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 .
Status of Claims
This action is in response to the RCE filed 01/15/2026 in which Claims 1, 7-8 have been amended.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/15/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to the prior art have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant primarily argues that Jardine fails to teach the amended features including:
"wherein the processor is further configured to create the first driving plan so that the vehicle is moved to a shoulder side of the traffic lane bordering the shoulder in which the vehicle is traveling and has traveled a predetermined distance along the shoulder side of the traffic lane bordering the shoulder," as recited in claim 1.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Jardine describes autonomous vehicle control logic that, in response to an internal hazard (such as a non-responsive driver or a fault), plans a sequence to safely move the vehicle out of active traffic lanes. Specifically, Jardine discloses that when a stop is required and a full exit to a safe area (like a hard shoulder) is not immediately available, the system is configured to first move the vehicle laterally within its current lane toward the shoulder side (see [0070], [0512]-[0522], [0523]-[0539]). Jardine’s system may then have the vehicle continue traveling along the shoulder-side edge of the lane for a distance, rather than an immediate full lane departure. Jardine further teaches that the vehicle may travel a predetermined distance along the shoulder or the shoulder-side of the lane before coming to a stop, to ensure that the stop is performed in a safer, less obstructive location. For example, in [0528]-[0539], the system assesses terrain, and may continue moving alongside the shoulder until a suitable stopping location is found, thus covering a predetermined distance along the shoulder before stopping. Once the system determines, based on its sensors and map data, that the chosen location is suitable, it brings the vehicle to a stop ([0540]-[0544]).
Applicant further argues that none of the cited references, taken alone or in combination, disclose or suggest "determine a first target stopping location for stopping the vehicle on the shoulder in order to create a first driving plan in which the vehicle is moved to the first target stopping location when it is assessed there is a problem with the driver, it is assessed that the vehicle is travelling in the traffic lane bordering the shoulder and the object traveling the shoulder from behind the vehicle and approaching the vehicle is not detected, and an abnormality has been detected by a location estimating device," as recited in claim 1.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees because as explained in the detailed rejection below, Sugano discloses at [0062] “A road 8 in FIGS. 2 to 4 is a four-lane road, wherein two lanes on one side consists of an overtaking lane 81 and a cruising lane 82. The system 1 is operable, upon satisfaction of a given condition during traveling of the vehicle 2, to control the vehicle 2 to stop at a stop point SP on behalf of the driver, as an emergency measure.”; and in [0064] “Specifically, FIG. 3 shows a situation where a given condition is satisfied when the vehicle 2 is traveling in the cruising lane 82, and a road shoulder 83 existing in the traveling direction of the vehicle 2 is set as the stop point SP.” where the given condition is satisfied (assessed) when the vehicle travels in the cruising lane (lane bordering a shoulder) and further in [0074]) "In step S6, the ECU 5 operates to narrow down the stop point candidates.”; (see at least Sugano [0086]) “In step S8, the ECU 5 operates to set a stop point. Specifically, the ECU 5 operates to set, among the stop point candidates narrowed down in the step S6, one stop point candidate…”; and [0064] "FIG. 3 shows a second pattern in which the stop point setting part 67 of the system 1 operates to set a road shoulder 83 of the road 8, as the stop point SP.” where setting one second pattern stop point from the narrowed candidates corresponds to a determining a stopping location on a road shoulder.
Accordingly, Sugano teaches an abnormality detection part that detects physical abnormality (consciousness, eyes closed, center‑of‑gravity, etc.) from interior camera and other sensors and Sugano directly teaches that the shoulder stop planning/execution is triggered when the system assesses that the driver has a physical abnormality.
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but have been found unpersuasive.
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 1-5, 7-8 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.
Amended Claim 1 recites the limitation " the location estimating device". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 7 and 8 recite similar limitation and are rejected using the same rationale.
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, 7, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugano et al. (US 20200070825 A1) in view of Katsuhiko Sato (US 20210094575 A1 - as indicated in the Information Disclosure Statement dated 03 August, 2023) (hereinafter Sato) and further in view of Fraser Jardine (US 20220135039 A1) (hereinafter Jardine).
