DETAILED ACTION
This is the first office action on the merits. Claims 1-2, 7, 10-11, 13-31, 33-36, 38-41, 43, 45, 47-50, and 52 are currently pending.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/22/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 7, 10, 11, 13-14, 16, 18-21, 23, 25-31, 39-41, and 47-48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Pei et al., US 20170307759 A1 (“Pei”).
Regarding claims 1 and 48, Pei discloses A hybrid LiDAR system and A vehicle comprising a hybrid LiDAR system, the hybrid LiDAR system comprising:
a long-range LiDAR subsystem characterized by a first range and a first azimuth angular coverage (Figs. 3-4, first lidar sensor 310, first angular field of view 314, Paragraph [0034]); and
a short-range LiDAR subsystem characterized by a second range and a second azimuth angular coverage (Figs. 3-4, second lidar sensor 320, second angular field of view 324, Paragraph [0034]),
wherein:
the first range is greater than the second range (Figs. 3-4, first angular field of view 314, second angular field of view 324, Paragraph [0036]), and
the second azimuth angular coverage is greater than the first azimuth angular coverage (Figs. 3-4, first angular field of view 314, second angular field of view 324, Paragraph [0036]).
Regarding claim 2, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 1, wherein the long-range LiDAR subsystem and the short-range LiDAR subsystem are configured to emit light simultaneously (Figs. 3-4, first lidar sensor 310, second lidar sensor 320, Paragraph [0039]).
Regarding claim 7, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 1, wherein the long-range LiDAR subsystem is further characterized by a first elevation angular coverage (Figs. 3-4, first angular field of view 314, Paragraph [0023]: Equation 1 shows angular FOV determination which includes azimuth and elevation angles; See also Fig. 1, laser source 110a , emitting lens 130), and the short- range LiDAR subsystem is further characterized by a second elevation angular coverage (Figs. 3-4, second angular field of view 324, Paragraph [0023]: Equation 1 shows angular FOV determination which includes azimuth and elevation angles; See also Fig. 1, laser source 110a , emitting lens 130), wherein the second elevation angular coverage is larger than the first elevation angular coverage (Paragraphs [0023] and [0037]).
Regarding claim 10, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 1, wherein:
the long-range LiDAR subsystem comprises a first illuminator array, and a first detector array (Figs. 3-4, first lidar sensor 310, Paragraph [0033]; Fig. 1, laser source 110a-b, photodetector 160a-b, Paragraph [0023]), and
the short-range LiDAR subsystem comprises a second illuminator array and a second detector array (Figs. 3-4, second lidar sensor 320, Paragraph [0033]; Fig. 1, laser source 110a-b, photodetector 160a-b, Paragraph [0023]).
Regarding claim 11, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 10, wherein the first illuminator array and the second illuminator array are configured to emit light simultaneously (Fig. 4, first lidar sensor 310, second lidar sensor 320, Paragraph [0039]), and wherein a field-of-view (FOV) of the first illuminator array at least partially overlaps a FOV of the second illuminator array (Fig. 4, first angular field of view 314, second angular field of view 324, Paragraph [0038]).
Regarding claim 13, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 10, further comprising:
at least one processor coupled to the first illuminator array, the second illuminator array, the first detector array, and the second detector array (Paragraph [0038], [0043]; See also: Fig. 1, processor 190).
Regarding claim 14, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 13, wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
cause the first illuminator array and the second illuminator array to emit light simultaneously (Fig. 4, first lidar sensor 310, second lidar sensor 320, Paragraph [0039]; Fig. 6, 602-604, Paragraph [0042]-[0044]),
obtain a first signal from the first detector array (Fig. 6, 602-604, Paragraph [0042]-[0044]),
obtain a second signal from the second detector array (Fig. 6, 602-604, Paragraph [0042]-[0044]), and
process the first signal and the second signal to estimate a position of at least one object in view of the hybrid LiDAR system (Fig. 6, 602-604, Paragraph [0042]-[0044]).
Regarding claim 16, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 1, wherein at least one of the long- range LiDAR subsystem or the short-range LiDAR subsystem comprises:
an illuminator array comprising one or more illuminators (Fig. 1, laser source 110a-b, Paragraph [0023]); and
a detector array comprising one or more detectors (Fig. 1, photodetector 160a-b, Paragraph [0023]).
Regarding claim 18, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 1, wherein:
the long-range LiDAR subsystem is configured to sense a first volume of space (Figs. 3-4, first angular field of view 314, Paragraph [0036]; See also Paragraph [0023]), and
the short-range LiDAR subsystem is situated to sense a second volume of space (Figs. 3-4, second angular field of view 324, Paragraph [0036] ; See also Paragraph [0023]).
Regarding claim 19, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 18, wherein: the first volume of space and the second volume of space partially overlap (Fig. 4, first angular field of view 314, second angular field of view 324, Paragraph [0038]).
Regarding claim 20, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 19, wherein:
the long-range LiDAR subsystem is further configured to create a first three- dimensional point cloud of the first volume of space (Fig. 6, 602, Paragraph [0042]), and
the short-range LiDAR subsystem is further configured to create a second three- dimensional point cloud of the second volume of space (Fig. 6, 604, Paragraph [0043]).
Regarding claim 21, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 20, further comprising: at least one processor configured to fuse the first three-dimensional point cloud and the second three-dimensional point cloud (Fig. 6, 606, Paragraph [0044]).
Regarding claim 23, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 20, wherein the long-range LiDAR subsystem or the short-range LiDAR subsystem comprises at least one processor configured to fuse the first three-dimensional point cloud and the second three- dimensional point cloud (Fig. 6, 606, Paragraph [0044]).
Regarding claim 25, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 18, wherein: the first volume of space and the second volume of space are non-intersecting (Fig. 3, first angular field of view 314, second angular field of view 324, Paragraph [0034]).
Regarding claim 26, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 25, wherein:
the long-range LiDAR subsystem is further configured to create a first three- dimensional point cloud of the first volume of space (Fig. 6, 602, Paragraph [0042]), and
the short-range LiDAR subsystem is further configured to create a second three- dimensional point cloud of the second volume of space (Fig. 6, 604, Paragraph [0043]).
Regarding claim 27, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 1, wherein at least one of the long- range LiDAR subsystem or the short-range LiDAR subsystem comprises:
a plurality of N illuminators, each of the plurality of N illuminators configured to illuminate a respective one of a plurality of N illuminator fields-of-view (FOVs) (Fig. 1, laser source 110a-b, Paragraph [0017], [0023]);
a detector comprising at least one focusing component and at least one detector array, wherein the detector is configured to observe a detector FOV that overlaps at least a first illuminator FOV of the plurality of N illuminator FOVs (Fig. 1, photodetector 160a-b, Paragraph [0018], [0023]); and
at least one processor (Fig. 1, processor 190, Paragraph [0019]) configured to:
cause a first illuminator of the plurality of N illuminators to emit an optical pulse to illuminate the first illuminator FOV (Fig. 1, laser source 110a-b, Paragraph [0017]; Fig. 6, 602, Paragraph [0042]),
obtain a signal representing at least one reflected optical pulse detected by the detector (Fig. 1, photodetector 160a-b, Paragraph [0018]; Fig. 6, 602, Paragraph [0042]), and
determine a position of at least one target using the signal (Fig. 1, processor 190, Paragraph [0019]; Fig. 6, 602, Paragraph [0042]).
Regarding claim 28, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 27, wherein the detector FOV is a first detector FOV (Fig. 1, photodetector 160a, Paragraph [0018]), and wherein the detector is further configured to observe a second detector FOV that overlaps at least a second illuminator FOV of the plurality of N illuminator FOVs (Fig. 1, photodetector 160b, Paragraph [0018]).
Regarding claim 29, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 27, wherein the detector FOV overlaps a second illuminator FOV of the plurality of N illuminator FOVs (Fig. 1, laser source 110a-b, photodetector 160a-b, Paragraph [0017]-[0018]).
Regarding claim 30, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 27, wherein the at least one detector array comprises a plurality of detector arrays (Fig. 1, photodetector 160a-b, Paragraph [0018], [0023]), and wherein a particular focusing component of the at least one focusing component is configured to focus reflected signals on the plurality of detector arrays (Fig. 1, receiving lens 140, Paragraph [0018]).
Regarding claim 31, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 30, wherein the particular focusing component comprises a lens (Fig. 1, receiving lens 140, Paragraph [0018]) and/or a mirror and each of the plurality of N illuminators comprises a respective laser (Fig. 1, laser source 110a-b, Paragraph [0017]).
Regarding claim 39, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 27, wherein each of the plurality of N illuminators comprises a respective laser (Fig. 1, laser source 110a-b, Paragraph [0017], [0023]).
Regarding claim 40, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 39, wherein the at least one focusing component comprises a lens (Fig. 1, receiving lens 140, Paragraph [0018]).
Regarding claim 41, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 40, wherein the at least one detector array includes a plurality of detector arrays (Fig. 1, photodetector 160a-b, Paragraph [0018], [0023]), and wherein the lens is shared by the plurality of detector arrays (Fig. 1, receiving lens 140, Paragraph [0018]).
Regarding claim 47, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 27, wherein the detector FOV is a first detector FOV and the optical pulse is a first optical pulse (Fig. 1, photodetector 160a, laser pulse 120, Paragraph [0018]), and wherein the detector is further configured to observe a second detector FOV that overlaps a second illuminator FOV of the plurality of N illuminator FOVs (Fig. 1, photodetector 160b, laser pulse 120, Paragraph [0018]), and wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause a second illuminator of the plurality of N illuminators to emit a second optical pulse to illuminate the second illuminator FOV (Fig. 1, laser source 110a, laser pulse 120, Paragraph [0018]).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pei in view of Retterath et al., US 20150131080 A1 (“Retterath”).
Regarding claim 15, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 10, wherein the first illuminator array comprises a first illuminator and a second illuminator,
Pei does not teach: wherein the first illuminator is configured to generate a first pulse sequence, and the second illuminator is configured to generate a second pulse sequence, wherein the first pulse sequence and the second pulse sequence are different.
However, Retterath teaches a LIDAR unit with an emitter array and a detector array, where the emitter array is set to emit pulses according to a 38-bit sequence. In the pulse sequence, the first emitter is configured to generate a first pulse sequence, and the second emitter is configured to generate a second pulse sequence, wherein the first pulse sequence and the second pulse sequence are different (Fig. 12, pulse sequence for emitter k, pulse sequence for emitter k+1, Paragraph [0079]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the pulse sequences of Pei’s light sources by emitting a different pulse sequence for each light source, which is disclosed by Retterath. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to ensure each paired detector is configured to detect the pulse sequence from its paired laser source to reduce interference due to crosstalk, as suggested by Retterath (Paragraphs [0001] and [0079]).
Claims 17, 33-36, 38, and 45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pei in view of Pacala et al., US 20180167602 A1 (“Pacala”).
Regarding claim 17, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 16.
Pei does not teach: wherein the one or more detectors comprise an avalanche photo-diode (APD), a single-photon avalanche diode (SPAD) detector, or a silicon photomultiplier (SiPM) detector.
However, Pacala teaches a LIDAR system with a detector array composed of SPADs (Fig. 1, set of pixels 170, first pixel 171, Paragraph [0064]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted one known detector element for another and the results would have been predictable (MPEP 2143 I KSR Rationale B).
Regarding claim 33, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 27, […], and the at least one detector array comprises a plurality of detector arrays (Fig. 1, photodetector 160a-b, Paragraph [0018], [0023]).
Pei does not teach: wherein the at least one focusing component comprises a plurality of focusing components.
However, Pacala teaches a LIDAR system with a plurality of focusing elements that correspond to a detector in the detector array (Fig. 1, set of lenses 150, Paragraph [0034], [0062]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted Pacala’s set of lenses, where one lens corresponds to one detector element, for Pei’s receiving lens and the results would have been predictable (MPEP 2143 I KSR Rationale B).
Regarding claim 34, Pei, as modified in view of Pacala, discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 33, wherein the plurality of focusing components comprises N focusing components (Pacala, Fig. 1, set of lenses 150, Paragraph [0034], [0062]) and the plurality of detector arrays comprises N detector arrays (Pei, Fig. 1, photodetector 160a-b, Paragraph [0018], [0023]).
Regarding claim 35, Pei, as modified in view of Pacala, discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 34, wherein each of the plurality of N illuminators is associated with a respective one of the N focusing components and a respective one of the N detector arrays (Pei, Fig. 1, laser source 110a-b, receiving lens 140, photodetector 160a-b, Paragraph [0017]-[0018], [0023]).
Regarding claim 36, Pei, as modified in view of Pacala, discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 35.
Pei, as modified in view of Pacala, does not teach: wherein each of the N detector arrays comprises at least 200 optical detectors, wherein each of the at least 200 optical detectors comprises an avalanche photodiode (APD), a single-photon avalanche diode (SPAD), or a silicon photomultiplier (SiPM).
However, Pacala teaches a LIDAR system with a detector array that comprises at least 200 optical detectors (Fig. 1, set of pixels 170, Paragraph [0087]: 24x24 grid of pixels), wherein each optical detector comprises a SPAD (Fig. 1, set of pixels 170, Paragraph [0087]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have replaced Pei’s detectors with Pacala’s detector array with at least 200 SPADs. One of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted one detector for another and the results would have been predictable (MPEP 2143 I KSR Rationale B).
Regarding claim 38, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 27.
Pei does not teach: wherein the at least one detector array comprises a plurality of avalanche photodiodes, single-photon avalanche diode (SPAD) detectors, or silicon photomultiplier (SiPM) detectors.
However, Pacala teaches a LIDAR system with a detector array composed of SPADs (Fig. 1, set of pixels 170, first pixel 171, Paragraph [0064]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted one known detector element for another and the results would have been predictable (MPEP 2143 I KSR Rationale B).
Regarding claim 45, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 27.
Pei does not teach: wherein the plurality of N illuminators includes at least 40 illuminators and/or the at least one detector array comprises at least 200 optical detectors.
However, Pacala teaches a LIDAR system with a detector array that comprises at least 200 optical detectors (Fig. 1, set of pixels 170, Paragraph [0087]: 24x24 grid of pixels), wherein each optical detector comprises a SPAD (Fig. 1, set of pixels 170, Paragraph [0087]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have replaced Pei’s detectors with Pacala’s detector array with at least 200 SPADs. One of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted one detector for another and the results would have been predictable (MPEP 2143 I KSR Rationale B).
Claims 22 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pei in view of Castorena, J., Puskorius, G.V. & Pandey, G. Motion Guided LiDAR-Camera Self-calibration and Accelerated Depth Upsampling for Autonomous Vehicles. J Intell Robot Syst 100, 1129–1138 (2020). (“Castorena”).
Regarding claim 22, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 20, further comprising: at least one processor configured
Pei does not teach: at least one processor configured to apply optimal transport theory to fuse the first three-dimensional point cloud and the second three-dimensional point cloud.
However, Castorena teaches a method for generating upsampled depth maps from a LIDAR system. In a step that determines the association between two LIDAR point clouds, Castorena computes point associations using an equation formulated from optimal transport theory (page 1131, Equation 2). Optimizing the point associations between two point clouds results in a pair of point clouds which can easily be fused into a higher resolution point cloud.
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Pei’s method of combining point clouds by adding a step of using optimal transport theory to associate point between point clouds, which is disclosed by Castorena. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to utilize an effective solution to perform registration between the point clouds, as suggested by Castorena (page 1131 Col. 2).
Regarding claim 24, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 20, wherein the long-range LiDAR subsystem or the short-range LiDAR subsystem comprises at least one processor configured
Pei does not teach: at least one processor configured to apply optimal transport theory to fuse the first three-dimensional point cloud and the second three-dimensional point cloud.
However, Castorena teaches a method for generating upsampled depth maps from a LIDAR system. In a step that determines the association between two LIDAR point clouds, Castorena computes point associations using an equation formulated from optimal transport theory (page 1131, Equation 2). Optimizing the point associations between two point clouds results in a pair of point clouds which can easily be fused into a higher resolution point cloud.
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Pei’s method of combining point clouds by adding a step of using optimal transport theory to associate point between point clouds, which is disclosed by Castorena. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to utilize an effective solution to perform registration between the point clouds, as suggested by Castorena (page 1131 Col. 2).
Claim 43 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pei in view of Donovan et al., US 20200041614 A1 (“Donovan”).
Regarding claim 43, Pei discloses The hybrid LiDAR system recited in claim 27.
Pei does not teach: wherein the at least one focusing component comprises a mirror.
However, Donovan teaches a LIDAR system that uses a combination of two mirrors to focus the light onto the detector (Fig. 6, mirrors 602, 604, receiver 612, [0042]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Pei’s focusing elements by adding a mirror, which is disclosed by Donovan. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to aid in determining the projection angle of the LIDAR system, as suggested by Donovan (Paragraph [0042]).
Claims 49, 50, and 52 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pei in view of Smith et al., US 20200150238 A1 (“Smith”).
Regarding claim 49, Pei discloses The vehicle recited in claim 48, wherein:
the long-range LiDAR subsystem comprises a first portion situated to sense a first volume of space in front of the vehicle (Figs. 3-4, first lidar sensor 310, first angular field of view 314, Paragraph [0034]) […], and
the short-range LiDAR subsystem is situated to sense a third volume of space in front of the vehicle (Figs. 3-4, second lidar sensor 320, second angular field of view 324, Paragraph [0034]).
Pei does not teach: the long-range LiDAR subsystem comprises a second portion situated to sense a second volume of space behind the vehicle.
However, Smith teaches a vehicle with both long-range and short-range LIDAR sensors with a second long-range sensor situated to sense a second volume of space behind the vehicle (Fig. 5, long-range lidar sensor assemblies 100, Paragraph [0040]).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Pei’s vehicle by adding a second long-range sensor in the rear of the vehicle, which is disclosed by Smith. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide coverage behind the vehicle, as suggested by Smith (Paragraph [0040]).
Regarding claim 50, Pei, as modified in view of Smith, discloses The vehicle recited in claim 49, wherein: the first volume of space and the third volume of space partially overlap (Pei, Fig. 4, first angular field of view 314, second angular field of view 324, Paragraph [0034]), or the first volume of space and the third volume of space are non-intersecting (Pei, Fig. 3, first angular field of view 314, second angular field of view 324, Paragraph [0038]).
Regarding claim 52, Pei, as modified in view of Smith, discloses The vehicle recited in claim 49, wherein the long-range LiDAR subsystem is further characterized by a first elevation angular coverage (Pei, Figs. 3-4, first angular field of view 314, Paragraph [0023]: Equation 1 shows angular FOV determination which includes azimuth and elevation angles; See also Fig. 1, laser source 110a , emitting lens 130), and the short-range LiDAR subsystem is further characterized by a second elevation angular coverage (Pei, Figs. 3-4, second angular field of view 324, Paragraph [0023]: Equation 1 shows angular FOV determination which includes azimuth and elevation angles; See also Fig. 1, laser source 110a , emitting lens 130), wherein the second elevation angular coverage is larger than the first elevation angular coverage (Pei, Paragraphs [0023] and [0037]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wee, US 20120242972 A1 discloses a vehicular object ranging system having a long-range sensor having a long-range field of view and a short-range sensor.
Droz, US 20180149732 A1 discloses a first lidar system having a long-range FOV and a second lidar system having a short-range FOV.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RACHEL N NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5405. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 5:30 pm ET.
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, Yuqing Xiao can be reached at (571) 270-3603. 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.
/RACHEL NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/YUQING XIAO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights