The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 8/5/26 has been entered. Claims 1, 13, and 14 have been amended. Claims 1 – 9 and 12 – 16 are pending.
Response to Amendments / Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the previously raised claim rejections under 35 USC 103 based on the Ding – Overvig combination have been fully considered but they are moot in view of the new grounds of rejections, as necessitated by Applicant’s amendments. Specifically, the new limitations in the independent claims define that the leaky-wave metasurface comprises a plurality of meta-atoms consisting of at least one of dielectric pillars and air apertures etched in the high refractive index layer. As correctly noted by Applicant (para. bridging pp. 6 – 7 of the Remarks), Ding describes a plurality of meta-atom formed by multi-layered (MIM) pillars. Accordingly, the Examiner applies a combination of Overvig (as the primary reference) and Ding (as a secondary reference), the Ding – Overvig combination considering a plurality of meta-atoms consisting of air apertures etched in a high refractive index layer (as in Fig. 2a of Overvig). As was noted in the 5/19/26 Office Action for claim 6 (p. 9), “Alternatively, the teachings of Ding (a 2D metasurface integrated on a slab waveguide and driven by a guided wave in it) can be applied to the structure in Overvig and change free-space excitation of the metasurface to guided-wave excitation”.
Additionally, the Examiner applies a reference by Gao et al (US 11,435,528 B1) that has been yielded by an updated prior art search and discloses a thin waveguide, a waveguide taper, and a leaky-wave metasurface for conversion between a waveguide mode and a free-space optical wave. In combination with other prior art of record, Gao teaches expressly or renders obvious all of the limitations recited by the amended claims, as detailed below.
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 of this title, 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:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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 – 9 and 12 – 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Multifunctional Nonlocal Metasurfaces” by Overvig et al, PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS, vol. 125, paper 017402, pp. 1 – 6, 2020 (hereinafter Overvig) in view of “Metasurface-Dressed Two-Dimensional on-Chip Waveguide for Free-Space Light Field Manipulation” by Ding et al, ACS Photonics, vol. 9, pp. 398−404, January 2022 (hereinafter Ding).
Regarding claims 1 and 12, Overvig describes (Figs. 1 and 2; pp. 1 – 5) a leaky-wave metasurface for conversion between a waveguide mode (of a silicon waveguide) and a free-space optical wave (as shown in Fig. 2a) with a designer phase wavefront (Abstract; 4th and 5th para. on p. 1; para. bridging pp. 4 – 5; last para. on p. 5), the leaky-wave metasurface defined within a high refractive index layer of dielectric material (silicon) and comprising a plurality of meta-atoms (Figs. 1a, 1b, and 2a) consisting of at least one of dielectric pillars (1st complete para. on p. 017402-2) and air apertures/holes etched in the high-refractive index (silicon) layer, the high-refractive index (silicon) layer being deposited on a low refractive index (silicon dioxide) substrate (“We begin by considering a two-dimensional PCS composed of air holes in a silicon slab, sitting on a silicon dioxide substrate” at para. bridging pp. 1 – 2; “Figure 2(a) schematically depicts such a metasurface consisting of a slab of silicon etched with elliptical holes that encode a phase gradient” at para. bridging columns on p. 017402-3 of Overvig, emphasis added).
Overvig does not teach a waveguide taper to provide/expand input light to the leaky-wave metasurface (for emission into free space) and collect/focus light received by the leaky-wave metasurface (from free space). However, Ding describes (Fig. 1; Abstract; pp. 398 – 399) an integrated metasurface device for conversion between a waveguide mode TE00 (in a silicon waveguide) and a free-space optical wave (“An off-chip focusing function was demonstrated numerically and experimentally” at last para. on p. 402) with a designer wavefront (e.g., a converging wavefront of a focused free-space beam; “We show that a metasurface-coated two-dimensional (2D) slab waveguide enables the generation of arbitrary complex light fields by combining the extreme versatility and freedom on the wavefront control of optical metasurfaces” in the Abstract; also 3rd para. on p. 398), comprising:
a) a thin waveguide (the narrow waveguide portion in Fig. 1; a single-mode Si waveguide on a SiO2 substrate; “An edge-coupling port connected with a single-mode waveguide was used to eliminate higher-order propagation modes” at the left column on p. 400);
b) a waveguide taper (as seen in Fig. 1; “The single-mode waveguide was immediately followed by a taper that could adiabatically convert the fundamental TE00 mode from the single-mode waveguide into a TE00 mode with extended width in the slab waveguide” at the right column on p. 400, emphasis added);
c) a leaky-wave metasurface defined within a high refractive index (silicon) layer of dielectric material (“In this work, we extended the capability of using a metasurface to control scattered light from 1D to 2D. By placing metal−dielectric−metal metaatoms on top of a slab waveguide, we can tune the phase of scattered light covering 2π” at para. bridging pp. 398 – 399; “The nanoantennas we used here are metal−insulator−metal (MIM) sandwiched nanobars … A sandwiched nanobar composed of stacked Au, Si, and Au layers, with a thickness of 30 nm for each layer, was placed on top of a 500 nm thick Si slab waveguide on a SiO2 substrate” at 1st complete para. on p. 399, emphasis added); and
d) a low refractive index substrate (of silicon dioxide; “A sandwiched nanobar composed of stacked Au, Si, and Au layers, with a thickness of 30 nm for each layer, was placed on top of a 500 nm thick Si slab waveguide on a SiO2 substrate” at 1st complete para. on p. 399”, emphasis added), the high refractive index layer deposited thereon.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the leaky-wave metasurface of Overvig can be used, in accordance with the teachings of Ding, together with a waveguide taper in order to expand input light from an (narrow) input/output waveguide to the (wider) leaky-wave metasurface (for emission into free space) and/or collect light received by the leaky-wave metasurface (from free space) and focus it into the (narrow) input/output waveguide.
In light of the foregoing analysis, the Overvig – Ding combination teaches expressly or renders obvious all of the recited limitations.
Regarding claim 2, the Overvig – Ding combination considers that the thin (silicon) waveguide supports a (single) waveguide mode TE00 (“An edge-coupling port connected with a single-mode waveguide was used to eliminate higher-order propagation modes” at the right column on p. 400 of Ding).
Regarding claim 3, the Overvig – Ding combination considers that the waveguide taper converts the (single) waveguide mode TE00 into a slab waveguide mode TE00 in the form of a sheet of light (as illustrated in Fig. 1 of Ding; “The single-mode waveguide was immediately followed by a taper that could adiabatically convert the fundamental TE00 mode from the single-mode waveguide into a TE00 mode with extended width in the slab waveguide” at the right column on p. 400).
Regarding claim 4, the Overvig – Ding combination considers that the leaky-wave metasurface comprises a plurality of meta-units (groups of nanoholes in Figs. 1a, 1b, 2a, and 2b of Overvig).
Regarding claim 5, the Overvig – Ding combination considers that each meta-unit comprises at least two sets with different orientations of perturbation (as seen in Figs. 1a, 1b, 2a, and 2b of Overvig).
Regarding claim 6, Overvig describes (Figs. 1 and 2; pp. 1 – 4) a 2D metasurface configured for decomposing light into two orthogonal polarization components (which produce a right-hand circularly polarized (RCP) wave and a left-hand circularly polarized (LCP) wave when the relative phase difference between two orthogonal polarization components is ±90 degrees), and modifying them.
