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 Amendment
This office action is in response to remarks and amendments filed on 3/16/2026. Claims 11 and 17 are cancelled. Claims 1-10, 12-16, and 18-22 are pending.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-10, and 18-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2019/0311666 ("Chen") in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2015/0001414 ("Morita") and U.S. Patent Publication No. 2020/0288070 ("Siala") further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2016/0146639 ("Chan").
Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses an assembly for an electronic device, the assembly comprising:
a display screen (1, Fig. 2B, 2D, paragraph [0046]) including a plurality of pixels (11+12, Fig. 2B, 2D form a pixel) arranged in a matrix scheme having rows orientated in a first direction and columns orientated in a second direction (see Fig. 2B, pixels arranged in rows and columns); and
a proximity sensor (2, Fig. 2D, can detect distance between display and user, see paragraphs [0048], [0050]) including at least one optical light emitter (21, Fig. 2D, emitter array inherently includes at least one optical light emitter, see also paragraph [0063]) adapted to emit a light beam through one or more first pixels (first pixel 12, Fig. 2D, paragraphs [0049], [0073]) of the display screen (Figs. 5, 10), and an optical detector (22, Fig. 2D, 2E, paragraphs [0049]-[0050]) adapted to receive through one or more second pixels (second pixel 12, Fig. 2D, 2E, paragraph [0073]) of the display screen (1, Fig. 2D, 2E) the light beam emitted by the at least one optical light emitter (21, Fig. 2D) and reflected on an object (Fig. 3, paragraphs [0050], [0076]-[0080]).
Chen does not disclose that the at least one optical light emitter and the optical detector being separated by a first internal wall having a first end coupled to a first wall of the proximity sensor and a second end coupled to a second wall of the proximity sensor, nor that none of the one or more second pixels are in a same row as any one of the one or more first pixels, and none of the one or more second pixels are in a same column as any one of the one or more first pixels.
However, Morita discloses a proximity sensor (19, Figs. 1, or 11A) with light emitters and light detectors arranged in such a way (see arrangement in Fig. 11A, for example) that when placed behind a display would result in none of the one or more second pixels to be in a same row as any one of the one or more first pixels, and none of the one or more second pixels to be in a same column as any one of the one or more first pixels (see, Fig. 11A, assuming the display pixels are the same size or smaller than the size of the light emitting elements and light receiving element of the proximity sensor).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to arrange the light emitter/detectors of a proximity sensor as disclosed by Morita in Fig. 11A under the display screen of Chen in order to create a compact configuration that facilitates proximity detection from various directions.
Siala is a reference used to teach that the size of pixels in a displays can be smaller than the size of light emitting elements and/or photodetectors (see Fig. 5B, paragraph [0072]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have an area of the emitter/sensor larger than the area of a single pixel as disclosed by Siala in the device of Chen in view of Morita in order to obtain a specific spatial coordination of various elements of the display.
Chen in view of Morita and Siala does not disclose that the at least one optical light emitter and the optical detector are separated by a first internal wall having a first end coupled to a first wall of the proximity sensor and a second end coupled to a second wall of the proximity sensor.
However, Chan discloses a proximity sensor (Figs. 1-1A, paragraph [0005]) wherein the at least one optical light emitter (12, Figs. 1-1A) and the optical detector (13, or 14, Figs. 1-1A) are separated by a first internal wall (111, Figs. 1-1A) having a first end coupled to a first wall of the proximity sensor and a second end coupled to a second wall of the proximity sensor (see Fig. 1A, the inner wall 111 is coupled to both ends of the housing 11, paragraph [0029]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to separate the light emitter and detector with an internal wall as disclosed by Chan in the device of Chen in view of Morita and Siala in order to minimize cross talk and improve sensitivity of the sensor.
Regarding claim 2, Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan discloses the assembly according to claim 1, and Morita further discloses that each common axis passing through a center of one of the at least one optical light emitter (center of 25D and 25B, Fig. 11A) and a center of the optical detector (center of 32, Fig. 11A) is offset with regard to each of the first and second directions (horizontal and vertical directions, Fig. 11A) by an acute angle of at least 10° and at most 80° (see Fig. 11A, paragraph [0109], common axis appears to be close to 45° from the horizontal and vertical directions).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to align the common axis as disclosed by Morita in the device of Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan in order to create a compact configuration that facilitates proximity detection from various directions.
Regarding claim 3, Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan discloses the assembly according to claim 2, and Morita further discloses that a first acute angle of each common axis with regard to the first direction (either one of horizontal or vertical directions, Fig. 11A) is in a range between 10° and 45° (see Fig. 11A, paragraph [0109], common axis appears to be close to 45° from either horizontal and vertical directions).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to align the common axis as disclosed by Morita in the device of Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan in order to create a compact configuration that facilitates proximity detection from various directions.
Regarding claim 4, Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan discloses the assembly according to claim 2, and Morita further discloses that a second acute angle of each common axis with regard to the second direction (other one of horizontal or vertical directions, Fig. 11A) is in a range between 10° and 45° (see Fig. 11A, paragraph [0109], common axis appears to be close to 45° from either the horizontal and vertical directions).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to align the common axis as disclosed by Morita in the device of Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan in order to create a compact configuration that facilitates proximity detection from various directions.
Regarding claim 6, Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan discloses the assembly according to claim 1, and Morita further discloses that the at least one optical light emitter (any one of 10A, 10B, 10C, Figs. 1, 11A) and the optical detector (32, Figs. 1, 11A) are housed within an optical package (paragraph [0086]), and each common axis passing through a center of one of the at least one optical light emitter and a center of the optical detector is substantially aligned with the [horizontal edge] of the optical package (see for example, Fig. 1, common axis passing through a center of 10B and center of 32 is aligned with a horizontal edge of the package, see also paragraphs [0086], [0089]).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to align the common axis to an edge of the package as disclosed by Morita in the device of Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan in order to create a compact configuration that facilitates vertical and horizontal proximity detection.
Further, Chan discloses the first wall (for example front wall where label 11 is, Fig. 1A) of the proximity sensor being a first wall of the optical package (1, Fig. 1A) and the second wall (back wall of 1, Fig. 1A) of the proximity sensor being a second wall of the optical package (1, Fig. 1A), and each common axis (for example see line going through module 1, Fig. 1A) passing through a center of one of the at least one optical light emitter (12, Figs. 1-1A) and a center of the optical detector (13, 14, Fig. 1-1A) is substantially aligned with the first wall of the optical package (wall labeled 11, Fig. 1A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include walls in the optical package/module as disclosed by Chan in the device of Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan in order to block optical cross talk, further, the alignment of the light emitter and optical detectors is an obvious matter of design choice which can be optimized to further reduce optical cross talk. See In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice).
Regarding claim 7, Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan discloses the assembly according to claim 1, and Morita further discloses that the at least one optical light emitter (any one of 10A, 10B, 10C, Figs. 1, 11A) and the optical detector (32, Figs. 1, 11A) are housed within an optical package (paragraph [0086]), and each common axis passing through a center of one of the at least one optical light emitter and a center of the optical detector is offset with regard to the first [edge] and the second [edge] of the optical package by an acute angle of at least 10° and at most 80° (see Fig. 11A, common axis passing through a center of 25B, 25D, and center of 32 is aligned with the corner edge of the package, approximately 45° from each of the horizontal and vertical edges, see also paragraph [0089]).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to align the common axis as disclosed by Morita in the device of Chen in view of Morita and Siala in order to create a compact configuration that facilitates proximity detection from various directions.
Further, Chan teaches the first wall (for example front wall where label 11 is, Fig. 1A) of the proximity sensor is a first wall of the optical package (1, Fig. 1A) and the second wall (back wall of 1, Fig. 1A) of the proximity sensor being a second wall of the optical package (1, Fig. 1A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include walls in the optical package/module as disclosed by Chan in the device of Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan in order to block optical cross talk, further, the alignment of the light emitter and optical detectors is an obvious matter of design choice which can be optimized to further reduce optical cross talk. See In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice).
Regarding claim 8, Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan discloses the assembly according to claim 7, and Morita further discloses that the optical package is substantially rectangular or square (paragraphs [0038], [0089]), and at least one common axis is orientated substantially in a diagonal of the optical package (see Fig. 11A, common axis between 25B, 25D, and 32 is substantially diagonal).
Regarding claim 9, Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan discloses the assembly according to claim 8, and Chen further discloses that the optical detector (22, Fig. 2D) includes an array of light sensitive pixels having rows and columns of light sensitive pixels (Fig. 2J, paragraph [0066], an array inherently has rows and columns), the rows of light sensitive pixels substantially aligned with a direction of the at least one common axis (common axis being in the horizontal direction for example, see Fig. 2E).
Regarding claim 10, Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan discloses the assembly according to claim 1, and Chen further discloses that the at least one optical light emitter includes at least two optical light emitters (paragraph [0063]).
Regarding claim 18, Chen discloses a method for forming an assembly including a display screen (1, Fig. 2B, 2D, paragraph [0046]) having a plurality of pixels (11+12, Fig. 2B, 2D form a pixel) arranged in a matrix scheme having rows orientated in a first direction and columns orientated in a second direction (see Fig. 2B, pixels arranged in rows and columns), the method comprising:
placing a proximity sensor (2, Fig. 2D, can detect distance between display and user, see paragraphs [0048], [0050]) including at least one optical light emitter (21, Fig. 2D, emitter array inherently includes at least one optical light emitter, see also paragraph [0063]) and an optical detector (22, Fig. 2D, 2E, paragraphs [0049]-[0050]) under the display screen (1, Fig. 2B, 2D) in a manner wherein:
each of the at least one optical light emitter (21, Fig. 2D) is adapted to emit a light beam through one or more first pixels (first pixel 12, Fig. 2D, paragraphs [0049], [0073]) of the display screen (Figs. 5, 10), the optical detector (22, Fig. 2D, 2E, paragraphs [0049]-[0050]) is adapted to receive through one or more second pixels (second pixel 12, Fig. 2D, 2E, paragraph [0073]) of the display screen (1, Fig. 2D, 2E) the light beam emitted by the at least one optical light emitter (21, Fig. 2D) and reflected on an object (Fig. 3, paragraphs [0050], [0076]-[0080]).
Chen does not disclose that the optical light emitter and optical detector are separated by a first interior wall, nor that none of the one or more second pixels is in a same row as any one of the one or more first pixels, and none of the one or more second pixels is in a same column as any one of the one or more first pixels.
However, Morita discloses a proximity sensor (19, Figs. 1, or 11A) with light emitters and light detectors arranged in such a way (see arrangement in Fig. 11A, for example) that when placed behind a display would result in none of the one or more second pixels is in a same row as any one of the one or more first pixels, and none of the one or more second pixels is in a same column as any one of the one or more first pixels (see, Fig. 11A, assuming the display pixels are the same size or smaller than the size of the light emitting elements and light receiving element of the proximity sensor).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to arrange the light emitter/detectors of a proximity sensor as disclosed by Morita in Fig. 11A under the display screen of Chen in order to create a compact configuration that facilitates proximity detection from various directions.
Siala is a reference used to teach that the size of pixels in a displays can be smaller than the size of light emitting elements and/or photodetectors (see Fig. 5B, paragraph [0072]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have an area of the emitter/sensor larger than the area of a single pixel as disclosed by Siala in the device of Chen in view of Morita in order to obtain a specific spatial coordination of various elements of the display.
Chen in view of Morita and Siala does not disclose that the optical light emitter and optical detector are separated by a first interior wall.
However, Chan discloses a proximity sensor (Figs. 1-1A, paragraph [0005]) wherein the at least one optical light emitter (12, Figs. 1-1A) and the optical detector (13, or 14, Figs. 1-1A) are separated by a first internal wall (111, Figs. 1-1A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to separate the light emitter and detector with an internal wall as disclosed by Chan in the device of Chen in view of Morita and Siala in order to minimize cross talk and improve sensitivity of the sensor.
Regarding claim 19, Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan discloses the method of claim 18, and Chen discloses positioning the proximity sensor (2, Fig. 2D) under the display screen (1, Fig. 2D); and assembling the proximity sensor to the display screen (see Fig. 2D). Chen does not disclose the orientation of the proximity sensor.
Morita discloses that placing the proximity sensor includes:
providing the proximity sensor having the at least one optical light emitter and the optical detector both housed within an optical package (paragraph [0086]), each common axis passing through a center of one of the at least one optical light emitter and a center of the optical detector being substantially aligned with a first edge of the optical package (see Fig. 1, common axis passing through a center of 10B and center of 32 is aligned with a horizontal edge of the package, see also paragraph [0089]); and
rotating the proximity sensor (see for example, rotated sensor in Fig. 11A-B) to offset the first edge of the optical package with regard to each of the first and second directions by an acute angle of at least 10° and at most 80° (see Fig. 11A, paragraph [0109], common axis appears to be close to 45° from the horizontal and vertical directions).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to align the common axis as disclosed by Morita in the device of Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan in order to create a compact configuration that facilitates proximity detection from various directions.
Regarding claim 20, Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan discloses the method of claim 18, and Chen discloses that assembling the proximity sensor (2, Fig. 2D) under the display screen (2, Fig. 2D) so that each of the plurality of edges of the optical package is substantially aligned with one of the first direction or the second direction (see for example, 2E, components 21, 22 are aligned with the horizontal and vertical directions).
Morita discloses that placing the proximity sensor includes:
providing the proximity sensor having the at least one optical light emitter (any one of 10A, 10B, 10C, Figs. 1, 11A) and the optical detector (32, Figs. 1, 11A) both housed within an optical package (paragraph [0086]), each common axis passing through a center of one of the at least one optical light emitter and a center of the optical detector is offset with regard to each of a plurality of edges of the optical package by an acute angle of at least 10° and at most 80° (see Fig. 11A, common axis passing through a center of 25B, 25D, and center of 32 is aligned with the corner edge of the package, approximately 45° from each of the horizontal and vertical edges, see also paragraph [0089]).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to align the common axis as disclosed by Morita in the device of Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan in order to create a compact configuration that facilitates proximity detection from various directions.
Regarding claim 21, Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan discloses the method of claim 19, and Chan further discloses that the first interior wall (111, Figs. 1-1A) has a first end coupled to the first edge and a second end coupled to a second edge of the optical package (see Fig. 1A, the inner wall 111 is coupled to both ends of the housing 11, paragraph [0029]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to separate the light emitter and detector with an interior wall as disclosed by Chan in the device of Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan in order to minimize cross talk and improve sensitivity of the sensor.
Claims 12-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morita in view of Chen further in view of Chan.
Regarding claim 12, Morita discloses a proximity sensor (19, Fig. 1, or see Fig. 11A) comprising at least one optical light emitter (any one of 10A, 10B, 10C, Figs. 1, 11A) each adapted to emit a light beam (paragraph [0039]) [on a display of an electronic device] (paragraph [0090]), and an optical detector (32, Figs. 1, 11A) adapted to receive [on a display of an electronic device] (paragraph [0090]) the light beam (paragraph [0067]) emitted by the at least one optical light emitter (any one of 10A-10C, Figs. 1, 11A) and reflected on an object (paragraph [0067]), wherein:
the at least one optical light emitter (any one of 10A, 10B, 10C, Figs. 1, 11A) and the optical detector (32, Figs. 1, 11A) are housed within an optical package (paragraph [0086]) having four edges (see Figs. 1, 11A), and each common axis passing through a center of one of the at least one optical light emitter (for example, 10B, Figs. 1, 11A) and a center of the optical detector (32, Figs. 1, 11A) is offset with regard to each of the edges of the optical package by an acute angle of at least 10° and at most 80° (see Fig. 11A, light emitter 10B is offset approximately 45° from the horizontal and vertical edges of the package).
Morita does not disclose that the light emitter and optical detector are adapted to emit and receive light through a display screen, nor that the optical detector is separated from the optical light emitter by a septum having a first end coupled to a first of the four edges and a second end coupled to a second of the four edges different from the first of the four edges.
However, Chen discloses a light emitter (21, Fig. 2D) and optical detector (22, Fig. 2D) are adapted to emit and receive light (paragraphs [0050], [0076]-[0080]) through a display screen (1, Fig. 2D).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to adapt the proximity sensor to emit and receive light through a display screen as disclosed by Chen in order to increase the screen-to-body ratio of the terminal with a display screen, improve display performance of the terminal and improve aesthetic appeal of the terminal.
Morita in view of Chen does not disclose the optical detector is separated from the optical light emitter by a septum having a first end coupled to a first of the four edges and a second end coupled to a second of the four edges different from the first of the four edges.
However, Chan discloses a proximity sensor (Figs. 1-1A, paragraph [0005]) wherein the at least one optical light emitter (12, Figs. 1-1A) and the optical detector (13, or 14, Figs. 1-1A) are separated by a septum (111, Figs. 1-1A) having a first end coupled to a first of the four edges (front edge/wall, Fig. 1A) and a second end coupled to a second of the four edges different from the first of the four edges (see Fig. 1A, the inner wall 111 is coupled to both front and back edges/walls of the housing 11, paragraph [0029]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to separate the light emitter and detector with an internal wall as disclosed by Chan in the device of Morita in view of Chen in order to minimize cross talk and improve sensitivity of the sensor.
Regarding claim 13, Morita in view of Chen and Chan discloses the proximity sensor of claim 12, and Morita further discloses that the acute angle of each common axis with regard to each edge of the optical package is in a range between 10° and 45° (see Fig. 11A, common axis passing through a center of 25B, 25D, and center of 32 is aligned with the corner edge of the package, approximately 45° from each of the horizontal and vertical edges, see also paragraph [0089]).
Regarding claim 14, Morita in view of Chen and Chan discloses the proximity sensor according to claim 12, and Morita further discloses that the optical package is substantially rectangular or square (paragraphs [0038], [0089]), and at least one common axis is orientated substantially in a diagonal of the optical package (see Fig. 11A, common axis between 25B, 25D, and 32 is substantially diagonal).
Regarding claim 15, Morita in view of Chen and Chan discloses the proximity sensor according to claim 14, and Chen further discloses that the optical detector (22, Fig. 2D) includes an array of light sensitive pixels having rows and columns of light sensitive pixels (Fig. 2J, paragraph [0066], an array inherently has rows and columns), the rows of light sensitive pixels or the columns of light sensitive pixels substantially aligned with a direction of the at least one common axis (common axis being in the horizontal or vertical direction for example, see Fig. 2E).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use an array of light sensitive pixels for the optical detector as disclosed by Chen in the device of Morita in view of Chen and Chan in order to receive light from different directions.
Regarding claim 16, Morita in view of Chen and Chan discloses the proximity sensor according to claim 12, and Morita further discloses that the at least one optical light emitter (any one of 10A, 10B, 10C, Figs. 1, 11A) includes at least two optical light emitters (see Fig. 1, 11A, three light emitters shown).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0344440 ("Lee").
Regarding claim 5, Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan discloses the assembly according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose that the display screen is an OLED screen, and each pixel of the OLED screen has a pentile subpixel arrangement.
However, Lee discloses a display screen is an OLED screen (Fig. 1, paragraph [0054]), and each pixel of the OLED screen has a pentile subpixel arrangement (paragraph [0054]), with a proximity sensor (paragraph [0057]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use an OLED screen with a pentile subpixel arrangement as disclosed by Lee in the device of Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan in order to reduce per pixel sub-pixel density and require less driving current.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan further in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2011/01231181 ("Costello").
Regarding claim 22, Chen in view of Morita, Siala, and Chan discloses the method of claim 21, but does not disclose that the first and second edges of the optical package are adjacent.
However, Costello discloses a proximity sensor with a first interior wall (52, Figs. 1-4) that has a first end coupled to the first edge of the package (sidewall 45, Fig. 2-4) and a second end coupled to a second edge of the optical package (second sidewall 45, Figs. 2-4, paragraph [0031]), and the first and second edges are adjacent (see 52, Figs. 2-4, couple to two adjacent walls 45).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to arrange the interior wall in any direction and coupled to the edges of the package in order to minimize the magnitude of undesired light rays passing through partitioning divider, as taught, known, and predicable.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 12, and 18 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 MONICA T. TABA whose telephone number is (571)272-1583. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 am - 6 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, Georgia Epps can be reached at 571-272-2328. 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.
/MONICA T TABA/Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Prosecution Insights