DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/12/2026 has been entered.
Status of claims
Claims 5 and 8 are cancelled.
Claims 1-4, 6-7 and 9 are amended.
Claims 10 and 11 are new claims.
Claims 1-4, 6-7, 9-11 are pending.
Reponses to arguments
With respect to Applicant’s remarks filed on 01/12/2025; Applicant's “Amendments and Remarks” have been fully considered. Applicant’s remarks will be addressed in sequential order as they were presented.
Applicant remarks:
Claim 1 and 9 are not being directed to abstract mental process.
Chiba does not teach conditional acquisition of sensor data.
Office Response:
Amended claim 1 recited “during automatic driving of the vehicle at a first automatic driving level” does not recite any abstract idea rather it belongs to the additional element of the claim. Amended claim 1 recites “the sensor data includes at least one of image data from a camera of the mobile terminal, input ….mobile terminal”-is not mental process, it also belongs to the additional element of the claim.
Please see new mapping above, specifically the mapping for the independent claims.
Applicant further argues that the other independent claims which recite similar features are allowable and the dependent claims are also allowable since they depend on allowable subject and the Office respectfully disagrees. It is the Office's stance that all of the claimed subject matter has been properly rejected; therefore, the Office's respectfully disagrees with applicant’s arguments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-4, 6-7, 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Analysis for claim 1:
In January, 2019 (updated October 2019), the USPTO released new examination guidelines setting forth a two-step inquiry for determining whether a claim is directed to non-statutory subject matter. According to the guidelines, a claim is directed to non-statutory subject matter if:
STEP 1: the claim does not fall within one of the four statutory categories of invention (process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter), or
STEP 2: the claim recites a judicial exception, e.g. an abstract idea, without reciting additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, as determined using the following analysis:
STEP 2A (PRONG 1): Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?
STEP 2A (PRONG 2): Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
STEP 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
Using the two-step inquiry, it is clear that claim 1 is directed toward non-statutory subject matter, as shown below:
STEP 1: Does claim 1 fall within one of the statutory categories?
Yes. The claim is directed toward a data gathering (i.e. sensor gathering data) and mental process which falls within one of the statutory categories.
STEP 2A (PRONG 1): Is the claim directed to a law of nature, a natural phenomenon or an abstract idea?
Yes, the claim is directed to an abstract idea.
With regard to STEP 2A (PRONG 1), the guidelines provide three groupings of subject matter that are considered abstract ideas:
Mathematical concepts – mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations;
Certain methods of organizing human activity – fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk); commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations); managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions); and
Mental processes – concepts that are practicably performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion).
Claim 1:
A driver monitoring device of a vehicle comprising;
a processor programmed to, during automatic driving of the vehicle at a first automatic driving level:
acquire an image of the driver from an imaging device of the vehicle,
determine whether a driver of the vehicle is in a drive ready state in which the driver can perform driving operations based on the image acquired from the imaging device of the vehicle, and
in response to determining that the driver is not in the drive ready state based on the acquired image, acquire sensor data from a mobile terminal of the driver and
re-determine whether the driver is in the drive ready state based on the acquired sensor data,
wherein the sensor data includes at least one of image data from a camera of the mobile terminal, input data from a touch sensor of the mobile terminal, and acceleration data from an acceleration sensor of the mobile terminal, in response to determining that the driver is in the drive ready state based on the acquired image, not acquire the sensor data from the mobile terminal, and
issue a warning to the driver if it is judged that the driver is not in the drive ready state.
Claim 9:
A non-transitory recording medium having recorded thereon a computer program, the computer program causing a computer to:
acquire an image of a driver from an imaging device of a vehicle;
determine whether a driver of the vehicle is in a drive ready state in which the driver can perform driving operations based on the image acquired from the imaging device of the vehicle;
in response to determining that the driver is not in the drive ready state based on the acquired image, acquire sensor data from a mobile terminal of the driver and re-determine whether the driver is in the drive ready state based on the acquired sensor data,
wherein the sensor data includes at least one of image data from a camera of the mobile terminal, input data from a touch sensor of the mobile terminal, and acceleration data from an acceleration sensor of the mobile terminal, and in response to determining that the driver is in the drive ready state based on the acquired image, not acquire the sensor data from the mobile terminal, and
issue a warning to the driver if it is judged that the driver is not in the drive ready state.
