DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1, 3, and 6-20 are pending. Claims dated 10/22/2025 are being examined.
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 Arguments
35 U.S.C. § 101:
Applicant has amended the claims to overcome the previously set forth rejections. Claims do not recite a mental process when they do not contain limitations that can practically be performed in the human mind, for instance when the human mind is not equipped to perform the claim limitations. SRI Int’l, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., 930 F.3d 1295, 1304 (Fed. Cir. 2019).
The claimed steps of receiving and processing radio frequency waves emitted by a plurality of emitters cannot, as a practical matter, be performed in the human mind. Accordingly, the Examiner has withdrawn the previously set forth 101 rejections to the claims.
35 U.S.C. § 102/103:
Applicant’s arguments filed 10/22/2025 with respect to claims have been 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 § 112
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 13 and 16 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.
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 recites “wherein at the at least one of the plurality of emitters comprises a combination of a radio frequency identification (RFID) tag and a light emitting diode (LED)”. It is not clear how one emitter can comprise 2 emitters – both a RFID tag and a LED. Should this limitation be “wherein
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 recites the limitation “the sensor system”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, this is interpreted as “a sensor system”.
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 6, 8, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Davidoff (WO-2015117216-A1) and herein after will be referred to as Davidoff.
Regarding claim 1, Davidoff teaches a landing guidance system for an aircraft, the landing guidance system comprising ([0016] This advantageous feature makes it possible to precisely navigate an unmanned aerial vehicle not using GPS or GLONASS units, which are traditionally used for navigation and have low accuracy, but using radio frequency identification tags, which can ensure exceptionally high landing accuracy):
at least one receiver for installation on the aircraft ([0056] reader antenna 85), the at least one receiver receiving signals comprising radio frequency (RF) waves emitted by a plurality of emitters associated with a landing area ([0075] the antenna system of the unmanned aerial vehicle automatically repeatedly estimates the distance from each radio frequency identification tag to each antenna, for example, based on the method of measuring the delay time of the signal as it propagates from the antenna to the radio frequency identification tag and back and/or the method of measuring the attenuation of the radio signal as it propagates from the antenna to the radio frequency identification tag and back),
wherein at least one of the plurality of emitters comprises a radio frequency identification (RFID) tag; and (FIG. 1 radio frequency identification tags 4; [0049] But it is mainly assumed that two radio frequency identification tags will be used)
a processing system receiving the signals and processing the received signals to determine at least one of a location, a distance, an orientation, a configuration, and a geometry of the landing area relative to a position and location of the aircraft above the landing area ([0075] The radio frequency response of the RFID tags contains a code component that allows each RFID tag of a specific landing site to be uniquely addressed and identified to avoid erroneous acquisition of data from RFID tags belonging to other landing sites. In the event of successful identification of the landing site and reliable capture of data from the radio frequency identification tags placed on it, the antenna system of the unmanned aerial vehicle automatically repeatedly estimates the distance from each radio frequency identification tag to each antenna, for example, based on the method of measuring the delay time of the signal as it propagates from the antenna to the radio frequency identification tag and back and/or the method of measuring the attenuation of the radio signal as it propagates from the antenna to the radio frequency identification tag and back; [0076] Based on the received data and the embedded autonomous landing program, the unmanned aerial vehicle control device generates control signals for the flight control system (for example, the propeller system), which ensures the movement of the unmanned aerial vehicle in the desired direction until the moment of landing);
wherein the at least one receiver is further configured to emit at least one query signal for causing the plurality of emitters to emit the received signals ([0074] When the unmanned aerial vehicle approaches the landing site at a distance less than the range of the radio tags, the navigation unit of the unmanned aerial vehicle begins to transmit a sequence of repeating signals to interrogate the radio frequency identification tags 4).
Regarding claim 3, Davidoff teaches the landing guidance system of claim 1.
Davidoff also teaches wherein the at least one receiver comprises an RFID reader ([0056] reader antenna 85; [0075] the antenna system of the unmanned aerial vehicle automatically repeatedly estimates the distance from each radio frequency identification tag to each antenna, for example, based on the method of measuring the delay time of the signal as it propagates from the antenna to the radio frequency identification tag and back and/or the method of measuring the attenuation of the radio signal as it propagates from the antenna to the radio frequency identification tag and back).
Regarding claim 6, Davidoff teaches the landing guidance system of claim 1.
Davidoff also teaches wherein at least one of the plurality of emitters comprises a passive RFID tag ([0019] There is a variant of the invention in which the radio frequency identification tags are passive).
Regarding claim 8, Davidoff teaches the landing guidance system of claim 1.
Davidoff also teaches wherein the plurality of emitters are arranged in a configuration relative to the landing area and wherein the configuration is known to the landing guidance system ([0070] Basically, two radio frequency identification tags are installed at a site, located at a distance from each other, the coordinates of which are determined and entered into the system, so that the unmanned aerial vehicle can navigate along them).
Regarding claim 17, Davidoff teaches a computer-implemented method for providing a landing guidance system for an aircraft, wherein the aircraft has installed thereon a receiver device, the method comprising:
receiving by the receiver a signal comprising a radio frequency (RF) wave emitted by an emitter associated with a landing area ([0056] reader antenna 85; [0074] When the unmanned aerial vehicle approaches the landing site at a distance less than the range of the radio tags, the navigation unit of the unmanned aerial vehicle begins to transmit a sequence of repeating signals to interrogate the radio frequency identification tags 4), wherein the received signal comprises information for identifying at least one of a location, a distance, an orientation, a configuration, and a geometry of the landing area relative to the aircraft; and ([0075] The radio frequency response of the RFID tags contains a code component that allows each RFID tag of a specific landing site to be uniquely addressed and identified to avoid erroneous acquisition of data from RFID tags belonging to other landing sites. In the event of successful identification of the landing site and reliable capture of data from the radio frequency identification tags placed on it, the antenna system of the unmanned aerial vehicle automatically repeatedly estimates the distance from each radio frequency identification tag to each antenna, for example, based on the method of measuring the delay time of the signal as it propagates from the antenna to the radio frequency identification tag and back and/or the method of measuring the attenuation of the radio signal as it propagates from the antenna to the radio frequency identification tag and back)
processing the received signal to determine feedback comprising the at least one of the location, the distance, the orientation, the configuration, and the geometry of the landing area relative to the aircraft ([0076] Based on the received data and the embedded autonomous landing program, the unmanned aerial vehicle control device generates control signals for the flight control system (for example, the propeller system), which ensures the movement of the unmanned aerial vehicle in the desired direction until the moment of landing).
Regarding claim 18, Davidoff teaches the method of claim 17.
Davidoff also teaches further comprising, prior to the receiving, emitting by the receiver at least one query signal for triggering the emitter to emit the received signal ([0074] When the unmanned aerial vehicle approaches the landing site at a distance less than the range of the radio tags, the navigation unit of the unmanned aerial vehicle begins to transmit a sequence of repeating signals to interrogate the radio frequency identification tags 4).
Regarding claim 19, Davidoff teaches the method of claim 17.
Davidoff also teaches further comprising: comparing the feedback with a predetermined approach plan for the aircraft to determine a difference therebetween ([0076] --comparing distance difference from RFID tags with landing --); and providing the determined difference to at least one of a flight control system and a pilot display system for controlling operation of the aircraft ([0076] Based on the received data and the embedded autonomous landing program, the unmanned aerial vehicle control device generates control signals for the flight control system (for example, the propeller system), which ensures the movement of the unmanned aerial vehicle in the desired direction until the moment of landing).
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 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 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 7, 9-10, 12-13, 15-16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davidoff, in view Sherback et al. (US-20200312170-A1) and herein after will be referred to as Sherback.
Regarding claim 7, Davidoff teaches the landing guidance system of claim 1.
Davidoff does not explicitly teach: wherein the at least one of the plurality of emitters further comprises a light emitting diode.
