DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 33-37 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant's arguments filed 04/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s claimed invention for independent claim 1 is in regards to an addition of a camera and a rearrangement of parts in regards to Vickery ‘333. For example, Vickery shows in Fig. 3 that the components such as a transceiver, processor/memory and sensors (i.e. circuitry (118) reside in either the base housing (112) or the upper housing (110). Therefore, this a mere repositioning of parts such that these components reside in only the base housing (112). Furthermore, Vickery does not disclose that the sensors include a camera and activating the camera based on sensor data. However, Deering does disclose a camera incorporated with a pest station and activating the camera based on sensor data. It would be obvious to incorporate the teachings of Derring to include a camera with a pest station and/or activate the camera when a certain condition has been met to save power. Furthermore, Vickery discloses in [0003] that pest management devices fail to provide an indication, independent of manual inspection by a user, that a particular device has operated. Therefore, it would be obvious to provide visual data to a user such that manual inspection is only necessary when needed.
Applicant argues that the prior art of Deering is overcome due to the amended limitations of “activating the camera of the secondary station based on the one or more sensors of the base station”. The examiner respectfully disagrees. Vickery discloses that a base housing and an upper housing are removably coupled, and house a plurality of sensors. Vickery fails to disclose that the sensor is a camera and that the camera is located in the upper housing and the other sensors are located in the base housing. However, as explained above, it is obvious to include a camera with a pest management device. Furthermore, the positioning or location of the components in regards to the base part and upper part is a mere rearrangement of parts. For example, the same functionality is achieved if the camera is activated via sensor data via the base part or if the camera is activated via sensor data via the upper part. Furthermore, applicant’s published spec. [0004] describes the problems of integrated pest-management devices such that the whole device needs to be repaired if the components fail. However, Vickery does disclose a removably coupled base housing with upper housing. The location of where the components reside (i.e. base housing or upper housing) is a mere design choice.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 04/16/2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 02/20/2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 37 is objected to because of the following informalities: Please correct “the one or more second light source” to “the one or more second light sources”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 33-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 33 recites the limitation “wherein the two or more mode settings is based on the sensor data from the one or more sensors.” Applicant’s provided support (i.e. para. 0087) provides support for where the two or more mode settings are based on sensor data from a plurality of sensors (i.e. this paragraph did not provide support for where the two or more mode settings are based on sensor data from a singular sensor). Please clarify.
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.
Claim 33 recites the limitation “the one or more first light sources”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 1 nor 33 defines or introduces “one or more first light sources”. Please clarify.
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, 14, 16-17, 19-21 and 30-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vickery et al. (herein after will be referred to as Vickery) (US 20210022333) in view of Deering et al. (herein after will be referred to as Deering) (US 20210029983).
Regarding claim 1, Vickery discloses
a monitoring device for a pest-management device, the monitoring device comprising: a base station including: a one or more sensors of the base station configured to couple to a pest station, [See Vickery [Fig. 1] Part (104) includes base part (112) that is coupled to a pest trap and platform.]
the sensors of the base station including at least one of a reed switch, a touch sensor, or a motion sensor; [See Vickery [0072] reed switch (116) is integrated in base part (112) or Fig. 3, external to base part.]
a transceiver configured to wirelessly transmit data; a memory; and a processor coupled to the memory; and [See Vickery [Fig. 3] Shows that the circuitry (118) resides within parts (110 and 112). Also, see Fig. 5, Circuitry (118) includes transceiver (528), memory (520) and controller (510).]
a secondary station removably coupled to the base station, [See Vickery [Fig. 4 and 0069] Part (104) includes a first portion (110) and a second portion (112) that a removably coupled.]
[See Vickery [Fig. 3] Shows that the circuitry (118) resides within parts (110 and 112). Also, see Fig. 5, Circuitry (118) includes sensors (532).]
Vickery does not explicitly disclose
the secondary station including a camera configured to capture image data; and
wherein the processor is configured to activate the camera based on sensor data from the one or more sensors
However, Deering does disclose
the secondary station including a camera configured to capture image data; and [See Deering [Fig. 4B, 0093] Sensor station (4256) removably coupled with pest station. Also, see 0071 and/or 0106, sensor station includes a camera.]
wherein the processor is configured to activate the camera based on sensor data from the one or more sensors [See Deering [0129] Sensors have been activated…such as motion sensor has been activated as well a corresponding camera sensor.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the device by Vickery to add the teachings of Deering, in order to incorporate the benefits of utilizing a camera with a pest trap or animal monitoring device and/or to utilize obvious power saving techniques such as by activating a camera based upon a motion sensor output.
Regarding claim 14, Vickery (modified by Deering) disclose the device of claim 1. Furthermore, Vickery discloses
wherein the base station and the secondary station each include a housing and wherein the housing of the base station is configured to couple to the housing of the secondary station in a plurality of different configurations. [See Vickery [Fig. 4 and 0069] Detector device housing includes a first portion (110) and a second portion (112) that a removably coupled. Also, see 0010, achieve different device configurations.]
Regarding claim 16, Vickery (modified by Deering) disclose the device of claim 1. Furthermore, Vickery discloses a pest-management system comprising:
a pest-management station, the pest-management station comprising: a base portion; and a lid portion; and the monitoring device of any of claims 1-15 configured to couple to the pest-management station. [See Vickery [Fig. 25] Base portion and Lid for pest-management.]
Regarding claim 17, Vickery (modified by Deering) disclose the device of claim 16. Furthermore, Vickery discloses
further comprising a server configured to communicate with the monitoring device. [See Vickery [0093] Detector device coupled to a server.]
Regarding claim 19, Vickery (modified by Deering) disclose the device of claim 16. Furthermore, Vickery discloses
further comprising a holder that is configured to receive at least a portion of the base station, secondary station, or both, and wherein the holder is configured to be coupled to the pest-management station. [See Vickery [Figs. 24-28]]
Regarding claim 20, Vickery (modified by Deering) disclose the device of claim 16. Furthermore, Vickery discloses
wherein the holder is disposed in a chamber defined by the lid portion of the pest-management station. [See Vickery [Fig. 25] Holder (1610) positioned inside a chamber (i.e. enclosed space) defined by the lid and base of the station.]
Regarding claim 21, Vickery (modified by Deering) disclose the device of claim 16. Furthermore, Vickery does not explicitly disclose
wherein the processor is further configured to: analyze sensor data from the one or more sensors; and activate the camera to initiate capture of an image.
However, Deering does disclose
wherein the processor is further configured to: analyze sensor data from the one or more sensors; and activate the camera to initiate capture of an image. [See Deering [0129] Sensors have been activated…such as motion sensor has been activated as well a corresponding camera sensor.]
Applying the same motivation as applied in claim 1.
Regarding claim 30, Vickery (modified by Deering) disclose the device of claim 1. Furthermore, Vickery discloses
wherein the pest-management device comprises a pest-management station, and wherein the monitoring device is configured to be coupled to the pest-management station. [See Vickery [Figs. 24-28]]
Regarding claim 31, Vickery (modified by Deering) disclose the device of claim 1. Furthermore, Vickery discloses
wherein the pest-management device comprises a pest monitoring mount, and wherein the monitoring device is configured to be coupled to the pest monitoring mount. [See Vickery [Figs. 24-28]] A holder by definition is analogous to a mount (which a mount by definition is a support for a piece of equipment).]
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vickery (US 20210022333) in view of Deering (US 20210029983) and in further view of Dick (US 20190166823).
Regarding claim 2, Vickery (modified by Deering) disclose the device of claim 1. Furthermore, Vickery does not explicitly disclose
wherein the camera is positioned such that it is configured to capture images of an environment exterior to the pest-management station, to capture images of an interior portion of the pest-management station, or both.
However, Dick does disclose
wherein the camera is positioned such that it is configured to capture images of an environment exterior to the pest-management station, to capture images of an interior portion of the pest-management station, or both. [See Dick [Fig. 1].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the device by Vickery (modified by Deering) to add the teachings of Dick, in order to perform a simple modification of the camera’s FOV. Furthermore, see Dick [0006] Improvement for a pest animal trap.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vickery (US 20210022333) in view of Deering (US 20210029983) and in further view of Janet et al. (herein after will be referred to as Janet) (US 20180027795).
