DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 14 November 2025 has been entered.
Election/Restrictions
Newly submitted Claims 21-24 and 27 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons: Claims 21-24 and 27 are directed to a display panel embodiment that is of significantly different scope from the originally presented and prosecuted display panel embodiments of original Claims 1-20. Claims 21-24 and 27 would have been properly restricted from the originally presented and claimed invention of original Claims 1-20 if the distinct embodiments had been originally presented together.
Specifically, originally presented Claims 1-20 are directed to display panel embodiments in which the display panel has first, second, and third display areas, and a pixel circuit is configured to operate in first and second “modes,” wherein a plethora of different refresh rate requirements is implemented in each of the corresponding first, second, and third display areas for each of the first and second “modes.” Conversely, Claims 21-24 and 27 are directed to a display panel embodiment in which the display panel has more than three display areas, wherein an image is displayed only on one of those display areas and the other display areas are black and display no image, wherein a refresh rate of the display area displaying the image is higher than the refresh rate of the display areas that are black and display no image. While both of originally presented Claims 1-20 and newly presented Claims 21-24 and 27 are directed to display panels having display areas implementing different refresh rates, the display panel of newly presented Claims 21-24 and 27 neither recites nor requires the specific functional features of the display panel of originally presented Claims 1-20, and the scope of newly presented Claims 21-24 and 27 does not overlap with that of originally presented Claims 1-20. In this regard, newly presented Claims 21-24 and 27 present a search burden in so much as this newly claimed embodiment requires employing different search queries and/or search strategies from those of originally filed Claims 1-20, and a search for the specific functional features of originally filed Claims 1-20 is not likely to result in the discovery of art that is relevant to the specific functional features of newly presented Claims 21-24 and 27.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, Claims 21-24 and 27 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-4, 6-8, 12, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Independent Claim 1 recites:
“A display panel, comprising: a first display area; a second display area; a third display area; and a pixel circuit… configured to operate in a first mode and a second mode, and wherein in the first mode, the first display area corresponds to a refresh rate of F11 and the second display area corresponds to a refresh rate of F12; in the second mode, the first display area corresponds to a refresh rate of F21, and the second display area corresponds to a refresh rate of F22” and “wherein the third display area corresponds to a refresh rate of F13 in the first mode and corresponds to a refresh rate of F23 in the second mode,” and wherein the combination of conditions on the refresh rates of the first, second, and third display areas in the respective first and second modes include:
|F21-F11| /= |F22-F12|
|F21-F11| /= |F23-F13|; and/or
|F22-F12| /= |F23-F13|
F11>F12>F13,
F11/F12 <= F12/F13
F21>F22>F23
F21/F22 <= F22/F23
F11 > F21 and 1 <= F11/F12 < F21/F22; or
(F21-F11) x (F22-F12) < 0.
It should be noted that the indices of the respective refresh rate terms “F” represent a “mode” and a “display area,” respectively.
In this regard, Condition (I) requires that, when the pixel circuit changes from the first mode to the second mode, the refresh rate of at least one of the first area and the second area changes, and the amount of change must satisfy the inequality. Condition (II) further requires that, when the pixel circuit changes from the first mode to the second mode, the refresh rate of at least one of the first area and the third area changes and/or the refresh rate of at least one of the second area and the third area changes, and the amount of change in each case must satisfy the inequality.
Condition (III) further requires that, in both of the first mode and the second mode, the refresh rate of the first display area is always larger than the refresh rate of the second display area, and the refresh rate of the second display area is always larger than the refresh rate of the third display area. In other words, the refresh rate is required to decrease among the respective display areas when moving from the first display area to the second display area to the third display area. In addition, Condition (III) further requires that, in both of the first mode and the second mode, the ratio of the refresh rates of the first display area to the second display area must always be less than or equal to the ratio of the refresh rates of the second display area to the third display area.
