DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
2. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Interpretation
3. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
4. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
5. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a bone suppression processing unit”, “a reconstruction processing unit” and “an adjustment processing unit” in claim 1; “a step of moving”, “a step of generating”, “a step of suppressing”, “a step of performing” and “a step of adjusting” in claim 12.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) limitations: CPU (see Specification, paragraphs 0017, 0021). It is noted that that the functions performed or controlled by CPU are disclosed in a manner that transforms the general CPU or the like to a special purpose CPU or the like programmed to perform the disclosed functions. That is, the various "unit" functions claimed are described in the specification in the form of prose and flow charts in a manner that provides sufficient structure.
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner's interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
6. `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.
7. Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, because the claim purports to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, but fails to recite a combination of elements as required by that statutory provision and thus cannot rely on the specification to provide the structure, material or acts to support the claimed function. As such, the claims 1-11 recite a system that has no limits and covers every conceivable means for achieving the stated function, while the specification discloses at most only those means known to the inventor. Accordingly, the disclosure is not commensurate with the scope of the claim. In this case, claims 1-11 are directed to a system to perform series of steps without a combination of elements {specification: Figs.1-2}.
Note that "a machine is a concrete thing, consisting of parts or certain devices and combination of devices" {Burr V. Duryee, 68 U.S. (1 Wall) 531, 570, 17 L. Ed. 659 (1863), see also MPEP 2106}.
8. Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as based on a disclosure which is not enabling. The disclosure does not enable one of ordinary skill in the art to practice the invention without "a memory, coupled to the processor, storing executable instructions (e.g. the method of " moving at least one of an X-ray irradiator configured to irradiate a target part of a subject with X-rays and an X-ray detector configured to detect the X-rays with which the subject is irradiated by the X-ray irradiator, and generating a plurality of X-ray images by performing tomosynthesis imaging on the target part of the subject during movement of the at least one of the X-ray irradiator and the X-ray detector; and generating a bone-suppressed tomographic image representing a cross- section of the subject in which a bone structure of the target part is suppressed based on the plurality of X-ray images generated by performing the tomosynthesis imaging, wherein the generating the bone-suppressed tomographic image includes suppressing the bone structure of the target part based on the plurality of X-ray images generated, performing, based on the plurality of X-ray images generated, reconstruction for generating the tomographic image, and adjusting a suppression degree of the bone structure in the bone- suppressed tomographic image to be generated." {claim 12}, when executed by the processor to perform the claimed operations" {Patent Application/Control Number: 18/290,690
Application Publication of this instant application, US 2024/0273784 A1: Figs.1-2 & paragraphs 0033-0034 wherein "The block diagram (FIG. 2) used for the description of the above embodiment shows a block of functional units. Those functional blocks (structural components) can be realized by a desired combination of at least one of hardware and software.", which is/are critical or essential to the practice of the invention but not included in the claim(s). See In re Mayhew, 527 F.2d 1229, 188 USPQ 356 (CCPA 1976). In this case, the method in claim 12 requires these essential elements, e.g. a memory, coupled to the processors, storing executable instructions, when executed by the processor to perform the claimed apply operations. Likewise, the applying method (e.g. executable instructions) in claim 12 requires a memory, coupled to the processors, storing executable instructions, when executed by the processor to perform the claimed operations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. Claims 1-9, 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NOTOHARA et al. U.S. Patent Application No.2016/0113601 (hereinafter NOTOHARA) (IDS) in view of HAN U.S. Patent Application No. 2021/0304460 (hereinafter HAN).
Regarding claim 1, NOTOHARA (2016/0113601) (IDS) discloses an X-ray imaging system (A radiographic apparatus system, Figure 1) comprising:
an X-ray irradiator configured to irradiate a target part of a subject with X-rays (An X-ray tube 3, paragraph 77, Figure 1);
an X-ray detector configured to detect the X-rays with which the subject is irradiated by the X-ray irradiator (X-ray tube 3 irradiates a corn-shaped X-ray beam to the subject M arranged on the upper portion of the top board 2, paragraph 77, Figures 1-2);
a moving mechanism configured to move at least one of the X-ray irradiator and the X-ray detector (synchronous movement mechanism 7 is configured to move the X-ray tube 3 and the FPD 4 synchronously in opposite directions with respect to the part of interest of the subject M, at least paragraphs 77-82, Figure 1);
an imaging controller configured to perform imaging of the target part of the subject while the moving mechanism is moving the at least one of the X-ray irradiator and the X-ray detector (An X-ray tube movement controller 8a for controlling the X-ray tube movement mechanism 7a and an FPD movement controller 8b for controlling the FPD movement mechanism 7b; paragraphs 78-79, Figure 1); and
an image processor configured to generate, based on a plurality of X-ray images generated by the imaging, a bone-suppressed tomographic image representing a cross-section of the subject in which a bone structure of the target part is suppressed (One or more processors or CPU, memory, circuitry, and computer programs configured to carry out the image processing; paragraphs 74, 81- 84, 122, 124-125 and 126-127, Figures 2, 14-19), wherein the image processor includes
a bone suppression processing unit configured to suppress the bone structure of the target part based on the plurality of X-ray images generated (A main controller 30 for generally controlling such as a plurality of X-ray transparent images are taken while changing the position of the X-ray tube 3 and that of the FPD 4; paragraphs 81-82),
a reconstruction processing unit configured to perform, based on the plurality of X- ray images generated, reconstruction for generating the tomographic image (An image reconstruction block/section 13 for generating a tomographic image D by composing subtraction images s; paragraphs 83-85, 116-118), and
an adjustment processing unit (Image subtraction 12, Figure 1) configured to adjust a suppression degree of the bone structure in the bone-suppressed tomographic image to be generated (Image subtraction section 12 can adjust the image emphasis state in the subtraction image, and to adjust the image emphasis state of the difference image by changing the coefficient used for differential operation, and it is recognized that the degree of the suppression of the bones in the image in which soft/hard tissues are emphasized is adjusted, it corresponds to the adjustment processing portion; paragraphs 117, 146-147).
NOTOHARA does not explicitly disclose an image processor configured to generate, based on a plurality of X-ray images generated by the tomosynthesis imaging, a bone-suppressed tomographic image representing a cross-section of the subject in which a bone structure of the target part is suppressed.
However, HAN (2021/0304460) working in the same field of endeavor (paragraphs 40-43) teaches an image processor (Detector 20, Figure 2) configured to generate, based on a plurality of X-ray images generated by the tomosynthesis imaging (Tomosynthesis unit 120 applies a tomosynthesis technique to the plurality of 2D images transferred from the image input unit 110 and reconstructs the 2D images in 3D to generate the reconstructed 3D image; paragraphs 76-92, Figure 8), a bone-suppressed tomographic image representing a cross-section of the subject in which a bone structure of the target part is suppressed (A synthetic 2D image in which a specific material is emphasized or suppressed—that is, the intensity of an image by a specific material is adjusted; paragraph 73, Figure 3).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at before time of the invention was made to combine the system of NOTOHARA as taught by HAN to include: an image processor configured to generate, based on a plurality of X-ray images generated by the tomosynthesis imaging, a bone-suppressed tomographic image representing a cross-section of the subject in which a bone structure of the target part is suppressed. By doing so, the combined system of HAN would have generated a specific material or a part having a characteristic in an image is adjusted according to a request or setting of a user to provide an adaptive synthetic image (paragraph 0024 of HAN).
Regarding claim 2, NOTOHARA discloses the X-ray imaging system according to claim 1.
However, NOTOHARA in view of HAN teaches wherein the bone suppression processing unit is configured to suppress the bone structure on the plurality of X-ray images before the reconstruction is performed or on the tomographic image after the reconstruction is performed (The reconstructed 3D image generated by the tomosynthesis unit 120; paragraphs 60-65, Figures 5-8); and
the adjustment processing unit is configured to adjust the suppression degree of the bone structure in the bone-suppressed tomographic image to be generated by performing adjustment of the suppression degree of the bone structure based on a post-bone- suppression image that is a result of the suppression by the bone suppression processing unit (A synthetic 2D image may be generated in which the intensity of at least one material of the target object is adjusted by using the segmentation data; paragraphs 18, 24, 61, 73).
Regarding claim 3, NOTOHARA discloses the X-ray imaging system according to claim 2.
However, NOTOHARA in view of Han teaches wherein the adjustment processing unit is configured to adjust the suppression degree of the bone structure in the bone-suppressed tomographic image based on a pre-bone-suppression image before the bone structure is suppressed by the bone suppression processing unit and the post-bone- suppression image after the bone structure is suppressed by the bone suppression processing unit (A synthetic 2D image is generated in which the intensity of at least one material of the target object is adjusted by using the segmentation data; paragraphs 7, 18, 24, 73 of HAN).
Regarding claim 4, NOTOHARA discloses the X-ray imaging system according to claim 1.
