DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submissions filed on July 31st, 2026, and August 21st, 2026, have been entered.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-20 in the claim set filed February 17th, 2026, were pending for examination in the Application No. 18/027,912 filed March 22nd, 2023. In the remarks and amendments received on July 31st, 2026, claims 1, 10, and 19 are amended. Accordingly, claims 1-20 are currently pending for examination in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed February 17th, 2026, regarding the rejection of the independent claims are moot because the arguments do not apply to the new combination of the references being used in the current rejection below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on August 21st, 2026, is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS is being considered and attached by the examiner.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-8, 10-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cohen et al. (Cohen 2022; US 2022/0253135 A1) in view of Agrawal et al. (Agrawal; US 2018/0365490 A1), and further in view of Cho et al. (JP 2008099716 A).
Regarding claim 1, Cohen 2022 discloses a system, comprising:
two or more cameras configured to capture images of an eye region of a user (para(s). [0725], [0735], and [0778], recite(s)
[0725] “As illustrated in FIG. 9B,… The left eye imaging system can include one or more inward-facing cameras (2014, 2016). …The right eye imaging system can include one or more inward-facing cameras (2018, 2020). …The left eye tracking camera 2018 and right eye tracking camera 2020 may be located to the left and right of each other, respectively, possibly left and right of center of the right eyepiece, respectively. The one or more cameras in the left eye tracking system 2010A and the one or more cameras in the right eye tracking system 2010B may be situated within the wearable device 2000 so as to unobtrusively capture images of the user's eye(s). Other configurations are possible.”
[0735] “The imaging system of the wearable system may be part of an eye tracking assembly (for example, as shown in FIGS. 9A-E). The imaging system may include one or more cameras. …In another example, the imaging system can include multiple cameras that may be located at different locations in relation to the user's eye 1110.”
[0778] “…Additionally or alternatively, the module 614 can receive images of a user's eye(s) with different camera conditions, such as camera distance from the user's eye, vertical or horizontal location with respect to the user's eye, or any combination thereof, which may provide different camera perspectives and/or for different cameras having different locations and/or perspectives. As described above, a wearable device can prompt the user to engage in different eye poses by, for example, causing the display of gaze targets in different regions of the display…”
, where the “inward-facing cameras” are two or more cameras from different points of view capturing images of an eye region of a user (e.g., left eye and right eye));
a controller comprising one or more processors (para(s). [0799], recite(s)
[0799] “Each of the processes, methods, and algorithms described herein and/or depicted in the attached figures may be embodied in, and fully or partially automated by, code modules executed by one or more physical computing systems, hardware computer processors, application-specific circuitry, and/or electronic hardware configured to execute specific and particular computer instructions…”
) configured to:
analyze two or more images of the eye region captured by the two or more cameras from different points of view to select one of the two or more images to be used in a biometric authentication process, wherein the two or more images include at least one image captured by each camera, wherein the selected one of the two or more images is selected based on(para(s). [0775] and [0668], recite(s)
[0775] “At an image receiving block 2110, the module 614 can receive one or more images of a user's eye. The images can be obtained from an imaging system associated with a wearable device worn by the user. For example, the wearable device can be a head mounted display that includes a left eyepiece 2010A and a right eyepiece 2010B with imaging systems that include inward-facing cameras 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2020 as illustrated in FIGS. 9A-9D. The module 614 can optionally analyze the images for quality. For example, the module 614 can determine if the images pass a quality threshold. The threshold can include metrics for quality of the image relating to blur, obstruction, unwanted glints, or other quality metrics that may affect the accuracy of the center of rotation analysis. If the module 614 determines that the image passes the image quality threshold, the module 614 may use the image in further analysis.”
[0668] “…The inward-facing imaging system 466 can be used to obtain images for use in determining the direction the user is looking (e.g., eye pose) or for biometric identification of the user (e.g., via iris identification)…”
, where “determin[ing] if the images pass a quality threshold” is analyzing at least two or more images captured by the two or more cameras from different points of view (as disclosed in paras. [0735] and [0778] cited previously in the first claim limitation above) and selecting at least one of the two or more images based on biometric aspects of the user of comprising features from at least an iris (e.g., “iris identification” includes selecting images via thresholds for “blur, obstruction, unwanted glints, or other quality metrics”); wherein para. [0068] above further recites the selected one of the two or more images is to be used in a biometric authentication process (e.g., “biometric identification… via iris identification”)); and
perform biometric authentication for the user based at least in part on the two or more different biometric aspects of the user from the selected image (para(s). [0668]—see citation above—, where “us[ing] the obtain[ed] images… for biometric identification of the user (e.g., via iris identification)” is performing biometric authentication for the user based at least in part on the biometric aspects of the user (e.g., “iris”) from the selected image (e.g., “the image passes the image quality threshold, the module 614 may use the image in further analysis”, where the “further analysis” is the “biometric identification”)).