Condition (IV) further requires that one or the other of the following sub-requirements must additionally be satisfied: (i) the refresh rate of the first display area in the first mode must always be larger than the refresh rate of the first display area in the second mode, and the ratio of the refresh rate of the first display area to the refresh rate of the second display area in the first mode must always be greater than or equal to one and also less than the ratio of the refresh rate of the first display area to the second display area in the second mode; or (ii) the product of the difference in the refresh rates of the first display area in the first mode and the second mode, and the difference in the refresh rates of the second display area in the first mode and the second mode, must be negative. In other words, (ii) requires that the refresh rates of both the first display area and the second display area must change between the first mode and the second mode, and the change must necessarily be an increase in the refresh rate of one of the first display area and the second display area, and a decrease in the refresh rate of the other of the first display area and the second display area.
The originally filed disclosure does not appear to provide support for the combination of Conditions (I) through (IV) including at least Sub-requirement (ii) as newly recited in independent Claim 1. It should be noted that the applicant has not directed attention to any portion of the Specification, and further has not provided a reference to any example embodiment shown in the originally filed disclosure, that includes all of Conditions (I) through (IV) and includes Sub-requirement (ii). Furthermore, the examiner has not identified any portion of the originally filed disclosure that provides support for the combination of all of Conditions (I) through (IV) and includes Sub-requirement (ii).
Therefore, Claims 1-4, 6-8, 12, and 25 are rejected for failing to comply with the written description requirement.
Claims 3 and 6 are further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Specifically, Claim 3 recites Sub-condition (iii) that includes:
(iii) F12=F22 and F11 /= F21.
Claim 6 recites Sub-condition (iv) that includes:
(iv) (F21-F11)x(F22-F12)<0.
Neither of these Sub-conditions appears to be supported by the originally filed disclosure for the same reasons applicable to Independent Claim 1 above.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the combination of conditions recited in independent Claim 1 and dependent Claims 3 and 6 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 14-18 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (hereinafter “Yang” US 2019 / 0043435) in view of Lee et al. (hereinafter “Lee” US 2021 / 0110771).
As pertaining to Claim 14, Yang discloses (see Fig. 2, Fig. 3, Fig. 4, and Fig. 5) a display panel (30), comprising:
a first display area (31);
a second display area (32); and
the display panel (30) is configured to operate in a first mode (i.e., see any one of, or combinations of, the First Mode, Second Mode, Third Mode, and Fourth Mode in Fig. 2) and a second mode (i.e., again, see any one of, or combinations of, the First Mode, Second Mode, Third Mode, and Fourth Mode in Fig. 2), and wherein in the first mode (i.e., see any Mode or Mode combination in Fig. 2), the first display area (31) corresponds to a refresh rate of F11 (i.e., see any of (24Hz, 60Hz, 75Hz, 120Hz) in Fig. 2) and the second display area (32) corresponds to a refresh rate of F12 (i.e., see any of (24Hz, 60Hz, 75Hz, 120Hz) in Fig. 2); in the second mode (i.e., see any Mode or Mode combination in Fig. 2), the first display area (31) corresponds to a refresh rate of F21 (i.e., see any of (24Hz, 60Hz, 75Hz, 120Hz) in Fig. 2), and the second display area (32) corresponds to a refresh rate of F22 (i.e., see any of (24Hz, 60Hz, 75Hz, 120Hz) in Fig. 2), and wherein |F21-F11| /= |F22-F12| (i.e., at least one of the first display area (31) and the second display area (32) operates with a refresh rate in the second mode that is different from the refresh rate in the first mode based on the type of image being displayed; see Page 1 through Page 2, Para. [0018]-[0020] and [0023]-[0024]; and note that a first mode includes the first display area (31) and the second display area (32) operating with any of the same or different refresh rates (F11, F12), based on a type of image being displayed on each of the first display area (31) and the second display area (32), in the first mode, and the second mode includes the first display area (31) and the second display area (32) operating with any of the same or different refresh rates (F21, F22), which may be the same as or different from (F11, F12) in the first mode, based on the type of image being displayed on each of the first display area (31) and the second display area (32) in the second mode).
Yang does not explicitly provide a detailed description of the display panel (30). That is, Yang does not explicitly disclose a pixel circuit, wherein the pixel circuit comprises a first pixel circuit and a second pixel circuit, the first pixel circuit is connected to a light emitting element in the first display area (31), the second pixel circuit is connected to a light emitting element in the second display area (32). However, the teachings of Yang are applicable to any type of display panel known in the art.
In the same field of endeavor, Lee discloses (see Fig. 1, Fig. 23, and Fig. 24) a display panel (510) comprising a first display area (PR1) and a second display area (PR2), each respectively driven with a refresh rate (see Fig. 24) that is based on a type of image to be displayed on each of the first display area (PR1) and the second display area (PR2), wherein the display panel (510) is explicitly shown to include a pixel circuit (100), wherein the pixel circuit (100) comprises a first pixel circuit (i.e., a first (100) associated with a first pixel (PX)) and a second pixel circuit (i.e., a second (100) associated with a second pixel (PX)), the first pixel circuit (100) is connected to a light emitting element (i.e., a light emitting element (EL) of the first pixel) in the first display area (PR1), the second pixel circuit (100) is connected to a light emitting element (i.e., a light emitting element (EL) of the second pixel) in the second display area (PR2; see Page 5, Para. [0075]; Page 13, Para. [0144]; and Page 14, Para. [0147]). It is a goal of Lee to provide a means of reducing power consumption in a display panel by controlling a refresh rate of display data in different display areas based on a type of image to be displayed (see Page 1, Para. [0003]). This is a goal shared by Yang (see Page 2, Para. [0022] of Yang). In this regard, Lee provides an explicit disclosure of a display panel structure that is implied, but not shown, by Yang for the shared purpose of providing refresh rate control in different display areas of a display panel based on a type of image to be displayed.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Yang with the teachings of Lee, such that a pixel circuit of Yang comprises a first pixel circuit and a second pixel circuit, the first pixel circuit is connected to a light emitting element in the first display area (31), the second pixel circuit is connected to a light emitting element in the second display area (32), as suggested by Lee, in order to provide reduced power consumption in the display panel using a display panel structure that is known in the art and has been implemented for the shared purpose of providing refresh rate control in different display areas of a display panel based on a type of image to be displayed.
In this regard, Yang and Lee both disclose (see Fig. 2, Fig. 3, Fig. 4, and Fig. 5 of Yang; and see Fig. 23 and Fig. 24 of Lee) a third display area (i.e., another of the plurality of display windows, as disclosed by Yang, corresponding to (PR3), as disclosed by Lee; see Page 2, Para. [0023] of Yang and Page 13, Para. [0144] of Lee) wherein the third display area (i.e., display window; see (PR3), for example of Lee) corresponds to a refresh rate of F13 (i.e., see any of (24Hz, 60Hz, 75Hz, 120Hz) in Fig. 2 of Yang) in the first mode (i.e., again, see any one of, or combinations of, the First Mode, Second Mode, Third Mode, and Fourth Mode in Fig. 2 of Yang) and corresponds to a refresh rate of F23 (i.e., see any of (24Hz, 60Hz, 75Hz, 120Hz) in Fig. 2 of Yang) in the second mode (i.e., again, see any one of, or combinations of, the First Mode, Second Mode, Third Mode, and Fourth Mode in Fig. 2 of Yang), and wherein |F21-F11|/=|F23-F13|; and/or |F22-F12|/=|F23-F13] (i.e., at least one of the first display area (31), the second display area (32), and the third display area (i.e., display window; see (PR3), for example of Lee) operates with a refresh rate in the second mode that is different from the refresh rate in the first mode based on the type of image being displayed; see Page 1 through Page 2, Para. [0018]-[0020] and [0023]-[0024] of Yang; for example, F11=24Hz, F21=24Hz, F13=60Hz, F23=24Hz; and/or F21=24Hz, F22=24Hz), wherein the first display area (see (31) of Yang corresponding to (PR1) of Lee), the second display area (see (32) of Yang corresponding to (PR2) of Lee), and the third display area (i.e., another of the plurality of display windows of Yang corresponding to (PR3) of Lee) are area arranged sequentially along a first direction (i.e., either of a horizontal or vertical direction), and wherein F12>F11, and F12>F13; and/or F22>F21, and F22>F23 (i.e., this condition is satisfied whenever the refresh rate of the second display area (32) is greater than the refresh rate of the first display area (31) and the refresh rate of the second display area (32) is greater than the refresh rate of the third display area (i.e., third display window corresponding to (PR3) of Lee); see Page 1 through Page 2, Para. [0018]-[0020] and [0023]-[0024] of Yang; for example, F11=60Hz, F12=120Hz, F13=75Hz; or F11=60Hz, F12=75Hz, F13=60Hz).
As pertaining to Claim 15, Yang and Lee both disclose (see Fig. 2, Fig. 3, Fig. 4, and Fig. 5 of Yang; and see Fig. 23 and Fig. 24 of Lee) that |F12-F11|=|F12-F13|; and/or |F22-F21|=|F22-F23| (i.e., this condition is satisfied whenever the difference between the refresh rate of the first display area (31) and the refresh rate of the second display area (32) is the same as the difference between the refresh rate of the second display area (32) and the refresh rate of the third display area (i.e., third display window corresponding to (PR3) of Lee) in a first determination period, and/or the difference between the refresh rate of the first display area (31) and the refresh rate of the second display area (32) is the same as the difference between the refresh rate of the second display area (32) and the refresh rate of the third display area (i.e., third display window corresponding to (PR3) of Lee) in a second determination period; see Page 1 through Page 2, Para. [0018]-[0020] and [0023]-[0024] of Yang; for example, F11=24Hz, F12=24Hz, F13=24Hz; and/or F21=24Hz, F22=24Hz, F23=24Hz).
As pertaining to Claim 16, Yang and Lee both disclose (see Fig. 2, Fig. 3, Fig. 4, and Fig. 5 of Yang; and see Fig. 23 and Fig. 24 of Lee) that |F12-F11|/=|F12-F13|; and/or |F22-F21|/=|F22-F23| (i.e., this condition is satisfied whenever the difference between the refresh rate of the first display area (31) and the refresh rate of the second display area (32) is different than the difference between the refresh rate of the second display area (32) and the refresh rate of the third display area (i.e., third display window corresponding to (PR3) of Lee) in a first determination period, and/or the difference between the refresh rate of the first display area (31) and the refresh rate of the second display area (32) is different than the difference between the refresh rate of the second display area (32) and the refresh rate of the third display area (i.e., third display window corresponding to (PR3) of Lee) in a second determination period; see Page 1 through Page 2, Para. [0018]-[0020] and [0023]-[0024] of Yang; for example, F11=24Hz, F12=60Hz, F13=75Hz; and/or F21=24Hz, F22=60Hz, F23=75Hz).
As pertaining to Claim 17, Yang and Lee both disclose (see Fig. 2, Fig. 3, Fig. 4, and Fig. 5 of Yang; and see Fig. 23 and Fig. 24 of Lee) that |F12-F11|>|F12-F13|; and/or |F22-F21|>|F22-F23| (i.e., this condition is satisfied whenever the difference between the refresh rate of the first display area (31) and the refresh rate of the second display area (32) is greater than the difference between the refresh rate of the second display area (32) and the refresh rate of the third display area (i.e., third display window corresponding to (PR3) of Lee) in a first determination period, and/or the difference between the refresh rate of the first display area (31) and the refresh rate of the second display area (32) is greater than the difference between the refresh rate of the second display area (32) and the refresh rate of the third display area (i.e., third display window corresponding to (PR3) of Lee) in a second determination period; see Page 1 through Page 2, Para. [0018]-[0020] and [0023]-[0024] of Yang; for example, F11=24Hz, F12=60Hz, F13=120Hz; and/or F21=24Hz, F22=60Hz, F23=120Hz).
As pertaining to Claim 18, Yang and Lee both disclose (see Fig. 2, Fig. 3, Fig. 4, and Fig. 5 of Yang; and see Fig. 23 and Fig. 24 of Lee) that |F12-F11|>|F12-F13| and |F22-F21|<|F22-F23|; or |F12-F11|<|F12-F13| and |F22-F21|>|F22-F23| (i.e., this condition is satisfied whenever the difference between the refresh rate of the first display area (31) and the refresh rate of the second display area (32) is greater than the difference between the refresh rate of the second display area (32) and the refresh rate of the third display area (i.e., third display window corresponding to (PR3) of Lee) in a first determination period, and the difference between the refresh rate of the first display area (31) and the refresh rate of the second display area (32) is less than the difference between the refresh rate of the second display area (32) and the refresh rate of the third display area (i.e., third display window corresponding to (PR3) of Lee) in a second determination period; or the difference between the refresh rate of the first display area (31) and the refresh rate of the second display area (32) is less than the difference between the refresh rate of the second display area (32) and the refresh rate of the third display area (i.e., third display window corresponding to (PR3) of Lee) in a first determination period, and the difference between the refresh rate of the first display area (31) and the refresh rate of the second display area (32) is greater than the difference between the refresh rate of the second display area (32) and the refresh rate of the third display area (i.e., third display window corresponding to (PR3) of Lee) in a second determination period; see Page 1 through Page 2, Para. [0018]-[0020] and [0023]-[0024] of Yang; for example, F11=24Hz, F12=120Hz, F13=120Hz, F22=24Hz, F21=24Hz, F23=120Hz; or F11=24Hz, F12=24Hz, F13=120Hz, F22=24Hz, F21=120Hz, F23=24Hz).
As pertaining to Claim 26, Yang discloses (see Fig. 1) a display device (1) comprising the display panel (30) according to claim 14 (see Page 1, Para. [0013]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 14 November 2025 have been fully considered but they are either not persuasive or are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection provided above. The applicant has argued, with respect to independent Claim 1, that the combined teachings of Yang and Lee, as relied upon by the examiner in the prior Office Action, do not teach or fairly suggest the specific refresh rate relationships as newly recited and currently presented in Claim 1. (see Remarks at Pages 6 through 11). Respectfully, the combination of specific refresh rate relationships newly recited in independent Claim 1 do not appear to be supported by the originally filed disclosure (see above rejections).
The applicant has further argued that the combined teachings of Yang and Lee, again as relied upon by the examiner in the prior Office Action, do not provide for the features of independent Claim 14 because the teachings of Yang are limited to a “specific combination of refresh rates of two display windows” and the teachings of Yang are not relevant to more than two display windows (see Remarks at Pages 9 and 10). The applicant has further argued that the teachings of Lee “only gives a solution opposite to the solution” of Claim 14. The examiner respectfully disagrees. In fact, the teachings of Yang are not limited simply to the example refresh rate embodiment and “specific combination of refresh rates” shown in Figure 2. Rather, Yang explicitly discloses that the disclosed display panel “can be in a range from about 20 Hz to about 120 Hz” (see Page 1, Para. [0013]) and that, in fact, “the relationship between the display mode of the display screen… and the refresh rate… can be set by a user” (see Page 1, Para. [0017]). In other words, the teachings of Yang are more broadly applicable to refresh rate relationships beyond those shown in the example of Figure 2. Furthermore, the examiner respectfully maintains that one of ordinary skill in the art clearly would have recognized, given the combined teachings of Yang and Lee, that the teachings of Yang and Lee are applicable to more than just two display areas (see Page 2, Para. [0023] of Yang and Page 13, Para. [0144] of Lee) and that Yang and Lee plainly suggest a plurality of display areas that operate with refresh rates that are based on the type of image being displayed in the display area.
Newly submitted Claims 21-24 and 27 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed and, therefore, have been withdrawn.
The rejection of Claims 1-4, 6-8, 12, 14-18, and 25-26 is maintained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yu et al. (US 2025 / 0098452), Lu (US 2022 / 0309977), Seo et al. (US 2021 / 0035488), and Wang et al. (US 2016 / 0042708) all disclose display panels in which different display areas operate at different refresh rates based on different display modes.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON M MANDEVILLE whose telephone number is (571)270-3136. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 7:30AM-4:00PM.
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, Chanh Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-7772. 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.
/JASON M MANDEVILLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2623