
Regarding claim 19, Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton teach the system of claim 14, wherein the digital camera is a component of a smart phone or tablet computer (Aggarwal - Examples of mobile device 22 include a smart phone ... tablet computer ... The camera 34 on the mobile device may be a simple digital camera)([0024] and [0025]).
Regarding claim 20, Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton teach the system of claim 19, wherein the computing system is fully or partially located on the smart phone or tablet computer (Aggarwal - the processing power may be distributed across a number of devices and servers. For example, some steps may be performed by a mobile device such as a smart phone)([0098]).
Regarding claim 23, Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton teach the system of claim 14, wherein the digital camera is a video camera, and wherein the multiple digital images are from a video captured by the video camera (Aggarwal - The camera 34 on the mobile device may be ... video capture device ... Time stamps between the video clip and the IMU tracking are matched up to identify single frames as static images)([0025] and [0051]).
Regarding claim 24, the claim generally corresponds to method claim 1 and recites similar features in non-transitory computer readable storage form; therefore, the claim is rejected under similar rational.
Regarding claim 25, Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton teach the method of claim 1, comprising displaying, by a computing system, instructions for multiple orientations of the torso of the subject in a field of view of a camera of the computing system (Aggarwal - In step 306, the loaded instructions are provided to the user via the mobile device's user interface (e.g., via a touchscreen and/or audio speaker) to facilitate image data capture)([0040]).
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aggarwal, Trangmar, Eaton, and in further view of Koh et al. (US Publication 20190357615A1).
Regarding claim 7, Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton teach the method of as applied above, wherein processing is performed using the machine learning model (Aggarwal - FIG. 12 is a flowchart illustrating wearable generation including concurrent computer vision and machine learning processes)([0098]). Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton differs from the claim in that Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton fails to teach the machine learning model is a supervised machine learning model. However, processing using a supervised machine learning model is taught by Koh (the deep learning algorithms may learn in supervised (e.g., classification) and/or unsupervised (e.g., pattern analysis) manners ... learn multiple levels of representations that correspond to different levels of abstraction of the information encoded in the images (e.g., body, body part, etc.))([0082]). The examiner notes Aggarwal, Trangmar, Eaton, and Koh teach a method for modeling a subject. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton to include the processing of Koh such that the method processes using a supervised machine learning model. One would be motivated to make such a combination to provide the advantage of training using labeled data thereby enabling accurate predictions on new unseen data.
Regarding claim 8, Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton teach the method of as applied above, wherein processing is performed using the machine learning model and computer vision (Aggarwal - FIG. 12 is a flowchart illustrating wearable generation including concurrent computer vision and machine learning processes)([0098]). Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton differs from the claim in that Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton fails to teach the machine learning model is an unsupervised machine learning model. However, processing using an unsupervised machine learning model is taught by Koh (the deep learning algorithms may learn in supervised (e.g., classification) and/or unsupervised (e.g., pattern analysis) manners ... learn multiple levels of representations that correspond to different levels of abstraction of the information encoded in the images (e.g., body, body part, etc.))([0082]). The examiner notes Aggarwal, Trangmar, Eaton, and Koh teach a method for modeling a subject. As such, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Aggarwal-Trangmar-Eaton to include the processing of Koh such that the method processes using an unsupervised machine learning model. One would be motivated to make such a combination to provide the advantage of training using unlabeled data thereby reducing complexity.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1-8, 10-12, 14, 16-20, and 23-25 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Regarding claims 1, 14, and 24, applicant argues the combination of Aggarwal and Trangmar fails to teach “each digital image of the multiple digital images is separated by a time interval from a sequential digital image of the multiple digital images”; the examiner respectfully disagrees.
Aggarwal discloses capturing multiple images of a subject such that each image is separated by a time interval (i.e., multiple images are not instantaneously taken together) “FIG. 3 is a flowchart illustrating a process for acquiring images of the user ... In step 308, the mobile device camera captures body part image data ... In step 314, the application software determines if more images are required ... the user is once again expected to orient the mobile device correctly to capture an acceptable image … FIG. 10 is a flowchart illustrating a process for API access at a number of steps in wearable generation ... In step 1002, the system obtains image or video data of a part of a living body ... step 1002 refers to obtaining the video or images through mobile application software 42 ... The mobile application software 42 has an ... connection to the processing server 24” ([0039], [0041], [0043], [0080], and [0082]). Notably, Figure 3 of Aggarwal depicts an exemplary embodiment for capturing multiple images in sequential order. As shown in the figure, there are processing steps (e.g., providing instructions) between the capturing of sequential images; consequently, multiple images are not instantaneously captured but are separated by a time interval.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record on form PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is required under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(c) to consider the reference fully when responding to this action. The document cited therein and enumerated below teaches a method and apparatus for modeling a user and creating customized garments.
10176275B1
10813715B1
20160093085 A1
WO1999025536A1
WO2005055010A2
WO2019164390A1
WO2019190968A1
CN105877879A
CN105997313A
AU2014268117A1
Pattern Design for Asymmetric Bodies: Garments Custom-Made, Altered, or Made-To-Measure to Fit Individuals with Asymmetric Body Figures
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 Yongjia Pan whose telephone number is (571)270-1177. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST.
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, Scott Baderman can be reached at 571-272-3644. 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.
/YONGJIA PAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118
Prosecution Insights