DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
The status of the claims is as follows:
(a) Claims 1-19 remain pending.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-5 and 10-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schoenherr DE102014220144A1 (hereinafter, Schoenherr), in view of Deguchi et al. U.S. P.G. Publication 2002/0038171A1 (hereinafter, Deguchi).
Regarding Claim 1, Schoenherr describes a method for operating a motor vehicle, comprising:
-operating the motor vehicle in a teaching mode in which a driver can drive and thereby teach a trajectory by manually driving the motor vehicle (a learning phase is activated by the driver and the driver manually drives the vehicle along a first trajectory from a start position to a target position, with information regarding the trajectory stored, Schoenherr, Paragraphs 0007 and 0012-0013 and Figure 1);
-operating the motor vehicle in a following mode in which the motor vehicle at least semi-autonomously follows the trajectory or an adapted variant thereof (after activation of an assistance function, the vehicle is moved partially or fully automatically along a second trajectory based on information stored during the learning phase, Schoenherr, Paragraphs 0008-0010, 0014-0015, and 0034-0035 and Figure 2);
-wherein in the teaching mode during manually driving the motor vehicle by the driver, a steering angle limit smaller than a system-related maximum possible steering angle is provided (during the learning phase, the maximum steering wheel angle adjustable by the driver is limited to a predefined steering wheel angle limit that is smaller than the maximum possible steering angle, Schoenherr, Paragraphs 0013 and 0016) ...
Schoenherr does not specifically disclose the method to include determining a requirement for a steering angle limit depending on a current driving situation; and based on the determined requirement, selectively adjusting the steering angle limit of the motor vehicle; wherein the steering angle limit in the teaching mode during manually driving the motor vehicle by the driver has at least two states, comprising an unlimited state and a limited state; in the unlimited state, the steering angle limit corresponds to a system-related maximum possible steering angle; and wherein in the limited state, the steering angle limit is smaller than the system-related maximum possible steering angle.
Deguchi discloses, teaches, or at least suggests the missing limitation. Deguchi determines whether a steering angle limit mode should be set based on the current relationship between the vehicle and a disallowed boundary, including the steering quantity and distance to the boundary. When the steering angle limit mode is set, a steering-angle limit is active, and when the mode is cleared, no steering-angle limitation is imposed, thereby providing limited and non-limited steering states (Deguchi, Paragraphs 0052-0061 and 0075-0078). Deguchi further teaches selectively setting or clearing the steering-angle-limit mode based on the current driving situation, including obstacle distance, vehicle speed, vehicle location, and vehicle advancing direction (Deguchi, Paragraphs 0057-0059 and 0097-0101).
As a result, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to modify Schoenherr's method to include determining a requirement for a steering angle limit depending on a current driving situation; and based on the determined requirement, selectively adjusting the steering angle limit of the motor vehicle; wherein the steering angle limit in the teaching mode during manually driving the motor vehicle by the driver has at least two states, comprising an unlimited state and a limited state; in the unlimited state, the steering angle limit corresponds to a system-related maximum possible steering angle; and wherein in the limited state, the steering angle limit is smaller than the system-related maximum possible steering angle, as disclosed, taught, or suggested by Deguchi.
It would have been obvious to combine and modify the cited references, with a reasonable expectation of success, to selectively set or clear the steering angle limit based on the current driving situation because doing so allows steering to be restricted when necessary to maintain appropriate clearance from surrounding boundaries while avoiding unnecessary steering restriction otherwise (Deguchi, Paragraphs 0052-0060 and 0099).
Regarding Claim 2, Schoenherr, as modified, describes the method of claim 1.
Schoenherr does not specifically disclose the method to include detecting a driving situation using an environmental sensor system of the motor vehicle.
Deguchi discloses, teaches, or at least suggests the missing limitation. Deguchi uses a CCD camera and image processing device to detect an approach-disallowed area, including a road boundary, blocking wall, or white line, and determines the distance and orientation between the detected boundary and the vehicle for determining whether the steering-angle-limit mode should be set (Deguchi, Paragraphs 0052-0057).
As a result, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to modify Schoenherr's method to include detecting a driving situation using an environmental sensor system of the motor vehicle, as disclosed, taught, or suggested by Deguchi.
It would have been obvious to combine and modify the cited references, with a reasonable expectation of success, to use an environmental sensor system to detect the driving situation because doing so allows the steering angle limit to be adjusted based on the vehicle's actual surroundings (Deguchi, Paragraphs 0052-0057).
Regarding Claim 3, Schoenherr, as modified, describes the method of claim 1.
