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 .
Drawings
Graphs 4B, 4C, 4D, 4F, and 4G are not clear as the first three arrows from the left are not specified. The examiner will proceed as if they are unit arrows to the corresponding first, and second emission control pulse sets, and the ranging pulse set.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description:
444;
Para [0097], the "next first emission" pulse having energy 424 appears to be -having energy- of Fig C., Character 444. the examiner will proceed as such.
1385;
1357;
1391;
1632;
and 1642 .
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Para. [00115], line 7, "However, Thus, no ranging" appears to be --However, no ranging--;
Para. [00148], line 7, “aperturing” appears to be --making an aperture of--;
Para. [00152], lines 6 and 7, “high rate and low rate” appears to be --high-rate-- and --low-rate--;
Para. [00159], line 6, “high power”) appears to be --high-power--;
Para. [00149], line 12 and Para. [00183], line 12, “90 degree” appears to be --90-degree--. Para. [00166], lines 6,8, and 9 respectively, “25 degree”, ”50 degree”, “110 degree” appear to be --25-degree--, --50-degree--, and --110-degree-;
Para. [00183], line 7, “motion at a a relatively” appears to be --motion at a relatively--;
Para. [00200], line 5, “general purpose” appears to be --general-purpose--.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 3, 14 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2, line 2, "area” appears to be –are--;
Claim 3, line 4, “off” appears to be --of--;
Claim 14, line 4, “off” appears to be --of--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 7-8, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 7, the limitation "the safety range" is unclear. Previously in claim 1, there were a first safety range and a second safety range. Which should be considered as “the safety range”?
Regarding claim 8, the limitation "the safety range" is unclear. See discussion of claim 7 above.
In line 5, the limitation “extend first time period” is unclear. There is no recitation of a “first time period.” What makes the time period “first”?
Regarding claim 18, the limitation "the safety range" is unclear. See discussion of claim 7 above.
Regarding claim 19, the limitation "the safety range" is unclear. See discussion of claim 7 above.
In line 4, it is unclear what “extend first time period” means. See discussion of claim 8 above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-4, 9, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu (US 20220155416 A1, “Zhu”)
Regarding claim 1, Zhu teaches an apparatus comprising:
a laser light source configured to produce laser light pulses (Fig 2A, laser source 206. Para. [0022], lines 3-7);
an optical assembly (Fig 2A, scanner 210. Para. [0022], lines 8-13) the optical assembly including beam scanning optics to scan the laser light pulses into a scan field;
a detector to detect reflections of the laser light pulses from measurements points in the scan field (Fig 2A, receiver 204. Para. [0023], lines 1-4);
and a light source controller coupled to the laser light source and the detector (Fig. 2A, controller 252 Para. [0024] lines 9-11), the light source controller adapted to control the laser light source to:
emit a first emission control pulse set at a reduced first energy level to detect objects within a first safety range (Fig. 3A, 1st emission scheme, Para. [0028] lines 1-7,);
However, Zhu does not teach responsive to not detecting an object within the first safety range with reflections of the first emission control pulse set, emit a second emission control pulse set following the first emission control pulse set and at a reduced second energy level to detect objects within a second safety range, where the second safety range extends further than the first safety range, and where the reduced second energy level is greater than the reduced first energy level;
and responsive to not detecting an object within the first safety range with reflections of the first emission control pulse set and to not detecting an object within the second safety range with reflections of the second emission control pulse set, emit a ranging pulse set at a higher energy level where the higher energy level is greater than the reduced first energy level and the reduced second energy level.
On the other hand, Zhu does teach a LiDAR apparatus with a desired safety range, a controller emitting a pulse set within a safety range (Para [0028], lines 1-13), and the emission of a second pulse set outside of the safety range (Fig 3A, Para. [0029] lines 1-7). Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have repeatedly applied the same technique of establishing safety ranges, such that there would be a first and second safety range, and therefore a first, second, and ranging pulse set.
Regarding claim 2, Zhu teaches the apparatus of claim 1,
wherein the first emission control pulse set, the second emission control pulse set, and the ranging pulse set area each directed to detect objects at a measurement point in a plurality of the measurement points in the scan field (Para [0043] lines 5-12).
