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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the holographic projector, holographic wavefront, first surface, second surface, entrance pupil, first region, second region, third region, image plane, illumination system, first holographic sub-wavefront, second holographic sub-wavefront, array, at least one replica of the first holographic sub-wavefront, at least one replica of the second holographic sub-wavefront, a method of calculating a hologram, obtaining a target image, splitting the target image into a first image region and a second image region, generating a first sub-hologram corresponding to the first image region and a second, sub-hologram corresponding to the second image region, method of holographic projection, displaying a hologram on a display device, illuminating the displayed hologram, directing the holographic wavefront through a waveguide, an input arranged to receive the holographic wavefront, as an initial step, calculating the sub-holograms for viewing of the image by the viewing system, method is at least partially computer implemented, a computer, and fourth region must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The spacing of the lines of the specification is such as to make reading difficult. New application papers with lines 1 1/2 or double spaced (see 37 CFR 1.52(b)(2)) on good quality paper are required.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 14 requires end punctuation (e.g., a period), for the claim recites “wherein the hologram further comprises a fourth sub-hologram of a fourth region of the image, adjoined to at least one of the first, second or third sub-holograms” Correction is required to ensure clarity, proper grammatical structure, and compliance with 37 C.F.R. § 1.75(d)(1).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
With respect to Claims 10-13, [a] single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. See In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Litigation, 639 F.3d 1303, 1318, 97 USPQ2d 1737, 1748-49 (Fed. Cir. 2011), Katz, 639 F.3d at 1318, 97 USPQ2d at 1749 (citing IPXL Holdings v. Amazon.com, Inc., 430 F.3d 1377, 1384, 77 USPQ2d 1140, 1145 (Fed. Cir. 2005).
In the current instance, “method of calculating a hologram for a holographic system” in Claim 1, “displaying a hologram on a display device” in Claim 11, “as an initial step, calculating the sub-holograms for viewing of the image” in Claim 12, and “wherein said method is at least partially computer implemented” in Claim 13, recite methods of using the apparatus within method/process claim limitations. Thus, it is unclear whether infringement occurs when one creates a system that allows partially computer implemented methods of calculating and displaying holograms, or whether infringement occurs when calculating and displaying holograms are partially computer implemented. See Ex parte Lyell, 17 USPQ2d 1548 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1990) & MPEP § 2173(p).
For the prosecution on merits, examiner interprets the claimed subject matter described above as introducing optional elements, optional structural limitations, optional expressions, and optional functionality within methods of calculating a hologram for a holographic projection system and holographic projection.
Applicant should clarify the claim limitations as appropriate. Care should be taken during revision of the description and of any statements of problem or advantage, not to add subject-matter which extends beyond the content of the application (specification) as originally filed.
If the language of a claim, considered as a whole in light of the specification and given its broadest reasonable interpretation, is such that a person of ordinary skill in the relevant art would read it with more than one reasonable interpretation, then a rejection of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, is appropriate. See MPEP 2173.05(a), MPEP 2143.03(I), and MPEP 2173.06.
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 1-5, and 7-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kollin et al. US 20180120563 A1 (herein after "Kollin").
With respect to Claim 1, Kollin discloses a holographic projector (near-eye display device 100 including a holographic display system; [0009]; e.g., holographic display system 200; fig. 1 & 2) comprising:
a display device (display device 100, holographic display systems representative of right-eye and left-eye 102R and 102L described in more detail with reference to figs. 2-7; [0015] & [0021]) arranged to form a holographic wavefront by spatially modulating light (digital dynamic hologram configured to receive the light and spatially modulate the light for coupling; [0052]) in accordance with a hologram (digital dynamic hologram/DDH 204; [0026]) displayed thereon;
a waveguide (pupil replicating waveguide/WG 202; [0026]) having: an input (diverging light; [0026]) arranged to receive the holographic wavefront (fig. 2); and a first surface (top surface of WG 202; fig. 2) and a second surface (bottom surface of WG 202; fig. 2) arranged to waveguide (pupil replicating waveguide/WG 202; [0026]) the holographic wavefront therebetween (fig. 2), wherein the first surface (top surface of WG 202; fig. 2) is partially reflective-transmissive (light coupled and transmitted into WG 202 through top surface, light propagates through waveguide by reflecting from top surface; [0026]; as seen in fig. 2) such that a plurality of replicas of the holographic wavefront (small pupil formed by DDH 204 replicated by pupil replicating holograms/PRH 210 of WG 202; [0026]) are emitted therefrom (fig. 2);
wherein a size of the hologram (digital dynamic hologram/DDH 204; [0026]) is less than a size (pixel size of the LRAD could be 10 to 100 times larger than the DDH pixel size e.g., 100's of μm; [0013]) of an entrance pupil (aperture formed by low resolution amplitude display/LRAD 206; [0026]) of a viewing system (eye boxes; [0026]) for receiving the holographic wavefront (small pupil formed by DDH 204; [0026]) from the first surface (top surface of WG 202; fig. 2) of the waveguide (pupil replicating waveguide/WG 202; [0026]) and the hologram (digital dynamic hologram/DDH 204; [0026]) comprises a first sub-hologram (waveguide coupling hologram/WGCH 208; [0026-27]) of a first region (WGCH 208 having more regions; [0027]) of an image (image in a user’s eye; [0026]) adjoined to a second sub-hologram (one or more PRH 210; [0021] & [0026]) of a second region (at the PRH, light beam splits into two beams; [0025]; horizontal hologram as seen in fig. 2) of the image (different parts of the DDH create different parts of the image; [0011]; two holograms, i.e. at the entrance of the WGCH and the exit of the PRH; [0025]).
With respect to Claim 2, Kollin discloses the holographic projector (near-eye display device 100 including a holographic display system; [0009]; e.g., holographic display system 200; fig. 1 & 2) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the hologram (digital dynamic hologram/DDH 204; [0026]) further comprises a third sub-hologram (of one or more PRH 210; [0021] & [0026]) of a third region (PRH including more than one hologram, e.g., PRH including horizontal hologram and vertical hologram that cooperatively replicate a pupil; [0025]) of the image (image in a user’s eye; [0026]), adjoined to at least one of the first or second sub-holograms (one or more PRH 210; [0021] & [0026]).
With respect to Claim 3, Kollin discloses the holographic projector (near-eye display device 100 including a holographic display system; [0009]; e.g., holographic display system 200; fig. 1 & 2) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first (WGCH 208 having more regions; [0027]) and second regions (at the PRH, light beam splits into two beams; [0025]; fig. 2) of the image are adjacent one another (WGCH 208 and PRH 210 adjacent one another, as seen in fig. 2; DDH 204, WG 202 and WGCH 208 are shown as being parallel to one another; [0028]), to form a substantially continuous image on an image plane (light is primarily steered rather than attenuated to form the image; [0010]).
With respect to Claim 4, Kollin discloses the holographic projector (near-eye display device 100 including a holographic display system; [0009]; e.g., holographic display system 200; fig. 1 & 2) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the hologram (digital dynamic hologram/DDH 204; [0026]) is configured so that light that is spatially modulated (hologram may modulate phase, amplitude, or both; [0022]) by each of the sub-holograms (WGCH 208 and PRHs 210; [0026]) will enter the entrance pupil (aperture formed by low resolution amplitude display/LRAD 206; [0026]) of the viewing system (eye boxes; [0026]) substantially simultaneously (fig. 2), when the display device (display device 100; fig. 1) displaying the hologram (digital dynamic hologram/DDH 204; [0026]) is illuminated (holographic display systems 102/200 include image display componentry configured to project computerized virtual imagery; [0015]; DDH 204 illuminated with diverging light; [0026]; fig. 1 & 2).
With respect to Claim 5, Kollin discloses the holographic projector (near-eye display device 100 including a holographic display system; [0009]; e.g., holographic display system 200; fig. 1 & 2) as claimed in the holographic projector (near-eye display device 100 including a holographic display system; [0009]; e.g., holographic display system 200; fig. 1 & 2) as claimed in claim 1, further comprising: an illumination system (light diverging from source 207 illuminates a phase or amplitude modulating device in the form of DDH 204; [0026]) arranged to illuminate the hologram (digital dynamic hologram/DDH 204; [0026]) displayed on the display device (display device 100; light-deflecting image display componentry includes one or more holographic optical components; [0015]), to form a holographic wavefront (small pupil formed by DDH 204; [0026]).