Regarding claim 3, Vickery (modified by Deering) disclose the device of claim 1. Furthermore, Vickery discloses
wherein the secondary station further comprises: a housing defining one or more recessed portions; and [See Vickery [Fig. 1]]
Vickery does not explicitly disclose
one or more first light sources disposed within at least one of the one or more recessed portions.
However, Janet does disclose
one or more first light sources disposed within at least one of the one or more recessed portions. [See Janet [0086 or 0087] Array of light sources. Visible and infrared illumination is used.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the device by Vickery (modified by Deering) to add the teachings of Janet, in order to include multiple LEDs within the device of Vickery for illuminating a surveillance area to improve the lighting conditions and improve the image quality.
Regarding claim 4, Vickery (modified by Deering and Janet) disclose the device of claim 3. Furthermore, Vickery does not explicitly disclose
further comprising one or more second light sources, the one or more second light sources being different from the one or more first light sources, wherein the one or more first light sources comprises a visible light LED, and wherein the one or more second light sources comprises an infrared LED.
However, Janet does disclose
further comprising one or more second light sources, the one or more second light sources being different from the one or more first light sources, wherein the one or more first light sources comprises a visible light LED, and wherein the one or more second light sources comprises an infrared LED. [See Janet [0086 or 0087] Array of light sources. Visible and infrared illumination is used.]
Applying the same motivation as applied in claim 3.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vickery (US 20210022333) in view of Deering (US 20210029983) and in further view of Bonduelle et al. (herein after will be referred to as Bonduelle) (US 20230309536).
Regarding claim 11, Vickery (modified by Deering) disclose the device of claim 1. Furthermore, Vickery does not explicitly disclose
further comprising artificial intelligence (AI) based pest identification software, wherein the processor is configured to identify rodents based on the AI based pest identification software.
However, Bonduelle does disclose
further comprising artificial intelligence (AI) based pest identification software, wherein the processor is configured to identify rodents based on the AI based pest identification software. [See Bonduelle [0085] Image processing by machine learning/neural network for object recognition. Also, see 0118-0119.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the device by Vickery (modified by Deering) to add the teachings of Bonduelle, in order to incorporate an object recognition algorithm with the pest camera system in Deering. This will improve upon appropriate trap activation.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vickery (US 20210022333) in view of Deering (US 20210029983) in view of Bonduelle (US 20230309536) and in further view of Martino et al. (herein after will be referred to as Martino) (US 20210279349).
Regarding claim 12, Vickery (modified by Deering and Bonduelle) disclose the device of claim 11. Furthermore, Vickery does not explicitly disclose
wherein the AI based pest identification software is configured to identify rodent species, rodent gender, a particular rodent, or a combination thereof, based on rodent eye curvature image data.
However, Martino does disclose
wherein the AI based pest identification software is configured to identify rodent species, rodent gender, a particular rodent, or a combination thereof, based on rodent eye curvature image data. [See Martino [0067] ML or AI model identifies the identity of the person based on eye shape from within captured images.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the device by Vickery (modified by Deering and Bonduelle) to add the teachings of Martino, in order to improve upon object identification by utilizing specific features such as eye shape.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vickery (US 20210022333) in view of Deering (US 20210029983) in view of Bonduelle (US 20230309536) and in further view of Yang et al. (herein after will be referred to as Yang) (US 20220247929).
Regarding claim 13, Vickery (modified by Deering and Bonduelle) disclose the device of claim 11. Furthermore, Vickery does not explicitly disclose
wherein the AI based pest identification software is configured to compensate for weather conditions, lighting conditions, angle, orientation of the pest, distance, or a combination thereof.
However, Yang does disclose
wherein the AI based pest identification software is configured to compensate for weather conditions, lighting conditions, angle, orientation of the pest, distance, or a combination thereof. [See Yang [0252] Image enhancement using a neural network model to perform brightness improvement, contrast enhancement and/or saturation enhancement.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the device by Vickery (modified by Deering and Bonduelle) to add the teachings of Yang, in order to improve upon image quality.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vickery (US 20210022333) in view of Deering (US 20210029983) and in further view of Chait (US 20140279600).
Regarding claim 18, Vickery (modified by Deering) disclose the device of claim 17. Furthermore, Vickery does not explicitly disclose
further comprising a router configured to receive data from the monitoring device, and forward the data to the server.
However, Chait does disclose
further comprising a router configured to receive data from the monitoring device, and forward the data to the server. [See Chait [0048] Server is connected with a router for receiving data from sensors.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the device by Vickery (modified by Deering) to add the teachings of Chait, in order to incorporate obvious networking gateways such as a router for forwarding data within a network. The benefits of utilizing network gateways are obvious.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vickery (US 20210022333) in view of Deering (US 20210029983) in view of Nixon (US Patent No. 11,232,685) and in further view of Gaskamp (US 20160277688).
Regarding claim 27, Vickery (modified by Deering) disclose the device of claim 1. Furthermore, Vickery does not explicitly disclose
wherein the processor is configured to: compare sensor data from one or more sensors of the plurality of sensors to one or more corresponding thresholds; determine, based on one or more comparisons of the sensor data to the one or more corresponding thresholds, whether to initiate activation of the camera; and
responsive to a determination to activate the camera, cause the camera to capture an image using a visible light flash, an infrared light flash, or both.
However, Nixon does disclose
wherein the processor is configured to: compare sensor data from one or more sensors of the plurality of sensors to one or more corresponding thresholds; determine, based on one or more comparisons of the sensor data to the one or more corresponding thresholds, whether to initiate activation of the camera; and [See Nixon [Col. 33 lines 23-25] Comparing motion sensor output with a threshold such that the output is indicative of motion to activate a camera.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the device by Vickery (modified by Deering) to add the teachings of Nixon, in order to incorporate a motion sensor threshold to avoid false positives and activating the camera inappropriately.
Vickery (modified by Deering and Nixon) do not explicitly disclose
responsive to a determination to activate the camera, cause the camera to capture an image using a visible light flash, an infrared light flash, or both.
However, Gaskamp does disclose
responsive to a determination to activate the camera, cause the camera to capture an image using a visible light flash, an infrared light flash, or both. [See Gaskamp [0061] Activate an illumination source upon detected motion (which will awaken the camera for imaging, para. 0003).]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the device by Vickery (modified by Deering and Nixon) to add the teachings of Gaskamp, in order to incorporate illumination when activating a camera. This will improve upon image quality.
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vickery (US 20210022333) in view of Deering (US 20210029983) and in further view of Acharya et al. (herein after will be referred to as Acharya) (US 20220142135).
Regarding claim 28, Vickery (modified by Deering) disclose the device of claim 1. Furthermore, Vickery does not explicitly disclose
wherein the processor is configured to: responsive to a determination to that a timer has expired or a timer condition is satisfied, cause the camera to capture an image using a visible light flash.
However, Acharya does disclose
wherein the processor is configured to: responsive to a determination to that a timer has expired or a timer condition is satisfied, cause the camera to capture an image using a visible light flash. [See Acharya [0075] Image capture schedule. Also, see 0058, light source is a flash device.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the device by Vickery (modified by Deering) to add the teachings of Acharya, in order to perform image capturing according to capturing schedule. This will improve user functionality with the device such that the user can program the device to capture images at specific times within the day/week/etc.
Claim 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vickery (US 20210022333) in view of Deering (US 20210029983) and in further view of Gin (US 20030093805).
Regarding claim 33, Vickery (modified by Deering) disclose the device of claim 1. Furthermore, Vickery does not explicitly disclose
further comprising one or more second light sources, the one or more second light sources being different from the one or more first light sources, wherein the camera can be operated using two or more mode settings, wherein in a first mode setting, the one or more first light sources are activated, wherein in a second mode setting, the one or more second light sources are activated, and wherein the two or more mode settings is based on the sensor data from the one or more sensors.