Claim 11:
A system comprising:
a vehicle including an imaging device configured to capture an image of a driver and a first processor programmed to control the vehicle to execute automatic driving at a plurality of automatic driving levels including a first automatic driving level;
a mobile terminal of the driver, the mobile terminal including a plurality of sensors including a camera configured to generate image data, a touch sensor configured to generate input data, and an acceleration sensor configured to generate acceleration data;
and a driver monitoring device including a second processor programmed to, during automatic driving of the vehicle at the first automatic driving level:
acquire the image of the driver from the imaging device,
determine whether the driver is in a drive ready state in which the driver can perform driving operations based on the acquired image,
in response to determining that the driver is not in the drive ready state based on the acquired image, acquire sensor data from the mobile terminal and re-determine whether the driver is in the drive ready state based on the acquired sensor data,
wherein the sensor data includes at least one of the image data from the camera, the input data from the touch sensor, and the acceleration data from the acceleration sensor, in response to determining that the driver is in the drive ready state based on the acquired image, not acquire the sensor data from the mobile terminal, and
issue a warning to the driver if it is judged that the driver is not in the drive ready state.
The method in claim 1 is a mental process that can be practicably performed in the human mind and, therefore, an abstract idea. Specifically, the limitations of claim 1 highlighted above merely consist of judging the driver state whether the driver is in the drive ready state based on the image from the imaging device, response to the determination of the driver state acquire sensor data from the mobile terminal. These steps are merely an observation of image data to determine the driver state whether the driver is in the drive ready state based on the image and the driver information and if the driver is not in driving state only then acquire sensor data from the mobile terminal. More specifically, a person can mentally decide if the driver is in the drive ready state or not from the image in vehicle device and if driver is in not in driving state, can acquire sensor data otherwise not. Thus, the claims recite a mental process.
STEP 2A (PRONG 2): Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
No, the claim does not recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
STEP 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
No, the claim does not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Claim 1 does not recite any specific limitation or combination of limitations that are not well-understood, routine, conventional (WURC) activity in the field. Further, applicant’s specification does not provide any indication that the determining steps and the operating steps are performing using anything other than a conventional computer (see spec para[0019]).
Thus, since claim 1 is: (a) directed toward an abstract idea (mental process), (b) does not recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application, and (c) does not recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Dependent claims 2-4,6-7 further limit the abstract idea without integrating the abstract idea into practical application or adding significantly more.
With respect to claim 9 and claim 11, please see the rejection above with respect to claim 1 which is commensurate in scope to claim 1, with claim 1 being drawn to a device, claim 9 being drawn to a non-transitory computer program and claim 11 being drawn to a system.
As such, claims 1-4,6-7, 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 101 as being drawn to an abstract idea without significantly more, and thus are ineligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-4, 6-7,9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatented over JP2022145990A to Matsumura (herein after “Matsumura”) in view of EP3067827A1 to Hampiholi et al. (herein after “Hampiholi”).
Regarding claim 1, Matsuma discloses A driver monitoring device of a vehicle comprising; (see Matsumura driver distraction detection system)
a processor programmed to (see Matsumura ECU 10), during automatic driving of the vehicle at a first automatic driving level:
acquire an image of the driver from an imaging device of the vehicle, (see Matsumura first imaging unit 76; para [0008] An arousal state determination system in one or more embodiments includes a first imaging unit (76) mounted in a vehicle (VA) for imaging a driver (DR) of the vehicle)
determine whether a driver of the vehicle is in a drive ready state in which the driver can perform driving operations based on the image acquired from the imaging device of the vehicle, (see Matsumura para[0022] The control device uses terminal-side information, which is information acquired from the mobile terminal (110), to determine the It is configured to determine whether the driver is in the awake state. ) (see Matsumura para [0072] Therefore, when it is estimated that the reliability of the determination result of the wakefulness determination process based on the first image is low during the execution of the automatic driving control, the ECU 10 uses the information acquired by the mobile terminal 110 to perform driving. It is determined whether or not the person DR is in an awakened state.)
, input data from a touch sensor of the mobile terminal, and acceleration data from an acceleration sensor of the mobile terminal (See Matsumura para[0020] The mobile terminal includes a second acceleration sensor (203) that acquires information on acceleration occurring in the mobile terminal as second acceleration information. ),
in response to determining that the driver is in the drive ready state based on the acquired image, not acquire the sensor data from the mobile terminal, and
issue a warning to the driver if it is judged that the driver is not in the drive ready state. (see Matsumura para [0063] When the ECU 10 determines that the driver is not in an awake state, the ECU 10 causes the notification device 51 to perform predetermined attention calling processing. Specifically, the ECU 10 uses the meter ECU 50 to sound a buzzer and display a warning lamp on the display device.)
However, Matsumura does not expressly disclose or otherwise teach in response to determining that the driver is not in the drive ready state based on the acquired image, acquire sensor data from a mobile terminal of the driver, re-determine whether the driver is in the drive ready state based on the acquired sensor data, wherein the sensor data includes at least one of image data from a camera of the mobile terminal. Nevertheless, in a related field of invention Hampiholi teaches in response to determining that the driver is not in the drive ready state based on the acquired image, acquire sensor data from a mobile terminal of the driver and (See Hampiholi claim 1 receive image data from the mobile device via the external device interface, the image data imaging a driver and a driver environment; determine a driver state based on the received image data;
responsive to determining that the driver state indicates that the driver is distracted: receive vehicle data from one or more of the vehicle systems via the inter-vehicle system communication module;)
re-determine whether the driver is in the drive ready state based on the acquired sensor data, (See Hampiholi claim 1 determine a vehicle state based on the vehicle data;para[0062] determine a vehicle state based on the vehicle data, determine a distraction severity level based on the driver state and the vehicle state)
wherein the sensor data includes at least one of image data from a camera of the mobile terminal (See Hampiholi para[0079] receive image data from the driver-facing camera and sensor data from the one or more sensors of the wearable device indicating a driver state,)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Matsumura’s awakening state determination system with Hampiholi’s method of acquire vehicle data based on the response of the driver state from images of mobile terminal with as claimed the method of mobile terminal sensor data (image) based on the response to the driver state from the image of vehicle device in order to allow to perform a selected action based on the distraction severity level (see Hampiholi’s abstract).
Regarding claim 2, Matsumura and Hampiholi remain applied as claim 1. Matsumura discloses wherein the driver information includes an image generated by a camera (see Matsumura driver monitor camera ; para[0024] example of an image (first image) acquired by the driver monitor camera in the situation of FIG. 4; ) mounted at the terminal or information input by the driver to the terminal (see Matsumura para[[0008] An arousal state determination system in one or more embodiments includes a first imaging unit (76) mounted in a vehicle (VA) for imaging a driver (DR) of the vehicle) .
Regarding claim 3, Matsumura and Hampiholi remain applied as claim 1. Matsumura discloses wherein the processor is configured to judge whether the driver is in a drive ready state based on the image by a predetermined judgment criteria, judge whether the driver is in an awake state based on the driver information, and ease the judgment criteria when judging the driver is in the awake state (see Matsumura para[0008] The control device uses terminal-side information, which is information acquired by the mobile terminal, when a predetermined condition that is satisfied when the reliability of the determination result of the arousal state determination process is estimated to be low is satisfied. , and is configured to determine whether the driver is in the awake state. ).
Regarding claim 4, Matsumura and Hampiholi remain applied as claim 1. Matsumura discloses wherein the processor is configured to judge whether the driver is in the drive ready state based on the image by a predetermined judgment criteria and, judge whether the driver is in an awake state based on the driver information when judging that the driver is not in the drive ready state based on the image (see Matsumura para[0008] The control device uses terminal-side information, which is information acquired by the mobile terminal, when a predetermined condition that is satisfied when the reliability of the determination result of the arousal state determination process is estimated to be low is satisfied. , and is configured to determine whether the driver is in the awake state. ), and, invalidate a result of judgment based on the image when judging that the driver is in the awake state (see Matsumura para[0062] On the other hand, when the eye closure rate is greater than the predetermined threshold, the ECU 10 determines that the degree of wakefulness of the driver is less than the predetermined degree (that is, the driver is not in an alert state).
Regarding claim 6, Matsumura and Hampiholi remain applied as claim 1. Matsumura discloses wherein the processor is configured to limit or prohibit operation of the terminal by the driver when level 2 or lower automated driving is being performed at the vehicle (see Matsumura para [0085] After that, the driver DR drives the vehicle VA. A vehicle VA is traveling on an expressway at a vehicle speed SPD equal to or lower than the speed threshold SPDth. In this situation, the driver DR presses the automatic operation switch 81 . The ECU 10 determines that the conditions for executing automatic driving are satisfied, and starts automatic driving control (level 3) (step 802). The ECU 10 transmits an activation instruction signal to the mobile terminal 110 (step 803). The activation instruction signal is a signal that instructs activation of the monitoring application 330).
Regarding claim 7, Matsumura and Hampiholi remain applied as claim 1. Matsumura discloses wherein the terminal is a smart phone (see Matsumura para [0006] For example, assume that the driver operates a mobile terminal (for example, a smart phone) during execution of automatic driving control; see Matsumura para [0064] (Structure of Portable Terminal) The portable terminal 110 is a device carried by the driver, and in this example, is the smart phone shown in FIG) .