With respect to Claim 7, Kollin discloses the holographic projector (near-eye display device 100 including a holographic display system; [0009]; e.g., holographic display system 200; fig. 1 & 2) as claimed in claim 1, in which the holographic wavefront (small pupil formed by DDH 204; [0026]) formed by the display device (display device 100; fig. 1) comprises a first holographic sub-wavefront (collimation and coupling by WGCH 208; [0026]), formed by the first sub-hologram (waveguide coupling hologram/WGCH 208; [0026-27]), and a second, different, holographic sub-wavefront (PRH 210 replicating pupil formed by DDH 204; [0026]), formed by the second sub-hologram (one or more PRH 210; [0021] & [0026]).
With respect to Claim 8, Kollin discloses the holographic projector (near-eye display device 100 including a holographic display system; [0009]; e.g., holographic display system 200; fig. 1 & 2) as claimed in claim 7, wherein the waveguide (pupil replicating waveguide/WG 202; [0026]) is configured to form an extended modulator (light beam splits into two beams with first light beam exiting the WG and being directed to user’s eye and second light beam continuing on path through WG, light beam continues down WG and splits again into PRH, extending modulation and effectively expanding eye boxes; [0025-26]) comprising a plurality of replicas of the holographic wavefront (small pupil formed by DDH 204 replicated by pupil replicating holograms/PRH 210 of WG 202; [0026]) formed by the display device (display device 100; fig. 1), arranged in an array (as seen in fig. 2), wherein the array (fig. 2) comprises at least one replica (angular distribution of rays at each of holograms, i.e. WGCH and PRH is related to Fourier transform of image, or is in Fourier space as compared with image space focused by the user’s eye; [0025]; alternating wavefront replicas as seen in fig. 2) of the first holographic sub-wavefront (collimation and coupling by WGCH 208; [0026]), alternated with at least one replica (Fourier transform of image/Fourier space; [0025]; alternating wavefront replicas; fig. 2) of the second holographic sub-wavefront (PRH 210 replicating pupil formed by DDH 204; [0026]).
With respect to Claim 9, Kollin discloses the holographic projector (near-eye display device 100 including a holographic display system; [0009]; e.g., holographic display system 200; fig. 1 & 2) as claimed in claim 1, wherein the image (image in a user’s eye; [0026]) is formed at a non-infinite image distance (near-eye display device 100 including a holographic display system 102/200, wherein holographic display system 200 includes a DDH 204 illuminated by a diverging/converging beam to form an image at the waveguide 202; [0009]), from the display device (display device 100; fig. 1).
With respect to Claim 10, Kollin discloses a method of calculating (instructions implemented to perform a task, implement a data type, transform the state of one or more components, e.g., calculate sub-holograms; [0043]) a hologram (digital dynamic hologram/DDH 204; [0026]) for a holographic projection system (near-eye display device 100 including a holographic display system; [0009]; e.g., holographic display system 200; fig. 1 & 2) comprising a display device (display device 100, holographic display systems representative of right-eye and left-eye 102R and 102L described in more detail with reference to figs. 2-7; [0015] & [0021]) configured to display a hologram (digital dynamic hologram/DDH 204; [0026]) and output a holographic wavefront (small pupil formed by DDH 204; [0026]) when illuminated (holographic display systems 102/200 include image display componentry configured to project computerized virtual imagery; [0015]; DDH 204 illuminated with diverging light; [0026]; fig. 1 & 2), and a waveguide (pupil replicating waveguide/WG 202; [0026]) arranged to receive the holographic wavefront (small pupil formed by DDH 204; [0026]) and emit a plurality of replicas of the holographic wavefront (small pupil formed by DDH 204 replicated by pupil replicating holograms/PRH 210 of WG 202; [0026]), the method comprising:
obtaining a target image (image in a user’s eye; [0026]), for which a hologram (digital dynamic hologram/DDH 204; [0026]) is to be generated (image forming hologram; [0022]);
splitting the target image (different parts of the DDH create different parts of the image; [0011]; two holograms, i.e. at the entrance of the WGCH and the exit of the PRH; [0025]) into a first image region (WGCH 208 having more regions; [0027]) of an image (image in a user’s eye; [0026]) and a second image region (at the PRH, light beam splits into two beams; [0025]; horizontal hologram as seen in fig. 2); and
generating a first sub-hologram (waveguide coupling hologram/WGCH 208; [0026-27]) corresponding to the first image region (WGCH 208 having more regions; [0027]) of an image (image in a user’s eye; [0026]) and a second
sub-hologram (one or more PRH 210; [0021] & [0026]) corresponding to the second image region (at the PRH, light beam splits into two beams; [0025]; horizontal hologram as seen in fig. 2).
Under the principles of inherency, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device. When the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will inherently perform the claimed process. See In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 231 USPQ 136 (Fed. Cir. 1986). See also MPEP § 2112.02.
With respect to Claim 11, Kollin discloses a method of holographic projection (holographic display systems 102/200 include image display componentry configured to project computerized virtual imagery; [0015]; DDH 204 illuminated with diverging light; [0026]; fig. 1 & 2) comprising:
displaying a hologram (digital dynamic hologram/DDH 204; [0026]) on a display device (display device 100, holographic display systems representative of right-eye and left-eye 102R and 102L described in more detail with reference to figs. 2-7; [0015] & [0021]), the hologram (digital dynamic hologram/DDH 204; [0026]) comprising a first sub-hologram (waveguide coupling hologram/WGCH 208; [0026-27]) of a first region (WGCH 208 having more regions; [0027]) of an image (image in a user’s eye; [0026]) adjoined to a second sub-hologram (one or more PRH 210; [0021] & [0026]) of a second region (at the PRH, light beam splits into two beams; [0025]; fig. 2) of the image (image in a user’s eye; [0026]);
illuminating (DDH 204 illuminated with diverging light; [0026]) the displayed hologram (digital dynamic hologram/DDH 204; [0026]), to form a holographic wavefront (small pupil formed by DDH 204; [0026]);
directing the holographic wavefront (small pupil formed by DDH 204; [0026]) through a waveguide (pupil replicating waveguide/WG 202; [0026]);
wherein the waveguide (pupil replicating waveguide/WG 202; [0026]) comprises an input (diverging light; [0026]) arranged to receive the holographic wavefront (small pupil formed by DDH 204; [0026]); and a first (top surface of WG 202; fig. 2) and second surface (bottom surface of WG 202; fig. 2) arranged to waveguide (pupil replicating waveguide/WG 202; [0026]) the holographic wavefront (small pupil formed by DDH 204; [0026]) therebetween (fig. 2), wherein the first surface (top surface of WG 202; fig. 2) is partially reflective-transmissive (light coupled and transmitted into WG 202 through top surface, light propagates through waveguide by reflecting from top surface; [0026]; as seen in fig. 2) such that a plurality of replicas of the holographic wavefront (small pupil formed by DDH 204 replicated by pupil replicating holograms/PRH 210 of WG 202; [0026]) are emitted therefrom (fig. 2);
wherein a size of the hologram (digital dynamic hologram/DDH 204; [0026]) is less than a size (pixel size of the LRAD could be 10 to 100 times larger than the DDH pixel size e.g., 100's of μm; [0013]) of an entrance pupil (aperture formed by low resolution amplitude display/LRAD 206; [0026]) of a viewing system (eye boxes; [0026]) for receiving the holographic wavefront (small pupil formed by DDH 204; [0026]) from the first surface (top surface of WG 202; fig. 2) of the waveguide (pupil replicating waveguide/WG 202; [0026]).
Under the principles of inherency, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device. When the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will inherently perform the claimed process. See In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 231 USPQ 136 (Fed. Cir. 1986). See also MPEP § 2112.02.
With respect to Claim 12, Kollin discloses the method of claim 11 comprising, as an initial step, calculating (holographic display systems implemented in computing system in form of near-eye display device 100 as well as computing system 1000, wherein holographic display systems include pupil replicating waveguide assembly including a waveguide (WG), a waveguide coupling hologram (WGCH), and one or more pupil replicating holograms (PRH); [0021]; instructions implemented to perform a task, implement a data type, transform the state of one or more components, e.g., calculate sub-holograms; [0043]) the sub-holograms (WGCH 208 and PRHs 210; [0026]) for viewing of the image (image in a user’s eye; [0026]) by the viewing system (eye boxes; [0026]).
With respect to Claim 13, Kollin discloses the method of claim 11, wherein said method is at least partially computer implemented (on-board computing system 108 configured to render computerized display imagery as well as the example computing system 1000; [0017] & [0021]; fig. 1 & 10).
With respect to Claim 14, Kollin discloses the holographic projector (near-eye display device 100 including a holographic display system; [0009]; e.g., holographic display system 200; fig. 1 & 2) as claimed in claim 2 wherein the hologram (digital dynamic hologram/DDH 204; [0026]) further comprises a fourth sub-hologram (of one or more PRH 210; [0021] & [0026]) of a fourth region (PRH including more than one hologram, e.g., PRH including horizontal hologram and vertical hologram that cooperatively replicate a pupil; [0025]) of the image (image in a user’s eye; [0026]), adjoined to at least one of the first, second or third sub-holograms (one or more PRH 210; [0021] & [0026]).
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 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kollin et al. US 20180120563 A1 (herein after "Kollin") in view of Leister et al. US 20200166754 A1 (herein after "Leister").
With respect to Claim 6, Kollin discloses the holographic projector (near-eye display device 100 including a holographic display system; [0009]; e.g., holographic display system 200; fig. 1 & 2) as claimed in claim 1.
Kollin does not appear to explicitly teach the following limitation wherein the size of the entrance pupil is no more than 15 mm.
However, in another field of endeavor, Leister teaches a display device for enlarging a field of view ([0035]), wherein a holographic segment that generates a virtual observer window small in its dimensions, e.g., 3 mm to 5 mm large in its dimensions, is generated using a single parallax encoding of a hologram in a spatial light modulation device ([0133]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the near eye display device of Kollin to include the technical feature of scaling the size of an entrance pupil to be about 3 mm to 5 mm while also utilizing computer-generating holography, for the purpose of providing an observer window in a non-encoding direction while providing a virtual observer window in an encoding direction of a hologram, as taught by Leister ([0133-134]). Furthermore, it would have been an obvious matter of choice to scale the size of an entrance pupil within an holographic optical system, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of the component. A change of size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP §2144.04(IV)(A).
With respect to Claim 15, Kollin in view of Leister teaches the holographic projector (near-eye display device 100 including a holographic display system; [0009]; e.g., holographic display system 200; fig. 1 & 2) as claimed in claim 6.
Kollin does not appear to explicitly teach the following limitation wherein the size of the entrance pupil is no more than 12 mm or no more than 10 mm.
However, in another field of endeavor, Leister teaches a display device for enlarging a field of view ([0035]), wherein a holographic segment that generates a virtual observer window small in its dimensions, e.g., 3 mm to 5 mm large in its dimensions, is generated using a single parallax encoding of a hologram in a spatial light modulation device ([0133]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the near eye display device of Kollin to include the technical feature of scaling the size of an entrance pupil to be about 3 mm to 5 mm while also utilizing computer-generating holography, for the purpose of providing an observer window in a non-encoding direction while providing a virtual observer window in an encoding direction of a hologram, as taught by Leister ([0133-134]). Furthermore, it would have been an obvious matter of choice to scale the size of an entrance pupil within an holographic optical system, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of the component. A change of size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP §2144.04(IV)(A).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Payne et al. US 6760135 B1 discloses holographic displays similar to that of the claimed invention. Jang et al. US 20220091560 A1 discloses a lightguide based holographic display similar to that of the claimed invention. Watanabe US 20160378062 A1 discloses hologram data generating method, hologram image reproduction method, and hologram image reproduction device similar to that of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to K MUHAMMAD whose telephone number is (571)272-4210. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 1:00pm - 9:30pm EDT.
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, Ricky Mack can be reached at 571-272-2333. 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.
/K MUHAMMAD/Examiner, Art Unit 2872 24 November 2025
/SHARRIEF I BROOME/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights