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 Office Action is in response to the application filed on 12/08/2025. Claims 1-3, 8, 10-13, 15, 18, and 20 have been amended. Claims 1-20 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Response to Amendments
In response to Applicant's Amendments dated 12/08/2025, Examiner withdraws the previous prior art ground(s) of rejection. However, a new ground(s) of rejection is made.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/08/2025 have been fully considered, but they are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to ATA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-6, 8-16, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. No. 20220073099 (hereinafter, "Park"; previously of record), in view of U.S. Pub. No. 20240278807 (hereinafter, "Setoguchi"; previously of record), and in further view of U.S. Pub. No. 20220111871 (hereinafter, "Schmitt"; newly of record).
Regarding claim 1, Park discloses an apparatus comprising:
at least one sensor configured to acquire sensed data associated with at least one object in proximity to a vehicle (Fig. 3, #S110);
a driving device configured to drive the vehicle (“the computing device 100 may determine a control command for controlling the autonomous vehicle 10 according to the finalized driving plan including the stop location of the autonomous vehicle” (para 0173)); and
at least one processor configured to:
control the driving device to control a speed of the vehicle at an end point of the decelerating section to be lower than a speed of the vehicle at a starting point of the decelerating section (“and a preset sectional acceleration profile (e.g., FIG. 5), maintain the speed of the autonomous vehicle 10 at v.sub.tail for a certain period (Buffer) from a time point at which the speed of the autonomous vehicle 10 becomes v.sub.tail, and reduce the speed of the autonomous vehicle 10 from v.sub.tail to zero and stop the autonomous vehicle 10 at the determined candidate stop location using the preset sectional acceleration profile after the certain period” (para 0143) and “the computing device 100 may determine a control command for controlling the autonomous vehicle 10 according to the finalized driving plan including the stop location of the autonomous vehicle” (para 0173)).
However, Park does not explicitly teach
determine a decelerating section starting at a position that is spaced a first distance from the stop point; and
detect, based on the sensed data, a potential passenger;
determine, based on a detection of the potential passenger, a stop point for stopping the vehicle in a stop zone;
Setoguchi, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
detect, based on the sensed data, a potential passenger (“In the present embodiment, the patrol vehicle 102 recognizes a person making the gesture indicating the boarding intention, among persons detected by the sensor 10, as the prospective passenger 103 by referring to the reference gesture pattern 17” (para 0035));
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Park with the teachings of Setoguchi in order to recognize a person; see Setoguchi at least at [0035].
determine, based on a detection of the potential passenger, a stop point for stopping the vehicle in a stop zone (“The stop candidate location extraction unit 33 executes a stop candidate location extraction process. The stop candidate location extraction process is a process of extracting candidate locations (the stop candidate locations) with respect to the stop location at which the vehicle 102 is stopped in order to allow the prospective passenger 103 to board” (para 0050));
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Park with the teachings of Setoguchi in order to provide a stop candidate location; see Setoguchi at least at [0050].
Schmitt, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
determine a decelerating section starting at a position that is spaced a first distance from the stop point (“FIG. 13 illustrates an expressive deceleration maneuver 1300 based on the scenario represented in FIG. 12. … In general, the deceleration zone 1208 is an amount of distance required to perform the expressive deceleration maneuver and is defined by the starting point 1302A and the stopping point 1302C, which in turn, can be based on the vehicle's 1204 initial velocity V0” (para 0130)); and
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Park with the teachings of Schmitt in order to complete stop in the “deceleration zone”; see Schmitt at least at [0130].
Regarding claim 2, Park discloses the apparatus of claim 1. However, Park does not explicitly teach wherein a length of the decelerating section is determined based on a current speed of the vehicle, and wherein the end point of the decelerating section comprises the stop point.
Schmitt, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
wherein a length of the decelerating section is determined based on a current speed of the vehicle, and wherein the end point of the decelerating section comprises the stop point (“the deceleration zone 1208 is an amount of distance required to perform the expressive deceleration maneuver and is defined by the starting point 1302A and the stopping point 1302C, which in turn, can be based on the vehicle's 1204 initial velocity V0.” (para 0130)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Park with the teachings of Schmitt in order to a complete stop in the “deceleration zone”; see Schmitt at least at [0130].
Regarding claim 3, Park discloses the apparatus of claim 1. However, Park does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
determine, as the potential passenger, an object corresponding to a person present within a first reference radius from the stop point, or an object approaching the vehicle or moving to the stop point, within a second reference radius from the stop point, wherein the second reference radius is greater than the first reference radius.
Setoguchi, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
determine, as the potential passenger, an object corresponding to a person present within a first reference radius from the stop point, or an object approaching the vehicle or moving to the stop point, within a second reference radius from the stop point, wherein the second reference radius is greater than the first reference radius (“A reference for narrowing down the stoppable locations in the first process by the stop candidate location extraction unit 33 is a predetermined time or a predetermined distance (or a predetermined path). That is, when the predetermined time is used as a reference in the first process, the stoppable locations are narrowed down to a location where a time required for the prospective passenger 103 to move (hereinafter, referred to as a first movement time) is equal to or shorter than the predetermined time. In addition, when the distance is used as a reference in the first process, the stoppable locations are narrowed down such that a movement distance or a path (hereinafter, referred to as a first movement distance) of the prospective passenger 103 is equal to or less than the predetermined distance” (para 0053)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Park with the teachings of Setoguchi in order to provide a reference for narrowing down the stoppable locations; see Setoguchi at least at [0053].
Regarding claim 4, Park discloses the apparatus of claim 1. Additionally, Park discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
determine the stop point by searching for position coordinates matched with the stop point within a specific distance from the vehicle (Fig. 4B, #42 and #41).
Regarding claim 5, Park discloses the apparatus of claim 4. Additionally, Park discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
detect, based on the sensed data, a surrounding object in a region associated with the position coordinates; and determine the stop point while excluding a region in which the surrounding object is detected (“the determining of the candidate stop locations may include determining, as the candidate stop location, at least one of a location which is spaced a certain distance from a stop line on the determined candidate route, a location which is spaced a certain distance from a location at which an object present on the determined candidate route has stopped or is predicted to stop, and a location input by a driver or a passenger of the autonomous vehicle, the calculating of the scores may include calculating scores for the determined candidate stop locations and the candidate driving plans including driving methods to the determined candidate stop locations, and the finalizing of the driving plan may include finalizing a route, a stop location, and a driving plan including a driving method to the stop location for the autonomous vehicle on the basis of the calculated score” (para 0011)).
Regarding claim 6, Park discloses the apparatus of claim 1. Additionally, Park discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
after the vehicle passes the stop point, control the driving device to maintain a first speed, of the vehicle, for a specific period within the stop zone (“the first speed profile may increase or reduce a speed of the autonomous vehicle from v.sub.0 to a preset target speed of v.sub.target using the current acceleration of a.sub.0 and a preset sectional acceleration profile, may maintain the speed of the autonomous vehicle at v.sub.target for a certain period from a time point at which the speed of the autonomous vehicle becomes v.sub.target, and may reduce the speed of the autonomous vehicle from v.sub.target to zero using the preset sectional acceleration profile and stop the autonomous vehicle at the determined candidate stop location after the certain period” (para 0012)).
Regarding claim 8, Park discloses the apparatus of claim 1. Additionally, Park discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
determine a second stop point in the stop zone after passing the stop point, wherein the second stop point is for boarding the potential passenger or another passenger in the stop zone (Fig. 4B, #42); and
perform accelerating or decelerating before reaching the second stop point ((Fig. 5) and “Although not shown in FIG. 4B, the computing device 100 may determine a location which is spaced a certain distance from the stop line as a first candidate stop location for a second candidate route for changing lanes and traveling before another vehicle passes by, determine a location spaced the certain distance from a location at which an object in front of the autonomous vehicle 10 has stopped or is predicted to stop on the second candidate route as a second candidate stop location, and determine a location wanted by the driver or passenger on the second candidate route as a third candidate stop location” (para 0088)).
Regarding claim 9, Park discloses the apparatus of claim 1. Additionally, Park discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
control, based on a second stop point being not determined, the driving device to accelerate the vehicle so that the vehicle moves out of the stop zone ((Fig. 5) and “Although not shown in FIG. 4B, the computing device 100 may determine a location which is spaced a certain distance from the stop line as a first candidate stop location for a second candidate route for changing lanes and traveling before another vehicle passes by, determine a location spaced the certain distance from a location at which an object in front of the autonomous vehicle 10 has stopped or is predicted to stop on the second candidate route as a second candidate stop location, and determine a location wanted by the driver or passenger on the second candidate route as a third candidate stop location” (para 0088)).
Regarding claim 10, Park discloses the apparatus of claim 6. Additionally, Park discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
based on a jerk, an acceleration, and a target stop distance of the vehicle, determine the first speed and whether to accelerate or decelerate the vehicle (“a.sub.decel in the third speed profile may be a negative value such that the speed of the autonomous vehicle 10 is reduced and may be variably set such that a distance traveled by the autonomous vehicle 10 becomes s.sub.target. However, a.sub.decel is not limited thereto” (para 0138) and “Referring to FIG. 9, in various embodiments, the computing device 100 may calculate a score for a candidate driving plan for the autonomous vehicle 10 to travel a candidate route and then stop at a determined candidate stop location according to the fourth speed profile by applying the fourth speed profile to the autonomous vehicle” (para 00142)).
Regarding claim 11, Park discloses a method comprising:
controlling, by the apparatus (“the computing device 100 may determine a control command for controlling the autonomous vehicle 10 according to the finalized driving plan including the stop location of the autonomous vehicle” (para 0173)), a speed of the vehicle at an end point of the decelerating section to be lower than a speed of the vehicle at a starting point of the decelerating section (“and a preset sectional acceleration profile (e.g., FIG. 5), maintain the speed of the autonomous vehicle 10 at v.sub.tail for a certain period (Buffer) from a time point at which the speed of the autonomous vehicle 10 becomes v.sub.tail, and reduce the speed of the autonomous vehicle 10 from v.sub.tail to zero and stop the autonomous vehicle 10 at the determined candidate stop location using the preset sectional acceleration profile after the certain period” (para 0143)).
However, Park does not explicitly teach
determining, by the apparatus, a decelerating section starting at a position that is spaced a first distance from the stop point; and
detecting, by an apparatus, a potential passenger;
determining, by the apparatus and based on a detection of the potential passenger, a stop point for stopping a vehicle in a stop zone;
Setoguchi, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
detecting, by an apparatus, a potential passenger (“In the present embodiment, the patrol vehicle 102 recognizes a person making the gesture indicating the boarding intention, among persons detected by the sensor 10, as the prospective passenger 103 by referring to the reference gesture pattern 17” (para 0035));
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Park with the teachings of Setoguchi in order to recognize a person; see Setoguchi at least at [0035].
determining, by the apparatus and based on a detection of the potential passenger, a stop point for stopping a vehicle in a stop zone (“The stop candidate location extraction unit 33 executes a stop candidate location extraction process. The stop candidate location extraction process is a process of extracting candidate locations (the stop candidate locations) with respect to the stop location at which the vehicle 102 is stopped in order to allow the prospective passenger 103 to board” (para 0050));
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Park with the teachings of Setoguchi in order to provide a stop candidate location extraction unit; see Setoguchi at least at [0050].
Schmitt, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
determining, by the apparatus, a decelerating section starting at a position that is spaced a first distance from the stop point (“FIG. 13 illustrates an expressive deceleration maneuver 1300 based on the scenario represented in FIG. 12. … In general, the deceleration zone 1208 is an amount of distance required to perform the expressive deceleration maneuver and is defined by the starting point 1302A and the stopping point 1302C, which in turn, can be based on the vehicle's 1204 initial velocity V0” (para 0130)); and
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Park with the teachings of Schmitt in order to complete stop in the “deceleration zone”; see Schmitt at least at [0130].
Regarding claim 12, Park discloses the method of claim 11. However, Park does not explicitly teach wherein a length of the decelerating section is determined based on a current speed of the vehicle, and wherein the end point of the decelerating section comprises the stop point.
Schmitt, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
wherein a length of the decelerating section is determined based on a current speed of the vehicle, and wherein the end point of the decelerating section comprises the stop point (“the deceleration zone 1208 is an amount of distance required to perform the expressive deceleration maneuver and is defined by the starting point 1302A and the stopping point 1302C, which in turn, can be based on the vehicle's 1204 initial velocity V0.” (para 0130)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Park with the teachings of Schmitt in order to complete stop in the “deceleration zone”; see Schmitt at least at [0130].
Regarding claim 13, Park discloses the method of claim 11. However, Park does not explicitly teach wherein the detecting of the potential passenger comprises:
determining whether an object is present within a first reference radius from the stop point or whether the object approaches the vehicle or moves to the stop point, within a second reference radius from the stop point, wherein the second reference radius is greater than the first reference radius.
Setoguchi, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the detecting of the potential passenger comprises:
determining whether the object approaches the vehicle or moves to the stop point, within a second reference radius from the stop point, wherein the second reference radius is greater than the first reference radius (“A reference for narrowing down the stoppable locations in the first process by the stop candidate location extraction unit 33 is a predetermined time or a predetermined distance (or a predetermined path). That is, when the predetermined time is used as a reference in the first process, the stoppable locations are narrowed down to a location where a time required for the prospective passenger 103 to move (hereinafter, referred to as a first movement time) is equal to or shorter than the predetermined time. In addition, when the distance is used as a reference in the first process, the stoppable locations are narrowed down such that a movement distance or a path (hereinafter, referred to as a first movement distance) of the prospective passenger 103 is equal to or less than the predetermined distance” (para 0053)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Park with the teachings of Setoguchi in order to provide a reference for narrowing down the stoppable locations; see Setoguchi at least at [0053].
Regarding claim 14, Park discloses the method of claim 11. Additionally, Park discloses wherein the determining of the stop point comprises:
searching for position coordinates matched with the stop point within a specific distance from the vehicle (Fig. 4B, #42 and #41).
Regarding claim 15, Park discloses the method of claim 14. Additionally, Park discloses wherein the determining of the stop point comprises:
acquiring, by a sensor, sensed data associated with at least one object in proximity to the vehicle; detecting, based on the sensed data, a surrounding object in a region associated with the position coordinates; and determining the stop point while excluding a region in which the surrounding object is detected (“the determining of the candidate stop locations may include determining, as the candidate stop location, at least one of a location which is spaced a certain distance from a stop line on the determined candidate route, a location which is spaced a certain distance from a location at which an object present on the determined candidate route has stopped or is predicted to stop, and a location input by a driver or a passenger of the autonomous vehicle, the calculating of the scores may include calculating scores for the determined candidate stop locations and the candidate driving plans including driving methods to the determined candidate stop locations, and the finalizing of the driving plan may include finalizing a route, a stop location, and a driving plan including a driving method to the stop location for the autonomous vehicle on the basis of the calculated score” (para 0011)).
Regarding claim 16, Park discloses the method of claim 11. Additionally, Park discloses wherein the controlling of the speed of the vehicle comprises:
after the vehicle passes the stop point, maintaining a first speed, of the vehicle, for a specific period within the stop zone (“the first speed profile may increase or reduce a speed of the autonomous vehicle from v.sub.0 to a preset target speed of v.sub.target using the current acceleration of a.sub.0 and a preset sectional acceleration profile, may maintain the speed of the autonomous vehicle at v.sub.target for a certain period from a time point at which the speed of the autonomous vehicle becomes v.sub.target, and may reduce the speed of the autonomous vehicle from v.sub.target to zero using the preset sectional acceleration profile and stop the autonomous vehicle at the determined candidate stop location after the certain period” (para 0012)).
Regarding claim 18, Park discloses the method of claim 11. Additionally, Park discloses wherein the controlling of the speed of the vehicle comprises:
determining a second stop point in the stop zone after passing the stop point, wherein the stop point is for boarding the potential passenger or another passenger in the stop zone (Fig. 4B, #42); and
performing accelerating or decelerating before reaching the second stop point ((Fig. 5) and “Although not shown in FIG. 4B, the computing device 100 may determine a location which is spaced a certain distance from the stop line as a first candidate stop location for a second candidate route for changing lanes and traveling before another vehicle passes by, determine a location spaced the certain distance from a location at which an object in front of the autonomous vehicle 10 has stopped or is predicted to stop on the second candidate route as a second candidate stop location, and determine a location wanted by the driver or passenger on the second candidate route as a third candidate stop location” (para 0088)).
Regarding claim 19, Park discloses the method of claim 11. Additionally, Park discloses wherein the controlling of the speed of the vehicle comprises:
controlling, based on a second stop point being not determined, a driving device to accelerate the vehicle so that the vehicle moves out of the stop zone ((Fig. 5) and “Although not shown in FIG. 4B, the computing device 100 may determine a location which is spaced a certain distance from the stop line as a first candidate stop location for a second candidate route for changing lanes and traveling before another vehicle passes by, determine a location spaced the certain distance from a location at which an object in front of the autonomous vehicle 10 has stopped or is predicted to stop on the second candidate route as a second candidate stop location, and determine a location wanted by the driver or passenger on the second candidate route as a third candidate stop location” (para 0088)).