Where Cohen 2022 does not specifically disclose
…wherein the selected one of the two or more images is selected based on visibility in the one of the two or more images of two or more different biometric aspects of the user due to different points of view, wherein the two or more different biometric aspects comprise of features from two or more of an iris, an eye, or a periorbital region of the user; and
perform biometric authentication for the user based at least in part on the two or more different biometric aspects of the user from the selected image; Agrawal teaches in the same field of endeavor of biometric authentication for systems comprising two or more cameras from different points of view
…wherein the selected one of the two or more images is selected based on visibility in the one of the two or more images of two or more different biometric aspects of the user due to different points of view, wherein the two or more different biometric aspects comprise of features from two or more of an iris, an eye, or a periorbital region of the user (Fig. 2A and para(s). [0029-0030], recite(s)
[0029] “FIGS. 2A and 2B schematically show anatomical features of a human eye. FIG. 2A depicts a direct facing view of eye 200, showing various features of the eye such as pupil 202, iris 204, sclera 206, eyelashes 208, and eyelids 210. …”
[0030] “External light L may also impinge upon and be reflected by the front corneal surface of eye 200 . Such reflections may appear as intense areas or glints when the eye is imaged. During imaging, the positioning and intensity of such glints may vary depending on the relative positions of the optical source(s), eye, and optical sensor(s). In some scenarios, one or more eyelashes 208 , eyelids 210 , and/or other obstructions may occlude or obscure a portion of pupil 202 and/or iris 204 , either directly or via shadows. Such images may be discarded, occluded regions and/or regions likely to be occluded may be masked by the eye-imaging system, and/or the eye-imaging system may be trained to only take images of the eye from perspectives and/or illumination angles that are likely to generate unoccluded images.”
PNG
media_image1.png
493
601
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, where “only tak[ing] images of the eye from perspectives and/or illumination angles that are likely to generate unconcluded images” is selecting at least one of two or more images based on visibility (e.g., an image from a “perspective[s]” without “intense areas or glints” and/or obstructions) in the one of the two or more images of features of two or more different biometric aspects of a user of at least an iris and an eye (i.e., “intense areas or glints and/or “obstructions” of an “iris 204” and an “eye 200”) due to different points of view (e.g., variance of “intense areas or glints” due to “relative positions of the optical source(s), eye, and optical sensor(s)”—i.e., “images of the eye from [different] perspectives”)); and
perform biometric authentication for the user based at least in part on the two or more different biometric aspects of the user from the selected image (para. [0058], recite(s)
[0058] “At 630, method 600 includes recognizing a user ID based on the two or more sets of corresponding pixels. For example, characteristics of one or more aligned, normalized images may be quantized and compared with images corresponding to user IDs for all enrolled users. Eye characteristics, such as iris color, eye shape, etc. may be utilized to restrict the number of comparisons. If no user ID is recognized based on the two or more sets of corresponding pixels, the authentication process may be aborted, and/or the user may be asked to have their eye re-imaged. If a user ID is recognized, the authentication process may proceed.”
, where authenticating a user based on eye characteristics is performing biometric authentication for the user based at least in part on the two or more different biometric aspects of the user of at least the two or more different biometric aspects (e.g., “iris color” and “eye shape”)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the presently filed invention to modify the system of Cohen 2022 to incorporate selecting at least one of the two or more images based on visibility of two or more different biometric aspects of the user—wherein the two or more different biometric aspects comprise of features from two or more of an iris, an eye, or a periorbital region of the user—and performing biometric authentication for the user based at least in part on the two or more different biometric aspects of the user from the selected image to improve biometric authentication systems by discarding images of poor quality, such as images with obstructions and/or intense reflections as taught by Agrawal above.
Where Cohen 2022 in view of Agrawal does not explicitly disclose
…wherein …the one of the two or more images of two or more different biometric aspects of the user…, wherein the two or more different biometric aspects comprise of features from two or more of an iris, an eye sclera, or a periorbital region of the user; and
perform biometric authentication for the user based at least in part on the two or more different biometric aspects of the user from the selected image;
Cho teaches in the same field of endeavor biometric authentication based on at least in part on two or more different biometric aspects of a user comprising of features of at least an iris and an eye
…wherein …the one of the two or more images of two or more different biometric aspects of the user…, wherein the two or more different biometric aspects comprise of features from two or more of an iris, an eye sclera, or a periorbital region of the user (description, para(s). [0048], recite(s)
[0048] “…the present invention makes it possible to measure the vascular pattern of the conjunctiva and/or sclera of the eyeball. Therefore, it can be used for authentication of animals, humans, etc., by comparing the conjunctival and/or scleral vascular pattern from previously captured images with the current image.