Regarding claim 9, Matsumura discloses A non-transitory recording medium having recorded thereon a computer program, the computer program causing a computer to: (see Matsumura ECU 10)
acquire an image of a driver from an imaging device of a vehicle; (see Matsumura first imaging unit 76; para [0008] An arousal state determination system in one or more embodiments includes a first imaging unit (76) mounted in a vehicle (VA) for imaging a driver (DR) of the vehicle)
determine whether a driver of the vehicle is in a drive ready state in which the driver can perform driving operations based on the image acquired from the imaging device of the vehicle; , (see Matsumura para[0022] The control device uses terminal-side information, which is information acquired from the mobile terminal (110), to determine the It is configured to determine whether the driver is in the awake state. ) (see Matsumura para [0072] Therefore, when it is estimated that the reliability of the determination result of the wakefulness determination process based on the first image is low during the execution of the automatic driving control, the ECU 10 uses the information acquired by the mobile terminal 110 to perform driving. It is determined whether or not the person DR is in an awakened state.).
and acceleration data from an acceleration sensor of the mobile terminal(See Matsumura para[0020] The mobile terminal includes a second acceleration sensor (203) that acquires information on acceleration occurring in the mobile terminal as second acceleration information. ),
issue a warning to the driver if it is judged that the driver is not in the drive ready state. (see Matsumura para [0063] When the ECU 10 determines that the driver is not in an awake state, the ECU 10 causes the notification device 51 to perform predetermined attention calling processing. Specifically, the ECU 10 uses the meter ECU 50 to sound a buzzer and display a warning lamp on the display device.)
However, Matsumura does not expressly disclose or otherwise teach in response to determining that the driver is not in the drive ready state based on the acquired image, acquire sensor data from a mobile terminal of the driver, and re-determine whether the driver is in the drive ready state based on the acquired sensor data, wherein the sensor data includes at least one of image data from a camera of the mobile terminal, input data from a touch sensor of the mobile terminal, and in response to determining that the driver is in the drive ready state based on the acquired image. Nevertheless, in a related field of invention Hampiholi teaches in response to determining that the driver is not in the drive ready state based on the acquired image, acquire sensor data from a mobile terminal of the driver(See Hampiholi claim 1 receive image data from the mobile device via the external device interface, the image data imaging a driver and a driver environment; determine a driver state based on the received image data; responsive to determining that the driver state indicates that the driver is distracted: receive vehicle data from one or more of the vehicle systems via the inter-vehicle system communication module)
and re-determine whether the driver is in the drive ready state based on the acquired sensor data, (See Hampiholi claim 1 determine a vehicle state based on the vehicle data;para[0062] determine a vehicle state based on the vehicle data, determine a distraction severity level based on the driver state and the vehicle state)
wherein the sensor data includes at least one of image data from a camera of the mobile terminal, input data from a touch sensor of the mobile terminal, (See Hampiholi para[0079] receive image data from the driver-facing camera and sensor data from the one or more sensors of the wearable device indicating a driver state,)
, and in response to determining that the driver is in the drive ready state based on the acquired image (See Hampiholi claim 1 responsive to determining that the driver state indicates that the driver is distracted, ), not acquire the sensor data from the mobile terminal (See claim 1 receive image data from the mobile device via the external device interface, the image data imaging a driver and a driver environment)),
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Matsumura’s awakening state determination system with Hampiholi’s method of acquire vehicle data based on the response of the driver state from images of mobile terminal with as claimed the method of mobile terminal sensor data (image) based on the response to the driver state from the image of vehicle device in order to allow to perform a selected action based on the distraction severity level (see Hampiholi’s abstract).
Regarding claim 11, Matsumura discloses A system comprising:
a vehicle including an imaging device configured to capture an image of a driver (see Matsumura first imaging unit 76; para [0008] An arousal state determination system in one or more embodiments includes a first imaging unit (76) mounted in a vehicle (VA) for imaging a driver (DR) of the vehicle)
and a first processor programmed to control the vehicle to execute automatic driving at a plurality of automatic driving levels including a first automatic driving level; (See Matsumura para[0004] The level of automatic driving control (so-called automatic driving level) is divided into a plurality of levels 0 to 5 by SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers).)
