DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 28 August 2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim 9 is 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. The claim recites determining position based on “adjusting the position.” The specification does not make clear how a camera adjusts a position of a positioning tag. The specification does not make clear how adjusting a position leads to determining said position.
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.
Claim(s) 1-10, 12-15, 17-18, 20, 24-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCoy (US 2015/0116501) in view of Shin (NPL “Camera focus adjustment using depth estimated via ultra-wideband handshake,” Technical Disclosure commons, 2022) and Kuehner (US PG Publication 2023/0339431).
Regarding Claim 1, McCoy (US 2015/0116501) discloses a method for operating at least one camera (controlling device 108 may comprise suitable logic, circuitry, interfaces, and/or code that may be operable to control the cameras 104 [0027]; dynamically control one or more parameters of the selected first camera 104a based on one or more signals received from the selected first sensor 106a [0058]) based at least in part on a position of a tracked subject (location of the objects 102 relative to the cameras 104 [0026]) in a camera view of the at least one camera (cameras 104 are able to automatically capture images of the tracked object 102 [0020]), the method comprising:
receiving, from positioning tags (object has an RFID tag [0052], or cell phone [0052], or Bluetooth transmitter [0055]) corresponding to one or more candidate subjects (one or more objects 102 [0015], sensor coupled to shirts worn [0088]; Bluetooth sensor embedded inside [0089]), including the tracked subject (first object 102a being tracked [0066]), responses (signals received from the sensor 106 [0058]) … corresponding to the one or more candidate subjects (the processor receives metadata identifying objects to be tracked [0047]; the metadata includes a unique identifier associated with a object to be tracked [0048]);
determining [] positions of the one or more candidate subjects (the current location of the object to be tracked is determined based on the signals received from the sensors 106 [0051]) over time (“track” whole document—tracking connotes “over time”) in the camera view of the at least one camera (the object 102 lies in the field of view of the camera [0056]) based on repeatedly computing the [] positions (location of object to be tracked is determined from the sensors 106 [0051]) over time (“track” whole document—tracking connotes “over time”) from the responses (sensors 106 detecting objects within a predetermined distance, e.g., Bluetooth, GPS, cell phone network-based sensor [0054]), each positioning tag (object has an RFID tag [0052], or cell phone [0052], or Bluetooth transmitter [0055] embedded inside [0089]) …;
identifying a match between a particular subject identifier of the received subject identifiers (based on the metadata identifying the object to be tracked [0047]; based on the metadata associated with the first object 102a and one or more signals received from the selected first sensor 106a [0060]) received from a particular positioning tag (object has an RFID tag [0052], or cell phone [0052], or Bluetooth transmitter [0055] embedded inside [0089]; sensor 106 [0060]-[0066]) and a tracked subject identifier (unique identifier associated with [0048]) of the tracked subject (an object to be tracked [0048]) …;
and adjusting a camera operation of the at least one camera (dynamically control pan, tilt, zoom of camera [0058], [0064]) to track the tracked subject (such that the object remains in the field of view [0058]), wherein adjusting the camera operation to track the tracked subject is contingent upon determining the [] position of the particular positioning tag (based on signals from sensor 106a [0058]; current location of the first object 102a to be tracked may be determined based on the one or more signals received from the sensors 106 [0051]) and identifying the match (based on the metadata identifying the object to be tracked [0047]; based on the metadata associated with the first object 102a and one or more signals received from the selected first sensor 106a [0060]).
McCoy does not disclose, but Shin (NPL “Camera focus adjustment using depth estimated via ultra-wideband handshake,” Technical Disclosure commons, 2022) teaches determining distinct positions (grounds in Claims 3 and 5, UWB chip, sensing angle and distance to, round trip time, Fig. 2 p. 5-6).
McCoy connotes but does not expressly disclose, and Kuehner (US PG Publication 2023/0339431) teaches
receiving, from positioning tags … responses including subject identifiers (UWB device 224 receives the identification data from UWB device 230 [0039]);
each positioning tag (UWB device 230 [0039]) storing a subject identifier (identification data distinctively corresponds to the device, personal identification number, unique identifier [0039]) of a candidate subject (authorized user [0039]) of the one or more candidate subjects (all persons having UWB) and transmitting a response of the responses (transmit [0039]) including the subject identifier of the candidate subject (transmit identification data [0039]);
identifying a match (determining whether a pin matches [0039]) between a particular subject identifier of the received subject identifiers received from a particular positioning tag (PIN received [0039]) and a tracked subject identifier of the tracked subject (authorized user PIN, defined PIN for an authorized user [0039]) stored in a database (stored [0040]) by comparing the tracked subject identifier to the received subject identifiers (determining whether a PIN matches is a comparison by definition).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to replace the positioning tags of McCoy with the UWB positioning tags of Shin because Shin teaches that UWB is a low-cost, non-bulky method of distinguishing subjects from backgrounds (Background, p. 2-3), enabling more accurate focusing onto subjects of interest during video capture.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to implement the subject tracking of McCoy “based on the metadata identifying the object to be tracked” by matching a received PIN to a stored PIN, as in Kuehner, because it is a straightforward, known method of identifying which of the received metadata from the nearby objects is the object selected by the user and yields predictable results.
Regarding Claim 2, McCoy (US 2015/0116501) discloses the method of claim 1, wherein determining the distinct positions of the one or more candidate subjects comprises determining the distinct positions (current location of the first object 102a to be tracked may be determined based on the one or more signals received from the sensors 106 [0051]; sensors 106 include Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) sensors, Bluetooth sensors, Global Positioning System (GPS) sensors, sensors operable to detect cellular Network [0023]) based at least in part on a response received from the positioning tags associated with the one or more candidate subjects (object has an RFID tag [0052], or cell phone [0052], or Bluetooth transmitter [0055] embedded inside [0089]).
Regarding Claim 3, McCoy (US 2015/0116501) discloses the method of claim 2, including the subject identifier (metadata identifying objects to be tracked [0047]; the metadata includes a unique identifier associated with a object to be tracked [0048]).
McCoy does not disclose, but Shin (NPL “Camera focus adjustment using depth estimated via ultra-wideband handshake,” Technical Disclosure commons, 2022) teaches wherein determining the distinct positions comprises:
determining, for each positioning tag, an angle of arrival of the response (round trip time, Fig. 2, p. 5-6) … transmitted by the positioning tag (UWB chip 2, Fig. 2);
and determining, for each positioning tag (user 1, user 2, Fig. 4), the distinct position based at least in part on the angle of arrival (estimate angle based on phase, p. 6).
McCoy implies, but Kuehner (US PG Publication 2023/0339431) teaches response including the subject identifier (UWB device 230 configured to transmit identification data that distinctively corresponds to the device (and associated with the user 240 that possess the device 230) such as a personal identification number (PIN) or unique user identifier, to the UWB device 224 of the user ID device 22 [0039]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to replace the positioning tags of McCoy with the UWB positioning tags of Shin because Shin teaches that UWB is a low-cost, non-bulky method of distinguishing subjects from backgrounds (Background, p. 2-3), enabling more accurate focusing onto subjects of interest during video capture.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to implement the subject tracking of McCoy “based on the metadata identifying the object to be tracked” by matching a received PIN to a stored PIN, as in Kuehner, because it is a straightforward, known method of identifying which of the received metadata from the nearby objects is the object selected by the user and yields predictable results.
Regarding Claim 4, McCoy (US 2015/0116501) discloses the method of claim 3.
McCoy does not disclose, but Shin (NPL “Camera focus adjustment using depth estimated via ultra-wideband handshake,” Technical Disclosure commons, 2022) teaches wherein the response is received via an antenna array (multiple antennas, p. 6) and wherein determining the angle of arrival (angle between camera device receiving the reply, p. 6) comprises measuring a phase difference across antennas of the antenna array (phases of the signal received at each antenna, p. 6) of the received response and calculating the angle of arrival from the measured phase difference (estimate the angle between devices based on the phase deviations, p. 6).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to replace the positioning tags of McCoy with the UWB positioning tags of Shin because Shin teaches that UWB is a low-cost, non-bulky method of distinguishing subjects from backgrounds (Background, p. 2-3), enabling more accurate focusing onto subjects of interest during video capture.
Regarding Claim 5, McCoy (US 2015/0116501) discloses the method of claim 2.
McCoy does not disclose, but Shin (NPL “Camera focus adjustment using depth estimated via ultra-wideband handshake,” Technical Disclosure commons, 2022) teaches wherein determining the distinct positions comprises:
broadcasting requests (impulse signal 206, Fig. 2) to the one or more candidate subjects (each discovered candidate device, p. 6) at respective first times (t0, Fig. 2), wherein the responses (return signal 208, Fig. 2) are received at respective second times (t3, Fig. 2) and the responses are received responsive to broadcasting the requests (“handshake protocol,” Fig. 2);
determining, for each positioning tag (each discovered candidate device, p. 6), a time of flight between the respective first time corresponding to the respective request and the respective second time corresponding to the respective response (round trip time, Fig. 2);
calculating, for each positioning tag, a distance based at least in part on the time of flight (distance = half * (speed of light times (round trip time – reply time)), p. 6);
and determining, for each positioning tag, the distinct position based at least in part on the distance (position is based on distance and angle therefore position is based on distance, p. 5-6).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to replace the positioning tags of McCoy with the UWB positioning tags of Shin because Shin teaches that UWB is a low-cost, non-bulky method of distinguishing subjects from backgrounds (Background, p. 2-3), enabling more accurate focusing onto subjects of interest during video capture.
Regarding Claim 6, McCoy (US 2015/0116501) discloses the method of claim 5.
McCoy does not disclose, but Shin (NPL “Camera focus adjustment using depth estimated via ultra-wideband handshake,” Technical Disclosure commons, 2022) teaches wherein broadcasting the respective request includes broadcasting the respective request via ultra-wideband communication channels and wherein receiving the subject identifiers includes receiving … via the UWB communication channels (UWB handshake protocol, Fig. 2).
McCoy does not disclose, but Kuehner (US PG Publication 2023/0339431) teaches receiving the subject identifiers via the UWB communication channels (UWB device 230 configured to transmit identification data that distinctively corresponds to the device (and associated with the user 240 that possess the device 230) such as a personal identification number (PIN) or unique user identifier, to the UWB device 224 of the user ID device 22 [0039]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to replace the positioning tags of McCoy with the UWB positioning tags of Shin because Shin teaches that UWB is a low-cost, non-bulky method of distinguishing subjects from backgrounds (Background, p. 2-3), enabling more accurate focusing onto subjects of interest during video capture.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to implement the subject tracking of McCoy “based on the metadata identifying the object to be tracked” by matching a received PIN to a stored PIN, as in Kuehner, because it is a straightforward, known method of identifying which of the received metadata from the nearby objects is the object selected by the user and yields predictable results.
Regarding Claim 7, McCoy (US 2015/0116501) discloses the method of claim 5.
McCoy does not disclose, but Shin (NPL “Camera focus adjustment using depth estimated via ultra-wideband handshake,” Technical Disclosure commons, 2022) teaches wherein broadcasting the respective request includes broadcasting the request via ultra-wideband communication channels (UWB handshake protocol, Fig. 2).
McCoy does not disclose, but Kuehner (US PG Publication 2023/0339431) teaches wherein receiving the subject identifiers includes receiving the subject identifiers (transmit identification data that distinctively corresponds to the device (and associated with the user 240 that possess the device 230) such as a personal identification number (PIN) or unique user identifier [0039]) via Wi-Fi communication channels or Bluetooth communication channels (communications via any of a number of communication protocols such as, for example, WiFi, Bluetooth [0085]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to replace the positioning tags of McCoy with the UWB positioning tags of Shin because Shin teaches that UWB is a low-cost, non-bulky method of distinguishing subjects from backgrounds (Background, p. 2-3), enabling more accurate focusing onto subjects of interest during video capture.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to implement the subject tracking of McCoy “based on the metadata identifying the object to be tracked” by matching a received PIN to a stored PIN, as in Kuehner, because it is a straightforward, known method of identifying which of the received metadata from the nearby objects is the object selected by the user and yields predictable results.
Regarding Claim 8, McCoy (US 2015/0116501) discloses the method of claim 1, wherein adjusting the camera operation comprises adjusting, based at least in part on one or more camera rules, a focus of the at least one camera or modifying a field of view of the at least one camera (dynamically control pan, tilt, zoom of camera [0058]).
Regarding Claim 9, McCoy (US 2015/0116501) discloses the method of claim 1, wherein determining the position further comprises adjusting the distinct positions with respect to one or more specific components of the at least one camera (location of object relative to camera [0026]).
Regarding Claim 10, McCoy (US 2015/0116501) discloses a computing system (controlling device for controlling cameras and sensors [0038], Fig. 2) for operating at least one camera (controlling cameras [0038]) based at least in part on a position of a tracked subject (current location of the first object 102a to be tracked may be determined based on the one or more signals received from the sensors 106 [0051]) in a camera view of the at least one camera (cameras 104 are able to automatically capture images of the tracked object 102 [0020]), the computing system comprising:
one or more hardware processors (processor 202 [0039], ASIC [0041]);
an identity controller (identifying objects to be tracked [0047]) executable by the one or more hardware processors (processor 202 receives metadata identifying objects to be tracked [0047]) …;
a positioning controller (processes the received signals from sensor 106 to determine the current location of object 102a [0051]) executable by the one or more hardware processors (processor 202 processes the received signals from sensor 106 to determine the current location of object 102a [0051]) …;
a matching controller (based on received metadata that identifies the object to be tracked [0047]) executable by the one or more hardware processors (based on the metadata the processor 202 will [0047]) …;
and a camera operation controller (dynamically control position, zoom, tilt, pan of camera [0058]) executable by the one or more hardware processors (processor 202 will dynamically control position, zoom, tilt, pan of camera [0058]) ….
The remainder of Claim 10 is rejected on the grounds provided in Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 12, the claim is rejected on the grounds provided in Claim 3.
Regarding Claim 13, the claim is rejected on the grounds provided in Claim 4.
Regarding Claim 14, the claim is rejected on the grounds provided in Claim 5.
Regarding Claim 15, McCoy (US 2015/0116501) discloses one or more tangible processor-readable storage media embodied with instructions for executing on one or more processors and circuits of a computing device a process for operating at least one camera (software [0130]).
The remainder of Claim 15 is rejected on the grounds provided in Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 17, the claim is rejected on the grounds provided in Claim 3.
Regarding Claim 18, the claim is rejected on the grounds provided in Claim 6.
Regarding Claim 20, the claim is rejected on the grounds provided in Claim 9.
Regarding Claim 24, McCoy (US 2015/0116501) discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the adjusting operation is performed when the tracked subject at the distinct position is occluded in the camera view (the person to be tracked may not be visible in images or video captured by the cameras 104, select a camera capable of capturing videos of the person to be tracked [0063]).
Regarding Claim 25, McCoy (US 2015/0116501) discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the adjusting operation is performed at a first time, and further comprising: performing the identifying operation again at a second time after the first time; and performing, responsive to performing the identifying operation again at the second time, the adjusting operation (when the player moves across the soccer field, the camera 104 tracks the player [0095]; this implies that the system of McCoy operates continuously over time).
Regarding Claim 26, McCoy (US 2015/0116501) discloses the method of claim 1, wherein, when the tracked subject is occluded in the camera view (the person to be tracked may not be visible in images or video captured by the cameras 104, select a camera capable of capturing videos of the person to be tracked [0063]), the determining comprises receiving the responses from the particular positioning tag corresponding to the tracked subject (signals received from the sensors 106 [0063]) and determining the [] position of the particular positioning tag from the responses (determine, in real time, the current location of the person to be tracked based on one or more signals received from the sensors 106 [0063), and the adjusting operation is performed based on the determined [] position (the processor 202 may adjust the pan, tilt and/or zoom of the cameras 104 [0064]).
McCoy does not disclose, but Shin (NPL “Camera focus adjustment using depth estimated via ultra-wideband handshake,” Technical Disclosure commons, 2022) teaches distinct positions (grounds in Claims 3 and 5, UWB chip, sensing angle and distance to, round trip time, Fig. 2 p. 5-6).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to replace the positioning tags of McCoy with the UWB positioning tags of Shin because Shin teaches that UWB is a low-cost, non-bulky method of distinguishing subjects from backgrounds (Background, p. 2-3), enabling more accurate focusing onto subjects of interest during video capture.
Claim(s) 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCoy (US 2015/0116501) in view of Shin (NPL “Camera focus adjustment using depth estimated via ultra-wideband handshake,” Technical Disclosure commons, 2022), Kuehner (US PG Publication 2023/0339431), and Ullah (US 2013/0128755).
Regarding Claim 21, McCoy (US 2015/0116501) discloses the method of claim 1.
McCoy does not disclose, but Ullah (US PG Publication 2013/0128755) teaches wherein the positioning tag (Presence Beaconing Station PBS: A station that has presence beaconing capabilities, usually an end-user device [0088]) corresponding to each candidate subject (usually an end-user device [0088]) stores a device identifier (Device-Specific Identifier [0083]) that identifies the positioning tag (unique identifier used to identify the PBS—end-user device [0083]), wherein the device identifier is different from (device-specific identifier and application-specific user hash are different) the subject identifier (Application-specific user hash, to identify the user [0080]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to supplement the position sensing system of McCoy with the presence framework of Ullah because Ullah teaches that using a multi-layer framework for identification protects the user’s identity and ensures that privacy is maintained when the user uses the network [0129].
Regarding Claim 22, McCoy (US 2015/0116501) discloses the method of claim 2.
McCoy does not disclose, but Ullah (US PG Publication 2013/0128755) teaches the response including a device identifier identifying the positioning tag (machine-to-machine layer interface uses the Device Specific Interface to uniquely identify each presence enabled device [0131]) and the subject identifier (application partners are sent the ASUH to identify the user [0132]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to supplement the position sensing system of McCoy with the presence framework of Ullah because Ullah teaches that using a multi-layer framework for identification protects the user’s identity and ensures that privacy is maintained when the user uses the network [0129].
Claim(s) 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCoy (US 2015/0116501) in view of Shin (NPL “Camera focus adjustment using depth estimated via ultra-wideband handshake,” Technical Disclosure commons, 2022), Kuehner (US PG Publication 2023/0339431), and Aonuma (US 2011/0063108 A1).
Regarding Claim 23, McCoy (US 2015/0116501) discloses the method of claim 1.
Shin does not disclose, but Kuehner (US PG Publication 2023/0339431) teaches further comprising: retrieving the tracked subject identifier from a storage device (matches a defined PIN [0039]; PIN stored [0040]).
Shin does not disclose, but Aonuma (US 2011/0063108 A1) teaches the tracked subject identifier being an employee identifier and the tracked subject being an employee (an employee ID that uniquely identifies a particular employee).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to implement McCoy to use with employee IDs as the metadata because McCoy’s technology works the same on employees as it does on other people.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s remarks filed 28 August 2026 have been considered but are not persuasive.
Remarks at 10-13
Applicant argues that the combination of references does not adjust camera operation upon completion of determining the position of the tag and matching the identification. Remarks at 10-13. This is unpersuasive. McCoy discloses determination “based on the metadata associated with the first object 102a and one or more signals received from the selected first sensor 106a.” McCoy at [0060]. The metadata identifies the object [0047], the current location of the object to be tracked is determined based on the signals received from the sensors 106 [0051]. It is true that McCoy does not expressly disclose the matching of the metadata to an identifier from the sensor, but a person of ordinary skill still understands this step to be inherent, because McCoy successfully tracks the tracked object. For example, McCoy does not disclose panning the camera aimlessly because it does not know which object is associated with which sensor 106. If McCoy tracks the tracked object based on unique, identifying metadata and sensor signals, as disclosed in [0063]-[0064], McCoy must perform a matching step. Stated another way: how can a computer track without performing a comparison and finding a match? Regardless, McCoy is modified by Keuhner to match the ID received from the location-sensor to a selected ID. Therefore the combination of McCoy and Keuhner teaches adjusting camera operation upon completion of matching the positioning tag and the stored identification.
Remarks at 13-14
Applicant argues regarding Claim 24 that McCoy describes an object moving out of a field of view, instead of “being occluded within a camera field of view.” Remarks at 13. This is unpersuasive: McCoy states, “the person to be tracked may not be visible….” McCoy at [0063]. “May not be visible” connotes occlusion, not out of the field of view. Language that indicates out of the field of view typically includes the phrase “field of view.” For example, McCoy discloses, “In another example, the processor 202 may adjust the pan, tilt, and/or zoom… such that the person to be tracked may lie in the field of view….” McCoy at [0064]. There is no reason to interpret “may not be visible” as synonymous with “not in the field of view,” when McCoy has a second example specifically addressing objects not in the field of view, using the phrase “field of view.”
Applicant’s remarks regarding Claim 26 are addressed in the mapping of McCoy to Claim 26.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US-11503358-B1 – detect distance to presenter and adjust audio
US-11961410-B1 – determine focus levels of users in a vicinity
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHADAN E HAGHANI whose telephone number is (571)270-5631. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM - 5PM.
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, Jay Patel can be reached at 571-272-2988. 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.
/SHADAN E HAGHANI/ Examiner, Art Unit 2485
Prosecution Insights