NOTOHARA in view of Han teaches further comprising an input acceptor configured to accept an input instruction to adjust the suppression degree of the bone structure, wherein
the adjustment processing unit is configured to adjust the suppression degree of the bone structure in the bone-suppressed tomographic image based on a predetermined adjustment factor and to set the adjustment factor based on the input instruction accepted by the input acceptor (a specific material may be emphasized or suppressed by assigning the weight for each material in the synthetic 2D image synthesis process. That is, the intensity of an image pixel by a specific material in the generated synthetic 2D image may be adjusted; paragraphs 61-65, Figure 5).
Regarding claim 5, NOTOHARA discloses the X-ray imaging system according to claim 1.
NOTOHARA in view of Han teaches wherein the adjustment processing unit is configured be able to adjust the suppression degree of the bone structure in each of pixels of the bone-suppressed tomographic image to be generated (A specific material may be emphasized or suppressed by assigning the weight for each material in the synthetic 2D image synthesis process. That is, the intensity of an image pixel by a specific material in the generated synthetic 2D image may be adjusted; paragraphs 61, 73, Figure 7).
Regarding claim 6, NOTOHARA discloses the X-ray imaging system according to claim 1.
However, NOTOHARA in view of Han teaches wherein the bone suppression processing unit is configured to suppress the bone structure on each of the plurality of X-ray images generated; the adjustment processing unit is configured to perform the adjustment of the suppression degree of the bone structure on the plurality of X-ray images in which the bone structure is suppressed by the bone suppression processing unit; and the reconstruction processing unit configured to generate the bone-suppressed tomographic image in which the suppression degree of the bone structure is adjusted by performing the reconstruction based on the plurality of X-ray images in which the suppression degree of the bone structure is adjusted by the adjustment processing unit (paragraphs 61, 65-66, 73).
Regarding claim 7, NOTOHARA discloses the X-ray imaging system according to claim 1, wherein
the reconstruction processing unit is configured to generate a bone-present tomographic image that is the tomographic image including the bone structure of the target part by performing the reconstruction on the plurality of X-ray images (an image reconstruction block/section 13 for generating a tomographic image D by composing subtraction images; paragraphs 83-85).
NOTOHARA in view of Han teaches the bone suppression processing unit is configured to generate the bone-suppressed tomographic image by suppressing the bone structure on the bone-present tomographic image, which is generated by the reconstruction processing unit; and the adjustment processing unit is configured to perform the adjustment of the suppression degree of the bone structure on the bone-suppressed tomographic image, which is generated by the bone suppression processing unit (A specific material may be emphasized or suppressed by assigning the weight for each material in the synthetic 2D image synthesis process. That is, the intensity of an image pixel by a specific material in the generated synthetic 2D image may be adjusted; paragraphs 61, 73-85).
Regarding claim 8, NOTOHARA discloses the X-ray imaging system according to claim 1.
NOTOHARA in view of Han teaches wherein the bone suppression processing unit is configured to suppress the bone structure on each of the plurality of X-ray images generated (A specific material may be emphasized or suppressed by assigning the weight for each material in the synthetic 2D image synthesis process. That is, the intensity of an image pixel by a specific material in the generated synthetic 2D image may be adjusted; paragraph 61);
the reconstruction processing unit is configured to generate a bone-present tomographic image that is the tomographic image including the bone structure of the target part by performing the reconstruction on the plurality of X-ray images, and to generate a bone-extracted tomographic image that is the tomographic image in which the bone structure of the target part is extracted by performing the reconstruction on a plurality of bone-extracted images in which the bone structure of the target part is extracted and which are generated based on the plurality of X-ray images and the plurality of X-ray images in which the bone structure is suppressed by the bone suppression processing unit (A synthetic 2D image F in which a specific material is emphasized or suppressed—that is, the intensity of an image by a specific material is adjusted; paragraphs 73-85); and
the adjustment processing unit is configured to generate the bone-suppressed tomographic image in which the suppression degree of the bone structure is adjusted based on the bone-present tomographic image and the bone-extracted tomographic image (Wherein the synthetic 2D image synthesis unit generates a synthetic 2D image in which the intensity of a specific material of the target object is adjusted by using the segmentation data; paragraphs 7, 18, 24, 61, 73-78).
Regarding claim 9, NOTOHARA discloses the X-ray imaging system according to claim 1.
However, NOTOHARA in view of Han teaches wherein the reconstruction processing unit is configured to generate a bone-present tomographic image that is the tomographic image including the bone structure of the target part by performing the reconstruction on the plurality of X-ray images (Tomosynthesis unit 120 applies a tomosynthesis technique to the plurality of 2D images transferred from the image input unit 110 and reconstructs the 2D images in 3D to generate the reconstructed 3D image; paragraphs 76-85); and
the X-ray imaging system further comprises a display configured to display the bone-present tomographic image including the bone structure, and the bone-suppressed tomographic image in which the bone structure is suppressed (Synthetic 2D image generated by the synthetic 2D image synthesis unit 150 may be presented to a user through a display 160; paragraphs 44, 51, 81, 88).
Regarding claim 12, claim 12 is the method claim of device claim 1. Therefore, method claim 12 is rejected for the reason given in device claim 1.
12. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NOTOHARA and HAN, and further in view of Okabe U.S. Patent Application No. 2013/0094739 (hereinafter Okabe).
Regarding claim 10, NOTOHARA discloses the X-ray imaging system according to claim 1.
The combination of NOTOHARA and HAN does not explicitly disclose wherein
the target part includes at least one of a chest and an abdomen of the subject; and the image processor is configured to generate the bone-suppressed tomographic image in which the bone structure including ribs in the at least one of the chest and the abdomen is suppressed.
However, Okabe working in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein
the target part includes at least one of a chest and an abdomen of the subject (Projection data in imaging of parts of a chest to abdomen; paragraph 101, Figure 10); and
the image processor is configured to generate the bone-suppressed tomographic image in which the bone structure including ribs in the at least one of the chest and the abdomen is suppressed (an X-ray CT image which has low contrast and is excellent in resolution by applying a smoothing filter to suppress noise in an imaging part; paragraphs 10, 101-102, 177, Figure 10).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention was made to combine the system of NOTOHARA and HAN as taught by Okabe to include: the target part includes at least one of a chest and an abdomen of the subject; and the image processor is configured to generate the bone-suppressed tomographic image in which the bone structure including ribs in the at least one of the chest and the abdomen is suppressed. By doing so, the combined system of Okabe would have generated an X-ray CT image with optimal quality for each part (paragraph 0006 of Okabe).
13. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NOTOHARA and HAN, and further in view of TAKAHASHI et al. U.S. Patent Application No. 2021/0030374 (hereinafter TAKAHASHI), IDS.
Regarding claim 11, NOTOHARA discloses the X-ray imaging system according to claim 1.
The combination of NOTOHARA and HAN does not explicitly disclose wherein the bone suppression processing unit is configured to suppress the bone structure of the target part by performing image processing by using a learned model that is produced by machine learning to suppress the bone structure.
However, TAKAHASHI working in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein the bone suppression processing unit is configured to suppress the bone structure of the target part by performing image processing by using a learned model that is produced by machine learning to suppress the bone structure (Using the machine learning model trained in the training section 82, to generate an image showing the bone portion; see Abstract and paragraphs 11, 55-58, 75-78, Figure 3).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention was made to combine the system of NOTOHARA and HAN as taught by Okabe to include: wherein the bone suppression processing unit is configured to suppress the bone structure of the target part by performing image processing by using a learned model that is produced by machine learning to suppress the bone structure. By doing so, the combined system of TAKAHASHI would have generated an image showing a specific region from an X-ray image by machine learning using DRR images (paragraph 0010).
Information Disclosure Statement
14. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/19/2024 and 04/17/2025 were filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Cited Art
15. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Roeske et al. (US 2014/0243579) discloses an imaging process for selective visualization of soft tissues of a body, the process comprising: producing a hard tissue-enhanced image of a body containing both soft and hard tissues, the hard tissue-enhanced image containing images of the hard tissues that are enhanced relative to the soft tissues; obtaining a radiographic image of the body and the soft and hard tissues thereof; and performing a weighted subtraction algorithm between the radiographic image and the hard tissue-enhanced image to produce a soft tissue-enhanced image in which imaging of the soft tissues is enhanced relative to the hard tissues, wherein the hard tissue-enhanced image is produced by: obtaining initial radiographic images of the body and the soft and hard tissues thereof, a first of the initial radiographic images being at a first energy level and a second of the initial radiographic images being at a second energy level that is lower than the first energy level; and then performing a weighted subtraction algorithm on the first and second initial radiographic images to produce the hard tissue-enhanced image.
16. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALLEN H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1229. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7 am-4 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, ABDERRAHIM MEROUAN can be reached at (571) 270-5254. 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.
/ALLEN H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2683