Regarding claim 3, Zhu teaches the apparatus of claim 1,
wherein the reduced first energy level is implemented to meet a regulatory classification limit for at least all accessible portions of the first safety range, and wherein the reduced second energy level is implemented to meet the regulatory classification limit for at least a portion off the first safety range and the second safety range (Para [0027] lines 20-26).
Regarding claim 4, Zhu teaches the apparatus of claim 1,
However, Zhu does not teach wherein the second safety range partially overlaps with the first safety range.
On the other hand, Zhu does teach having a controller emitting a pulse set within a safety range, and a subsequent pulse set that extends beyond it (Fig. 4, D0 to Dd, Para [0060] lines 5-11). Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have repeatedly applied the same technique of establishing safety ranges, such that the subsequent pulse set has a safety range overlapping the first safety range by extending past it.
Regarding claim 9, Zhu teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
However, Zhu does not teach wherein the light source controller is further adapted to control the laser light source to:
responsive to not detecting an object within the first safety range with reflections of the first emission control pulse set and to not detecting an object within the second safety range with reflections of the second emission control pulse set, emit a third emission control pulse set following the second emission control pulse set and at a reduced third energy level to detect objects within a third safety range, where the third safety range extends further than the second safety range, and where the reduced third energy level is greater than the reduced second energy level, and wherein the ranging pulse set is emitted further responsive to not detecting an object in the third safety range.
On the other hand, Zhu does teach a LiDAR apparatus with a desired safety range, a controller emitting a pulse set within a safety range (Para [0028], lines 1-13), and the emission of a second pulse set outside of the safety range (Fig 3A, Para. [0029] lines 1-7). Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have repeatedly applied the same technique of establishing safety ranges, such that there would be a first, second, and third safety range, and therefore a first, second, third, and ranging pulse set.
Regarding claim 13, Zhu teaches an emission control method, where the method comprises:
for each measurement point in a plurality of measurement points in a scan field (Para [0043] lines 5-12):
emitting a first emission control pulse set at a reduced first energy level to detect objects within a first safety range (Fig. 3A, 1st emission scheme, Para. [0028] lines 1-7);
However, Zhu does not teach responsive to not detecting an object within the first safety range with reflections of the first emission control pulse set, emitting a second emission control pulse set following the first emission control pulse set and at a reduced second energy level to detect objects within a second safety range, where the second safety range is greater than the first safety range, and where the reduced second energy level is greater than first energy level, otherwise proceeding to a next measurement point in the plurality of measurement points in the scan field;
and responsive to not detecting an object within the first safety range with reflections of the first emission control pulse set and to not detecting an object within the second safety range with reflections of the second emission control pulse set, emitting a ranging pulse set at a higher energy level where the higher energy level is greater than the reduced first energy level and the reduced second energy level, then proceeding to the next measurement point in the plurality of measurement points in the scan field.
On the other hand, Zhu does teach a LiDAR apparatus with a desired safety range, a controller emitting a pulse set within a safety range (Para [0028], lines 1-13), and the emission of a second pulse set outside of the safety range (Fig 3A, Para. [0029] lines 1-7). Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have repeatedly applied the same technique of establishing safety ranges, such that there would be a first and second safety range, and therefore a first, second, and ranging pulse set.
Regarding claim 14, Zhu teaches the method of claim 13
wherein the reduced first energy level is implemented to meet a regulatory classification limit for at least all accessible portions of the first safety range, and wherein the reduced second energy level is implemented to meet the regulatory classification limit for at least a portion off the first safety range and the second safety range (Para [0027] lines 20-26).
Regarding claim 15, Zhu in view of Northern teaches the method of claim 13.
However, Zhu does not teach wherein the second safety range partially overlaps with the first safety range.
On the other hand, Zhu does teach having a controller emitting a pulse set within a safety range, and a subsequent pulse set that extends beyond it (Fig. 4, D0 to Dd, Para [0060] lines 5-11). Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have repeatedly applied the same technique of establishing safety ranges, such that the subsequent pulse set has a safety range overlapping the first safety range by extending past it.
Claims 5-7, 10-12, 16-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Northern et al. (US 20210270938 A1, “Northern”).
Regarding claim 5, Zhu teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
However, Zhu does not teach responsive to detecting an object within the first safety range with reflections of the first emission control pulse set, emit at least two additional first emission control pulse sets, each at the reduced first energy level to detect objects within the first safety range before emitting a next second emission control pulse set at the reduced second energy level to detect objects within the second safety range.
On the other hand, Northern teaches emitting at least two short-range pulses for identifying additional points within a first safety range (Northern, Fig. 4 (420 and 460), where when an object is detected with a short-range pulse, the process is repeated for subsequent pulses within that range, meaning at least two subsequent short pulses can be emitted if an object continues to be detected). Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the LiDAR apparatus of Zhu, in view of Northern, to continue repeating the process of using a short-range pulse, therefore teaching emitting at least two short-range pulses for identifying additional points within a first safety range.
Regarding claim 6, Zhu teaches the method of claim 6.
However, Zhu does not teach, responsive to detecting an object within the second safety range with reflections of the second emission control pulse set, emit at least two of a first emission control pulse set followed by the second emission control pulse set before emitting a next ranging pulse set, where the first emission control pulse sets are at the reduced first energy level to detect objects within the first safety range and second emission control pulse sets are at the reduced second energy level to detect objects within the second safety range.
On the other hand, Northern teaches emitting two first pulse sets, then one second pulse set and finally a ranged pulse set, when an object is detected within a second range (Northern, Fig. 4 (420, 430 and 460) where when an object is detected in 430 (i.e. second pulse set) it then follows the pattern of going to the next location and emitting short-range pulses (i.e. multiple first pulse sets until an object is detected), and then one or more longer pulses after repeating the process (i.e. second and ranging pulses)). Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the LiDAR apparatus of Zhu, in view of Northern, to continue repeating the process of using a short-range pulse and longer ranged pulses, therefore teaching emitting at least two short-range pulses, second pulse sets, and ranging pulse sets for identifying additional points within corresponding safety ranges.
Regarding claim 7, Zhu teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
However, Zhu does not teach responsive to detecting an object within the safety range with reflections of the first emission control pulse set, emit an adjusted first emission control pulse set, where the adjusted first emission control pulse set includes a further reduced first energy level relative.
On the other hand, Northern teaches further reducing the power of a first pulse set to make it more eye safe (Northern, Para. [0085] lines 1-7). Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the LiDAR apparatus of Zhu, by introducing a power control circuit that further reduces the power of subsequent control pulse sets to be more eye safe.
Regarding claim 10, Zhu teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
However, Zhu does not teach wherein the apparatus further comprises a time-of-flight (TOF) circuitry responsive to the detector to determine distances to the measurement points in the scan field from the detected reflections.
On the other hand, Northern teaches a time-of-flight (TOF) circuitry responsive being used to determine distances to measurement points in a FOV from detected reflections (Northern, Fig. 1, Para. [0029] lines 1-10). Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the LiDAR apparatus of Zhu, in view of Northern, by implementing a TOF device in between the photodetector and controller to determine distances to measurement points.
Regarding claim 11, Zhu in view of Northern teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
However, Zhu does not teach wherein the ranging pulse set comprises multiple pulses modulated with a signature.
On the other hand, Northern teaches having ranging pulse sets that are uniquely identifiable (Northern, Para. [0035], lines 1-7). Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the LiDAR apparatus of Zhu in view of Northern, by changing attributes of the ranging pulse sets (e.g. pulse power, pulse duration, pulse count).
Regarding claim 12, Zhu teaches an apparatus comprising:
a laser light source configured to produce laser light pulses (Zhu, Fig 2A, laser source 206. Para. [0022], lines 3-7);
an optical assembly (Zhu, Fig 2A, scanner 210. Para. [0022], lines 8-13) the optical assembly including beam scanning optics to scan the laser light pulses into a scan field;
a detector to detect reflections of the laser light pulses from measurements points in the scan field (Zhu, Fig 2A, receiver 204. Para. [0023], lines 1-4);
and a light source controller coupled to the laser light source and the detector (Zhu, Fig. 2A, controller 252 Para. [0024] lines 9-11), the light source controller adapted to control the laser light source to, for each measurement point in a plurality of the measurement points (Zhu, Para [0043] lines 5-12).:
emit a first emission control pulse set at a reduced first energy level to detect objects within a first safety range (Zhu, Fig. 3A, 1st emission scheme, Para. [0028] lines 1-7);
However, Zhu does not teach responsive to not detecting an object within the first safety range with reflections of the first emission control pulse set, emit a second emission control pulse set following the first emission control pulse set and at a reduced second energy level to detect objects within a second safety range, where the second safety range extends further than the first safety range, and where the reduced second energy level is greater than the reduced first energy level, otherwise proceeding to a next measurement point in the plurality of the measurement points in the scan field;
responsive to not detecting an object within the first safety range with reflections of the first emission control pulse set and to not detecting an object within the second safety range with reflections of the second emission control pulse set, emit a ranging pulse set at a higher energy level where the higher energy level is greater than the reduced first energy level and the reduced second energy level, then proceeding to the next measurement point in the plurality of the measurement points in the scan field ;
a time-of-flight (TOF) circuitry responsive to the detector to determine distances to the measurement points in the scan field from the detected reflections;
responsive to detecting an object within the first safety range with reflections of the first emission control pulse set, emit at least two additional first emission control pulse sets for a next two measurement points in the plurality of measurement points before emitting a next second emission control pulse set, each of the at least two additional first emission control pulse sets at the reduced first energy level to detect objects within the first safety range.
On the other hand, Zhu does teach a LiDAR apparatus with a desired safety range, a controller emitting a pulse set within a safety range (Zhu, Para [0028], lines 1-13), and the emission of a second pulse set outside of the safety range (Zhu, Fig 3A, Para. [0029] lines 1-7).
Northern teaches a time-of-flight (TOF) circuitry responsive being used to determine distances to measurement points in a FOV from detected reflections (Northern, Fig. 1, Para. [0029] lines 1-10). In addition, Northern teaches emitting at least two short-range pulses for identifying additional points within a first safety range (Northern, Fig. 4 (420 and 460), where when an object is detected with a short-range pulse, the process is repeated for subsequent pulses within that range, meaning at least two subsequent short pulses can be emitted if an object continues to be detected).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the LiDAR apparatus of Zhu, in view of Northern, to have repeatedly applied the same technique of establishing safety ranges, such that there would be a first and second safety range, and therefore a first, second, and ranging pulse set. Also implementing a TOF device in between the photodetector and controller to determine distances to measurement points. It would then be obvious to repeat the process established in Fig. 4 of Northern using a short-range pulse, therefore teaching emitting at least two short-range pulses for identifying additional points within a first safety range.
Regarding claim 16, Zhu in view of Northern teaches the method of claim 13.
However, Zhu does not teach responsive to detecting an object within the first safety range with reflections of the first emission control pulse set, emit at least two additional first emission control pulse sets, each at the reduced first energy level to detect objects within the first safety range before emitting a next second emission control pulse set at the reduced second energy level to detect objects within the second safety range.
On the other hand, Northern teaches emitting at least two short-range pulses for identifying additional points within a first safety range (Northern, Fig. 4 (420 and 460), where when an object is detected with a short-range pulse, the process is repeated for subsequent pulses within that range, meaning at least two subsequent short pulses can be emitted if an object continues to be detected). Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the LiDAR apparatus of Zhu, in view of Northern, to continue repeating the process of using a short-range pulse, therefore teaching emitting at least two short-range pulses for identifying additional points within a first safety range.
Regarding claim 17, Zhu in view of Northern teaches the method of claim 13.
However, Zhu does not teach, responsive to detecting an object within the second safety range with reflections of the second emission control pulse set, emit at least two of a first emission control pulse set followed by the second emission control pulse set before emitting a next ranging pulse set, where the first emission control pulse sets are at the reduced first energy level to detect objects within the first safety range and second emission control pulse sets are at the reduced second energy level to detect objects within the second safety range.
On the other hand, Northern teaches emitting two first pulse sets, then one second pulse set and finally a ranged pulse set, when an object is detected within a second range (Northern, Fig. 4 (420, 430 and 460) where when an object is detected in 430 (i.e. second pulse set) it then follows the pattern of going to the next location and emitting short-range pulses (i.e. multiple first pulse sets until an object is detected), and then one or more longer pulses after repeating the process (i.e. second and ranging pulses). Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the LiDAR apparatus of Zhu, in view of Northern, to continue repeating the process of using a short-range pulse and longer ranged pulses, therefore teaching emitting at least two short-range pulses, second pulse sets, and ranging pulse sets for identifying additional points within corresponding safety ranges.
Regarding claim 18, Zhu in view of Northern teaches the method of claim 13.
However, Zhu does not teach responsive to detecting an object within the safety range with reflections of the first emission control pulse set, emit an adjusted first emission control pulse set, where the adjusted first emission control pulse set includes a further reduced first energy level relative.
On the other hand, Northern teaches further reducing the power of a first pulse set to make it more eye safe (Northern, Para. [0085] lines 1-7). Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the LiDAR apparatus of Zhu, by introducing a power control circuit that further reduces the power of subsequent control pulse sets to be more eye safe.
Regarding claim 20 Zhu in view of Northern teaches the method of claim 13.
However, Zhu does not teach wherein the ranging pulse set comprises multiple pulses modulated with a signature.
On the other hand, Northern teaches having ranging pulse sets that are uniquely identifiable (Northern, Para. [0035], lines 1-7). Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the LiDAR apparatus of Zhu in view of Northern, by changing attributes of the ranging pulse sets (e.g. pulse power, pulse duration, pulse count).
Claims 8 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu in view of Northern and Hall et al. (US20180164408A1, “Hall”).
Regarding claim 8, Zhu teaches the apparatus of claim 1.
However, Zhu does not teach wherein the light source controller is further adapted to control the laser light source to: responsive to detecting an object within the safety range with reflections of the first emission control pulse set, emit an adjusted first emission control pulse set, where the adjusted first emission control pulse set includes an extended first time period following the first emission control pulse set.
On the other hand, Northern teaches further reducing the power of a first pulse set to make it more eye safe (Northern, Para. [0085] lines 1-7). Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the LiDAR apparatus of Zhu, by introducing a power control circuit that further reduces the power of subsequent control pulse sets to be more eye safe.
However, Zhu in view of Northern still does not teach. where the adjusted first emission control pulse set includes an extended first time period following the first emission control pulse set.
On the other hand, Hall teaches using an extended time to image objects with light pulses (Hall, Para. [0057]-[0058], Fig. 8). Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the LiDAR apparatus of Zhu in view of Northern, to use the method of delaying time between measurement pulses in Hall to reduce the amount of crosstalk between the first emission control and adjusted first emission control pulse set within the first safety range.
Regarding claim 19, Zhu teaches the method of claim 13.
However, Zhu does not teach responsive to detecting an object within the safety range with reflections of the first emission control pulse set, emit an adjusted first emission control pulse set where the adjusted first emission control pulse set includes an extended first time period following the first emission control pulse set.
On the other hand, Northern teaches further reducing the power of a first pulse set to make it more eye safe (Northern, Para. [0085] lines 1-7). Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the LiDAR apparatus of Zhu, by introducing a power control circuit that further reduces the power of subsequent control pulse sets to be more eye safe.
However, Zhu in view of Northern still does not teach where the adjusted first emission control pulse set includes an extended first time period following the first emission control pulse set.
On the other hand, Hall teaches using an extended time to image objects with light pulses (Hall, Para. [0057]-[0058], Fig. 8). Accordingly, it would have been obvious of one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the LiDAR apparatus of Zhu in view of Northern, to use the method of delaying time between measurement pulses in Hall to reduce the amount of crosstalk between the first emission control and adjusted first emission control pulse set within the first safety range. first pulse sets as disclosed in Northern.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZAKI HAWKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-6595. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, YUQING XIAO can be reached at (571) 270-3603. 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.
/Z.K.H./
Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/YUQING XIAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645