Since the vascular patterns of the conjunctiva and/or sclera are unique to each individual, they can be used for authentication purposes such as personal identification.
Furthermore, since blood flow can also be observed, it is not easy to replicate using engineering models, making it highly reliable. Furthermore, since capillaries change with age, it is possible to use them as a biometric authentication method that is only valid for a limited period of time. Furthermore, it is certainly possible to combine authentication methods using the fundus or iris, or to separately combine other authentication methods, such as fingerprints, voiceprints, voice, or vein patterns.”
, where the “sclera of the eyeball” and the “iris” are two or more biometric aspects of a user and comprise of two or more features of the two or more biometric aspects (e.g., “vascular patterns”, “iris”, etc.)); and
perform biometric authentication for the user based at least in part on the two or more different biometric aspects of the user from the selected image (paras. [0048]—see citation in the preceding limitation immediately above—, where the “authentication” of a user can be based on a combined authentication based on the “scleral vascular pattern” and “iris” of the user is performing biometric authentication for a user based at least in part on the two or more different biometric aspects of the user from a selected image (e.g., a “current image”)).
Since Cho also discloses selecting an image based on the visibility of a biometric aspect (e.g. description, para. [0029], recites:
[0029] “Furthermore, the image processing unit 5 can, if necessary, choose not to use images taken at the moment of blinking. …”
, where not using an image “taken at the moment of blinking” is selecting an image based on visibility—i.e., when the biometric aspect is not obstructed/occluded by eyelids due to blinking), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the presently filed invention to modify the system of Cohen 2022 in view of Agrawal to incorporate the eye sclera as one of the two or more features of the two or more different biometric aspects of the user and performing the selection process taught by Agrawal such that the selection process comprises of selecting one of the two or more images based on the visibility in the one of the two or more images due to different points of view of two or more different biometric aspects of the iris and eye sclera comprising of features of the iris and eye sclera of a user to improve biometric authentication of the user by selecting better quality images for a biometric authentication system based at least on part on the two or more different biometric aspects of a user.
Regarding claim 2, Cohen 2022, as modified by Agrawal and Cho, discloses the system as recited in claim 1, wherein Cohen 2022 further discloses the eye region includes one or more of an iris, an eye, a periorbital region, and a portion of the user's face (para(s). [0725]—see citation in claim 1 limitation “two or more cameras…” above—, and para(s). [0673] further recite(s):
[0673] “FIG. 5 illustrates an image of an eye 500 with eyelids 504 , sclera 508 (the “white” of the eye), iris 512 , and pupil 516 . Curve 516 a shows the pupillary boundary between the pupil 516 and the iris 512 , and curve 512 a shows the limbic boundary between the iris 512 and the sclera 508 . The eyelids 504 include an upper eyelid 504 a and a lower eyelid 504 b. The eye 500 is illustrated in a natural resting pose (e.g., in which the user's face and gaze are both oriented as they would be toward a distant object directly ahead of the user). The natural resting pose of the eye 500 can be indicated by a natural resting direction 520 , which is a direction orthogonal to the surface of the eye 500 when in the natural resting pose (e.g., directly out of the plane for the eye 500 shown in FIG. 5) and in this example, centered within the pupil 516 .”
, where the eye region includes at least an iris (“iris 512”), an eye (“eye 500”), and a periorbital region (e.g., “eyelids 504”)).
Regarding claim 3, Cohen 2022, as modified by Agrawal and Cho, discloses the system as recited in claim 1, wherein Cohen 2022 further discloses, to analyze the two or more images of the eye region captured by the two or more cameras to select one of the images to be used in a biometric authentication process, the controller is configured to apply objective criteria to the two or more images to determine whether the two or more images meet thresholds of quality for the biometric authentication (para(s). [0775]—see citation in claim 1 limitation “analyze two or more images…” above—, where the “metrics for quality” (e.g., “blur” or “unwanted glints”) are objective criteria and the “quality threshold… includ[ing] metrics for quality of the image” are thresholds of quality).
Regarding claim 4, Cohen 2022, as modified by Agrawal and Cho, discloses the system as recited in claim 3, wherein Cohen 2022 further discloses the objective criteria include one or more of exposure, contrast, shadows, edges, undesirable streaks, occluding objects, sharpness, uniformity of illumination, and absence of undesired reflections (para(s). [0775]—see citation in claim 3 above—, where the object criteria includes at least an absence of undesired reflections (e.g., “unwanted glints”)).
Regarding claim 5, Cohen 2022, as modified by Agrawal and Cho, discloses the system as recited in claim 1, wherein Agrawal further teaches in the same field of endeavor of biometric authentication for HMDs the controller is further configured to perform anti-spoofing based at least in part on the selected image (para(s). [0014] and [0017-0018], recite(s)
[0014] “However, 2D iris imaging is susceptible to spoofing. A high-resolution image of a user's iris may be printed on high-quality paper and presented for authentication. Further, a printed iris image may be placed over an attacker's eye (akin to a contact lens), thus surrounding the fake iris with real facial components and providing enough information to defeat many anti-spoofing measures.”
[0017] “In this detailed description, systems and methods are presented wherein iris images are generated from multiple illumination angles over multiple time points in order to extract rich, unique, 3D structural features for a user's iris. These features may be used both to enhance the iris recognition signature (e.g., by increasing the degrees of freedom in a 2D iris recognition pipeline), and to prevent against iris spoofing.”
[0018] “In one example implementation, an eye-imaging and iris-recognition system may be incorporated into a head-mounted display (HMD) device. Iris recognition may be performed each time a user puts the HMD device on. If a user is recognized based on their iris signature, they may be signed on to the device. In some examples, multiple users may share the same HMD device, but data, preferences, personal information, etc. affiliated with one user may be kept separate and private from other users through the use of iris recognition. Further, non-registered users of the HMD device may not be provided access to any personal data, and may denied access privileges to the device as a whole. One or both eyes may be imaged and subject to verification in order to sign a user on to the device.”
, where “prevent[ing] against iris spoofing” is performing anti-spoofing).
Regarding claim 6, Cohen 2022, as modified by Agrawal and Cho, discloses the system as recited in claim 1, wherein Cohen 2022 further discloses the system as recited in claim 1 further comprising an illumination source comprising a plurality of light-emitting elements configured to emit light towards the eye region to be imaged by the cameras (para(s). [0724] and [0736], recite(s)
[0724] “As illustrated in FIG. 9B, the left eyepiece 2010A may include one or more illumination sources 2022. Similarly, the right eyepiece 2010B may include one or more illumination sources 2024. For example, there may be four illumination sources 2022 and four illumination sources 2024. The illumination sources 2022 may be positioned within a left eyepiece 2010A to emit light towards a user's left eye 2012A. The illumination sources 2022 may be positioned so as not to obstruct the user's view through the left eyepiece 2010A. For example, the illumination sources 2022 may be positioned around a rim of a display within the left eyepiece 2010A so as not to obstruct a user's view through the display. Similarly, the illumination sources 2024 may be positioned within a right eyepiece 2010B to emit light towards a user's right eye 2012B. The illumination sources 2024 may be positioned so as not to obstruct the user's view through the right eyepiece 2010B. For example, the illumination sources 20204 may be positioned around a rim of a display within the right eyepiece 2010B so as not to obstruct a user's view through the display. The illumination sources 2022, 2024 may emit light in visible or non-visible light. For example, the illumination sources 2022, 2024 may be infrared (IR) LEDs. The illumination sources may also be located or configured differently.”
[0736] “The illumination source(s) 1102 can include one or more light sources such as light emitting diodes (LEDs). The illumination source(s) may emit light in visible or non-visible light (for example, infrared (IR) light). For example, the illumination source(s) 1102 can be infrared (IR) LEDs. The illumination source(s) 1102 can be part of an eye tracking assembly (for example, as illustrated in FIGS. 9A-E).”
, where the “illumination sources” are a plurality of light-emitting elements (e.g., “emit light in visible or non-visible light”)).
Regarding claim 7, Cohen 2022, as modified by Agrawal and Cho, discloses the system as recited in claim 6, wherein Cohen 2022 further discloses the light-emitting elements include light-emitting diodes (LEDs) (para(s). [0724]—see citation in claim 6 above—, where the “infrared (IR) LEDs” are light-emitting diodes).
Regarding claim 8, Cohen 2022, as modified by Agrawal and Cho, discloses the system as recited in claim 6, wherein Cohen 2022 further discloses the light-emitting elements include infrared (IR) light sources (para(s). [0724]—see citation in claim 6 above—, where “infrared (IR) LEDs” are infrared light sources), and wherein Cohen 2022 further teaches the cameras include at least one infrared camera (para(s). [0638], recite(s)
[0638] “…The depicted view also shows two miniature infrared cameras 324 paired with infrared light sources 326 (such as light emitting diodes “LED”s), which are configured to be able to track the eyes 302, 304 of the user to support rendering and user input. The cameras 324 may be part of the inward-facing imaging system 462 shown in FIG. 4…”
, where the “two or more cameras” includes at least one infrared camera (e.g., one of “miniature infrared cameras”)).
Regarding claim 10, the claim is the method performed by the system of claim 1. Therefore, claim 10 recites similar limitations to claim 1 and is rejected for similar rationale and reasoning (see the analysis for claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 11, the claim recites similar limitations to claim 2 and is rejected for similar rationale and reasoning (see the analysis for claim 2 above).
Regarding claim 12, the claim recites similar limitations to claim 3 and is rejected for similar rationale and reasoning (see the analysis for claim 3 above).
Regarding claim 13, the claim recites similar limitations to claim 4 and is rejected for similar rationale and reasoning (see the analysis for claim 4 above).
Regarding claim 14, the claim recites similar limitations to claim 5 and is rejected for similar rationale and reasoning (see the analysis for claim 5 above).
Regarding claim 15, the claim recites similar limitations to claim 6 and is rejected for similar rationale and reasoning (see the analysis for claim 6 above).
Regarding claim 16, the claim recites similar limitations to claim 7 and is rejected for similar rationale and reasoning (see the analysis for claim 7 above).
Regarding claim 17, the claim recites similar limitations to claim 8 and is rejected for similar rationale and reasoning (see the analysis for claim 8 above).
Regarding claim 19, the claim recites similar limitations to claim 1 but in the form of one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media storing program instructions that, when executed on or across one or more processors, perform the system of claim 1. Cohen 2022 discloses said one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media (para(s). [0799]—see citation in claim 1 limitation “a controller comprising…” above—, where para(s). [0801] further recite(s):
[0801] “Code modules or any type of data may be stored on any type of non-transitory computer-readable medium…”
).
Therefore, claim 19 recites similar limitations to claim 1 and is rejected for similar rationale and reasoning (see the analysis for claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 20, the claim recites similar limitations to claim 2 and is rejected for similar rationale and reasoning (see the analysis for claim 2 above).
Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cohen 2022, as modified by Agrawal and Cho, as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of Olade et al. (Olade; “A Review of Multimodal Facial Biometric Authentication Methods in Mobile Devices and Their Application in Head Mounted Displays,” 2018; cited as a prior art on record in the previously set forth Non-Final Office Action mailed February 21st, 2025).
Regarding claim 9, Cohen 2022, as modified by Agrawal and Cho, discloses the system as recited in claim 1, wherein Cohen 2022 further discloses the system is a component of a head-mounted device (HMD) (para. [0005], recite(s)
[0005] “…The display system can include a frame configured to be supported on a head of the user, a head-mounted display disposed on the frame, one or more eye tracking cameras configured to image the user's eye…”
)
Where Cohen 2022, as modified by Agrawal and Cho, does not specifically disclose
wherein a first camera of the two or more cameras is mounted on an upper half of the HMD and a second camera of the two or more cameras is mounted on a lower half of the HMD;
Olade teaches in the same field of endeavor biometric authentication using two or more cameras configured to capture images of an eye region of a user
wherein a first camera of the two or more cameras is mounted on an upper half of the HMD and a second camera of the two or more cameras is mounted on a lower half of the HMD (Fig. 11 and para. between pgs. 2002-2003, recite(s)
[pgs. 2002-2003] “…As shown in our conceptual HMD design (see Fig. 11), the interior visible light camera facing the users eyes can used for periocular and ocular surface vasculature (OSV) biometrics, while the infrared camera and the infrared LEDs could be used for iris based biometrics. We believe future research will be focused on implementing a seamless unobtrusive facial biometric authentication mechanism for HMDs.”
PNG
media_image2.png
657
942
media_image2.png
Greyscale
, where the “visible light camera” is a first camera mounted on an upper half of an HMD and the “infrared camera” is a second camera mounted on a lower half of the HMD).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the presently filed invention to modify the system of Cohen 2022, as modified by Agrawal and Cho, to incorporate mounting a first camera and second camera of the two or more cameras on an upper half and a lower half of an HMD, respectively, to improve facial biometric authentication for HMDs as taught by Olade above.
Regarding claim 18, the claim recites similar limitations to claim 9 and is rejected for similar rationale and reasoning (see the analysis for claim 9 above).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIA Z YAO whose telephone number is (571)272-2870. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (8:30AM - 5PM).
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, Emily Terrell can be reached on (571)270-3717. 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.
/J.Z.Y./Examiner, Art Unit 2666
/MING Y HON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2666
Prosecution Insights