Claims 7, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. No. 20220073099 (hereinafter, "Park"; previously of record), in view of U.S. Pub. No. 20240278807 (hereinafter, "Setoguchi"; previously of record), and in further view of U.S. Pub. No. 20220111871 (hereinafter, "Schmitt"; newly of record) as applied to claims 1 and 16 above, and in further view of U.S. Pub. No. 20220101633 (hereinafter, "Nishiyama"; previously of record).
Regarding claim 7, Park discloses the apparatus of claim 1. However, Park does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
control, based on the potential passenger being not detected, the driving device to drive the vehicle at a first speed at a time point at which the decelerating section ends.
Nishiyama, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
control, based on the potential passenger being not detected, the driving device to drive the vehicle at a first speed at a time point at which the decelerating section ends (“The speed calculation unit 26 calculates the time required for the prospective passenger 50 to walk to the stop location from the place where the hand-raising of the prospective passenger 50 is detected… If the boarding has been canceled, since keeping the autonomous driving vehicle 40 stopped is a waste of time, the vehicle control unit 29 causes the autonomous driving vehicle 40 to start traveling” (para 0036)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Park with the teachings of Nishiyama in order to reduce wasteful standby time of the autonomous driving vehicle; see Nishiyama at least at [0036].
Regarding claim 17, Park discloses the method of claim 16. However, Park does not explicitly teach wherein the controlling of the speed of the vehicle comprises:
controlling, based on the potential passenger being not detected, the speed of the vehicle to be decelerated to the first speed in the decelerating section.
Nishiyama, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the controlling of the speed of the vehicle comprises:
controlling, based on the potential passenger being not detected, the speed of the vehicle to be decelerated to the first speed in the decelerating section (“The speed calculation unit 26 calculates the time required for the prospective passenger 50 to walk to the stop location from the place where the hand-raising of the prospective passenger 50 is detected… If the boarding has been canceled, since keeping the autonomous driving vehicle 40 stopped is a waste of time, the vehicle control unit 29 causes the autonomous driving vehicle 40 to start traveling” (para 0036)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Park with the teachings of Nishiyama in order to reduce wasteful standby time of the autonomous driving vehicle; see Nishiyama at least at [0036].
Regarding claim 20, Park discloses the method of claim 17. Additionally, Park discloses wherein the controlling of the speed of the vehicle comprises:
determining the first speed and whether to accelerate or decelerate the vehicle (“a.sub.decel in the third speed profile may be a negative value such that the speed of the autonomous vehicle 10 is reduced and may be variably set such that a distance traveled by the autonomous vehicle 10 becomes s.sub.target. However, a.sub.decel is not limited thereto” (para 0138) and “Referring to FIG. 9, in various embodiments, the computing device 100 may calculate a score for a candidate driving plan for the autonomous vehicle 10 to travel a candidate route and then stop at a determined candidate stop location according to the fourth speed profile by applying the fourth speed profile to the autonomous vehicle” (para 00142)), and
However, Park does not explicitly teach
wherein based on a length of the stop zone being shorter than a threshold length, the position at which the decelerating section starts is determined to be a position outside of the stop zone.
Schmitt, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
wherein based on a length of the stop zone being shorter than a threshold length, the position at which the decelerating section starts is determined to be a position outside of the stop zone (“In some embodiments, the expressive vehicle system 1200 determines the deceleration profile 1302 based on the initial velocity V0 of the vehicle 1204. For example, the starting point can be further away from the pedestrian 1206A if the vehicle 1204 is travelling at a faster velocity so there is sufficient space to come to a complete stop at least 5 meters away from the pedestrian 1206A. This dependency is described below with reference to Table 1” (para 0137)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Park with the teachings of Schmitt in order to stop at least 5 meters away from the pedestrian; see Schmitt at least at [0137].
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM ALHARBI whose telephone number is (313)446-6621. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am-6:30pm.
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, Abby Flynn can be reached on (571) 272-9855. 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.
/ADAM M ALHARBI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663