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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed on 12/11/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-7 have been amended, and claims 8-17 have been added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 4 under 35 USC 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hamlyn et al (US 20200319326 A1 have been fully 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4-5, 7-12 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Eshraghi et al (US 20190154796), hereinafter Eshraghi.
Regarding claim 1, Eshraghi discloses:
a radar system comprising (Eshraghi, Abstract, A radar system for mobile applications includes transmitters and receivers. The transmitters are configured for installation and use in a mobile application. Each of the transmitters is configured to generate a radio signal. The receivers are configured for installation and use in the mobile application. Each of the receivers is configured to receive radio signals that include transmitted radio signals transmitted by the transmitters and reflected from objects in the environment. A first transmitter of the transmitters is configured to frequency modulate the transmitted radio signal using a shaped frequency pulse which is defined by a sequence of chips. The sequence of chips is selected to realize a selected frequency pulse shape):
a plurality of transmitters configured to transmit radio signals (Eshraghi, Abstract) and (para [0076], FIG. 5 illustrates an exemplary transmitter block diagram. A digital code generator 1010 is fed with a chiprate clock to produce a pseudorandom code for modulating the transmitter. The pseudorandom code preferably has good autocorrelation sidelobe properties at least up to a shift corresponding to the round-trip delay to a target at maximum range. The pseudorandom codes used by different transmitters of a MIMO radar should also be preferably mutually orthogonal or have low cross-correlation. In a first implementation of a radar embodying the invention, the codes are merely random and a long correlation length relied upon to reduce cross correlation and autocorrelation to the point where subtractive interference cancellation can take over and further suppress strong targets to reveal weaker targets. Optionally, the sequences of random binary values (codes or chips) may be provided by a truly random number generator or a pseudorandom number generator. Such number generators are explained in more detail in U.S. patent application, Ser. No. 15/204,003, filed Jul. 7, 2016, which is hereby incorporated by reference herein in its entirety);
a plurality of receivers configured to receive radio signals that include radio signals transmitted by the transmitters and reflected from objects in an environment (Eshraghi, Abstract);
wherein at least one of the transmitters of the plurality of transmitters is configured to generate a fast frequency hopping waveform that uses coded hopping patterns to achieve frequency diversity (Eshraghi, para [0050], As with communications systems such as cellular phones, the frequency band has to be shared by many users without unacceptable mutual interference, so the same concerns of multiple access efficiency, spectral efficiency and capacity arise, in terms of the number of devices per square kilometer that can be simultaneously operated. Through generations 1,2,3 and 4 of mobile phone systems, many different techniques of modulation and coding have been explored to optimize capacity, including Frequency Division Multiple Access (FDMA), Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA), Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) also known as Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum (DSSS) and Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum (FHSS). Many different modulation methods have also been explored, including Analog Frequency Modulation (FM), Digital frequency modulation, such as GSM's Gaussian Minimum Shift Keying (GMSK), and all the usual digital phase modulation schemes such as Quadrature Phase Shift Keying (QPSK), Offset QPSK (OQPSK), Quadrature Amplitude modulation (QAM, 16QAM, etc.), and latterly Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM),
wherein the at least one transmitter is configured to use the fast frequency hopping waveform to generate a plurality of corresponding frequency steps (Eshraghi, para [0076], FIG. 5 illustrates an exemplary transmitter block diagram. A digital code generator 1010 is fed with a chiprate clock to produce a pseudorandom code for modulating the transmitter. The pseudorandom code preferably has good autocorrelation sidelobe properties at least up to a shift corresponding to the round-trip delay to a target at maximum range. The pseudorandom codes used by different transmitters of a MIMO radar should also be preferably mutually orthogonal or have low cross-correlation. In a first implementation of a radar embodying the invention, the codes are merely random and a long correlation length relied upon to reduce cross correlation and autocorrelation to the point where subtractive interference cancellation can take over and further suppress strong targets to reveal weaker targets. Optionally, the sequences of random binary values (codes or chips) may be provided by a truly random number generator or a pseudorandom number generator. Such number generators are explained in more detail in U.S. patent application, Ser. No. 15/204,003, filed Jul. 7, 2016, which is hereby incorporated by reference herein in its entirety) and (para [0008]),
wherein a first coded hopping pattern comprises a plurality of randomly selected codes such that the first coded hopping pattern is randomly generated (Eshraghi, para [0076]),
and wherein the at least one transmitter is configured to individually modulate with a random modulation each of the plurality of frequency steps to generate a transmission waveform (Eshraghi, para [0008], In an aspect of the present invention, a radar system for a vehicle includes a transmitter and a receiver. The transmitter transmits an amplified and frequency modulated radio signal. Each transmitter comprises a frequency generator, a code generator, a modulator, a constant-envelop power amplifier, and an antenna. The frequency generator is operable to or configured to generate the radio signal with a desired mean or center frequency. The code generator is operable to or configured to generate a sequence of chips at a selected chiprate. A modulation interval between successive chips is a reciprocal of the chiprate. The modulator frequency is operable to or configured to modulate the radio signal such that the frequency modulation comprises shaped frequency pulses. The shaped frequency pulses correspond to a first signal, the frequency of which deviates from the desired mean or center frequency during each of the modulation intervals according to a selected pulse shape. The constant-envelope power amplifier amplifies the frequency modulated radio signal at a desired transmit power level. The antenna transmits the radio signal.);
and wherein the at least one transmitter comprises a step frequency generator and a phase modulator configured to use continuous phase modulation to minimize amplifier nonlinearities in the transmission waveform (Eshraghi, para [0063, col. 2, lines 11-28], The difference however is, that when the 1<-->0 transitions of the digital code are filtered or shaped to contain the spectrum, the MSK signal remains at a constant amplitude while an OQPSK signal acquires amplitude modulation, requiring a linear transmit power amplifier to preserve it. Such linear power amplifiers have lower efficiency than constant envelope amplifiers because they do not operate at the optimum power point 100% of the time. At low microwave frequencies such as L-band and S-band, a solid state constant envelope transmitter may achieve 60% efficiency while a linear power amplifier may achieve only 30% efficiency. Since even class-C constant envelope solid-state transmit power amplifiers operating at millimeter wave frequencies only have efficiencies of the order of 15% at the present state of the art, the extra loss of efficiency of a linear power amplifier is to be avoided. Thus, constant amplitude phase modulations such as MSK are of great interest for digital FMCW radar use) and (para [0050]) Examiner notes the modulations schemes of OQPSK and minimum shift keying (MSK) to reduce non-linearities.
Regarding claim 4, Eshraghi discloses:
(Currently amended) A method for generating a low-collision code pattern in a radar system (Eshraghi, Abstract) and (para [0076]) Examiner interprets low-cross correlation as low-collision code,
the method comprising (Eshraghi, Abstract):
transmitting, with a plurality of transmitters, radio signals (Eshraghi, Abstract);
receiving, with a plurality of receivers (Eshraghi, Abstract),
radio signals that include radio signals transmitted by the transmitters and reflected from objects in an environment (Eshraghi, Abstract);
generating a fast frequency hopping waveform that uses coded hopping patterns to achieve frequency diversity (Eshraghi, paras [0008]),
wherein at least one of the plurality of transmitters uses the fast frequency hopping waveform to generate a plurality of corresponding frequency steps (Eshraghi, paras [0008] and [0076]),
wherein a first coded hopping pattern comprises a plurality of randomly selected codes such that the first coded hopping pattern is randomly generated (Eshraghi, para [0076]),
and wherein the at least one transmitter individually modulates with a random modulation each of the plurality of frequency steps to generate a transmission waveform (Eshraghi, para [0008]);
wherein generating the fast frequency hopping waveform comprises the use of anti-causal shifting and pattern comparisons (Eshraghi, para [0108], The receiver however cannot remain wideband. The noise bandwidth must be limited. One way of limiting the bandwidth is to use a matched filter, which is known to achieve maximum signal-to-noise ratio. A matched filter corresponds to correlating the signal with the complex conjugate of itself. This produces the autocorrelation function (ACF). The ACF for the same signal is shown in FIG. 8) Examiner interprets matched filtering as patter comparison.
Regarding claim 5, Eshraghi discloses:
the method of claim 4 (Eshraghi, Abstract and para [0076]),
wherein the generation of the fast frequency hopping waveform comprises continuous phase modulation to minimize amplifier nonlinearities in the transmission waveform (Eshraghi, para [0063, col. 2, lines 11-28]),
wherein at least one of the transmitters comprises a step frequency generator and a phase modulator configured for continuous phase modulation (Eshraghi, para [0063, col. 2, lines 11-28]).
Claim 6 is rejected under the same analysis as claim 2.
Claim 7 is rejected under the same analysis as claim 3.
Regarding claim 8, Eshraghi discloses:
the radar system of claim 1 (Eshraghi, Abstract and para [0076]),
wherein the at least one transmitter comprises a random number generator configured to generate the randomly selected codes such that the first coded hopping pattern comprises a uniform distribution of codes (Eshraghi, para [0101], Consequently, there are optional methods for ensuring that the chip sequence C produced by the code generator 1010 at the transmitter is reproduced at a point in the receiver chain where it can be correlated with a locally generated replica of C. If this is not done, then correlation at the receiver must use the expected signs of I and Q. The autocorrelation sidelobe characteristics when using the latter method will not be the same as the autocorrelation characteristics of code C, but of code C with bits flipped according to the above alternating sign pattern. To obtain autocorrelation characteristics intended by design, it is necessary to ensure that the receiver correlates with a code having the desired characteristics, and this is ensured by the use of appropriate transmitter precoding in the I,Q waveform selection logic unit 1020 paired with the correct signal treatment at the receiver. The method chosen for the transmitter, i.e. any desired precoding, is built into I,Q waveform selection logic 1020) Examiner interprets the generated replica of C as uniform.
Regarding claim 9, Eshraghi discloses:
the radar system of claim 8 (Eshraghi, Abstract and para [0076]),
wherein the random number generator is configured to generate a plurality of sets of randomly selected codes for a plurality of coded hopping pattern (Eshraghi, paras [0050] and [0076]),
and wherein the fast frequency hopping waveform comprises the plurality of coded hopping patterns (Eshraghi, paras [0050] and [0076]).
Regarding claim 10, Eshraghi discloses:
The radar system of claim 8 (Eshraghi, Abstract and para [0076]),
wherein the random number generator is configured to pseudo-randomly generate the randomly selected codes (Eshraghi, para [0076]).
Regarding claim 11, Eshraghi discloses:
(New) The radar system of claim 1 (Eshraghi, Abstract and para [0076]),
wherein each of the randomly selected codes are statistically independent of each other (Eshraghi, para [0076]) Examiner interprets low-cross correlation and orthogonal as statistically independent.
Regarding claim 12, Eshraghi discloses:
the radar system of claim 1 (Eshraghi, Abstract and para [0076]),
wherein the at least one transmitter comprises a code generator configured to generate low-collision codes such that each of a plurality of coded hopping patterns are unique and not duplicative (Eshraghi, para [0076]).
Claim 14 is rejected under the same analysis as claim 11.
Regarding claim 15, Eshraghi discloses:
The method of claim 4 (Eshraghi, Abstract and para [0076]),
wherein the randomly selected codes of the first coded hopping pattern comprises a plurality of randomly generated sets of codes of a selected length (Eshraghi, para [0077, lines 20-28], The divided, down-sample rate clock is the desired chip rate clock and may be used to clock the digital code generator 1010. Each stage of counter 1040 produces a digital output as a further address bit to memory 1030. In the case of 8 samples/chip, three counter bits (t0, t1, and t2) are provided to memory 1030 to select one of the 8 samples. The selected sample (0 to 7) of waveform (0 to 7) comprises a digital I and Q value with a word length in the range of 8 to 16 bits) ,
wherein each respective set of codes is a code word (Eshraghi, para [0077, lines 20-28]),
and wherein each respective code word is shifted one position with an anti-causal shift (Eshraghi, para [0104], When the precoding of equation (3) is applied at the transmitter, and the receiver applies a systematic progressive 90 degree per chip twist to received signal samples, the twisted samples may be correlated with the shifts of the code C produced by the code generator 1010. If the receiver samples the received signal at N samples per chip, then selecting samples (e.g., 0, N, 2N, 3N), progressively twisting the samples and correlating with shifts of the code C, produces points on the correlation function (e.g., 0, N, 2N, 3N). Then, selecting points 1, N+1, 2N+1, 3N+1 etc., progressively twisting them and correlating with C, produces points 1, N+1, 2N+1, 3N+1 etc. of the correlation function. Continuing in this way produces the correlation function for all relative time shifts in steps of 1/N of the chip period).
Regarding claim 16, Eshraghi discloses:
he method of claim 15 (Eshraghi, Abstract and para [0076]),
wherein each newly generated code word is compared to a previously generated code word such that no code values are equal at each corresponding position of the code words (Eshraghi, para [0104]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 2-3, 6, 13 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eshraghi et al (US 20190154796 A1), hereinafter Eshraghi in view of Puglia US 20070152871 A1
Eshraghi in view of Puglia US 20070152871 A1.