, and an acceleration sensor configured to generate acceleration data; (See Matsumura para[0020] The mobile terminal includes a second acceleration sensor (203) that acquires information on acceleration occurring in the mobile terminal as second acceleration information. ),
and a driver monitoring device including a second processor programmed to, during automatic driving of the vehicle at the first automatic driving level:
acquire the image of the driver from the imaging device, (see Matsumura first imaging unit 76; para [0008] An arousal state determination system in one or more embodiments includes a first imaging unit (76) mounted in a vehicle (VA) for imaging a driver (DR) of the vehicle)
determine whether the driver is in a drive ready state in which the driver can perform driving operations based on the acquired image, (see Matsumura para[0022])
the input data from the touch sensor, and the acceleration data from the acceleration sensor, in response to determining that the driver is in the drive ready state based on the acquired image, not acquire the sensor data from the mobile terminal (See Matsumura para[0020] The mobile terminal includes a second acceleration sensor (203) that acquires information on acceleration occurring in the mobile terminal as second acceleration information. ), and
issue a warning to the driver if it is judged that the driver is not in the drive ready state. (see Matsumura para [0063] When the ECU 10 determines that the driver is not in an awake state, the ECU 10 causes the notification device 51 to perform predetermined attention calling processing. Specifically, the ECU 10 uses the meter ECU 50 to sound a buzzer and display a warning lamp on the display device.)
However, Matsumura does not expressly disclose or otherwise teach a mobile terminal of the driver, the mobile terminal including a plurality of sensors including a camera configured to generate image data, a touch sensor configured to generate input data, in response to determining that the driver is not in the drive ready state based on the acquired image, acquire sensor data from the mobile terminal, and re-determine whether the driver is in the drive ready state based on the acquired sensor data, wherein the sensor data includes at least one of the image data from the camera. Nevertheless, in a related field of invention Hampiholi teaches a mobile terminal of the driver, the mobile terminal including a plurality of sensors including a camera configured to generate image data, a touch sensor configured to generate input data (See Hampiholi claim 1 receive image data from the mobile device via the external device interface, the image data imaging a driver and a driver environment;
determine a driver state based on the received image data;
responsive to determining that the driver state indicates that the driver is distracted:
receive vehicle data from one or more of the vehicle systems via the inter-vehicle system communication module)
in response to determining that the driver is not in the drive ready state based on the acquired image, acquire sensor data from the mobile terminal(See Hampiholi claim 1 receive image data from the mobile device via the external device interface, the image data imaging a driver and a driver environment; determine a driver state based on the received image data; responsive to determining that the driver state indicates that the driver is distracted: receive vehicle data from one or more of the vehicle systems via the inter-vehicle system communication module)
and re-determine whether the driver is in the drive ready state based on the acquired sensor data, (See Hampiholi claim 1 determine a vehicle state based on the vehicle data;para[0062] determine a vehicle state based on the vehicle data, determine a distraction severity level based on the driver state and the vehicle state)
wherein the sensor data includes at least one of the image data from the camera (See Hampiholi para[0079] receive image data from the driver-facing camera and sensor data from the one or more sensors of the wearable device indicating a driver state,)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Matsumura’s awakening state determination system with Hampiholi’s method of acquire vehicle data based on the response of the driver state from images of mobile terminal with as claimed the method of mobile terminal sensor data (image) based on the response to the driver state from the image of vehicle device in order to allow to perform a selected action based on the distraction severity level (see Hampiholi’s abstract).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatented over Matsumura in view of Hampiholi and US 20120244851 A1 to Kawai herein after “Kawai”).
Regarding claim 10, Matsumura and Hampiholi remain applied as claim 6. However, Matsumura does not teach wherein the processor is further programmed to send a control signal to the mobile terminal to prohibit operation of the mobile terminal by the driver during automatic driving at a second automatic driving level. Nevertheless, Kawai same field of endeavor teaches wherein the processor is further programmed to send a control signal to the mobile terminal to prohibit operation of the mobile terminal by the driver during automatic driving at a second automatic driving level (See Kawai para [0107] In the case where the mobile telephone 2 has received an operation disabling signal (YES in S2), the operation control section 23 of the mobile telephone 2 (i) disables (prohibits) a camera photography function of the mobile telephone 2 (S3) and (ii) causes the display section 27 of the mobile telephone 2 to display a photography prohibition message and a questionnaire response agreeing/refusing message both received from the server device 3 (S4)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Matsumura’s awakening state determination system with Kawai’s operation control system of mobile to deactivate (prohibit receiving calls) in order to allow to be aware of that calls/photographing operation is prohibited during driving (see Kawai para[0107]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAZIA AFRIN whose telephone number is (703)756-1175. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-6.
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, Scott A Browne can be reached at 5712700151. 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.
/NAZIA AFRIN/Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/SCOTT A BROWNE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666
Prosecution Insights