The Overvig – Ding combination considers an integrated metasurface device, wherein the slab waveguide mode T00 is decomposed into two orthogonal standing waves (para. bridging columns on p. 4; para. bridging columns on p. 5), wherein the two sets of meta-atoms (e.g., shown in Figs. 2 and 4) independently control the two standing waves RCP,LCP, converting each standing wave into a surface emission with independent amplitude and polarization orientation, and wherein the two surface emissions merge into a single free-space wave (as shown in Fig. 2a) with completely and independently controllable amplitude, phase, polarization orientation, and polarization ellipticity at each point over the wavefront of the free-space wave (Fig. 4 and its caption; 4th para. on p. 1; para. bridging columns on p. 3; para. bridging pp. 4 – 5 and following para.).
In light of the foregoing analysis, the Overvig – Ding combination teaches expressly or renders obvious all of the recited limitations.
Regarding claim 7, the Overvig – Ding combination considers that the high refractive index layer comprises at least one layer (of silicon), and the leaky-wave metasurface is defined therein.
Regarding claim 8, the Overvig – Ding combination considers that the meta-atoms can be ellipse-shaped (Fig. 2a of Overvig), the magnitude of perturbation is an ellipticity of an ellipse, and the orientation of perturbation is an angular orientation of the ellipse.
Regarding claim 9, the Overvig – Ding combination considers that the meta-atoms can be rectangle-shaped (as illustrated in Fig. 1 of Ding), the magnitude of perturbation is a ratio between the long and short edges of a rectangle, and an orientation of perturbation is an angular orientation of the rectangle (according to the teachings in Figs. 1b and 2a of Overvig).
Regarding claim 13, the teachings of Overvig and Ding combine (see the arguments and motivation for combining, as provided above for claim 1) to teach expressly or render obvious all of the recited step limitations of a corresponding method of using the contemplated integrated metasurface device, as detailed above for claims 1 and 6. Specifically, the Overvig – Ding combination considers a method for converting a waveguide mode (TE00 mode of the single-mode waveguide) into a free-space optical wave (as shown in Fig. 1 of Ding) with a designer wavefront (as described by both Ding and Overvig), comprising:
a) converting the waveguide mode T00 into a slab waveguide mode T00 using a waveguide taper (as illustrated in Fig. 1; “The single-mode waveguide was immediately followed by a taper that could adiabatically convert the fundamental TE00 mode from the single-mode waveguide into a TE00 mode with extended width in the slab waveguide” at the right column on p. 400);
b) coupling the slab waveguide mode into a leaky-wave metasurface the leaky-wave metasurface comprising a plurality of meta-atoms consisting of at least one of dielectric pillars and air apertures etched in the high refractive index layer (as detailed above for claim 1);
c) decomposing the slab waveguide mode within the leaky-wave metasurface into two orthogonal standing waves that are 90-degree out of phase (two orthogonal polarization components which produce a right-hand circularly polarized (RCP) wave and a left-hand circularly polarized (LCP) wave when the relative phase difference between two orthogonal polarization components is ±90 degrees);
d) using two sets of meta-atoms (e.g., ellipse-shaped meta-atoms in Fig. 2a of Overvig) of the leaky-wave metasurface to independently convert the two orthogonal standing waves into two surface emissions with independently controllable amplitude and polarization orientation; and
e) merging the two surface emissions into a single free-space wave (Fig. 2a of Overvig) with completely and independently controllable amplitude, phase, polarization orientation, and polarization ellipticity at each point over the wavefront of the free-space wave (Fig. 4 and its caption; 4th para. on p. 1; para. bridging columns on p. 3; para. bridging pp. 4 – 5 and following para.).
Regarding claim 14, the device of the Overvig – Ding combination does not use non-reciprocal elements, is (inherently) bidirectional, and can be used for either direction of light propagation, i.e., from the waveguide into free-space and/or from free-space into the waveguide (also detailed above for claim 1). In the latter case, the device of the Overvig – Ding combination implements a method for converting a free-space optical wave with a designer wavefront into a waveguide mode, comprising:
a) decomposing a free-space wave into two free-space components that are 90-degree out of phase;
b) using two sets of meta-atoms of the leaky-wave metasurface to independently convert the two free-space components into two orthogonal standing waves that are within the leaky- wave metasurface comprising a plurality of meta-atoms consisting of at least one of dielectric pillars and air apertures etched in the high refractive index layer (as detailed above for claim 1);
c) combining two orthogonal standing waves into a slab waveguide mode; and
d) coupling the slab waveguide mode into a waveguide mode using a waveguide taper.
Regarding claim 15, the Overvig – Ding combination considers (e.g., Fig. 3c; 3rd complete para. on p. 3 of Overvig; Fig. 1; Abstract; pp. 398 – 399 of Ding;) a method of using an integrated metasurface device of claim 1 for free-space wavefront generation, comprising:
a) exciting an integrated metasurface device with a waveguide mode (the TE00 mode of the slab/wide waveguide portion); and
b) establishing a focused beam in free space (Fig. 3c; 3rd complete para. on p. 3 of Overvig; “We demonstrated off-chip 2D focusing and holographic projection with our metasurface-dressed photonic integrated devices” in the Abstract of Ding).
Regarding claim 16, the Overvig – Ding combination considers a utilization of an integrated metasurface device of claim 1, comprising incorporating the integrated metasurface device into AR/VR displays and wearable devices (“the device in Fig. 3 may prove useful for augmented reality applications as compact and highly transparent lenses” at 3rd complete para. on p. 3 of Overvig; “This technology holds the potential for many other optical applications requiring 2D light field manipulation with full on-chip integration, such as solid-state LiDAR and near-eye AR/VR displays” in the Abstract; “the developed platform could be exploited for many other optical applications requiring 2D light field manipulation with full on-chip integration, such as solid-state LiDAR and head-mounted AR/VR displays” at last para. on p. 402 of Ding).
Claims 1 – 9 and 12 – 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao et al (US 11,435,528 B1) in view of Overvig.
Regarding claims 1 and 12, Gao discloses (Figs. 3a and 11 – 13; 11:7 – 12:49; 15:48 – 17:47) an integrated metasurface device for conversion between a waveguide mode (in an input/output waveguide 1120 in Fig. 11) and a free-space optical wave (as shown in Fig. 12), comprising:
a) a thin waveguide (1120 in Fig. 11; 1210,1240 in Fig. 12);
b) a waveguide taper 1130 (shown in Fig. 11);
c) a leaky-wave metasurface 1110 (its top-down view in Fig. 11 corresponds to a side view 1260 in Fig. 12; “The beam shaping element 1260 may comprise a diffractive optical element or metasurface” at 16:63 – 65, emphasis added) defined within a high refractive index layer 1210 of dielectric material (“The core 1210 may comprise a high-index material, such as SiN for NIR light sources. The core 1210 may comprise silicon for SWIR light sources” at 16:22 – 25, emphasis added); and
d) a low refractive index substrate 1215,1205 (of silicon dioxide; “The cladding layer 1215 and the cladding layer 1220 may comprise a low index material, such as SiO2” at 16:57 – 58, emphasis added), the high refractive index layer 1210 deposited thereon (as seen in Fig. 12).
Figures 3A and 12 show that beam shaping elements (350 and 1255, respectively), if implemented as diffraction gratings, can be formed by a surface relief formed by etching (10:45 – 46). While Gao does not teach/exemplify a suitable/workable structure for a beam shaping element implemented as a metasurface (as taught at 16:63 – 65), Overvig describes (Figs. 1 and 2; pp. 1 – 4) a leaky-wave metasurface (coupling optical radiation to/from free-space, as shown in Fig. 2a) that comprises a plurality of meta-atoms (Figs. 1a, 1b, and 2a) including dielectric pillars (1st complete para. on p. 017402-2) and air apertures/holes formed by etching a high-refractive index (silicon) layer (“We begin by considering a two-dimensional PCS composed of air holes in a silicon slab, sitting on a silicon dioxide substrate” at para. bridging pp. 1 – 2; “Figure 2(a) schematically depicts such a metasurface consisting of a slab of silicon etched with elliptical holes that encode a phase gradient” at para. bridging columns on p. 017402-3 of Overvig, emphasis added).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the beam shaping elements implemented as metasurfaces, as taught by Gao, can have a structure described by Overvig. Such metasurface design has the benefit of enabling “multifunctional nonlocal devices: metasurfaces that produce narrow band spatially tailored wave fronts at multiple selected wavelengths and yet are otherwise transparent” (Abstract of Overvig)
In light of the foregoing analysis, the Gao – Overvig combination teaches expressly or renders obvious all of the recited limitations.
Regarding claim 2, the Gao – Overvig combination considers that the thin waveguide 1240 (comprising the waveguide core 1210 in Fig. 12) supports the waveguide mode.
Regarding claim 3, the Gao – Overvig combination considers that the waveguide taper 1120 (shown in Fig. 11) converts the waveguide mode (in the narrow input/output waveguide 1120) into a slab waveguide mode in a form of a sheet of light (covering the entire width of 1110; “The fan-out waveguide 1100 comprises a pipe section 1120 and a fan section 1130. The fan section 1130 is configured to distribute light in the pipe section 1120 across the entire grating 1110. The fan section 1130 is located between the pipe section 1120 and the grating 1110. A diameter D of the fan section 1130 is greater than the diameter of the pipe section 1120, and the diameter D increases at positions closer to the grating 1110” at 15:54 – 61 of Gao).
Regarding claim 4, the Gao – Overvig combination considers that the leaky-wave metasurface comprises a plurality of meta-units (groups of nanoholes in Figs. 1a, 1b, 2a, and 2b of Overvig).
Regarding claim 5, the Gao – Overvig combination considers that each meta-unit comprises at least two sets with different orientations of perturbation (as seen in Figs. 1a, 1b, 2a, and 2b of Overvig).
Regarding claim 6, Overvig describes (Figs. 1 and 2; pp. 1 – 4) a 2D metasurface configured for decomposing light into two orthogonal polarization components (which produce a right-hand circularly polarized (RCP) wave and a left-hand circularly polarized (LCP) wave when the relative phase difference between two orthogonal polarization components is ±90 degrees), and modifying them.
The Gao – Overvig combination considers an integrated metasurface device, wherein the slab waveguide mode is decomposed into two orthogonal standing waves (para. bridging columns on p. 4; para. bridging columns on p. 5), wherein the two sets of meta-atoms (e.g., shown in Figs. 2 and 4) independently control the two standing waves RCP,LCP, converting each standing wave into a surface emission with independent amplitude and polarization orientation, and wherein the two surface emissions merge into a single free-space wave (as shown in Fig. 2a) with completely and independently controllable amplitude, phase, polarization orientation, and polarization ellipticity at each point over the wavefront of the free-space wave (Fig. 4 and its caption; 4th para. on p. 1; para. bridging columns on p. 3; para. bridging pp. 4 – 5 and following para.).
In light of the foregoing analysis, the Gao – Overvig combination teaches expressly or renders obvious all of the recited limitations.
Regarding claim 7, the Gao – Overvig combination considers that the high refractive index layer comprises at least one layer (of silicon), and the leaky-wave metasurface is defined therein
Regarding claim 8, the Gao – Overvig combination considers that the meta-atoms can be ellipse-shaped (Fig. 2a of Overvig), the magnitude of perturbation is an ellipticity of an ellipse, and the orientation of perturbation is an angular orientation of the ellipse.
Regarding claim 9, the Gao – Overvig combination considers (Fig. 4 of Overvig) that the meta-atoms can be rectangle-shaped, the magnitude of perturbation is a ratio between the long and short edges of a rectangle, and an orientation of perturbation is an angular orientation of the rectangle (according to the teachings in Figs. 1b and 2a of Overvig).
Regarding claim 13, the teachings of Gao and Overvig combine (see the arguments and motivation for combining, as provided above for claim 1) to teach expressly or render obvious all of the recited step limitations of a corresponding method of using the contemplated integrated metasurface device, as detailed above for claims 1 and 6. Specifically, the Gao – Overvig combination considers a method for converting a waveguide mode (of the narrow input/output waveguide 1120 in Fig. 11 of Gao) into a free-space optical wave (Fig. 12 of Gao; Fig. 2A of Overvig) with a designer wavefront (as described by Overvig), comprising:
a) converting the waveguide mode into a slab waveguide mode using a waveguide taper 1120 (as illustrated in Fig. 11 of Gao);
b) coupling the slab waveguide mode into a leaky-wave metasurface, the leaky-wave metasurface comprising a plurality of meta-atoms consisting of at least one of dielectric pillars and air apertures etched in the high refractive index layer (as detailed above for claim 1);
c) decomposing the slab waveguide mode within the leaky-wave metasurface into two orthogonal standing waves that are 90-degree out of phase (two orthogonal polarization components which produce a right-hand circularly polarized (RCP) wave and a left-hand circularly polarized (LCP) wave when the relative phase difference between two orthogonal polarization components is ±90 degrees);
d) using two sets of meta-atoms (e.g., ellipse-shaped meta-atoms in Fig. 2a of Overvig) of the leaky-wave metasurface to independently convert the two orthogonal standing waves into two surface emissions with independently controllable amplitude and polarization orientation; and
e) merging the two surface emissions into a single free-space wave (Fig. 2a of Overvig) with completely and independently controllable amplitude, phase, polarization orientation, and polarization ellipticity at each point over the wavefront of the free-space wave (Fig. 4 and its caption; 4th para. on p. 1; para. bridging columns on p. 3; para. bridging pp. 4 – 5 and following para.).
Regarding claim 14, the device of the Gao – Overvig combination does not use non-reciprocal elements, is (inherently) bidirectional, and can be used for either direction of light propagation, i.e., from the waveguide into free-space and/or from free-space into the waveguide (also detailed above for claim 1). In the latter case, the device of the Gao – Overvig combination implements a method for converting a free-space optical wave with a designer wavefront into a waveguide mode, comprising:
a) decomposing a free-space wave into two free-space components that are 90-degree out of phase;
b) using two sets of meta-atoms of the leaky-wave metasurface to independently convert the two free-space components into two orthogonal standing waves that are within the leaky- wave metasurface comprising a plurality of meta-atoms consisting of at least one of dielectric pillars and air apertures etched in the high refractive index layer (as detailed above for claim 1);
c) combining two orthogonal standing waves into a slab waveguide mode; and
d) coupling the slab waveguide mode into a waveguide mode using a waveguide taper.
Regarding claim 15, the Gao – Overvig combination considers (e.g., Fig. 3c; 3rd complete para. on p. 3 of Overvig; Fig. 1) a method of using an integrated metasurface device of claim 1 for free-space wavefront generation, comprising:
a) exciting an integrated metasurface device with a waveguide mode (of the slab/wide waveguide portion); and
b) establishing a focused beam in free space (Fig. 3c; 3rd complete para. on p. 3 of Overvig).
Regarding claim 16, the Gao – Overvig combination considers a utilization of an integrated metasurface device of claim 1, comprising incorporating the integrated metasurface device into AR/VR displays and wearable devices (illustrated in Figs. 1A and 1B of Gao; “the device in Fig. 3 may prove useful for augmented reality applications as compact and highly transparent lenses” at 3rd complete para. on p. 3 of Overvig).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT TAVLYKAEV whose telephone number is (571)270-5634. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 am - 6:00 pm, Monday - Friday.
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, William Kraig can be reached on (571)272-8660. 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.
/ROBERT TAVLYKAEV/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
Prosecution Insights