However, Sherback teaches wherein the at least one of the plurality of emitters further comprises a light emitting diode (FIG. 2B Passive and Active ground structures; [0071] The active infrastructure can provide broadcasted signals that are unique to a particular landing site, takeoff site, or other site, and/or unique to a specific aircraft in flight. The active ground structures can broadcast signals including one or more of: light signals, radio signals, audio signals, and any other suitable signals).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify the at least one of the plurality of emitters as taught in Davidoff to incorporate the teachings of Sherback to include wherein the at least one of the plurality of emitters further comprises a light emitting diode, with a reasonable expectation of success “to promote secure signal transmission for localization of a specific aircraft, by providing mechanisms for encoding and decoding signals and/or multi-factor authentication” (Sherback [0073]).
Regarding claim 9, Davidoff teaches the landing guidance system of claim 1.
Davidoff does not explicitly teach further comprising a sensor system including at least one of a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) sensor, a laser detection and ranging (LADAR) sensor, and a radio detection and ranging (RADAR) sensor, wherein sensor signals generated by the sensor system are processed by the processing system to confirm or correct the determined at least one of the location, the distance, the orientation, the configuration, and the geometry of the landing area relative to the aircraft.
However, Sherback teaches further comprising a sensor system including at least one of a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) sensor, a laser detection and ranging (LADAR) sensor, and a radio detection and ranging (RADAR) sensor, wherein sensor signals generated by the sensor system are processed by the processing system to confirm or correct the determined at least one of the location, the distance, the orientation, the configuration, and the geometry of the landing area relative to the aircraft ([0028] Furthermore, while images are described, the radar subsystem 111 can be supplemented with or otherwise replaced with a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) subsystem that includes light emission elements and/or light sensors for receipt of optical signals indicative of features about the aircraft (e.g., in relation to light reflective objects, light scattering objects, light absorbing objects, light responsive objects, etc.), where the optical signals can be processed to determine locations of the aircraft 105 during flight, in relation to the method(s) described in Section 2 below. As such, the system 100 can implement other sensors that provide height information related to positions of the aircraft 105, in order to augment navigation of the aircraft 105 in space).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify the sensor system as taught in Davidoff to incorporate the teachings of Sherback to include further comprising a sensor system including at least one of a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) sensor, a laser detection and ranging (LADAR) sensor, and a radio detection and ranging (RADAR) sensor, wherein sensor signals generated by the sensor system are processed by the processing system to confirm or correct the determined at least one of the location, the distance, the orientation, the configuration, and the geometry of the landing area relative to the aircraft, with a reasonable expectation of success “to augment navigation of the aircraft 105 in space” (Sherback [0028]).
Regarding claim 10, Davidoff teaches a computer-implemented control system for an aircraft, the control system comprising:
a perception system comprising a receiver installed on the aircraft ([0056] reader antenna 85), the receiver emitting a query signal and receiving response signals comprising radio frequency (RF) waves emitted by a plurality of emitters associated with a landing pad in response to the query signal, wherein the received response signals are processed by the perception system to determine a location, a distance, an orientation, a configuration, and a geometry of the landing pad relative to a position and location of the aircraft above the landing pad; and ([0075] The radio frequency response of the RFID tags contains a code component that allows each RFID tag of a specific landing site to be uniquely addressed and identified to avoid erroneous acquisition of data from RFID tags belonging to other landing sites. In the event of successful identification of the landing site and reliable capture of data from the radio frequency identification tags placed on it, the antenna system of the unmanned aerial vehicle automatically repeatedly estimates the distance from each radio frequency identification tag to each antenna, for example, based on the method of measuring the delay time of the signal as it propagates from the antenna to the radio frequency identification tag and back and/or the method of measuring the attenuation of the radio signal as it propagates from the antenna to the radio frequency identification tag and back; [0076] Based on the received data and the embedded autonomous landing program, the unmanned aerial vehicle control device generates control signals for the flight control system (for example, the propeller system), which ensures the movement of the unmanned aerial vehicle in the desired direction until the moment of landing);
Davidoff does not explicitly teach a display system comprising a physical display device for displaying a representation of the determined location, the distance, the orientation, the configuration, and the geometry of the landing pad.
However, Sherback teaches a display system comprising a physical display device for displaying a representation of the determined location, the distance, the orientation, the configuration, and the geometry of the landing pad ([0094] Additionally, or alternatively, the method and associated system components can include functionality for supporting a pilot operating the aircraft. For instance, the method and/or system can operate in a co-pilot operation mode where any generated analyses of pose, analyses of pose trajectory, and/or instructions are transformed into notifications to the pilot (e.g., at a display, through an audio output device, etc.) in relation to suggestions for control of the aircraft; FIG. 1B HMD 140b).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify Davidoff to incorporate the teachings of Sherback to include a display system comprising a physical display device for displaying a representation of the determined location, the distance, the orientation, the configuration, and the geometry of the landing pad, with a reasonable expectation of success since doing so would have achieved the benefit of “supporting a pilot operating the aircraft” (Sherback [0094]).
Regarding claim 12, Davidoff, as modified, teaches the control system of claim 10.
Davidoff also teaches wherein the receiver comprises a radio frequency identification reader ([0056] reader antenna 85; [0075] the antenna system of the unmanned aerial vehicle automatically repeatedly estimates the distance from each radio frequency identification tag to each antenna, for example, based on the method of measuring the delay time of the signal as it propagates from the antenna to the radio frequency identification tag and back and/or the method of measuring the attenuation of the radio signal as it propagates from the antenna to the radio frequency identification tag and back).
Regarding claim 13, Davidoff, as modified, teaches the control system of claim 10.
Davidoff also teaches wherein at least one of the plurality of emitters comprises a combination of a radio frequency identification (RFID) tag and a light emitting diode (LED) at least one of radio frequency identification tags and light emitting diodes (LEDs) (FIG. 1 radio frequency identification tags 4; [0049] But it is mainly assumed that two radio frequency identification tags will be used. They are placed on different side walls or on the bottom at the greatest possible distance from each other).
Regarding claim 15, Davidoff, as modified, teaches the control system of claim 10.
Davidoff also teaches wherein the plurality of emitters are arranged in a configuration relative to the landing pad, wherein the configuration is known to the guidance system ([0070] Basically, two radio frequency identification tags are installed at a site, located at a distance from each other, the coordinates of which are determined and entered into the system, so that the unmanned aerial vehicle can navigate along them).
Regarding claim 16, Davidoff, as modified, teaches the control system of claim 10.
Davidoff does not explicitly teach: further comprising at least one of a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) sensor, a laser detection and ranging (LADAR) sensor, and a radio detection and ranging (RADAR) sensor, wherein sensor signals generated by the sensor system are processed by the perception system to confirm or correct the determined at least one of the location, the distance, the orientation, the configuration, and the geometry of the landing pad relative to the aircraft.
However, Sherback teaches further comprising at least one of a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) sensor, a laser detection and ranging (LADAR) sensor, and a radio detection and ranging (RADAR) sensor, wherein sensor signals generated by the sensor system are processed by the perception system to confirm or correct the determined at least one of the location, the distance, the orientation, the configuration, and the geometry of the landing pad relative to the aircraft ([0028] Furthermore, while images are described, the radar subsystem 111 can be supplemented with or otherwise replaced with a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) subsystem that includes light emission elements and/or light sensors for receipt of optical signals indicative of features about the aircraft (e.g., in relation to light reflective objects, light scattering objects, light absorbing objects, light responsive objects, etc.), where the optical signals can be processed to determine locations of the aircraft 105 during flight, in relation to the method(s) described in Section 2 below. As such, the system 100 can implement other sensors that provide height information related to positions of the aircraft 105, in order to augment navigation of the aircraft 105 in space).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify the sensor system as taught in Davidoff to incorporate the teachings of Sherback to include further comprising at least one of a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) sensor, a laser detection and ranging (LADAR) sensor, and a radio detection and ranging (RADAR) sensor, wherein sensor signals generated by the sensor system are processed by the perception system to confirm or correct the determined at least one of the location, the distance, the orientation, the configuration, and the geometry of the landing pad relative to the aircraft, with a reasonable expectation of success “to augment navigation of the aircraft 105 in space” (Sherback [0028]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davidoff, in view Ehrmantraut et al. (US-20220028289-A1) and herein after will be referred to as Ehrmantraut.