Schoenherr does not specifically disclose the method to include wherein the steering angle limit is fixed at a reduced value or set to a predetermined value below a maximum possible steering angle if the driving situation corresponds to maneuvering while not maintaining a minimum distance to interfering contours in an environment of the motor vehicle.
Deguchi discloses, teaches, or at least suggests the missing limitation. Deguchi determines the distance between the vehicle and an approach-disallowed boundary and sets the steering-angle-limit mode when the steering quantity is at least a predetermined amount and the distance to the boundary is approximately 0.5 meters or less. When the steering-angle-limit mode is set, the steering angle is limited to a predetermined value (Deguchi, Paragraphs 0052-0057 and 0076-0078).
As a result, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to modify Schoenherr's method to include wherein the steering angle limit is fixed at a reduced value or set to a predetermined value below a maximum possible steering angle if the driving situation corresponds to maneuvering while not maintaining a minimum distance to interfering contours in an environment of the motor vehicle, as disclosed, taught, or suggested by Deguchi.
It would have been obvious to combine and modify the cited references, with a reasonable expectation of success, to reduce the steering angle limit when the vehicle is maneuvering without maintaining sufficient distance from an interfering contour because doing so allows the vehicle to reduce the likelihood of approaching the interfering contour too closely (Deguchi, Paragraphs 0052-0057).
Regarding Claim 4, Schoenherr, as modified, describes the method of claim 1.
Schoenherr does not specifically disclose the method to include wherein the steering angle limit is fixed at a greater value or held at a predetermined value when the driving situation corresponds to maneuvering at a minimum distance to interfering contours in an environment of the motor vehicle.
Deguchi discloses, teaches, or at least suggests the missing limitation. Deguchi teaches clearing the steering-angle-limit mode when the relationship between the vehicle and the approach-disallowed boundary no longer requires the reduced steering limitation and expressly teaches clearing the steering-angle-limit mode when a detected distance to an obstacle is equal to or greater than a predetermined value, thereby permitting a greater steering-angle value (Deguchi, Paragraphs 0058-0059 and 0099).
As a result, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to modify Schoenherr's method to include wherein the steering angle limit is fixed at a greater value or held at a predetermined value when the driving situation corresponds to maneuvering at a minimum distance to interfering contours in an environment of the motor vehicle, as disclosed, taught, or suggested by Deguchi.
It would have been obvious to combine and modify the cited references, with a reasonable expectation of success, to provide a greater steering angle when sufficient distance from an interfering contour is maintained because doing so preserves greater maneuverability when the reduced steering restriction is not required (Deguchi, Paragraphs 0058-0059 and 0099).
Regarding Claim 5, Schoenherr, as modified, describes the method of claim 1, comprising adapting the trajectory at least partially before following in order to generate the adapted variant (an offset between the learned starting position and the later starting position is determined and corrections to the stored first trajectory are calculated to determine a second trajectory, which is subsequently followed automatically, Schoenherr, Paragraphs 0009-0010 and 0034-0035 and Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 10, Schoenherr describes a control unit for a motor vehicle (an electronic control unit including a memory device and a control device connected to vehicle components and configured to perform the disclosed method, Schoenherr, Paragraph 0026 and Figure 3), which is configured to:
-operate the motor vehicle in a teaching mode in which a driver can manually drive and thereby teach a trajectory (during the learning phase the driver manually drives the vehicle along a trajectory which is detected and stored, Schoenherr, Paragraphs 0007 and 0012-0013);
-operate the motor vehicle in a following mode in which the motor vehicle at least semi-autonomously follows the trajectory or an adapted variant thereof (the vehicle subsequently moves partially or fully automatically along a second trajectory based on the stored trajectory, Schoenherr, Paragraphs 0008-0010, 0014-0015, and 0034-0035);
-wherein, in the teaching mode during manually driving the motor vehicle by the driver, a steering angle limit smaller than the system-related maximum possible steering angle is provided (during the learning phase, the maximum steering wheel angle adjustable by the driver is limited to a predefined steering wheel angle limit that is 45-180 degrees smaller than the maximum possible steering angle, Schoenherr, Paragraphs 0013 and 0016) ...
Schoenherr does not specifically disclose the control unit to include determine a requirement for a steering angle limit depending on a current driving situation; and based on the determined requirement, selectively adjust the maximum steering angle of the motor vehicle; wherein the steering angle limit in the teaching mode during manually driving the motor vehicle by the driver has at least two states, comprising an unlimited state and a limited state; in the unlimited state, the steering angle limit corresponds to a system-related maximum possible steering angle; and wherein in the limited state, the steering angle limit is smaller than the system-related maximum possible steering angle.
Deguchi discloses, teaches, or at least suggests the missing limitation. Deguchi's ECU determines whether the steering-angle-limit mode should be set based on the current driving situation and, when set, restricts the steering angle, while when the mode is cleared no steering-angle limitation is imposed (Deguchi, Paragraphs 0052-0061 and 0075-0078).
As a result, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to modify Schoenherr's control unit to include determine a requirement for a steering angle limit depending on a current driving situation; and based on the determined requirement, selectively adjust the maximum steering angle of the motor vehicle; wherein the steering angle limit in the teaching mode during manually driving the motor vehicle by the driver has at least two states, comprising an unlimited state and a limited state; in the unlimited state, the steering angle limit corresponds to a system-related maximum possible steering angle; and wherein in the limited state, the steering angle limit is smaller than the system-related maximum possible steering angle, as disclosed, taught, or suggested by Deguchi.
It would have been obvious to combine and modify the cited references, with a reasonable expectation of success, to selectively set or clear the steering-angle limitation based on the current driving situation because doing so permits steering restriction when necessary for obstacle clearance without unnecessarily restricting steering otherwise (Deguchi, Paragraphs 0052-0060 and 0099).
Regarding Claim 11, Schoenherr, as modified, describes the method of claim 2.
Schoenherr does not specifically disclose the method to include wherein the steering angle limit is fixed at a reduced value or set to a predetermined value below a maximum possible steering angle if the driving situation corresponds to maneuvering while not maintaining a minimum distance to interfering contours in the environment.
Deguchi discloses, teaches, or at least suggests the missing limitation. Deguchi determines the distance between the vehicle and an approach-disallowed boundary and sets the steering-angle-limit mode when the steering quantity is at least a predetermined amount and the distance to the boundary is approximately 0.5 meters or less, thereby limiting the steering angle to a predetermined value (Deguchi, Paragraphs 0052-0057 and 0076-0078).
As a result, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to modify Schoenherr's method to include wherein the steering angle limit is fixed at a reduced value or set to a predetermined value below a maximum possible steering angle if the driving situation corresponds to maneuvering while not maintaining a minimum distance to interfering contours in the environment, as disclosed, taught, or suggested by Deguchi.
It would have been obvious to combine and modify the cited references, with a reasonable expectation of success, to reduce the steering angle limit when the vehicle is maneuvering without maintaining sufficient distance from an interfering contour because doing so allows the vehicle to reduce the likelihood of approaching the interfering contour too closely (Deguchi, Paragraphs 0052-0057).
Regarding Claim 12, Schoenherr, as modified, describes the method of claim 2.
Schoenherr does not specifically disclose the method to include wherein the steering angle limit is fixed at a greater value or held at a predetermined value when the driving situation corresponds to maneuvering at a minimum distance to interfering contours in the environment.
Deguchi discloses, teaches, or at least suggests the missing limitation. Deguchi teaches clearing the steering-angle-limit mode when the detected distance to an obstacle is equal to or greater than a predetermined value, thereby permitting a greater steering-angle value when sufficient clearance exists (Deguchi, Paragraphs 0058-0059 and 0099).
As a result, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to modify Schoenherr's method to include wherein the steering angle limit is fixed at a greater value or held at a predetermined value when the driving situation corresponds to maneuvering at a minimum distance to interfering contours in the environment, as disclosed, taught, or suggested by Deguchi.
It would have been obvious to combine and modify the cited references, with a reasonable expectation of success, to provide a greater steering angle when sufficient distance from an interfering contour is maintained because doing so preserves greater maneuverability when the reduced steering restriction is not required (Deguchi, Paragraphs 0058-0059 and 0099).
Regarding Claim 13, Schoenherr, as modified, describes the method of claim 3.
Schoenherr does not specifically disclose the method to include wherein the steering angle limit is fixed at a greater value or held at a predetermined value when the driving situation corresponds to maneuvering at a minimum distance to interfering contours in the environment.
Deguchi discloses, teaches, or at least suggests the missing limitation. Deguchi teaches clearing the steering-angle-limit mode when the detected distance to an obstacle is equal to or greater than a predetermined value, thereby permitting a greater steering-angle value when sufficient clearance exists (Deguchi, Paragraphs 0058-0059 and 0099).
As a result, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to modify Schoenherr's method to include wherein the steering angle limit is fixed at a greater value or held at a predetermined value when the driving situation corresponds to maneuvering at a minimum distance to interfering contours in the environment, as disclosed, taught, or suggested by Deguchi.
It would have been obvious to combine and modify the cited references, with a reasonable expectation of success, to provide a greater steering angle when sufficient distance from an interfering contour is maintained because doing so preserves greater maneuverability when the reduced steering restriction is not required (Deguchi, Paragraphs 0058-0059 and 0099).
Regarding Claim 14, Schoenherr, as modified, describes the method of claim 2, comprising adapting the trajectory at least partially before following in order to generate the adapted variant (an offset between the learned starting position and the later starting position is determined and corrections to the stored first trajectory are calculated to determine a second trajectory, which is subsequently followed automatically, Schoenherr, Paragraphs 0009-0010 and 0034-0035 and Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 15, Schoenherr, as modified, describes the method of claim 3, comprising adapting the trajectory at least partially before following in order to generate the adapted variant (an offset between the learned starting position and the later starting position is determined and corrections to the stored first trajectory are calculated to determine a second trajectory, which is subsequently followed automatically, Schoenherr, Paragraphs 0009-0010 and 0034-0035 and Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 16, Schoenherr, as modified, describes the method of claim 4, comprising adapting the trajectory at least partially before following in order to generate the adapted variant (an offset between the learned starting position and the later starting position is determined and corrections to the stored first trajectory are calculated to determine a second trajectory, which is subsequently followed automatically, Schoenherr, Paragraphs 0009-0010 and 0034-0035 and Figure 2).
Claims 6-9 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schoenherr DE102014220144A1 (hereinafter, Schoenherr), in view of Deguchi et al. U.S. P.G. Publication 2002/0038171A1 (hereinafter, Deguchi), in further view of Bhadgaonkar et al. U.S. P.G. Publication 2023/0159020A1 (hereinafter, Bhadgaonkar).
Regarding Claim 6, Schoenherr, as modified, describes the method of claim 5.
Schoenherr does not specifically disclose the method to include wherein the adaptation comprises increasing at least one curve radius of the trajectory.
Bhadgaonkar discloses, teaches, or at least suggests the missing limitation. Bhadgaonkar identifies a strongly curved section of a trained trajectory having a radius smaller than can be achieved using the maximum permissible steering lock in the following mode and generates a substitute trajectory having a maximum curvature that does not exceed the permissible curvature, thereby increasing the corresponding curve radius of the adapted portion (Bhadgaonkar, Paragraphs 0006-0007 and 0011-0015 and Figures 2-3 and 6).
As a result, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to modify Schoenherr's method to include wherein the adaptation comprises increasing at least one curve radius of the trajectory, as disclosed, taught, or suggested by Bhadgaonkar.
It would have been obvious to combine and modify the cited references, with a reasonable expectation of success, to increase the curve radius of an excessively curved portion of the learned trajectory because doing so allows the adapted trajectory to remain within the steering capability available during autonomous following (Bhadgaonkar, Paragraphs 0011-0015).
Regarding Claim 7, Schoenherr, as modified, describes the method of claim 5.
Schoenherr does not specifically disclose the method to include wherein the adaptation comprises shifting at least one steering-in point to a front, and/or shifting at least one steering-out point to the rear.
Bhadgaonkar discloses, teaches, or at least suggests the missing limitation. Bhadgaonkar determines the starting point and end point of a strongly curved section based on the steering angle and generates a substitute trajectory having a substitute starting point before the starting point of the strongly curved section and/or a substitute end point after the end point of the strongly curved section (Bhadgaonkar, Paragraphs 0014-0015 and 0022-0023 and Figure 2).
As a result, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to modify Schoenherr's method to include wherein the adaptation comprises shifting at least one steering-in point to a front, and/or shifting at least one steering-out point to the rear, as disclosed, taught, or suggested by Bhadgaonkar.
It would have been obvious to combine and modify the cited references, with a reasonable expectation of success, to shift the steering-in point forward and/or the steering-out point rearward because doing so allows a tightly curved portion of the taught trajectory to be replaced with a trajectory that can be followed within the permissible steering capability (Bhadgaonkar, Paragraphs 0014-0015 and 0022-0023).
Regarding Claim 8, Schoenherr, as modified, describes the method of claim 5.
Schoenherr does not specifically disclose the method to include comprising adapting the trajectory taking into account environmental information detected in teaching mode.
Bhadgaonkar discloses, teaches, or at least suggests the missing limitation. Bhadgaonkar records environmental sensor signals during the training mode and further teaches taking environmental sensor data into account when ascertaining the substitute trajectory (Bhadgaonkar, Paragraphs 0010 and 0037-0040).
As a result, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to modify Schoenherr's method to include adapting the trajectory taking into account environmental information detected in teaching mode, as disclosed, taught, or suggested by Bhadgaonkar.
It would have been obvious to combine and modify the cited references, with a reasonable expectation of success, to use environmental information detected during teaching when adapting the trajectory because doing so allows the adapted trajectory to account for surrounding obstacles and available maneuvering space (Bhadgaonkar, Paragraphs 0010 and 0037-0040).
Regarding Claim 9, Schoenherr, as modified, describes the method of claim 8.
Schoenherr does not specifically disclose the method to include wherein maximum permissible adaptations to the trajectory are defined by using the environmental information.
Bhadgaonkar discloses, teaches, or at least suggests the missing limitation. Bhadgaonkar defines a maximum permissible offset between the trained trajectory and the substitute trajectory and teaches that different limit values can be provided for different environments and that the upper limit for the maximum offset can be predefined based on the nature of the environment, including obstacles or objects present in the environment (Bhadgaonkar, Paragraphs 0026-0029 and Figures 2-3).
As a result, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to modify Schoenherr's method to include wherein maximum permissible adaptations to the trajectory are defined by using the environmental information, as disclosed, taught, or suggested by Bhadgaonkar.
It would have been obvious to combine and modify the cited references, with a reasonable expectation of success, to define the maximum permissible trajectory adaptation based on environmental information because doing so prevents the adapted trajectory from deviating excessively toward surrounding obstacles (Bhadgaonkar, Paragraphs 0026-0029).
Regarding Claim 17, Schoenherr, as modified, describes the method of claim 6.
Schoenherr does not specifically disclose the method to include wherein the adaptation comprises shifting at least one steering-in point to a front, and/or shifting at least one steering-out point to a rear.
Bhadgaonkar discloses, teaches, or at least suggests the missing limitation. Bhadgaonkar determines the starting point and end point of a strongly curved section and generates a substitute trajectory having a substitute starting point before the starting point of the strongly curved section and/or a substitute end point after the end point of the strongly curved section (Bhadgaonkar, Paragraphs 0014-0015 and 0022-0023 and Figure 2).
As a result, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to modify Schoenherr's method to include wherein the adaptation comprises shifting at least one steering-in point to a front, and/or shifting at least one steering-out point to a rear, as disclosed, taught, or suggested by Bhadgaonkar.
It would have been obvious to combine and modify the cited references, with a reasonable expectation of success, to shift the steering-in point forward and/or the steering-out point rearward because doing so allows a tightly curved portion of the taught trajectory to be replaced with a trajectory that can be followed within the permissible steering capability (Bhadgaonkar, Paragraphs 0014-0015 and 0022-0023).
Regarding Claim 18, Schoenherr, as modified, describes the method of claim 6.
Schoenherr does not specifically disclose the method to include comprising adapting the trajectory taking into account environmental information detected in teaching mode.
Bhadgaonkar discloses, teaches, or at least suggests the missing limitation. Bhadgaonkar records environmental sensor signals during the training mode and further teaches taking environmental sensor data into account when ascertaining the substitute trajectory (Bhadgaonkar, Paragraphs 0010 and 0037-0040).
As a result, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to modify Schoenherr's method to include adapting the trajectory taking into account environmental information detected in teaching mode, as disclosed, taught, or suggested by Bhadgaonkar.
It would have been obvious to combine and modify the cited references, with a reasonable expectation of success, to use environmental information detected during teaching when adapting the trajectory because doing so allows the adapted trajectory to account for surrounding obstacles and available maneuvering space (Bhadgaonkar, Paragraphs 0010 and 0037-0040).
Regarding Claim 19, Schoenherr, as modified, describes the method of claim 7.
Schoenherr does not specifically disclose the method to include comprising adapting the trajectory taking into account environmental information detected in teaching mode.
Bhadgaonkar discloses, teaches, or at least suggests the missing limitation. Bhadgaonkar records environmental sensor signals during the training mode and further teaches taking environmental sensor data into account when ascertaining the substitute trajectory (Bhadgaonkar, Paragraphs 0010 and 0037-0040).
As a result, a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have found it obvious to modify Schoenherr's method to include adapting the trajectory taking into account environmental information detected in teaching mode, as disclosed, taught, or suggested by Bhadgaonkar.
It would have been obvious to combine and modify the cited references, with a reasonable expectation of success, to use environmental information detected during teaching when adapting the trajectory because doing so allows the adapted trajectory to account for surrounding obstacles and available maneuvering space (Bhadgaonkar, Paragraphs 0010 and 0037-0040).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW J CROMER whose telephone number is (313)446-6563. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: ~ 8:15 A.M. - 6:00 P.M..
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, Faris Almatrahi can be reached at (313) 446-4821. 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.
/ANDREW J CROMER/Examiner, Art Unit 3667
