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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 02/07/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the claims of group I are to protect a catadioptric optical membrane, and Claim group II is claimed to protect an imaging optical lens assembly including a catadioptric optical membrane, wherein the catadioptric optical membrane of Claim group I is the same as the catadioptric optical membrane of the imaging optical lens assembly of Claim group II. Further, the catadioptric optical membrane of Claim group I is disposed on a surface of a substrate, and the catadioptric optical membrane of Claim group II is disposed on a surface of a lens element of the catadioptric lens assembly, wherein the lens element is a specific type of the substrate. This is not found persuasive because the claims of Group II do require search in a different field of classes/subclasses and different search queries to find details pertaining to a telephoto lens assembly, and individual lenses therein, which do not appear in Group I. Further, the groups have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classifications.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 reflection metal membrane, reflection oxidation membrane comprising a first reflection oxidation membrane and a second reflection oxidation membrane, deep-color membrane, deep-color metal membrane, deep-color oxidation membrane, first anti-reflection membrane, second anti-reflection membrane, and gradient refraction membrane comprising a plurality of pores 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.
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 1-5, 10-14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US20180024336A1) in view of Iketani (JP2000241612A) further in view of Ehmke (US 20210255372 A1).
With respect to Claim 1, Choi discloses a catadioptric optical membrane, which is disposed on a surface of a substrate (Fig. 2 and [0054]: transparent material), comprising:
a reflection membrane (Fig. 2-- element 130, reflective surfaces; [0044]) disposed on an effective optical path area (Fig. 2—light i4 reflects off element 130) of the substrate (Fig. 2 and [0054]: transparent material) and comprising:
a reflection metal membrane ([0044]: element 130 may be coated with a reflective metal material), wherein a main material of the reflection metal membrane ([0044]: element 130 may be coated with a reflective metal material) is aluminum ([0044]: element 130 may be coated with aluminum); and
a matting membrane (Fig. 2—element 140, connection surface may be coated with a black material for absorbing reflected light; [0062]) disposed on a non-effective optical path area (Fig. 2—element 140 is not within the direct beam path of i4) of the substrate (Fig. 2 and [0054]: transparent material).
However, Choi does not disclose a reflection oxidation membrane comprising a first reflection oxidation membrane and a second reflection oxidation membrane, wherein the first reflection oxidation membrane comprises at least two membrane layers, a main material of each of the membrane layers is an oxide, the reflection metal membrane is farther away from the substrate than the first reflection oxidation membrane, and the second reflection oxidation membrane is farther away from the substrate than the reflection metal membrane; and
wherein the matting membrane comprises a deep-color membrane and a first anti-reflection membrane, the deep-color membrane comprises a deep-color metal membrane and a deep-color oxidation membrane, a main material of the deep-color metal membrane is metal chrome, a main material of the deep-color oxidation membrane is chromium oxide, and the deep-color membrane is farther away from the substrate than the first anti-reflection membrane.
Choi and Iketani are related as both pertaining to the field of reflective films. Iketani does disclose reflection membrane (Fig. 1—reflective film; [0001]) comprising: a reflection metal (Fig. 1—element 5, aluminum oxide film; [0011]); and a reflection oxidation membrane (Fig. 1—elements 2 and 7; [0011] comprising a first reflection oxidation membrane (Fig. 1—element 2, silicon oxide film; [0011]) and a second reflection oxidation membrane (Fig. 1—element 7, silicon dioxide film; [0011]), the reflection metal membrane (Fig. 1—element 5, aluminum oxide film; [0011]) is farther away from the substrate (Fig. 1—element 1, plastic substrate; [0011]) than the first reflection oxidation membrane (Fig. 1—element 2, silicon oxide film; [0011]), and the second reflection oxidation membrane (Fig. 1—element 7, silicon dioxide film; [0011]) is farther away from the substrate (Fig. 1—element 1, plastic substrate; [0011]) than the reflection metal membrane (Fig. 1—element 5, aluminum oxide film; [0011]) (Fig. 1—elements are stacked such that element 2 is closest to the substrate, element 7 is the farthest, and element 5 is between elements 2 and 7).
However, Iketani does not disclose wherein the first reflection oxidation membrane comprises at least two membrane layers, a main material of each of the membrane layers is an oxide. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to duplicate the silicon oxide film of Iketani, since it has been held that a mere duplication of working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Harza 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the catadioptric optical membrane of Choi with the reflector stack of Iketani in order to create a reflective device which has excellent moisture resistance and good durability (Iketani, [0005]).
Choi and Ehmke are related as both pertaining to the field of optical films. Ehmke does disclose a matting membrane (Fig. 2—element 110, window aperture; [0019]), wherein the matting membrane (Fig. 2—element 110, window aperture; [0019]) comprises a deep-color membrane (Fig. 2—elements 202 and 206; [0014]) and a first anti-reflection membrane (Fig. 2—element 208, dielectric layer; [0016]), the deep-color membrane (Fig. 2—elements 202 and 206; [0014]) comprises a deep-color metal membrane (Fig. 2— element 206, chrome metal layer; [0021]) and a deep-color oxidation membrane (Fig. 2— element 202, chromium oxide layer; [0023]), a main material of the deep-color metal membrane (Fig. 2— element 206, chrome metal layer; [0021]) is metal chrome, a main material of the deep-color oxidation membrane (Fig. 2— element 202, chromium oxide layer; [0023]) is chromium oxide, and the deep-color membrane (Fig. 2—elements 202 and 206; [0014]) is farther away (Fig. 2—elements 202 and 206 are further away from element 108 than element 208) from the substrate (Fig. 2—element 108, window; [0020]) than the first anti-reflection membrane (Fig. 2—element 208, dielectric layer; [0016]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the catadioptric optical membrane of Choi with the dark mirror film of Ehmke in order to create a device which is capable of preventing reflected light from being picked up by an imaging device and causing unwanted optical artifacts (Ehmke, [0013]).
With respect to Claim 2, Choi, Iketani, and Ehmke disclose the catadioptric optical membrane of claim 1, Choi does not further disclose wherein a total membrane thickness of the first reflection oxidation membrane is Tro-s, a total membrane thickness of the second reflection oxidation membrane is Tro-a, and the following condition is satisfied:
0.88 ≤Tro-s/Tro-a ≤ 1.50.
Choi and Iketani are related as both pertaining to the field of reflective films. Iketani does disclose wherein a total membrane thickness of the first reflection oxidation membrane is Tro-s ([0008]: the film thickness of the silicon oxide underlayer is 20 angstroms or more and 100 angstroms or less), a total membrane thickness of the second reflection oxidation membrane is Tro-a ([0009]: silicon dioxide film has a thickness of 50 angstroms or more), and the following condition is satisfied:
0.88 ≤Tro-s/Tro-a ≤ 1.50 (The ranges that are disclosed by Iketani may satisfy this condition in multiple ways, for example: 75/50=1.5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the catadioptric optical membrane of Choi with the reflector stack of Iketani in order to create a reflective device which has excellent moisture resistance and good durability (Iketani, [0005]).
With respect to Claim 3, Choi, Iketani, and Ehmke disclose the catadioptric optical membrane of claim 1, Choi further discloses wherein the substrate (Fig. 2 and [0054]: transparent material) is made of a plastic material ([0054]: the transparent material may be plastic), and the surface comprising the catadioptric optical membrane of the substrate (Fig. 2 and [0054]: transparent material) is a curved surface (Fig. 2— at least element 130-4 and 130-5 are curved).
With respect to Claim 4, Choi, Iketani, and Ehmke disclose the catadioptric optical membrane of claim 3, Choi further discloses the reflection metal membrane ([0044]: element 130 may be coated with a reflective metal material). However, Choi does not disclose wherein a total membrane thickness of the reflection metal membrane is Trm, a total membrane thickness of the first reflection oxidation membrane is Tro-s, and the following condition is satisfied:
1.05 ≤Trm/Tro-s ≤4.90.
Choi and Iketani are related as both pertaining to the field of reflective films. Iketani does disclose wherein a total membrane thickness of the reflection metal membrane is Trm ([0009]: the thickness of the aluminum oxide of the first protective layer is 20 angstroms or more), a total membrane thickness of the first reflection oxidation membrane is Tro-s ([0008]: the film thickness of the silicon oxide underlayer is 20 angstroms or more and 100 angstroms or less), and the following condition is satisfied:
1.05 ≤Trm/Tro-s ≤4.90 (The ranges that are disclosed by Iketani may satisfy this condition in multiple ways, for example: 50/20= 2.5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the catadioptric optical membrane of Choi with the reflector stack of Iketani in order to create a reflective device which has excellent moisture resistance and good durability (Iketani, [0005]).
With respect to Claim 5, Choi, Iketani, and Ehmke disclose the catadioptric optical membrane of claim 3, Choi further discloses the reflection metal membrane ([0044]: element 130 may be coated with a reflective metal material). However, Choi does not disclose wherein a total membrane thickness of the reflection metal membrane is Trm, a total membrane thickness of the second reflection oxidation membrane is Tro-a, and the following condition is satisfied: 0.88 ≤Trm/Tro-a ≤ 10.00.
Choi and Iketani are related as both pertaining to the field of reflective films. Iketani does disclose wherein a total membrane thickness of the reflection metal membrane is Trm ([0009]: the thickness of the aluminum oxide of the first protective layer is 20 angstroms or more), a total membrane thickness of the second reflection oxidation membrane is Tro-a ([0009]: silicon dioxide film has a thickness of 50 angstroms or more), and the following condition is satisfied:
0.88 ≤Trm/Tro-a ≤ 10.00 (The ranges that are disclosed by Iketani may satisfy this condition in multiple ways, for example: 50/57= 0.88).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the catadioptric optical membrane of Choi with the reflector stack of Iketani in order to create a reflective device which has excellent moisture resistance and good durability (Iketani, [0005]).
With respect to Claim 10, Choi, Iketani, and Ehmke disclose the catadioptric optical membrane of claim 1, and Choi further discloses the reflection membrane (Fig. 2-- element 130, reflective surfaces; [0044]). However, Choi does not further disclose wherein an average reflectance in a wavelength range of 400 nm - 700 nm of the reflection membrane is R4070-r, and the following condition is satisfied:
90.0% ≤ R4070-r.
Choi and Iketani are related as both pertaining to the field of reflective films. Iketani does disclose wherein an average reflectance in a wavelength range of 400 nm - 700 nm of the reflection membrane (Fig. 1—reflective film; [0001]) is R4070-r ([0002] and [0015]: the reflectance of the film is above 98% at all wavelengths), and the following condition is satisfied:
90.0% ≤ R4070-r ([0002] and [0015]: the reflectance of the film is above 98% at all wavelengths).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the catadioptric optical membrane of Choi with the reflector stack of Iketani in order to create a reflective device which has excellent moisture resistance and good durability (Iketani, [0005] and has a high reflectance evenly at all wavelengths [0002]).
With respect to Claim 11, Choi, Iketani, and Ehmke disclose the catadioptric optical membrane of claim 1, and Choi further discloses a matting membrane (Fig. 2—element 140, connection surface may be coated with a black material for absorbing reflected light; [0062]). However, Choi does not disclose wherein a total membrane thickness of the matting membrane is tTKe, and the following condition is satisfied:
200 nm ≤ tTKe ≤2000 nm.
Choi and Ehmke are related as both pertaining to the field of optical films. Ehmke does disclose wherein a total membrane thickness of the matting membrane a matting membrane (Fig. 2—element 110, window aperture; [0019]) is tTKe (Calculated using values in [0023]-[0028]: tTKe= 217.48), and the following condition is satisfied:
200 nm ≤ tTKe ≤2000 nm (tTKe= 217.48).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the catadioptric optical membrane of Choi with the dark mirror film of Ehmke in order to create a device which is capable of preventing reflected light from being picked up by an imaging device and causing unwanted optical artifacts (Ehmke, [0013]).
With respect to Claim 12, Choi, Iketani, and Ehmke disclose the catadioptric optical membrane of claim 1, and Choi further discloses a matting membrane (Fig. 2—element 140, connection surface may be coated with a black material for absorbing reflected light; [0062]). However, Choi does not disclose wherein a total membrane thickness of the matting membrane is tTKe, a total membrane thickness of the deep-color membrane is Ted, and the following condition is satisfied:
0.10 ≤Ted/tTKe ≤ 0.95.
Choi and Ehmke are related as both pertaining to the field of optical films. Ehmke does disclose wherein a total membrane thickness of the matting membrane (Fig. 2—element 110, window aperture; [0019]) is tTKe (Calculated using values in [0023]-[0028]: tTKe= 217.48), a total membrane thickness of the deep-color membrane (Fig. 2—elements 202 and 206; [0014]) is Ted (Calculated using values in [0023]-[0028]: Ted= 55.48), and the following condition is satisfied:
0.10 ≤Ted/tTKe ≤ 0.95 (55.48/217.48= 0.25).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the catadioptric optical membrane of Choi with the dark mirror film of Ehmke in order to create a device which is capable of preventing reflected light from being picked up by an imaging device and causing unwanted optical artifacts (Ehmke, [0013]).
With respect to Claim 13, Choi, Iketani, and Ehmke disclose the catadioptric optical membrane of claim 1. However, Choi does not disclose wherein a total membrane thickness of the first anti-reflection membrane is Tea-s, and the following condition is satisfied:
50nm ≤Tea-s ≤ 1000 nm.
Choi and Ehmke are related as both pertaining to the field of optical films. Ehmke does disclose wherein a total membrane thickness of the first anti-reflection membrane (Fig. 2—element 208, dielectric layer; [0016]) is Tea-s ([0026]: Tea-s= 52 nm), and the following condition is satisfied:
50nm ≤Tea-s ≤ 1000 nm (Tea-s= 52 nm).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the catadioptric optical membrane of Choi with the dark mirror film of Ehmke in order to create a device which is capable of preventing reflected light from being picked up by an imaging device and causing unwanted optical artifacts (Ehmke, [0013]).
With respect to Claim 14, Choi, Iketani, and Ehmke disclose the catadioptric optical membrane of claim 1. However, Choi does not disclose wherein a total membrane thickness of the deep-color membrane is Ted, a total membrane thickness of the deep-color metal membrane is Ted-cr, and the following condition is satisfied:
0.05 ≤Ted-cr/Ted ≤0.85.
Choi and Ehmke are related as both pertaining to the field of optical films. Ehmke does disclose wherein a total membrane thickness of the deep-color membrane (Fig. 2—elements 202 and 206; [0014]) is Ted (Calculated using values in [0023]-[0028]: Ted= 55.48), a total membrane thickness of the deep-color metal membrane (Fig. 2— element 206, chrome metal layer; [0021]) is Ted-cr ([0025]: Ted-cr= 3.48), and the following condition is satisfied:
0.05 ≤Ted-cr/Ted ≤0.85 (3.48/55.48= 0.6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the catadioptric optical membrane of Choi with the dark mirror film of Ehmke in order to create a device which is capable of preventing reflected light from being picked up by an imaging device and causing unwanted optical artifacts (Ehmke, [0013]).
With respect to Claim 16, Choi, Iketani, and Ehmke disclose the catadioptric optical membrane of claim 1, and Choi further discloses a matting membrane (Fig. 2—element 140, connection surface may be coated with a black material for absorbing reflected light; [0062]). However, Choi does not disclose wherein the matting membrane further comprises: a second anti-reflection membrane, wherein the second anti-reflection membrane is farther away from the substrate than the deep-color membrane.
Choi and Ehmke are related as both pertaining to the field of optical films. Ehmke does disclose wherein the matting membrane (Fig. 2—element 110, window aperture; [0019]) further comprises: a second anti-reflection membrane (Fig. 2—element 204, dielectric layer; [0016]), wherein the second anti-reflection membrane (Fig. 2—element 204, dielectric layer; [0016]) is farther away (Fig. 2—element 204 is farther from element 108 than element 202) from the substrate (Fig. 2—element 108, window; [0020]) than the deep-color membrane (Fig. 2—elements 202 and 206; [0014]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the catadioptric optical membrane of Choi with the dark mirror film of Ehmke in order to create a device which is capable of preventing reflected light from being picked up by an imaging device and causing unwanted optical artifacts (Ehmke, [0013]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-9, 15 and 17 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.
With respect to Claim 6, Choi, Iketani, and Ehmke disclose the catadioptric optical membrane of claim 1, however, Choi does not disclose wherein the first reflection oxidation membrane comprises a substrate high-refractive-index oxidation membrane and a substrate low-refractive-index oxidation membrane, the substrate low-refractive-index oxidation membrane is farther away from the substrate than the substrate high-refractive-index oxidation membrane, a refractive index of the substrate high-refractive-index oxidation membrane is Nro-sl, a refractive index of the substrate low-refractive-index oxidation membrane is Nro-s2, and the following condition is satisfied:
Nro-sl > Nro-s2.
Choi and Iketani are related as both pertaining to the field of reflective films. Iketani does disclose a first reflection oxidation membrane (Fig. 1—element 2, silicon oxide film; [0011]). However, neither Choi, Iketani, or any other combination of the prior art discloses wherein the first reflection oxidation membrane comprises a substrate high-refractive-index oxidation membrane and a substrate low-refractive-index oxidation membrane, the substrate low-refractive-index oxidation membrane is farther away from the substrate than the substrate high-refractive-index oxidation membrane, a refractive index of the substrate high-refractive-index oxidation membrane is Nro-sl, a refractive index of the substrate low-refractive-index oxidation membrane is Nro-s2, and the following condition is satisfied:
Nro-sl > Nro-s2
in combination with all other limitations of claim 1.
With respect to Claim 7, this claim is dependent on Claim 6 and is allowable at least for the reasons stated supra.
With respect to Claim 8, Choi, Iketani, and Ehmke disclose the catadioptric optical membrane of claim 1. However, neither Choi, Iketani, or any other combination of the prior art discloses wherein the second reflection oxidation membrane comprises an air high-refractive-index oxidation membrane and an air low-refractive-index oxidation membrane, the air high-refractive-index oxidation membrane is farther away from the substrate than the air low-refractive-index oxidation membrane, a refractive index of the air high-refractive-index oxidation membrane is Nro-al, a refractive index of the air low-refractive-index oxidation membrane is Nro-a2, and the following condition is satisfied:
Nro-a1 > Nro-a2
in combination with all other limitations of claim 1.
With respect to Claim 9, this claim is dependent on Claim 8 and is allowable at least for the reasons stated supra.
With respect to Claim 8, Choi, Iketani, and Ehmke disclose the catadioptric optical membrane of claim 1, and Choi further discloses a matting membrane (Fig. 2—element 140, connection surface may be coated with a black material for absorbing reflected light; [0062]). Choi does not disclose wherein an average reflectance in a wavelength range of 400 nm - 700 nm of the matting membrane is R4070-e, an average transmittance in the wavelength range of 400 nm - 700 nm of the matting membrane is T4070-e, and the following conditions are satisfied:
0% < R4070-e ≤ 1.00%; and
0% < 100 x T4070-e ≤ 5.00%.
Choi and Ehmke are related as both pertaining to the field of optical films. Ehmke does disclose wherein an average reflectance in a wavelength range of 400 nm - 700 nm of the matting membrane (Fig. 2—element 110, window aperture; [0019]) is R4070-e ([0033]: the reflectance of the six-layer stack is below 0.25%), and the following condition is satisfied:
0% < R4070-e ≤ 1.00% ([0033]: the reflectance of the six-layer stack is below 0.25%).
However, neither Choi, Ehmke, or any combination of the prior art discloses an average transmittance in the wavelength range of 400 nm - 700 nm of the matting membrane is T4070-e, and the following condition is satisfied:
0% < 100 x T4070-e ≤ 5.00%
in combination with all other limitations of claim 1.
With respect to Claim 17, Choi, Iketani, and Ehmke disclose the catadioptric optical membrane of claim 1, and Choi further discloses a matting membrane (Fig. 2—element 140, connection surface may be coated with a black material for absorbing reflected light; [0062]). However, neither Choi nor any combination of the prior art discloses wherein the matting membrane further comprises:
a gradient refraction membrane, wherein the gradient refraction membrane comprises a plurality of pores, the pores away from the substrate are relatively larger than the pores close to the substrate, and the gradient refraction membrane is farther away from the substrate than the deep-color membrane in combination with all other limitations of claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sinclair (US 20200004006 A1) discloses aspects of the instant invention, see Fig. 2A and [0054]-[0056].
Forcht (US 20190369374 A1) discloses aspects of the instant invention, see Fig. 1 and [0064]-[0077].
Cheah (US 20190242004 A1) discloses aspects of the instant invention, see [0166].
Stachowiak (US 20050083576 A1) discloses aspects of the instant invention, see Fig. 2 and [0018]-[0029].
Cameron (CA 2177424 C) discloses aspects of the instant invention, see Fig. 4 and [0005].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MACKENZI BOURQUINE whose telephone number is (571)272-5956. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 - 4:30 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Pinping Sun can be reached at (571) 270-1284. 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.
/MACKENZI BOURQUINE/ Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/WILLIAM R ALEXANDER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872