Regarding claim 11, Davidoff, as modified, teaches the control system of claim 10.
Davidoff also teaches further comprising guidance system configured to: a receive from the perception system feedback comprising the determined location, the distance, the orientation, the configuration, and the geometry of the landing pad ([0075] The radio frequency response of the RFID tags contains a code component that allows each RFID tag of a specific landing site to be uniquely addressed and identified to avoid erroneous acquisition of data from RFID tags belonging to other landing sites. In the event of successful identification of the landing site and reliable capture of data from the radio frequency identification tags placed on it, the antenna system of the unmanned aerial vehicle automatically repeatedly estimates the distance from each radio frequency identification tag to each antenna, for example, based on the method of measuring the delay time of the signal as it propagates from the antenna to the radio frequency identification tag and back and/or the method of measuring the attenuation of the radio signal as it propagates from the antenna to the radio frequency identification tag and back);
compare the received feedback with a predetermined approach plan for the aircraft to determine a difference therebetween; and ([0076] --comparing distance difference from RFID tags with landing --)
provide the determined difference to a flight control system ([0076] Based on the received data and the embedded autonomous landing program, the unmanned aerial vehicle control device generates control signals for the flight control system (for example, the propeller system), which ensures the movement of the unmanned aerial vehicle in the desired direction until the moment of landing).
Davidoff does not explicitly teach also providing the determined difference to “a pilot display system for controlling operation of the aircraft”.
However, Ehrmantraut teaches also providing a determined difference to a pilot display system for controlling operation of the aircraft ([0036] The navigational computer 22 can then provide the updated heading to a pilot and/or control system that redirects the aircraft 12 based on the updated heading. For example, the updated heading can be provided to a pilot by any number of display devices. In one example, the aircraft 12 is redirected based on actuating various control surfaces of the aircraft 12).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify Davidoff to incorporate the teachings of Ehrmantraut to include also providing a determined difference to a pilot display system for controlling operation of the aircraft, with a reasonable expectation of success to assist the pilot in visualizing the landing area.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davidoff, in view Sherback, in further view of Gupta et al. (US-20180068570-A1) and herein after will be referred to as Gupta.
Regarding claim 14, Davidoff, as modified, teaches the control system of claim 10.
Davidoff also teaches wherein for each of the received response signals, the received response signal identifies which one of the plurality of emitters emitted the received response signal ([0075] The radio frequency response of the RFID tags contains a code component that allows each RFID tag of a specific landing site to be uniquely addressed and identified to avoid erroneous acquisition of data from RFID tags belonging to other landing sites).
Davidoff suggests but does not explicitly teach and wherein the perception system processes the received signals using triangulation techniques.
However, Gupta teaches wherein the perception system processes the received signals using triangulation techniques ([0043] In some embodiments, the navigation unit 125 may use signals received from recognizable radio frequency (RF) emitters (e.g., AM/FM radio stations, Wi-Fi access points, and cellular network base stations) on the ground. The locations, unique identifiers, single strengths, frequencies, and other characteristic information of such RF emitters may be stored in a database and used to determine position (e.g., via triangulation and/or trilateration) when RF signals are received by the radio 130).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present claimed invention to modify Davidoff to incorporate the teachings of Gupta to include wherein the perception system processes the received signals using triangulation techniques, with a reasonable expectation of success since doing so would have achieved the benefit of a more precise/reliable position estimate (Gupta [0043]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
WO-2015095948-A1: Davydoff discloses a similar invention focused on the aircraft navigating to a landing area with RFID tags.
US-12174030-B1: Billman teaches use of a combination of a RFID tag and a light signaling device to guide a drone to land
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVIN SEOL whose telephone number is (571) 272-6488. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
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, Jelani Smith can be reached on (571) 270-3969. 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.
/DAVIN SEOL/Examiner, Art Unit 3662
/JELANI A SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3662