DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendments and Arguments
The amendments and arguments filed 05/13/2026 are acknowledged and have been fully considered. Claims 1-10 remain canceled; claims 11 and 21 have been amended; claims 22 and 23 have been added; no claims have been withdrawn. Claims 11-23 are now pending and under consideration.
The previous objection to claim 21 has been withdrawn, in light of the amendments to the claim.
Applicant's arguments on pages 7-8 of the remarks with regard to the prior art rejections of independent claims 11 and 21 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0043896 to Lee et al. in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0139020 to Ikezawa et al. have been fully considered, and they are not persuasive. Specifically, Applicant’s asserts on page 8 of the remarks that neither of Lee and Ikezawa, alone or in combination, teaches or renders obvious the subject matter newly added by amendment to the last four lines of each of claims 11 and 21.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. At least ¶ 0038-0039 & 0084-0086 of Ikezawa teaches the subject matter newly added by amendment to the last four lines of each of claims 11 and 21. Therefore, the rejections have been maintained and updated in order to sufficiently address the amendments to the claims.
Claim Objections
Claims 11 and 21 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 11 should be amended to include a semicolon immediately following “the first signaling unit” at the end of line 16.
Claim 11 recites “of vehicle” in line 18, which appears to be a misstating of --of the vehicle--, especially in view of “a vehicle” being introduced in line 2 of the claim.
Claim 21 recites “of vehicle” in line 17, which appears to be a misstating of --of the vehicle--, especially in view of “a vehicle” being introduced in line 2 of the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 11-16 and 18-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0043896 to Lee et al. (hereinafter: “Lee”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0139020 to Ikezawa et al. (hereinafter: “Ikezawa”).
With respect to claim 11, Lee teaches a vehicle system (apparent from at least Figs. 1-8B) for providing a driving function for autonomous driving with automated longitudinal guidance and lateral guidance of a vehicle at a signaling unit (as depicted by at least Figs. 12A-12B and as discussed by at least ¶ 0004, 0025, 0055-0060, 0200, 0242, 0265, 0290 & 0346, vehicle 100 is selectively operable as an “autonomous vehicle” at times including when operated in a driving mode, of a number of different driving modes, such as an autonomous driving mode or an unmanned driving mode, including while at a traffic lamp), comprising: a vehicle guidance system comprising a processor (apparent from at least Figs. 7-8B) configured, during operation of the driving function for autonomous driving with automated longitudinal and lateral guidance, to: detect a first signaling unit which is arranged in front of the vehicle in the direction of travel on a road used by the vehicle (100) and determine a state of the first signaling unit [for example, as depicted by at least Figs. 2, 5-8A, 9 & 11-12B and as discussed by at least ¶ 0004, 0014, 0025, 0055-0060, 0100-0102, 0107, 0113, 0200, 0233-0237, 0242, 0250, 0265, 0271, 0276, 0290, 0311-0312, 0326, 0328-0329, 0331, 0333 & 0346, the apparent driver assistance system includes an object detection device 300 which detects a traffic signal including a traffic lamp OB15 (e.g., “first signaling unit”) in front of the vehicle 100 on a road in the direction of travel during a journey (e.g., “operation of the driving function”) of the vehicle 100, including while the vehicle 100 is selectively operated as the “autonomous vehicle” in the driving mode that is the autonomous driving mode or the unmanned driving mode instead of another one of the number of different driving modes, and the object detection device 300 determines object information (or traffic signal information) (e.g., “state”) of the traffic lamp OB15 directing vehicles to stop based on a signal 1101 displayed on the traffic lamp OB15 which directs vehicles to either stop or go, and where it is apparent from at least Figs. 5, 6, & 11-12B that the signal 1101 of the traffic lamp OB15 includes three distinct signal elements arranged in a row]; determine a driving mode that has been set from a plurality of different driving modes [for example, as depicted by at least Figs. 5-8A, 9 & 11-12B and as discussed by at least ¶ 0055-0060, 0062, 0064-0066, 0200, 0233-0234, 0238-0242, 0262, 0264-0265, 0307-0310, 0325 & 0340-0346, an interface unit 830 of the apparent driver assistance system receives a user-selected driving mode selected by a user from the number of different driving modes from a user interface device 200 (or from a controller 170) during the journey of the vehicle 100, including when the user-selected driving mode is the autonomous driving mode or the unmanned driving mode]; and effect at least the automated longitudinal guidance of the autonomous driving of the vehicle when approaching the first signaling unit on the basis of the driving mode that has been set and the state of the first signaling unit; wherein the processor is configured to effect at least the automated longitudinal guidance of the autonomous driving of vehicle differently when approaching the first signaling unit on the basis of the driving mode that has been set and the state of the first signaling unit [for example, as depicted by at least Figs. 2, 5-9 & 11-12B and as discussed by at least ¶ 0024, 0046, 0056, 0208, 0248-0295, 0306-0318 & 0324-0345, the apparent driver assistance system automatically effects deceleration during driving of the vehicle 100, via coasting (e.g., “automated longitudinal guidance”) and/or regenerative braking (e.g., “automated longitudinal guidance”) of the vehicle 100 based on the user-selected driving mode during the journey of the vehicle 100 and the object information (or the traffic signal information) of the traffic lamp OB15 directing vehicles to stop determined by the object detection device 300, at times including when approaching the traffic lamp OB15 during the journey of the vehicle 100, including when the user-selected driving mode is the autonomous driving mode or the unmanned driving mode].
Lee appears to lack a clear teaching as to whether the processor is further configured to determine the state of the first signaling unit based on a detected color of the first signaling unit, the color of the first signaling unit being red, amber, or green {Lee appears to be silent to as to whether any color(s) [and, if so, which color(s)] are displayed on the traffic lamp OB15 via the signal 1101, Lee appears to lack a clear teaching as to whether the object detection device 300 detects a color of the traffic lamp OB15 (or of the signal 1101 of the traffic lamp OB15), and Lee appears to be silent as to whether the object detection device 300 determines the object information (or the traffic signal information) directing vehicles to stop based on a color of the traffic lamp OB15 (or of the signal 1101 of the traffic lamp OB15); because red, amber, and green are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives}. Therefore, Lee also appears to lack a clear teaching as to whether the processor is further configured to effect the at least the automated longitudinal guidance of the autonomous driving of the vehicle when approaching the first signaling unit on the basis of the driving mode that has been set and the state of the first signaling unit determined based on the detected color of the first signaling unit, and whether the processor is configured to effect at least the automated longitudinal guidance of the autonomous driving of vehicle differently when the detected color of the first signaling unit is red, when the detected color of the first signaling unit is amber, and when the detected color of the first signaling unit is green.
Ikezawa teaches detecting, via a processor (10), a first signaling unit (C) which is arranged in front of a vehicle (M) in a direction of travel on a road used by the vehicle (100) and determine a state of the first signaling unit based on a detected color of the first signaling unit, the color of the first signaling unit being red [for example, as depicted by at least Figs. 1-2C and as discussed by at least ¶ 0038-0043 & 0084-0088, the driving assistance electronic control unit (ECU) 10, of a driving assistance apparatus 100 of the vehicle M, detects a traffic signal C ahead of the vehicle M during travel of the vehicle toward the traffic signal C and determines that the traffic signal C is a red (stop) traffic signal C having a red lighting color]; and effect automated longitudinal guidance of the vehicle when approaching the first signaling unit based, in part, on the state of the first signaling unit determined based on the detected color of the first signaling unit [for example, as depicted by at least Figs. 1-2C and as discussed by at least ¶ 0038-0043 & 0048-0088, the driving assistance ECU 10 determines the red (stop) traffic signal C as a first deceleration-triggering object and effects deceleration assistance of the vehicle M when approaching the traffic signal C based on the determination of the red (stop) traffic signal C as the first deceleration-triggering object], including to effect at least the automated longitudinal guidance of the autonomous driving of vehicle differently when the detected color of the first signaling unit is red, when the detected color of the first signaling unit is amber (e.g., “yellow”), and when the detected color of the first signaling unit is green (as discussed by at least ¶ 0038-0039 & 0084-0086).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the vehicle system of Lee with the teachings of Ikezawa, if even necessary, such that the processor is further configured to determine the state of the first signaling unit based on a detected color of the first signaling unit, the color of the first signaling unit being red, amber, or green because, as discussed in detail above, the object information (or the traffic signal information) of the traffic lamp OB15 directing vehicles to stop, as determined by the processor in Lee, includes a signal 1101 displayed on the traffic lamp OB15, of three distinct signal elements arranged in a row, which directs vehicles to either stop or go, and, similar to Lee, Ikezawa teaches detecting a signal displayed on a traffic lamp that directs vehicles to stop, in the alternative to go, by specifically detecting that a color of the signal of the traffic lamp is red, in the alternative to green or yellow (e.g., “amber”), such that providing further detection, by the processor of Lee, of the signal 1101 that directs vehicles to “stop” as a red light displayed on the traffic lamp OB15 would beneficially enable the vehicle system to associate specific (color-based) information communicated by the signal of the traffic lamp with the traffic requirement (e.g., stop or go) associated with said specific (color-based) information. Therefore, it would have also been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the vehicle system of Lee with the teachings of Ikezawa, if even necessary, such that the processor is further configured to effect the at least the automated longitudinal guidance of the autonomous driving of the vehicle when approaching the first signaling unit on the basis of the driving mode that has been set and the state of the first signaling unit determined based on the detected color of the first signaling unit, including to, at least at times, effect at least the automated longitudinal guidance of the autonomous driving of vehicle differently when the detected color of the first signaling unit is red, when the detected color of the first signaling unit is amber, and when the detected color of the first signaling unit is green, because, as discussed in detail above, the apparent driver assistance system of Lee automatically effects deceleration during driving of the vehicle 100, via coasting and/or regenerative braking of the vehicle 100 based on the user-selected driving mode during the journey of the vehicle 100 and the object information (or the traffic signal information) of the traffic lamp OB15 directing vehicles to stop determined by the object detection device 300, and Ikezawa demonstrates that detection of a red light traffic signal of a traffic lamp corresponds to a direction by the traffic lamp for vehicle to stop, with Ikezawa further teaching to change a target speed in deceleration assistance depending on a lighting color of the traffic signal being green, yellow, or red (alternatively, red or yellow, and excluding green).
With respect to claim 12, Lee modified supra teaches the vehicle system according to claim 11, wherein the processor of the vehicle guidance system is configured to: select a time of intervention (e.g., a regenerative braking start time) in the automatic longitudinal guidance on the basis of the driving mode {e.g., one of an “eco mode,” a “comfort mode,” or a “sport mode,” when in one of the “autonomous driving mode,” the “unmanned driving mode,” or a “manned driving mode” [in which the adaptive driver assistance device is operable to perform an Adaptive Cruise control (ACC) function (e.g., “automatic longitudinal guidance”) and an Automated Emergency Braking (AEB) function (e.g., “automatic longitudinal guidance”)]} that has been set (for example, apparent from at least Figs. 12A-12B in view of at least ¶ 0241-0242, 0290 & 0340-0349 of Lee); and move the intervention time back in terms of time (e.g., the regenerative braking start time occurs relatively later) with increasing dynamics of the driving mode that has been set (e.g., via the “sport mode”) and/or move the intervention time forward in terms of time (e.g., the regenerative braking start time occurs relatively sooner) with falling dynamics of the driving mode that has been set (e.g., via the “eco mode”) [for example, apparent from at least Figs. 12A-12B in view of at least ¶ 0241-0242, 0290 & 0340-0349 of Lee; because move the intervention time back in terms of time with increasing dynamics of the driving mode that has been set and move the intervention time forward in terms of time with falling dynamics of the driving mode that has been set are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives].
With respect to claim 13, Lee modified supra teaches the vehicle system according to claim 11, wherein the processor of the vehicle guidance system is configured to: select an operating mode of the automated longitudinal guidance and/or a temporal sequence of different operating modes of the automated longitudinal guidance of the vehicle from a plurality of different operating modes on the basis of the driving mode that has been set [for example, apparent from at least Figs. 12A-12B in view of at least ¶ 0241-0242, 0290 & 0340-0349 of Lee; because select an operating mode of the automated longitudinal guidance from a plurality of different operating modes and select a temporal sequence of different operating modes of the automated longitudinal guidance of the vehicle from a plurality of different operating modes are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives], wherein the plurality of different operating modes comprise at least one of: (i) coasting operation in which one or more drivable wheels of the vehicle are decoupled from a drive motor of the vehicle; (ii) towing operation in which the one or more drivable wheels of the vehicle drag the drive motor along; or (iii) braking operation in which one or more wheels of the vehicle are actively braked [for example, apparent from at least Figs. 12A-12B in view of at least ¶ 0241-0242, 0290 & 0340-0349 of Lee; because (i) coasting operation in which one or more drivable wheels of the vehicle are decoupled from a drive motor of the vehicle, (ii) towing operation in which the one or more drivable wheels of the vehicle drag the drive motor along, and (iii) braking operation in which one or more wheels of the vehicle are actively braked are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives].
With respect to claim 14, Lee modified supra teaches the vehicle system according to claim 13, wherein the active braking is via one or more regenerative brakes and/or one or more friction brakes of the vehicle [note: “wherein the active braking is via one or more regenerative brakes and/or one or more friction brakes of the vehicle” refers to “(iii) braking operation in which one or more wheels of the vehicle are actively braked” in claim 13, which is recited in the alternative to each of “(i)…” and “(ii)…” in claim 13, such that “wherein the active braking is via one or more regenerative brakes and/or one or more friction brakes of the vehicle” does not necessarily further define the claimed “vehicle “system” in a case where one or more of the alternatives of “(i)…” and “(ii)…” is addressed instead of “(iii)…” (also, see: MPEP 2111.04_I); even so, for example, apparent from at least Figs. 10 & 12A-12B in view of at least ¶ 0241-0242, 0290, 0319-0323 & 0340-0349 of Lee; also: because the active braking is via one or more regenerative brakes of the vehicle and the active braking is via one or more friction brakes of the vehicle are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives].
With respect to claim 15, Lee modified supra teaches the vehicle system according to claim 13, wherein the processor of the vehicle guidance system is configured to: determine whether a driving mode with relatively high dynamics or a driving mode with relatively low dynamics has been set (e.g., an “eco mode”) [for example, apparent from at least Figs. 12A-12B in view of at least ¶ 0241-0242, 0290 & 0340-0349 of Lee; because determine whether a driving mode with relatively high dynamics has been set and determine whether a driving mode with a driving mode with relatively low dynamics has been set are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives]; and use the coasting operation and/or the towing operation when approaching the first signaling unit if it is determined that the driving mode with relatively low dynamics has been set (e.g., the “eco mode”) [for example, apparent from at least Figs. 12A-12B in view of at least ¶ 0241-0242, 0290 & 0340-0349 of Lee; because use the coasting operation and use the towing operation are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives].
With respect to claim 16, Lee modified supra teaches the vehicle system according to claim 11, wherein the plurality of driving modes comprise an eco driving mode (“eco mode”), a comfort driving mode (“comfort mode”) and a sport driving mode (“sport mode”), the eco driving mode has lower dynamics than the comfort driving mode, and the comfort driving mode has lower dynamics than the sport driving mode (apparent from at least Figs. 12A-12B in view of at least ¶ 0241-0242, 0290 & 0340-0349 of Lee).
With respect to claim 18, Lee modified supra teaches the vehicle guidance system according to claim 16, wherein when approaching the first signaling unit, as of an intervention time, the processor of the vehicle guidance system is configured to select an operating mode for the vehicle in which a drive motor of the vehicle does not produce any drive torque or produces a drag torque or a braking torque on the vehicle [because an operating mode for the vehicle in which a drive motor of the vehicle does not produce any drive torque, an operating mode for the vehicle in which a drive motor of the vehicle produces a drag torque on the vehicle, and an operating mode for the vehicle in which a drive motor of the vehicle produces a braking torque on the vehicle are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives; for example, apparent from at least Figs. 12A-12B in view of at least ¶ 0052, 0177, 0241-0242, 0290 & 0340-0349 of Lee]; the intervention time is earlier in the eco driving mode than in the comfort driving mode; and the intervention time is earlier in the comfort driving mode than in the sport driving mode (apparent from at least Figs. 12A-12B in view of at least ¶ 0241-0242, 0290 & 0340-0349 of Lee).
With respect to claim 19, Lee modified supra teaches the vehicle system according to claim 11, wherein the processor of the vehicle guidance system is configured to determine that the vehicle is supposed to stop at the first signaling unit (apparent from at least Figs. 5, 6, 9 & 12A-12B and as discussed by at least ¶ 0237, 0245-0246, 0250, 0326 & 0328 of Lee); and set a deceleration behavior of the vehicle when approaching the first signaling unit on the basis of the driving mode that has been set (apparent from at least Fig. 12A in view of at least ¶ 0340-0345 of Lee).
With respect to claim 20, Lee modified supra teaches the vehicle system according to claim 19, wherein the processor of the vehicle guidance system is configured to: in a first driving mode with first dynamics (e.g., “sport mode”) greater than second dynamics of a second driving mode (e.g., “eco mode”), decelerate the vehicle with a first deceleration value as of a first intervention time; and in the second driving mode, decelerate the vehicle with a second deceleration value as of a second intervention time, wherein the first intervention time follows the second intervention time in terms of time, and/or the first deceleration value is greater than the second deceleration value in terms of absolute value [because the first intervention time follows the second intervention time in terms of time and the first deceleration value is greater than the second deceleration value in terms of absolute value are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives; for example, apparent from at least Figs. 12A-12B in view of at least ¶ 0241-0242, 0290 & 0340-0349 of Lee].
With respect to claim 21, Lee modified supra teaches a method for providing a driving function for autonomous driving with automated longitudinal and lateral guidance of a vehicle at a signaling unit, the method comprising: during operation of the driving function for autonomous driving with automated longitudinal and lateral guidance of the vehicle: detecting, with a processor, a first signaling unit which is arranged in front of the vehicle in a direction of travel on a road used by the vehicle and determining a state of the first signaling unit based on a detected color of the first signaling unit, the color of the first signaling unit being red, amber, or green; determining, with the processor, a driving mode that has been set from a plurality of different driving modes of the vehicle; and effecting, with the processor, at least the automated longitudinal guidance of the autonomous driving of the vehicle when approaching the first signaling unit on the basis of the driving mode that has been set and the state of the first signaling unit determined based on the detected color of the first signaling unit; wherein the processor is configured to effect at least the automated longitudinal guidance of the autonomous driving of vehicle differently when the detected color of the first signaling unit is red, when the detected color of the first signaling unit is amber, and when the detected color of the first signaling unit is green (as discussed in detail above with respect to claim 11).
With respect to claim 22, Lee modified supra teaches the method of claim 21, wherein when the detected color of the first signaling unit is amber, the automated longitudinal guidance of the autonomous driving of the vehicle is effected based in part on when the first signaling unit switched to amber (as discussed by at least ¶ 0038-0039).
With respect to claim 23, Lee modified supra teaches the vehicle system of claim 11, wherein when the detected color of the first signaling unit is amber, the automated longitudinal guidance of the autonomous driving of the vehicle is effected based in part on when the first signaling unit switched to amber (as discussed in detail above with respect to at least claims 11 and 22).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Ikezawa, and in view of DE 102018131280 A1 to Baumann (hereinafter: “Baumann”).
With respect to claim 17, Lee modified supra teaches the vehicle system according to claim 16; however, Lee appears to lack a clear teaching as to whether the processor of the vehicle guidance system is configured, when approaching the first signaling unit, to: first operate the vehicle in the coasting operation, then in the towing operation and then in the braking operation if the driving mode that has been set is the eco driving mode; and/or first operate the vehicle in the towing operation, without using the coasting operation, and then in the braking operation if the driving mode that has been set is the comfort driving mode; and/or operate the vehicle directly in the braking operation, without using the coasting operation and the towing operation, if the driving mode that has been set is the sport driving mode [because first operate the vehicle in the coasting operation, then in the towing operation and then in the braking operation if the driving mode that has been set is the eco driving mode, first operate the vehicle in the towing operation, without using the coasting operation, and then in the braking operation if the driving mode that has been set is the comfort driving mode, and operate the vehicle directly in the braking operation, without using the coasting operation and the towing operation, if the driving mode that has been set is the sport driving mode are recited in the alternative, it is sufficient to address one of the claimed alternatives].
Baumann teaches an analogous vehicle system including a vehicle guidance system configured, when in a vehicle deceleration process (e.g., K1 or K7), to first operate a vehicle in a towing operation (“coasting operation” or “coasting process”; 12), without using a coasting operation (“sailing operation” or “sailing process”), and then in a braking operation (“braking operation” or “braking process”; 14) in a driving mode of the vehicle (as depicted by at least Figs. 1-3 and as discussed by at least ¶ 0005-0011, 0031-0034, 0037-0039 & 0046).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the vehicle system of Lee with the teachings of Baumann, if even necessary, such that the processor of the vehicle guidance system is configured, when approaching the first signaling unit at times including when the driving mode that has been set is the comfort driving mode, to first operate the vehicle in the towing operation, without using the coasting operation, and then operate the vehicle in the braking operation, because Baumann further teaches that first operating the vehicle in a towing operation, without using a coasting operation, and then operating the vehicle in a braking operation beneficially improves rate of deceleration as compared to first operating the vehicle in the coasting operation and then operating the vehicle in the braking operation, while also beneficially reducing energy consumption as compared to only operating the vehicle in the braking operation.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN ZALESKAS whose telephone number is (571)272-5958. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Logan Kraft can be reached on 571-270-5065. 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.
/JOHN M ZALESKAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3747
Prosecution Insights