However, Gin does disclose
further comprising one or more second light sources, the one or more second light sources being different from the one or more first light sources, wherein the camera can be operated using two or more mode settings, wherein in a first mode setting, the one or more first light sources are activated, wherein in a second mode setting, the one or more second light sources are activated, and wherein the two or more mode settings is based on the sensor data from the one or more sensors. [See Gin [0023] Ambient light sensor…infrared illumination is used at night/low light levels and visible illumination at day/high light levels. Also, see 0012, the system has an infrared illuminator and a visible illuminator. Also, see Claim 1, selection of camera operation based on ambient light conditions.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the device by Vickery (modified by Deering) to add the teachings of Gin, in order to improve upon image quality depending on the time of day [See Gin [0001-0002]].
Claims 33-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vickery (US 20210022333) in view of Deering (US 20210029983) and in further view of Vickery (herein after will be referred to as Vickery ‘298) (US 20210056298).
Regarding claim 33, Vickery (modified by Deering) disclose the device of claim 1. Furthermore, Vickery does not explicitly disclose
further comprising one or more second light sources, the one or more second light sources being different from the one or more first light sources, wherein the camera can be operated using two or more mode settings, wherein in a first mode setting, the one or more first light sources are activated, wherein in a second mode setting, the one or more second light sources are activated, and wherein the two or more mode settings is based on the sensor data from the one or more sensors.
However, Vickery ‘298 does disclose
further comprising one or more second light sources, the one or more second light sources being different from the one or more first light sources, wherein the camera can be operated using two or more mode settings, wherein in a first mode setting, the one or more first light sources are activated, wherein in a second mode setting, the one or more second light sources are activated, and wherein the two or more mode settings is based on the sensor data from the one or more sensors. [See Vickery ‘298 [0103-0104]]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the device by Vickery (modified by Deering) to add the teachings of Vickery ‘298, in order to use different illuminations to improve upon the pest monitoring device [See Vickery ‘298 [0091]].
Regarding claim 34, Vickery (modified by Deering and Vickery ‘298) disclose the device of claim 33. Furthermore, Vickery does not explicitly disclose
wherein the one or more sensors includes a touch bar sensor indicating motion in an interior of the monitoring device.
However, Vickery ‘298 does disclose
wherein the one or more sensors includes a touch bar sensor indicating motion in an interior of the monitoring device. [See Vickery ‘298 [0103-0104]]
Applying the same motivation as applied in claim 33.
Regarding claim 35, Vickery (modified by Deering and Vickery ‘298) disclose the device of claim 34. Furthermore, Vickery does not explicitly disclose
wherein the one or more first light sources comprises a visible light source, and wherein the touch bar sensor indicates motion in the interior of the monitoring device, the camera is operated in the first mode setting.
However, Vickery ‘298 does disclose
wherein the one or more first light sources comprises a visible light source, and wherein the touch bar sensor indicates motion in the interior of the monitoring device, the camera is operated in the first mode setting. [See Vickery ‘298 [0103-0104]]
Applying the same motivation as applied in claim 33.
Regarding claim 36, Vickery (modified by Deering and Vickery ‘298) disclose the device of claim 33. Furthermore, Vickery does not explicitly disclose
wherein the one or more sensors includes a motion sensor indicating motion exterior to the monitoring device.
However, Vickery ‘298 does disclose
wherein the one or more sensors includes a motion sensor indicating motion exterior to the monitoring device. [See Vickery ‘298 [0103-0104]]
Applying the same motivation as applied in claim 33.
Regarding claim 37, Vickery (modified by Deering and Vickery ‘298) disclose the device of claim 36. Furthermore, Vickery does not explicitly disclose
wherein the one or more second light source comprises an ultraviolet light source, and wherein when the motion sensor indicates motion exterior to the monitoring device, the camera is operated in the second mode setting.
However, Vickery ‘298 does disclose
wherein the one or more second light source comprises an ultraviolet light source, and wherein when the motion sensor indicates motion exterior to the monitoring device, the camera is operated in the second mode setting. [See Vickery ‘298 [0103-0104]]
Applying the same motivation as applied in claim 33.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES T BOYLAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8242. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-3pm.
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, JAMIE ATALA can be reached at 571-272-7384. 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.
/JAMES T BOYLAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2486
Prosecution Insights