Regarding claim 2, Eshraghi discloses:
the radar system of claim 1 (Eshraghi, Abstract and para [0076]),
wherein at least one of the receivers of the plurality of receivers comprises a filter bank comprising analog and digital components (Eshraghi, para [0007], or operating at very high digital code rates, the memory is organized as a plurality of N memories that are read at the code rate divided by N. Each pair of read I,Q values is digital to analog converted using a D to A converter that shapes the quantizing noise to reduce its spectral density near the microwave carrier frequency, and low-pass filtered to obtain analog I,Q signals that are applied to the I,Q modulator) and (further reference paras [0077],[0149-0150], [0155] and [0157]) ,
Puglia discloses:
wherein the filter bank comprises an analog section comprising a plurality of selectively activated squelch switches (Puglia, para [0024], A radar configuration is disclosed wherein a substantially continuous waveform is transmitted and received by an antenna aperture, and samples of the received signal obtained by gating the transmitter off, while gating the receiver on. A variety of waveform types may be used, such as frequency-modulated continuous-wave (FMCW), frequency shift keying (FSK), pseudo-noise phase code (PN), random frequency hopping (RFH) and the like. In an aspect, the period of time associated with the transmitted transmitting the signal may be greater than or equal to the time that the receiver is enabled for receiving the returned signal) Examiner interprets gating as squelch control and the notes “off” and “on” as the switch capabilities,
a respective squelch switch of the plurality of squelch switches having squelch switched inserted in each sub-band receiver (Puglia, para [0024]),
and wherein each of the plurality of squelch switches is configured to selectively open a corresponding signal path such that signals with signal strengths high enough to saturate the analog section are stopped (Puglia, para [0024]).
It would have been obvious to someone in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Eshraghi with Puglia to incorporate the features of: wherein the filter bank comprises an analog section comprising a plurality of selectively activated squelch switches, a respective squelch switch of the plurality of squelch switches having squelch switched inserted in each sub-band receiver and wherein each of the plurality of squelch switches is configured to selectively open a corresponding signal path such that signals with signal strengths high enough to saturate the analog section are stopped. Both arts are considered analogous arts as they both disclose radar system wherein continuous waveforms are transmitted and may include random frequency hopping and random code sequences. The modification would render the predictable results of a reduction in false alarms, improved detection and reliability, and enhanced threshold detection.
Regarding claim 3, Eshraghi discloses:
the radar system of claim 2 further comprising a strong return estimator configured to estimate a return delay of strong signals from either signal reflections of a selected range delay or power coupling from ones of the transmitters to ones of the receivers (Eshraghi, para [0113], FIG. 10 illustrates correlation sidelobes using a Gaussian receive filter with BT=0.3. There is a 1.05 dB loss of power though such a filter and a 2 dB loss in peak correlation. However, the noise bandwidth of the filter is only 0.63 bitrates, which is a reduction of 1.95 dB, substantially compensating for any loss of signal power and correlation magnitude. The signal-to-noise ratio is therefore about the same as with a matched filter correlator. The sidelobes however are now reduced from −31 dB at +/−2 chips, using the matched filter, to −37 dB relative to the peak of correlation. The signal-to-noise ratio effects and the correlation sidelobes can now be explored as a function of the receiver's BT factor. FIG. 11 illustrates how the sidelobe levels at +/−0.5 chip, +/−1 chip, +/−1.5 chips, +/−2 chips and +/−2.5 chips depend on receiver filter BT. Also, the noise bandwidth and peak correlation loss are shown, and combined to show the SNR loss involved in choosing higher receiver BT factors to reduce correlation sidelobes. The correlation at +/−0.5 chip has the practical significance that it represents the loss of peak correlation that occurs due to a target echo arriving with a delay that is a non-integral number of chip periods. FIG. 12 shows the latter as well as noise bandwidth, peak correlation loss, and net SNR loss on a finer dB scale) Examiner interprets the matched filter as the strong return estimator,
wherein a strong signal is a signal with a signal strength above a threshold (Eshraghi, para [0133], The effect of receiver filtering when the transmitter uses handcrafted raised cosine digital FM is now illustrated in FIGS. 30 and 31 to compare with using GMSK, which was illustrated in FIGS. 11 and 12. The practical significance of these parameters is as follows: If the radar system needs to implement strong target subtraction in order to unmask weaker target reflections that are close in both range and Doppler, then the complexity of the strong target cancellation procedure is proportional to the number of correlation sidelobes after the receive filter that are significantly strong. For example, if it is desired to cancel a strong target echo to a level of −60 dB relative its uncanceled value, then FIGS. 30 and 31 illustrate that, for a receiver filter BT factor of 0.53 that gives a 1 dB loss of signal-to-noise ratio compared to a matched filter, the correlation sidelobes at +/−1.5 chips are at a level of approximately −62 dB. Thus, canceling the principal lobe and sidelobes at +/−1 chip will result in a 62 dB suppression even with the maximum +/−0.5 chip mis-sampling. Compared with FIGS. 11 and 12, the amount of suppression using GMSK would be approximately 48 dB. Thus, the raised cosine modulation provides a significant improvement over GMSK as regards to strong target suppression with a 3-tap interference canceler),
and wherein such signals interfere with other signals (Eshraghi, para [0133]),
and wherein the signals with signal strengths high enough to saturate the analog section are strong signals (Eshraghi, para [0133]) and (para [0157], Several methods have been discussed for optimizing a constant envelope modulation for use in a millimeter wave digital FMCW automotive radar with regard to the parameters that are important in such a system. The modulation is defined by a limited number of I,Q samples per bit, such as 4, 8, or 16, that are quantized in an optimum manner to a limited word length of, for example, 6, 7, or 8 bits. The I,Q samples are stored in memory (1030) from where they are recalled in dependence on the polarity of the modulation bits from a code generator, which may be precoded, and with regard to the current angular quadrant. Precoding and keeping track of the quadrant is performed by the state machine of I,Q selection logic (1020). The selected quantized I,Q samples are digital-to-analog converted using the above described analog-to-digital conversion techniques that shape the digital to analog quantization error noise to facilitate accurate subtraction of strong target echoes in the receiver by using a replica of the transmit modulator to generate a delayed, phase changed, and amplitude-weighted version that best matches the signal to be subtracted. The digital-to-analog converted analog signals are low-pass filtered by post digital-to-analog filters (1060A,B) and then a radar carrier signal is quadrature modulated at a desired center or mean frequency).
Regarding claim 13, Eshraghi discloses:
Puglia discloses:
The radar system of claim 3 further comprising a squelch control configured to control the plurality of selectively activated squelch switches in response to an indication from the strong return estimator (Puglia, para [0024])
It would have been obvious to someone in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Eshraghi with Puglia to incorporate the features of: The radar system of claim 3 further comprising a squelch control configured to control the plurality of selectively activated squelch switches in response to an indication from the strong return estimator. Both arts are considered analogous arts as they both disclose radar system wherein continuous waveforms are transmitted and may include random frequency hopping and random code sequences. The modification would render the predictable results of a reduction in false alarms, improved detection and reliability, and enhanced threshold detection
Claim 17 is rejected under the same analysis as claim 13.
References Cited But Not Relied Upon
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure as thus:
Stettiner US 11520003 B2 discloses a detection, mitigation and avoidance of mutual interference between automotive radars wherein there is squelching by way of blanking, additional the system comprises frequency hopping and sub-band receiver (via multi-band)
Maor et al US 20220334216 A1 discloses a system and method for detecting interference in a radar receive signal wherein there is frequency hopping (para [0246-0247]), sub-band receiver via an phased array (para [0043]), low collision pattern code via OFDM (para [0121])
Tansek US 20220011402 A1 discloses a pulsed radar with multi-spectral modulation to reduce interference, increase pulse repetition frequency, and improve Doppler velocity (Abstract), frequency hopping (para [0109]), sub-band via multi-band (para [0107]) and phased array (para [0055])
Hamlyn et al US 20200319326 A1 discloses a radar system that implements frequency hops para [0027]
Shtrom et al US 20210132209 A1 discloses a MIMO frequency-modulated continuous wave radar system that comprised of frequency diversity
Jeannin et al US 20230384418 A1 discloses a channel offset correction for radar data that generates frequency hopping (para [0065])
Fetterman et al US 20180095162 A1 discloses a system and method for mitigating interference in an automotive radar system
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIMBERLY JENKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-0404. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8a-5p EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Vladimir Magloire can be reached at 517.270.5144. 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.
/KIMBERLY JENKINS/ Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/VLADIMIR MAGLOIRE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights