, 0137DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed August 10, 2026 has been entered.
Claim 1, 5, and 8 are amended.
Claims 1-12 are pending this application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 4, 9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wanninger (Ion GNSS, 2004) in view of Paziewski et al (Earth, Planets, and Space, 2020).
Regarding Claim 1, Wanniger teaches a network Real-Time Kinematic (RTK) anti-ionospheric disturbance positioning method applicable to a terminal, the method comprising [page 2849, left column, last paragraph with page 2750 right column, first paragraph for removing ionospheric biases (anti-ionospheric disturbance)]:
receiving differential correction data and a quality indicator broadcast by a server [page 2849, right column, third paragraph and page 2853, right column, first paragraph for quality of ionospheric corrections],
wherein the differential correction data and the quality indicator are generated by the server according to observation data and position information of base stations and approximate position information uploaded by the terminal [page 2850, right column, first and second paragraphs for having ionospheric index while removing ionospheric biases and correcting residual errors by base station],
and the quality indicator is configured to characterize accuracy of an atmospheric error model used for generating the differential correction data [page 2850, left column, first paragraph for precise correction for atmospheric refraction for resolving ambiguity].
Wanniger fails to explicitly teach determining, according to the received quality indicator, an Real-Time Kinematic (RTK) filtering mode, wherein the RTK filtering mode comprises an ionosphere-free combined filtering mode or a non-combined filtering mode and performing filtering and calculation, using the determined RTK filtering mode, on observation data of the terminal and the differential correction data received by the terminal to obtain high-precision position information of the terminal.
Paziewski has multi-constellation relative positioning supported with network-derived ionospheric correction (abstract) and teaches determining, according to the received quality indicator, an RTK filtering mode, wherein the RTK filtering mode comprises an ionosphere-free combined filtering mode or a non-combined filtering mode and performing filtering and calculation [page 10, left column first two paragraphs for using IF and IW filters with double difference in ionospheric models],
using the determined RTK filtering mode, on observation data of the terminal and the differential correction data received by the terminal to obtain high-precision position information of the terminal [page 3, left column, second and third paragraphs for getting rover (terminal) position values using precise double difference ionospheric delay calculations].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the precise position techniques, as disclosed by Wanniger, further including the filtering calculations as taught by Paziewski for the purpose to reduce the impact of the ephemeris error (Paziewski, page 10, right column, first paragraph).
Regarding Claim 4, Wanniger teaches the quality indicator comprises ionospheric quality indicators corresponding to a plurality of satellites and tropospheric quality indicators corresponding to the plurality of satellites [page 2850, right column, first paragraph for having ionospheric index while removing ionospheric biases];
and the judging, according to the received quality indicator, whether the ionosphere at the current epoch is active comprises [page 2850, right column, first two paragraphs for margins for a predefined time]:
and judging whether an ionospheric quality indicator at a first quantile is greater than a tropospheric quality indicator at a second quantile [page 2851, left column, last paragraph to right column first paragraph for teaching comparison of index (quality) values],
and whether the ionospheric quality indicator at the first quantile is greater than a preset minimum activity threshold, wherein the first quantile is less than or equal to the second quantile; after the judging [page 2851, left column, last paragraph to right column first paragraph],
according to the received quality indicator, whether the ionosphere at the current epoch is active, the method further comprises [page 2851 right column, second paragraph for comparing index values hourly]:
determining, when the ionospheric quality indicator at the first quantile is greater than the tropospheric quality indicator at the second quantile, and the ionospheric quality indicator at the first quantile is greater than the preset minimum activity threshold, that the ionosphere at the current epoch is active [page 2851, and figure 3 for means for comparing values];
or sequencing the received ionospheric quality indicators of the plurality of satellites and the received tropospheric quality indicators of the plurality of satellites respectively from large to small [page 2851, left column second paragraph for using ionospheric correction models with coefficients].
Wanniger fails to explicitly teach sequencing the received ionospheric quality indicators of the plurality of satellites and the received tropospheric quality indicators of the plurality of satellites respectively from small to large; and judging whether an ionospheric quality indicator at a third quantile is greater than a tropospheric quality indicator at a fourth quantile, and whether the ionospheric quality indicator at the third quantile is greater than a preset minimum activity threshold, wherein the third quantile is greater than or equal to the fourth quantile; after the judging, according to the received quality indicator, whether the ionosphere at the current epoch is active, the method further comprises: determining, when the ionospheric quality indicator at the third quantile is greater than the tropospheric quality indicator at the fourth quantile, and the ionospheric quality indicator at the third quantile is greater than the preset minimum activity threshold, that the ionosphere at the current epoch is active.
Paziewski has multi-constellation relative positioning supported with network-derived ionospheric correction (abstract) and teaches sequencing the received ionospheric quality indicators of the plurality of satellites and the received tropospheric quality indicators of the plurality of satellites respectively from small to large [page 3, right column, last three paragraphs];
and judging whether an ionospheric quality indicator at a third quantile is greater than a tropospheric quality indicator at a fourth quantile, and whether the ionospheric quality indicator at the third quantile is greater than a preset minimum activity threshold, wherein the third quantile is greater than or equal to the fourth quantile [page 13, Table 3 for using low and high ionospheric activity for three different modes];
after the judging, according to the received quality indicator, whether the ionosphere at the current epoch is active, the method further comprises: determining, when the ionospheric quality indicator at the third quantile is greater than the tropospheric quality indicator at the fourth quantile [page 13, Table 3 for having multiple means and STD values for RTK solutions],
and the ionospheric quality indicator at the third quantile is greater than the preset minimum activity threshold, that the ionosphere at the current epoch is active [page 13, Table 3].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the precise position techniques, as disclosed by Wanniger, further including the filtering calculations as taught by Paziewski for the purpose to reduce the impact of the ephemeris error (Paziewski, page 10, right column, first paragraph).
Regarding Claim 9, Wanniger teaches a network RTK anti-ionospheric disturbance positioning device comprising: a processor and a memory storing computer program instructions [page 2853, left column, third paragraph with page 2853, right column, first two paragraphs];
wherein the processor, when executing the computer program instructions, implements the network RTK anti-ionospheric disturbance positioning method [page 2853, right column, first two paragraphs].
Regarding Claim 11, Wanniger teaches a non-transitory computer storage medium having computer program instructions stored thereon, wherein the computer program instructions, when executed by a processor, implement the network RTK anti-ionospheric disturbance positioning method [page 2853, left column, third paragraph with page 2853, right column, first two paragraphs].
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wanninger (Ion GNSS, 2004) in view of Paziewski et al (Earth, Planets, and Space, 2020) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of He (CN 112748455 A).
Regarding Claim 2, Wanniger fails to explicitly teach the determining, according to the received quality indicator, the RTK filtering mode comprises: judging, according to the received quality indicator, whether ionosphere at a current epoch is active; acquiring, when the ionosphere at the current epoch is active, a number of epochs at which the ionosphere is active in a first time period; and determining, when the number of epochs at which the ionosphere is active reaches a preset first epoch threshold, the ionosphere-free combined filtering mode as the RTK filtering mode.
He has a network RTK resolving method considering ionospheric activity (abstract) and teaches the determining, according to the received quality indicator, the RTK filtering mode comprises [0029-0030 for using RTK for ionospheric activity]:
judging, according to the received quality indicator, whether ionosphere at a current epoch is active [0032-0038 for first and second epoch];
acquiring, when the ionosphere at the current epoch is active, a number of epochs at which the ionosphere is active in a first time period [0039 for using a single epoch value and 0044];
and determining, when the number of epochs at which the ionosphere is active reaches a preset first epoch threshold, the ionosphere-free combined filtering mode as the RTK filtering mode [0051-0053].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the precise position techniques, as disclosed by Wanniger, further including the epoch calculations as taught by He for the purpose to calculate the single epoch value of the double-difference wide-lane ambiguity (He, 0038).
Regarding Claim 3, Wanniger fails to explicitly teach after the determining the ionosphere-free combined filtering mode as the RTK filtering mode, the method further comprises: acquiring, when the ionosphere at the current epoch is inactive, a number of epochs at which the ionosphere is inactive in a second time period; and switching, when the number of epochs at which the ionosphere is inactive reaches a preset second epoch threshold, the RTK filtering mode to the non-combined filtering mode.
He has a network RTK resolving method considering ionospheric activity (abstract) and teaches after the determining the ionosphere-free combined filtering mode as the RTK filtering mode, the method further comprises [0029-0032]:
acquiring, when the ionosphere at the current epoch is inactive, a number of epochs at which the ionosphere is inactive in a second time period [0042-0044 for using ambiguity by using phase calculations, with 0108 with having ionization is active and quiet];
and switching, when the number of epochs at which the ionosphere is inactive reaches a preset second epoch threshold, the RTK filtering mode to the non-combined filtering mode [0051-0053 0108 with having ionization is quiet (inactive)].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the precise position techniques, as disclosed by Wanniger, further including the epoch calculations as taught by He for the purpose to calculate the ambiguity integer solution and double-difference atmosphere delay of each satellite on each baseline (He, 0042).
Claims 5-8, 10, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paziewski et al (Earth, Planets, and Space, 2020) in view of Wanninger (Ion GNSS, 2004) and He (CN 112748455 A).
Regarding Claim 5, Paziewski teaches a network Real-Time Kinematic (RTK) anti-ionospheric disturbance positioning method applicable to a server, the method comprising [page 2, right column, frst and second paragraphs for ionospheric disturbance and using RTK]:
generating, according to observation data and position information of base stations in a base station network, ionospheric errors and tropospheric errors of a plurality of baselines, wherein the baseline is formed by connecting two of the base stations [page 3, left column, first two paragraphs and page 5, figure 1 for using permanent stations];
performing modeling based on the ionospheric errors and the tropospheric errors of the plurality of baselines and the position information of the base stations to obtain an atmospheric error model [page 3, right column, first paragraph and page 3, right column, second paragraph for modeling tropospheric delays];
calculating differential correction data for a plurality of grid point positions in the base station network and quality indicators for the plurality of grid point positions according to a model parameter of the atmospheric error model [page 3, left column, last paragraph for decomposing to undifferenced values, and page 4, right column, second paragraph for calculating residual ionospheric errors (quality)];
determining, according to approximate position information sent by a terminal, a target grid point closest to an approximate position of the terminal from the plurality of grid point positions [page 3, left column, last paragraph for using double difference observables for rover sites, with geometric distances].
Paziewski fails to explicitly teach broadcasting differential correction data and a quality indicator for the target grid point to the terminal, so that the terminal determines an RTK filtering mode according to the quality indicator for the target grid point, and performs, using the differential correction data.
Wanninger has index values providing statistical information on expected residual ionospheric biases (abstract) and teaches broadcasting differential correction data and a quality indicator for the target grid point to the terminal, so that the terminal determines an Real-Time Kinematic (RTK) filtering mode according to the quality indicator for the target grid point, and performs, using the differential correction data [page 2849, right column, third paragraph using base station for RTK network to users].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the RTK position techniques, as disclosed by Paziewski, further including the quality calculations as taught by Wanninger for the purpose to support baseline ambiguity resolution by providing statistical information (Wanninger, page 2849, right column, 2nd paragraph).
Paziewski fails to explicitly teach filtering and calculation according to the RTK filtering mode to obtain high-precision position information of the terminal, wherein the RTK filtering mode comprises an ionosphere-free combined filtering mode or a non-combined filtering mode.
He has a network RTK resolving method considering ionospheric activity (abstract) and teaches filtering and calculation according to the RTK filtering mode to obtain high-precision position information of the terminal [0029-0032], wherein the RTK filtering mode comprises an ionosphere-free combined filtering mode or a non-combined filtering mode [abstract for standard
deviation is less than the preset value use phase combined method].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the precise position techniques, as disclosed by Wanniger, further including the epoch calculations as taught by He for the purpose to calculate the ambiguity integer solution and double-difference atmosphere delay of each satellite on each baseline (He, Abstract).
Regarding Claim 6, Paziewski teaches the generating, according to the observation data and the position information of the base stations in the base station network, the ionospheric errors and the tropospheric errors of the plurality of baselines comprises [page 3 left column, first two paragraphs for using station coordinates]:
calculating, according to the observation data and position information of the base stations in the base station network, double difference ambiguities of the plurality of baselines [page 3 left column, first two paragraphs for calculating double different of baselines];
calculating, according to the double difference ambiguities of the plurality of base lines, values of the ionospheric errors and tropospheric errors of the plurality of baselines [page 3 left column, first two paragraphs for precise DD ionospheric delays are decomposed to undifferenced values and interpolate].
Regarding Claim 7, Paziewski teaches the calculating the differential correction data for the plurality of grid point positions in the base station network and the quality indicators for the plurality of grid point positions according to the model parameter of the atmospheric error model comprises [page 3, left column, first two paragraphs]:
calculating observation value residual errors of the baselines in the atmospheric error model according to the model parameter of the atmospheric error model, position information of base stations corresponding to the baselines and the values of the ionospheric errors and the tropospheric errors of the baselines [page 3, left column, last paragraph for decomposing to undifferenced values];
calculating an accuracy indicator matrix of the model parameter according to the observation value residual errors of the base lines [page 3, left column, last paragraph for using double difference observables for rover sites, with geometric distances].
Paziewski fails to explicitly teach and calculating, according to the accuracy indicator matrix and position information of the plurality of grid point positions in the base station network, the quality indicators of the grid point positions respectively.
Wanninger has index values providing statistical information on expected residual ionospheric biases (abstract) and teaches and calculating, according to the accuracy indicator matrix and position information of the plurality of grid point positions in the base station network, the quality indicators of the grid point positions respectively [page 2849, right column, third paragraph using base station for RTK network to users with base stations].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the RTK position techniques, as disclosed by Paziewski, further including the quality calculations as taught by Wanninger for the purpose to support baseline ambiguity resolution by providing statistical information (Wanninger, page 2849, right column, 2nd paragraph).
Regarding Claim 8, Paziewski teaches network Real-Time Kinematic (RTK) anti-ionospheric disturbance positioning system, comprising a server and a terminal, wherein [page 2, right column, second paragraph]:
the server generates, according to observation data and position information of base stations in a base station network, ionospheric errors and tropospheric errors of a plurality of baselines, wherein the baseline is formed by connecting two of the base stations [page 3, left column, first two paragraphs];
the server performs modeling based on the ionospheric errors and the tropospheric errors of the plurality of baselines and the position information of the base stations to obtain an atmospheric error model [page 3, left column, first two paragraphs];
the server calculates differential correction data for a plurality of grid point positions in the base station network and quality indicators for the plurality of grid point positions according to a model parameter of the atmospheric error model [page 3, left column, last paragraph for decomposing to undifferenced values, and page 4, right column, second paragraph for calculating residual ionospheric errors (quality)];
the server determines, according to approximate position information sent by a terminal, a target grid point closest to the approximate position of the terminal from the plurality of grid point positions [page 3, left column, last paragraph for using double difference observables for rover sites, with geometric distances];
[page 10, left column, first three paragraphs for broadcasting ephemeris data];
the terminal determines an Real-Time Kinematic (RTK) filtering mode according to the received quality indicator, wherein the RTK filtering mode comprises an ionosphere-free combined filtering mode or a non-combined filtering mode [page 10, right column, first paragraph];
and the terminal performs filtering and calculation, using the determined RTK filtering mode, on observation data of the terminal and the differential correction data received by the terminal to obtain high-precision position information of the terminal [page 8, right column second paragraph].
Paziewski fails to explicitly teach the server broadcasts differential correction data and a quality indicator for the target grid point to the terminal; the terminal receives differential correction data and a quality indicator broadcast by a server, wherein the differential correction data and the quality indicator are generated by the server according to observation data and position information of base stations and approximate position information uploaded by the terminal.
Wanninger has index values providing statistical information on expected residual ionospheric biases (abstract) and teaches the server broadcasts differential correction data and a quality indicator for the target grid point to the terminal [page 2849, left column, last paragraph];
the terminal receives differential correction data and a quality indicator broadcast by a server, wherein the differential correction data and the quality indicator are generated by the server according to observation data and position information of base stations and approximate position information uploaded by the terminal [page 2849, right column, third paragraph using base station for RTK network to users with base stations with page 2850, right column, first paragraph for having ionospheric index while removing ionospheric biases].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the RTK position techniques, as disclosed by Paziewski, further including the quality calculations as taught by Wanninger for the purpose to support baseline ambiguity resolution by providing statistical information (Wanninger, page 2849, right column, 2nd paragraph).
Paziewski fails to explicitly teach and the quality indicator is configured to characterize accuracy of an atmospheric error model used for generating the differential correction data.
He has a network RTK resolving method considering ionospheric activity (abstract) and teaches [0051-0053 0108 with having ionization is quiet (inactive)].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the applicant’s invention for modifying the precise position techniques, as disclosed by Wanniger, further including the epoch calculations as taught by He for the purpose to calculate the ambiguity integer solution and double-difference atmosphere delay of each satellite on each baseline (He, 0042).
Regarding Claim 10, Paziewski teaches a network RTK anti-ionospheric disturbance positioning device comprising [page 10, left column, second paragraph]:
a processor and a memory storing computer program instructions; wherein the processor, when executing the computer program instructions, implements the network RTK anti-ionospheric disturbance positioning method [page 10, left column, second paragraph].
Regarding Claim 12, Paziewski teaches a non-transitory computer storage medium having computer program instructions stored thereon, wherein the computer program instructions, when executed by a processor, implement the network RTK anti-ionospheric disturbance positioning method [page 10, left column, second paragraph].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a
general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references.
On page 9, third paragraph of the applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Wanninger does not teach differential correction data and quality indicator. The examiner respectfully disagrees: Wanninger teaches providing statistical information on expected
residual ionospheric biases are of great help to RTK users [page 2849, abstract] disclosing a network of GPS reference stations generating ionospheric correction coefficients using I9t (disturbance index).
On page 10, first paragraph of the applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Wanninger does not teach differential correction data and quality indicator for observation data. The examiner respectfully disagrees: Wanninger teaches differential biases are computed from the observations of the 3 surrounding reference stations [page 2853, right column, first paragraph] disclosing using position data for base station observation and position data.
On page 10, last paragraph of the applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Wanninger does not teach the quality indicator to characterize accuracy of the model. The examiner respectfully disagrees: Wanninger teaches amount of differential ionospheric biases such asvthey are experienced by users of differential GPS positioning [page 2850, right column, second paragraph] characterizing the accuracy of the ionospheric correction mode coefficients for the I95 index.
On page 12, first paragraph of the applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Paziewski fails to teach determining according to quality indicator an RTK filtering mode. The examiner respectfully disagrees: Paziewski teaches the IF and IW models to parametrize residual DD delays, and an enhanced RTC correction model based on assessed ionospheric activity level, [page 9, right column, last paragraph and page 10, Table 2] directly parallels a quality drive choice between an ionosphere eliminating combined/non-combined mode.
On page 12, third paragraph of the applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that Paziewski fails to teach performing filtering and calculations using RTK filtering mode. The examiner respectfully disagrees: Paziewski teaches correction of observables with interpolated network ionospheric corrections [page 3, left column, Rover Solution] reporting resulting positions STDs/residuals per model.
On page 13, second paragraph of the applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that there is no motivation to combine Wanninger and Paziewski. The examiner respectfully disagrees both references address the same problem of residual ionospheric error degrading RTK/network RTK ambiguity. Furthermore, Paziewski express cites Wanninger’s ionospheric disturbance index as the established means of supporting RTK users with indices for statistical information on ionospheric errors.
On page 14, first paragraph of the applicant’s arguments, the applicant states that the invention achieves unexpected synergistic results. The examiner respectfully disagrees: synergy is the predictable outcome each reference already teaches. Wanninger teaches an I95 index to inform about expected difficulties in RTK or Network RTK positioning [Wanninger, page 2849, Introduction] and Paziewski’s result confirms that switching the correction model based on ionospheric activity yields improved high precision positioning [Paziewski, page 1 Abstract].
The examiner acknowledges that this is a broader interpretation than Applicant’s.
However, examiners are not only allowed to apply broad interpretations, but are required to do so, as it reduces the possibility that the claims, once issued, will be interpreted more broadly than is justified. MPEP §2111. Patentability is determined by the “broadest reasonable interpretation
consistent with the specification” (MPEP §2111), not the narrowest reasonable interpretation. And Applicant does not have an explicit lexicographical statement in line with MPEP §2111.01
subsection IV requiring a specific interpretation of the relevant phrases which forces the examiner to interpret them only one way.
The express, implicit, and inherent disclosures of a prior art reference may be relied upon in the rejection of claims under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103. "The inherent teaching of a prior art reference, a question of fact, arises both in the context of anticipation and obviousness." In re Napier, 55 F.3d 610, 613, 34 USPQ2d 1782, 1784 (Fed. Cir. 1995).
For applicant’s benefit, portions of the cited reference(s) have been cited to aid in the review of the rejection(s). While every attempt has been made to be thorough and consistent within the rejection it is noted that the PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, including disclosures that teach away from the claims. See MPEP 2141.02 VI.
“The use of patents as references is not limited to what the patentees describe as their own inventions or to the problems with which they are concerned. They are part of the literature of the art, relevant for all they contain.” In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33, 216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). A reference may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art, including non-preferred embodiments. Merck & Co. v.Biocraft Laboratories, 874 F.2d 804, 10 USPQ2d 1843 (Fed. Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 975 (1989). See also Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQ2d 1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005) See MPEP 2123.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMARINA MAKHDOOM whose telephone number is (703)756-1044. The examiner can normally be reached Monday – Thursdays from 8:30 to 5:30 pm eastern time.
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, Resha Desai can be reached on 571-270-7792 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.
/SAMARINA MAKHDOOM/
Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights