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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 24, 34, 37, 39-41, and 42 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagata (U.S. 6,876,390) in view of Jones et al. (U.S. 2018/0045964).
Regarding claim 24, Nagata discloses an optical system (Fig. 2; col 12, lines 16-17), comprising:
in order from an object side (side of 31, Fig. 2) of the optical system to an image side (side of 3, Fig. 2; col 12, line 67) of the optical system:
a first freeform prism (10, Fig. 2; col 14, line 63) that includes:
a first surface (11, Fig. 2; col 14, line 66), a second surface (13, Fig. 2; col 15, line 1), and a third surface (14, Fig. 2; col 15, line 2), wherein an optical axis (optical axis along principal light path 2, Figs. 1-2; col 6, lines 60-63; col 13, lines 1-2, lines 16-17) of the optical system traverses the first surface (11, Fig. 2), the second surface (13, Fig. 2), and the third surface (14, Fig. 2),
wherein at least one of the first surface (11, Fig. 2), the second surface (13, Fig. 2), or the third surface (14, Fig. 2) of the first freeform prism (10, Fig. 2) is a freeform surface (freeform surface of 11, Figs. 1-2; col 13, lines 37-40); and
a second freeform prism (20, Fig. 2; col 14, lines 63-64) that includes:
a first surface (21, Fig. 2; col 15, line 7), a second surface (22, Fig. 2; col 15, line 9), a third surface (24, Fig. 2; col 15, lines 10-11), wherein the optical axis (optical axis along principal light path 2, Figs. 1-2; col 6, lines 60-63; col 13, lines 1-2, lines 16-17) of the optical system traverses the first surface (21, Fig. 2), the second surface (22, Fig. 2), and the third surface (24, Fig. 2),
wherein at least one of the first surface (21, Fig. 2), the second surface (22, Fig.
2), and the third surface (24, Fig. 2) of the second freeform prism (20, Fig. 2) is another freeform surface (freeform surface of 21, Figs. 1-2; col 13, lines 37-40);
wherein the first freeform prism (10, Fig. 2) is configured to fold the optical axis of the optical system twice (since light along the principal light path 2 is reflected twice in 10, Fig. 2; col 6, lines 65-67).
Nagata discloses wherein an effective focal length f of the optical system (such as Fx or Fy, Fig. 2; col 7, lines 46-50; col 17, line 61-66) is Fx=6.68 mm and Fy=6.50 mm, respectively, but does not expressly disclose wherein an effective focal length f of the optical system (Fig. 2) is within a range of 9 to 31 millimeters. However, at the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to configure the focal length f of the optical system of Nagata to satisfy the following range of 9 to 31 mm through routine experimentation and optimization. Applicant has not disclosed that the focal length f of the optical system in the range of 9 to 31 mm is for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected/significant result, or are otherwise critical. Indeed, it has been held that mere range limitations are prima facie obvious absent a disclosure that the limitations are for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected result, or are otherwise critical. Furthermore, Jones discloses an optical system (Fig. 3; page 2, para [0018]) wherein an effective focal length f of the optical system can be configured to be 18 mm (page 7, para [0075]) in order to optimize the optical characteristics of the optical system (page 7, para [0075]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention to configure the focal length f (Fx or Fy; col 7, lines 46-50; col 17, line 61-66) of the optical system of Nagata to be in the range of 9 to 31 mm in order to obtain the benefits of optimizing the optical characteristics of the optical system since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering an optimum workable range involves only routine skill in the art (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233).
Regarding claim 34, Nagata as modified by Jones discloses an optical system with all the limitations of claim 24 above and further discloses wherein the second surface (Nagata: 13, Fig. 2) of the first freeform prism (Nagata: 10, Fig. 2) is coated with an optically reflective coating to reflect light (Nagata: col 15, lines 1-2) received through the first surface (Nagata: 11, Fig. 2) of the first freeform prism (Nagata: 10, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 37, Nagata as modified by Jones discloses an optical system with all the limitations of claim 24 above and further discloses wherein an F-number of the optical system (Nagata: Fig. 2) is within a range of 2.0 to 4.0, such as 3.3 (Nagata: col 14, line 57).
Regarding claim 39, Nagata as modified by Jones discloses an optical system with all the limitations of claim 24 above and further discloses wherein half field of view of the optical system (Nagata: Fig. 2) is within a range of 4.5 degrees to 16 degrees, such as 5 degrees (Nagata: when field angle is 10 degrees, Fig. 2; col 10, lines 43-46).
Regarding claim 40, Nagata discloses a camera (200, Fig. 6; col 18, lines 21-29), comprising, in order from an object side of the camera (left side of 200, Fig. 6; side of 31, Fig. 2) to an image side of the camera (right side of 200, Fig. 6; side of 3, Fig. 2; col 12, line 67):
an optical system (Fig. 2; col 12, lines 16-17), comprising, in order from an object side (side of 31, Fig. 2) of the optical system to an image side (side of 3, Fig. 2; col 12, line 67) of the optical system:
a first freeform prism (10, Fig. 2; col 14, line 63) that includes:
a first surface (11, Fig. 2; col 14, line 66), a second surface (13, Fig. 2; col 15, line 1), and a third surface (14, Fig. 2; col 15, line 2), wherein an optical axis (optical axis along principal light path 2, Figs. 1-2; col 6, lines 60-63; col 13, lines 1-2, lines 16-17) of the optical system traverses the first surface (11, Fig. 2), the second surface (13, Fig. 2), and the third surface (14, Fig. 2),
wherein at least one of the first surface (11, Fig. 2), the second surface (13, Fig. 2), or the third surface (14, Fig. 2) of the first freeform prism (10, Fig. 2) is a freeform surface (freeform surface of 11, Figs. 1-2; col 13, lines 37-40); and
a second freeform prism (20, Fig. 2; col 14, lines 63-64) that includes:
a first surface (21, Fig. 2; col 15, line 7), a second surface (22, Fig. 2; col 15, line 9), a third surface (23, Fig. 2; col 15, lines 10-11), wherein the optical axis (optical axis along principal light path 2, Figs. 1-2; col 6, lines 60-63; col 13, lines 1-2, lines 16-17) of the optical system traverses the first surface (21, Fig. 2), the second surface (22, Fig. 2), and the third surface (24, Fig. 2),
wherein at least one of the first surface (21, Fig. 2), the second surface (22, Fig.
2), and the third surface (23, Fig. 2) of the second freeform prism (20, Fig. 2) is another freeform surface (freeform surface of 21, Figs. 1-2; col 13, lines 37-40);
wherein the first freeform prism (10, Fig. 2) is configured to fold the optical axis of the
optical system twice (since light along the principal light path 2 is reflected twice in 10, Fig. 2; col 6, lines 65-67); and
an image sensor (62, Fig. 6; col 18, lines 39-40) configured to capture light projected onto a surface of the image sensor from the second freeform prism (20, Figs. 2 and 6).
Nagata discloses wherein an effective focal length f of the optical system (such as Fx or Fy, Fig. 2; col 7, lines 46-50; col 17, line 61-66) is Fx=6.68 mm and Fy=6.50 mm, respectively, but does not expressly disclose wherein an effective focal length f of the optical system (Fig. 2) is within a range of 9 to 31 millimeters. However, at the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to configure the focal length f of the optical system of Nagata to satisfy the following range of 9 to 31 mm through routine experimentation and optimization. Applicant has not disclosed that the focal length f of the optical system in the range of 9 to 31 mm is for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected/significant result, or are otherwise critical. Indeed, it has been held that mere range limitations are prima facie obvious absent a disclosure that the limitations are for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected result, or are otherwise critical. Furthermore, Jones discloses an optical system (Fig. 3; page 2, para [0018]) wherein an effective focal length f of the optical system can be configured to be 18 mm (page 7, para [0075]) in order to optimize the optical characteristics of the optical system (page 7, para [0075]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention to configure the focal length f (Fx or Fy; col 7, lines 46-50; col 17, line 61-66) of the optical system of Nagata to be in the range of 9 to 31 mm in order to obtain the benefits of optimizing the optical characteristics of the optical system since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering an optimum workable range involves only routine skill in the art (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233).
Regarding claim 41, Nagata as modified by Jones discloses a camera with all the limitations of claim 40 above and further discloses wherein the third surface (Nagata: 23, Fig. 2) of the second freeform prism (Nagata: 20, Fig. 2) is coated with an optically reflective coating to reflect light (Nagata: col 15, lines 9-10) received from the second surface (Nagata: 22, Fig. 2) of the second freeform prism (Nagata: 20, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 42, Nagata discloses a device (Fig. 10; col 19, lines 61-col 20, line 3), comprising:
one or more processors (processing unit, Fig. 10; col 20, lines 17-19);
memory (such as memory of camera 200 of 405, Figs. 6 and 10; col 18, lines 57-60) configured to store program instructions accessible by the one or more processors, which when executed by the one or more processors control operations of a camera (200 of 405, Figs. 6 and 10; col 18, lines 57-60; col 20, lines 22-28); and
the camera (200, Fig. 6), comprising, in order from an object side of the camera (left side of 200, Fig. 6; side of 31, Fig. 2) to an image side of the camera (right side of 200, Fig. 6; side of 3, Fig. 2; col 12, line 67):
an optical system (Fig. 2; col 12, lines 16-17), comprising, in order from an object side (side of 31, Fig. 2) of the optical system to an image side (side of 3, Fig. 2; col 12, line 67) of the optical system:
a first freeform prism (10, Fig. 2; col 14, line 63) that includes:
a first surface (11, Fig. 2; col 14, line 66), a second surface (13, Fig. 2; col 15, line 1), and a third surface (14, Fig. 2; col 15, line 2), wherein an optical axis (optical axis along principal light path 2, Figs. 1-2; col 6, lines 60-63; col 13, lines 1-2, lines 16-17) of the optical system traverses the first surface (11, Fig. 2), the second surface (13, Fig. 2), and the third surface (14, Fig. 2),
wherein at least one of the first surface (11, Fig. 2), the second surface (13, Fig. 2), or the third surface (14, Fig. 2) of the first freeform prism (10, Fig. 2) is a freeform surface (freeform surface of 11, Figs. 1-2; col 13, lines 37-40); and
a second freeform prism (20, Fig. 2; col 14, lines 63-64) that includes:
a first surface (21, Fig. 2; col 15, line 7), a second surface (22, Fig. 2; col 15, line 9), a third surface (23, Fig. 2; col 15, lines 10-11), wherein the optical axis (optical axis along principal light path 2, Figs. 1-2; col 6, lines 60-63; col 13, lines 1-2, lines 16-17) of the optical system traverses the first surface (21, Fig. 2), the second surface (22, Fig. 2), and the third surface (24, Fig. 2),
wherein at least one of the first surface (21, Fig. 2), the second surface (22, Fig.
2), and the third surface (23, Fig. 2) of the second freeform prism (20, Fig. 2) is another freeform surface (freeform surface of 21, Figs. 1-2; col 13, lines 37-40);
wherein the first freeform prism (10, Fig. 2) is configured to fold the optical axis of the
optical system twice (since light along the principal light path 2 is reflected twice in 10, Fig. 2; col 6, lines 65-67); and
an image sensor (62, Fig. 6; col 18, lines 39-40) configured to capture light projected onto a surface of the image sensor from the second freeform prism (20, Figs. 2 and 6).
Nagata discloses wherein an effective focal length f of the optical system (such as Fx or Fy, Fig. 2; col 7, lines 46-50; col 17, line 61-66) is Fx=6.68 mm and Fy=6.50 mm, respectively, but does not expressly disclose wherein an effective focal length f of the optical system (Fig. 2) is within a range of 9 to 31 millimeters. However, at the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to configure the focal length f of the optical system of Nagata to satisfy the following range of 9 to 31 mm through routine experimentation and optimization. Applicant has not disclosed that the focal length f of the optical system in the range of 9 to 31 mm is for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected/significant result, or are otherwise critical. Indeed, it has been held that mere range limitations are prima facie obvious absent a disclosure that the limitations are for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected result, or are otherwise critical. Furthermore, Jones discloses an optical system (Fig. 3; page 2, para [0018]) wherein an effective focal length f of the optical system can be configured to be 18 mm (page 7, para [0075]) in order to optimize the optical characteristics of the optical system (page 7, para [0075]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention to configure the focal length f (Fx or Fy; col 7, lines 46-50; col 17, line 61-66) of the optical system of Nagata to be in the range of 9 to 31 mm in order to obtain the benefits of optimizing the optical characteristics of the optical system since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering an optimum workable range involves only routine skill in the art (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233).
Claim(s) 24-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aoki (U.S. 6,327,094) in view of Jones et al. (U.S. 2018/0045964).
Regarding claim 24, Aoki discloses an optical system (Fig. 2; col 26, lines 66-67), comprising:
in order from an object side (side of 11, Fig. 2; col 32, line 28) of the optical system to an image side (side of 3, Fig. 2; col 31, line 48) of the optical system:
a first freeform prism (10, Fig. 2; col 31, line 27) that includes:
a first surface (11/13, Fig. 2; col 31, line 28), a second surface (12, Fig. 2; col 31, line 29), and a third surface (14, Fig. 2; col 31, line 31), wherein an optical axis (optical axis along principal ray of a Z-axis, Fig. 2; col 16, lines 62-64) of the optical system traverses the first surface (11, Fig. 2), the second surface (12, Fig. 2), and the third surface (14, Fig. 2),
wherein at least one of the first surface (11, Fig. 2), the second surface (12, Fig. 2), or the third surface (14, Fig. 2) of the first freeform prism (10, Fig. 2) is a freeform surface (such as a freeform surface of 11, Fig. 2; col 18, lines 18-21); and
a second freeform prism (20, Fig. 2; col 31, line 27) that includes:
a first surface (21, Fig. 2; col 31, line 32), a second surface (combination of: 22 and 24, Fig. 2; col 31, lines 32-34), and a third surface (23, Fig. 2; col 31, lines 33-34), wherein the optical axis (optical axis along principal ray of a Z-axis, Fig. 2; col 16, lines 62-64) of the optical system traverses the first surface (21, Fig. 2), the second surface (combination of: 22 and 24, Fig. 2), and the third surface (23, Fig. 2),
wherein at least one of the first surface (21, Fig. 2), the second surface (combination of: 22 and 24, Fig. 2), or the third surface (23, Fig. 2) of the second freeform prism (20, Fig. 2) is another freeform surface (such as a freeform surface of 21, Fig. 2; col 18, lines 18-21);
wherein the first freeform prism (10, Fig. 2) is configured to fold the optical axis of the optical system twice (since light along the optical axis along principal ray of a Z-axis is reflected twice, Fig. 2).
Aoki discloses wherein an effective focal length f of the optical system is 5 mm (col 31, lines 23-24) but does not expressly disclose wherein an effective focal length f of the optical system (Fig. 2) is within a range of 9 to 31 millimeters. However, at the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to configure the focal length f of the optical system of Aoki to satisfy the following range of 9 to 31 mm through routine experimentation and optimization. Applicant has not disclosed that the focal length f of the optical system in the range of 9 to 31 mm is for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected/significant result, or are otherwise critical. Indeed, it has been held that mere range limitations are prima facie obvious absent a disclosure that the limitations are for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected result, or are otherwise critical. Furthermore, Jones discloses an optical system (Fig. 3; page 2, para [0018]) wherein an effective focal length f of the optical system can be configured to be 18 mm (page 7, para [0075]) in order to optimize the optical characteristics of the optical system (page 7, para [0075]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention to configure the focal length f (Fx or Fy; col 7, lines 46-50; col 17, line 61-66) of the optical system of Aoki to be in the range of 9 to 31 mm in order to obtain the benefits of optimizing the optical characteristics of the optical system since it has been held that where the general conditions of the claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering an optimum workable range involves only routine skill in the art (In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233).
Regarding claim 25, Aoki as modified by Jones discloses an optical system with all the limitations of claim 24 above and further discloses wherein, to fold the optical axis (Aoki: optical axis along principal ray of a Z-axis, Fig. 2; col 16, lines 62-64) of the optical system twice:
the first surface (Aoki: 11/13, Fig. 2) of the first freeform prism (Aoki: 10, Fig. 2) receives light from an object field on the object side (Aoki: side of 11, Fig. 2) of the optical system and transmits the light to the second surface (Aoki: 12, Fig. 2) of the first freeform prism (Aoki: 10, Fig. 2) on a first portion of the optical axis (Aoki: first portion of the optical axis from 11 to 12, Fig. 2);
the second surface (Aoki: 12, Fig. 2) of the first freeform prism (Aoki: 10, Fig. 2) reflects the light received on the first portion (Aoki: first portion of the optical axis from 11 to 12, Fig. 2) on to a second portion of the optical axis (Aoki: second portion of the optical axis from 12 to 11, Fig. 2); and
the first surface (Aoki: 11/13, Fig. 2) of the first freeform prism (Aoki: 10, Fig. 2) reflects the light received on the second portion of the optical axis (Aoki: second portion of the optical axis from 12 to 13, Fig. 2; col 31, line 30) via total internal reflection on to a third portion of the optical axis (Aoki: third portion of the optical axis from 13 to 14, Fig. 2);
wherein the third surface (Aoki: 14, Fig. 2) of the first freeform prism (Aoki: 10, Fig. 2) transmits the light on the third portion of the optical axis (Aoki: third portion of the optical axis from 13 to 14, Fig. 2; col 31, line 31) to the first surface (Aoki: 21, Fig. 2) of the second freeform prism (Aoki: 20, Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 26, Aoki as modified by Jones disclose an optical system with all the limitations of claim 25 above and further discloses wherein the second freeform prism (Aoki: 20, Fig. 2) is configured to fold the optical axis of the optical system twice (Aoki: optical axis along principal ray of a Z-axis is reflected twice in 20, Fig. 2; col 16, lines 62-64), wherein, to fold the optical axis of the optical system twice:
the first surface (Aoki: 21, Fig. 2) of the second freeform prism (Aoki: 20, Fig. 2) receives light on the third portion of the optical axis (Aoki: third portion of the optical axis from 13 to 14, Fig. 2) and transmits the light to the second surface (Aoki: combination of: 22 and 24, Fig. 2) of the second freeform prism (Aoki: 20, Fig. 2);
the second surface (Aoki: combination of: 22 and 24, Fig. 2) of the second freeform prism (Aoki: 20, Fig. 2) reflects the light received on the third portion of the optical axis via total internal reflection on to a fourth portion of the optical axis (Aoki: light is reflected onto a fourth portion of the optical axis from portion 22 to 23, Fig. 2; col 31, lines 37-39); and
the third surface (Aoki: 23, Fig. 2) of the second freeform prism (Aoki: 20, Fig. 2) reflects the light received on the fourth portion of the optical axis (Aoki: fourth portion of the optical axis from portion 22 to 23, Fig. 2) on to a fifth portion of the optical axis (fifth portion of the optical axis from 23 to 24, Fig. 2);
wherein the second surface (Aoki: combination of: 22 and 24, Fig. 2) of the second freeform prism (Aoki: 20, Fig. 2) transmits the light on the fifth portion of the optical axis (Aoki: fifth portion of the optical axis from 23 to 24 is transmitted by the portion 24 of the second surface 22/24, Fig. 2) to form an image at an image plane (Aoki: 3, Fig. 2; col 31, line 48) on the image side of the optical system (Aoki: side of 3, Fig. 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 27-33, 35-36, 38, and 43 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art as presently searched does not disclose the optical system of claim 27 (having all the combination of features including wherein the second freeform prism is configured to fold the optical axis of the optical system once, wherein, to fold the optical axis of the optical system once: the first surface of the second freeform prism receives light on the third portion of the optical axis and transmits the light to the second surface of the second freeform prism; the second surface of the second freeform prism reflects the light received on the third portion of the optical axis on to a fourth portion of the optical axis; and the third surface of the second freeform prism transmits the light on the fourth portion of the optical axis to form an image at an image plane on the image side of the optical system), does not disclose the optical system of claim 28 (having all the combination of features including an objective lens having positive refractive power and located on the object side of the first freeform prism, wherein light from an object field is refracted by the objective lens before entering the first surface of the first freeform prism), does not disclose the optical system of claim 35 (having all the combination of features including wherein the first freeform prism is composed of an optical plastic material with Abbe number Vd2 that satisfies a condition: Vd2 > 50; and wherein the second freeform prism is composed of an optical plastic material with Abbe number Vd3 that satisfies a condition: Vd3 < 25), does not disclose the optical system of claim 36 (having all the combination of features including wherein the optical system satisfies a condition:
0.05 <AD<0.3 where A is optical power of the optical system, and D is semi-diagonal image height), does not disclose the optical system of claim 38 (having all the combination of features including wherein semi-diagonal image height of the optical system is within a range of 2.5 to 2.9 millimeters), and does not disclose the device of claim 43 (having all the combination of features including wherein the first freeform prism is composed of an optical plastic material with Abbe number Vd2 that satisfies a condition: Vd2 > 50; and wherein the second freeform prism is composed of an optical plastic material with Abbe number Vd3 that satisfies a condition: Vd3 < 25). Claims 29-33 are objected to as being dependent on claim 28.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL CHANG LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7923. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am-6pm.
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, Michael H Caley can be reached at 571-272-2286. 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.
/PAUL C LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2871