Regarding Claim 1,
Sugano discloses A drive planning device comprising: (see at least Sugano [Abs]) “Provided is a vehicle stop support system for supporting vehicle stop in an emergency condition…sets a stop point; and controls the vehicle to travel to the stop point and stop at the stop point.”
a processor configured to assess whether there is a problem with a driver, (see at least Sugano [0050]) "In FIG. 1, each function of the ECU 5 is shown as a block. However, it should be understood that a software modules incorporated in the analog circuit or digital processor”; (see at least Sugano [0069]) "In step S2, the ECU 5 operates to determine whether or not the driver has a physical abnormality. Specifically, the ECU 5 operates to determine, based on a result of the detection in the step S1, whether or not the driver has a physical abnormality which causes the driver to become unable to drive the vehicle 2 safely.”
assess whether the vehicle is travelling in a traffic lane bordering a shoulder (see at least Sugano [0062]) “A road 8 in FIGS. 2 to 4 is a four-lane road, wherein two lanes on one side consists of an overtaking lane 81 and a cruising lane 82. The system 1 is operable, upon satisfaction of a given condition during traveling of the vehicle 2, to control the vehicle 2 to stop at a stop point SP on behalf of the driver, as an emergency measure.”; (see at least Sugano Fig. 3, [0064]) “Specifically, FIG. 3 shows a situation where a given condition is satisfied when the vehicle 2 is traveling in the cruising lane 82, and a road shoulder 83 existing in the traveling direction of the vehicle 2 is set as the stop point SP.” where the given condition is satisfied (assessed) when the vehicle travels in the cruising lane (lane bordering a shoulder).
and determine a first target stopping location for stopping the vehicle on the shoulder
(see at least Sugano [0074]) "In step S6, the ECU 5 operates to narrow down the stop point candidates.”; (see at least Sugano [0086]) “In step S8, the ECU 5 operates to set a stop point. Specifically, the ECU 5 operates to set, among the stop point candidates narrowed down in the step S6, one stop point candidate…”; (see at least Sugano [0064]) "FIG. 3 shows a second pattern in which the stop point setting part 67 of the system 1 operates to set a road shoulder 83 of the road 8, as the stop point SP.” where setting one second pattern stop point from the narrowed candidates corresponds to a determining a stopping location on a road shoulder.
in order to create a first driving plan in which the vehicle is moved to the first target stopping location when it is assessed there is a problem with the driver, (see at least Sugano [0069]) “determine, based on a result of the detection in the step S1, whether or not the driver has a physical abnormality which causes the driver to become unable to drive the vehicle 2 safely.”; (see at least Sugano [0073]) "In step S5…the ECU 5 operates to first search, based on a given algorithm, a course to each of the stop point candidates detected in the step S3, and determine a vehicle speed pattern of the vehicle 2 when the vehicle 2 travels along the course… to each of the stop point candidates” where determining the vehicle speed pattern traveling along the course to a stop point corresponds to creating a driving plan.
determine a second target stopping location for stopping the vehicle in the traffic lane in which the vehicle is traveling in order to create a second driving plan in which the vehicle is moved to the second target stopping location when it is assessed there is a problem with the driver, (see at least Sugano [0069]) “…causes the driver to become unable to drive the vehicle 2 safely.”; (see at least Sugano [0086]) “In step S8, the ECU 5 operates to set a stop point. Specifically, the ECU 5 operates to set, among the stop point candidates narrowed down in the step S6, one stop point candidate…”
(see at least Sugano [0063]) "FIG. 2 shows a first pattern in which the stop point setting part 67 (see FIG. 1) of the system 1 operates to set a point within the road 8, as the stop point SP. Specifically, FIG. 2 shows a situation where a given condition is satisfied when the vehicle 2 is traveling in the overtaking lane 81, and a point located on the overtaking lane 81 in the traveling direction of the vehicle 2 is set as the stop point SP…so as to controllably cause the vehicle 2 to keep traveling in the overtaking lane 81.” where setting the stopping point in the overtaking lane to control the vehicle corresponds to the second driving plan when a problem with the driver is assessed; And an abnormality has been detected by the location estimating device, (Sugano, see [0049]; “The ECU 5 comprises an abnormality detection part 51…a stop point setting part 67, a vehicle control part 68, and a storage part 69.”; [0051] “The abnormality detection part 51 is configured to detect a physical abnormality of the driver of the vehicle 2. The abnormality detection part 51 is operable to detect the physical abnormality of the driver, based on signals received by the ECU 5 from the vehicle interior camera 32…”);
and determine a third target stopping location for stopping the vehicle on the shoulder in order to create a third driving plan in which the vehicle is moved to the third target stopping location (see at least Sugano [0065]) "FIG. 4 shows a third pattern in which the stop point setting part 67 of the system 1 operates to set an emergency parking bay 84 provided on the lateral side of the road 8, as the stop point SP.” where the parking bay on the lateral side of the road corresponds to a third target location stopping the vehicle on the shoulder.
Sugano fails to explicitly teach the limitations detect an object approaching behind a vehicle,
and whether an object traveling the shoulder from behind the vehicle and approaching the vehicle is detected,
(and it is assessed that the vehicle is travelling in the traffic lane bordering the shoulder) and the object traveling the shoulder from behind the vehicle and approaching the vehicle is not detected,
(and it is assessed that the vehicle is travelling in the traffic lane bordering the shoulder) and the object traveling the shoulder from behind the vehicle and approaching the vehicle is detected,
when it is assessed that the object traveling the shoulder from behind the vehicle and approaching the vehicle is not detected after the second target stopping location has been determined.
However, Sato discloses a vehicle driving control apparatus for emergency evacuation to a road shoulder when a driver cannot take over operation that teaches detect an object approaching behind a vehicle, (see at least Sato [0058]) "monitoring of the periphery of the vehicle is continued by external information obtained by the environmental condition estimating part 11 through the external sensor 21, and if intrusion (interruption) of another vehicle into the front predetermined area ZF, rear predetermined area ZR, or lateral predetermined area ZL is confirmed…” where the external information confirms (detecting) an intruding (approaching) vehicle in the rear predetermined area (behind the vehicle).
and whether an object traveling the shoulder from behind the vehicle and approaching the vehicle is detected, (see at least Sato [0104]) "Whether an obstacle is on the road shoulder 50 is sensed to determine whether the vehicle can move to the road shoulder (step 123), and if it is determined to be able to so move, a road shoulder movement possible flag is set (step 124).”
and whether an object traveling the shoulder from behind the vehicle and approaching the vehicle is detected, (see at least Sato [0053]) “regarding other vehicles driving in the neighboring lane, their future positions and speeds are predicted, and automated lane change is executed by automatic steering by determination of the system in which it is determined that there is no other vehicle in a front predetermined area ZF, a rear predetermined area ZR”
(see at least Sato [0097]) "It is determined whether the lane position the vehicle is driving is the first driving lane 51 neighboring the road shoulder 50 (step 114).”; (see at least Sato [0102]) "If the vehicle is determined to be driving in the first lane 51, it is determined whether there is an evacuation space on the road shoulder 50 (step 121).”; (see at least Sato [0104]) "Whether an obstacle is on the road shoulder 50 is sensed to determine whether the vehicle can move to the road shoulder (step 123), and if it is determined to be able to so move, a road shoulder movement possible flag is set (step 124).”
Therefore, Sato teaches detecting a vehicle traveling on the shoulder when the vehicle is driving in the lane neighboring the shoulder, and determines whether the vehicle has space to move to the shoulder based on a predicted future position of the detected vehicle (predicted traveling on the shoulder behind and approaching the vehicle).
and it is assessed that the vehicle is travelling in the traffic lane bordering the shoulder and the object traveling the shoulder from behind the vehicle and approaching the vehicle is not detected, (see Sato [0053], [0097], [0104] above) where determining the vehicle can move to the shoulder corresponds to an object traveling on the shoulder and approaching from behind not being detected.
and it is assessed that the vehicle is travelling in the traffic lane bordering the shoulder and the object traveling the shoulder from behind the vehicle and approaching the vehicle is detected, (see Sato [0053], [0097], [0104] above).
when it is assessed that the object traveling the shoulder from behind the vehicle and approaching the vehicle is not detected after the second target stopping location has been determined. (see at least Sato [0059]) "If it is determined that lane change cannot be continued and lane change is cancelled, the automated driving controller 10 (path generating part 12) changes the following target to the center line of the lane (original lane) in which the vehicle was driving before lane change to regenerate a target path…and thereby the vehicle returns to the original lane by automatic steering (automated lane return function).”
(see at least Sato [0061]) "On the other hand, if it is determined that continuation of lane change is difficult, an operation takeover request is notified, automated lane change is cancelled, and authority is transferred to the driver…but when the driver cannot take over, the minimal risk maneuver (MRM) is activated.”; (see at least Sato [0062]) "The minimal risk maneuver (MRM) indicates automatically shifting to a minimal risk condition when failure or the like occurs in a system, and specifically, control for evacuation to a road shoulder or the like and deceleration and stop by automatic steering and braking is performed.”; (see at least Sato [0068]) "Lane change by the MRM can be performed when no other vehicle is in the front predetermined area ZF and the rear predetermined area ZR…”
Therefore, Sato teaches an automated lane change returning the vehicle to the original lane, regenerates a target path (a second target stopping location), and when the driver cannot take over, executes the minimal risk condition maneuver for moving the vehicle to the shoulder which is performed when no vehicle in the rear predetermined area is present.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the vehicle stop support system as taught by Sugano, with the automated lane change when there is no other vehicle in a predetermined area of neighboring lane as taught by Sato, with a reasonable expectation of success, because both inventions are from the same field of endeavor for detection of driver abnormality and automated driving support.
One would be motivated to make this combination because during automated lane change operation when the driver is unable to operate the vehicle, the system as taught by Sato (see [0111]) “has advantages of preventing the sudden deceleration, sudden steering, unstable behavior of the vehicle, and sudden approach to other vehicles, caused by excessive override” of the vehicle driver, thereby increasing vehicle safety.
Modified Sugano further teaches wherein the processor is further configured to create the first driving plan so that the vehicle is moved to the shoulder and stopped (see at least Sugano [0064]) "FIG. 3 shows a second pattern in which the stop point setting part 67 of the system 1 operates to set a road shoulder 83 of the road 8, as the stop point SP.”; (see at least Sato [0097]) “It is determined whether the lane position the vehicle is driving is the first driving lane 51 neighboring the road shoulder.”
after the vehicle has been moved to the shoulder side in the traffic lane in which the vehicle is traveling (see at least Sugano [0064]) “FIG. 3 shows a second pattern in which the stop point setting part 67 of the system 1 operates to set a road shoulder 83 of the road 8, as the stop point SP. Specifically, FIG. 3 shows a situation where a given condition is satisfied when the vehicle 2 is traveling in the cruising lane 82, and a road shoulder 83 existing in the traveling direction of the vehicle 2 is set as the stop point SP. In this situation, the vehicle control part 68 of the system 1 operates to transmit a control signal to the electric power steering 43 so as to controllably cause the vehicle 2 to keep traveling in the cruising lane 82 and move forwardly and obliquely leftwardly in the vicinity of the stop point SP.”
Modified Sugano fails to explicitly teach wherein the processor is further configured to create the first driving plan so that the vehicle is moved to a shoulder side of the traffic lane bordering the shoulder in which the vehicle is traveling and has traveled a predetermined distance along the shoulder side of the traffic lane bordering the shoulder.
However, Jardine teaches wherein the processor is further configured to create the first driving plan so that the vehicle is moved to a shoulder side of the traffic lane bordering the shoulder in which the vehicle is traveling and has traveled a predetermined distance along the shoulder side of the traffic lane bordering the shoulder. (see at least Jardine [0639]) "The lateral offset may therefore be in preparation for the lane change.”; (see at least Jardine [0519]) "Checking for a designated stopping location may comprise determining at least one constraint for when and/or where the host vehicle 10 must stop…The constraint may comprise a time and/or distance limit.”; (see at least Jardine [0251]) "The distance D may be sufficiently high for a given speed limit to enable road users to smoothly enter their preferred lanes”; (see at least Jardine [0252]) "the length of D may be a predetermined value.” ([0522] “The method 7000 comprises, at block 7006, causing control of a direction of the host vehicle 10 to cause the host vehicle 10 to stop in a position laterally offset from a centre of the lane, in dependence on block 7004.”)
Therefore, Modified Sugano teaches determining a stop point on a shoulder and when the vehicle is in the lane neighboring the shoulder, moving to the shoulder side of the traveling lane, while Jardine teaches controlling a lateral offset from the center of a lane in preparation for a lane change, and uses the predetermined distance D as a constraint for reaching the stopping location.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the road shoulder movement as taught by Modified Sugano, with the lateral offset with distance limit for changing lanes toward a stopping location, as taught by Jardine, because the both inventions control a vehicle to stop on a shoulder in the case of a driver emergency, and the lateral offset with distance limit as taught by Jardine would (see Jardine [0060]) reduce disruption to other road users and (see Jardine [0251]) enable road users to smoothly enter their preferred lanes.
Regarding Claim 2,
Sugano and Sato in combination (hereinafter Modified Sugano) teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Modified Sugano further teaches wherein the processor is further configured not to create the first driving plan when it is assessed that a predetermined distance between the vehicle and another object is not maintained. (see at least Sato [0046]) “in a case of having caught up with the vehicle ahead (in a case in which a speed of the vehicle ahead is slower than ACC set speed), the ACC function performs following cruise following the vehicle ahead while maintaining an inter-vehicle distance (set inter-vehicle distance)”; (see at least Sato [0085]) "If it is determined that a system failure has occurred in step 101, a system failure flag is set, and the driver is notified of automated lane change function stop and operation authority transfer (operation takeover request or takeover request)”; (see at least Sato [0069]) “when the driver performs brake operation or steering operation, the MRM is overridden and the operation shifts to manual driving.”
Therefore, the failure of the ACC system maintaining a set (predetermined) inter-vehicle distance causes a driver takeover request, and manual operation by the driver overrides the MRM. Therefore, the automated evacuation procedure, including creating the first driving plan, is not performed when the driver assumes manual operation.
Regarding Claim 3,
Modified Sugano teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Modified Sugano further teaches wherein the processor is further configured to create the first driving plan in which the vehicle is moved between traffic lanes when it is assessed that a predetermined distance between the vehicle and another object is maintained. (see at least Sato [0010]- [0015]) “a path generating part for generating a target path… performing automated in-lane driving by maintaining…a set inter-vehicle distance when there is a preceding other vehicle…performing automated lane change to a neighboring lane when there is no other vehicle in a predetermined area of the neighboring lane…for evacuating the vehicle to a road shoulder when the driver cannot take over operation at the notification.”
Regarding Claim 4,
Modified Sugano teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Modified Sugano further teaches wherein the processor is further configured to create the third driving plan so that the vehicle begins to move to the third target stopping location ensuring a second predetermined distance is maintained between the vehicle and another vehicle. (see at least Sugano [0065]) “FIG. 4 shows a third pattern in which the stop point setting part 67 of the system 1 operates to set an emergency parking bay 84 provided on the lateral side of the road 8, as the stop point SP…and to keep traveling in the cruising lane 82 and move forwardly and obliquely leftwardly in the vicinity of the stop point SP.”
(see at least Sato [0046]) “in a case of having caught up with the vehicle ahead (in a case in which a speed of the vehicle ahead is slower than ACC set speed), the ACC function performs following cruise following the vehicle ahead while maintaining an inter-vehicle distance”; (see at least Sato [0053]) "regarding other vehicles driving in the neighboring lane, their future positions and speeds are predicted, and automated lane change is executed by automatic steering by determination of the system in which it is determined that there is no other vehicle in a front predetermined area ZF, a rear predetermined area ZR, and a lateral predetermined area ZL of the neighboring lane set according to speed of the vehicle.”
Therefore, Modified Sugano teaches determining evacuation to a road shoulder (creating a driving plan), prepares for the road shoulder evacuation by moving forwardly and leftward toward the stop point (begins to move to the third stopping location) while maintaining a predetermined inter-vehicle distance ZF from vehicles ahead (first predetermined distance) and also rear and lateral areas ZR and ZL (a second predetermined distance) during automatic steering.
Regarding Claim 5,
Modified Sugano teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. Modified Sugano further teaches wherein the processor is further configured to create the first driving plan so that the vehicle is moved to the first target stopping location and stopped while decelerating toward the first target stopping location. (see at least Sato [0037]) "The path generating part 12 generates a target path from the vehicle's own position estimated by the environmental condition estimating part 11 to an arrival target.”; (see at least Sato [0062]) "control for evacuation to a road shoulder or the like and deceleration and stop by automatic steering and braking is performed.”; (see at least Sato [0103]) "If it is determined to be possible to evacuate to the road shoulder 50, the ACC set speed is changed to a lower speed, for example, the minimum speed of the highway (50 km/h) for preparation for road shoulder evacuation, and deceleration is started (step 122).” where the generated path is towards an arrival target, and the vehicle is decelerated and stopped while evacuating to a road shoulder.
Regarding Claims 7 and 8,
Claim 7 recites a computer-readable, non-transitory storage medium storing a computer program for creating the driving plan to be performed by the drive planning device of claim 1.
Sugano further discloses (see [0049]) “The ECU 5 comprises an abnormality detection part 51…a stop point setting part 67, a vehicle control part 68, and a storage part 69.”; (see at least Sugano [0061]) "The storage part 69 is composed of, e.g., a non-volatile memory, and stores therein a variety of information. The information stored in the storage part 69 is read by the abnormality detection part 51 and others, and used for various calculations.”
Therefore, Claims 7 and 8 are rejected for reciting substantially similar limitations and for substantially similar reasoning as discussed in claim 1 above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANISS CHAD whose telephone number is (571)270-3832. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:00pm EST.
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, James Trammell can be reached at 571-272-6712. 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.
/ANISS CHAD/
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3662
Prosecution Insights