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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-5 and 10-14 have been considered but are unpersuasive. The Applicant assets that Oguchi is silent regarding the microcontroller of a computer peripheral device that is arranged to periodically detecting whether signal interference occurs, is arranged to automatically use a higher report rate to report the displacement data if detecting that no signal interferences occur, and is arranged to automatically use a lower report rate to report the displacement data if detecting that the signal interference occurs. The Applicant further asserts that Oguchi is non-analogous and functionally distinct from the above-identified claim features, based on the following reasons. In accordance with the abstract of Oguchi, Oguchi teaches a "distributed computing" or "load sharing" mechanism. More specifically, Oguchi decides where to perform an image processing calculation (color conversion) - either on the scanner or on the host computer- depending on the host's loading. However, Oguchi is silent on deciding how frequently to send data (or report rate) to prevent the host from becoming overwhelmed. In addition, the applicant respectfully points out the teachings of Oguchi is concerned with "image processing (color conversion)" which is a static calculation task and is different from a real-time, stream-based task of the dynamic displacement data report rate of an optical navigation device such as an optical mouse.
Thus, based on the above reason, the applicant believes that Oguchi does not teach reducing the frequency of data transmission to smooth out user experience. Oguchi merely teaches shifting the computational burden of a single task to the peripheral device. The applicant respectfully submits that it is also inappropriate and unreasonable to use the teachings of Oguchi to read on the claimed invention since Oguchi is silent on deciding how frequently to send data (or report rate) to prevent the host from becoming overwhelmed.
In addition, the applicant respectfully points out that the combination of Chauvin
and Oguchi fails to teach providing a smooth user experience even when the optical
navigation device is in an unstable and worse radio environment since the claimed
invention is associated with sacrificing sampling frequency (report rate) to gain perceived system smoothness while Chauvin merely views a lower report rate as a negative consequence of error (packet loss) or a power-saving mode and Oguchi merely teaches using the peripheral's CPU to help the Host's CPU. Accordingly, one person skilled in the art would not be motivated to combine Oguchi's "load sharing" processing with Chauvin's communication protocol to arrive at the above-identified claim features. As noted in the rejection below, Chauvin teaches this amended feature of claim 1 in Fig. 4A and [0085-0086]. (See Fig. 4A, [0085-0086] microcontroller 410 is coupled to optical sensor and reports displacement data via wireless communications protocol between mouse 404 and dongle 400 as a specific communication interface that is connected to host computer 402; [0043], report rate is dynamically controlled at reduced report rate of 4-10 ms or increased report rate of 1 ms or faster; [0005, 0041-0042, 0044], wireless interference, jitter or signal interference causes wireless data or reports to be corrupted and to automatically reduce a report rate from a higher report rate of 1 ms to an automatic lower report rate which happens when microcontroller detects lost wireless packets periodically). As also noted in the rejection below, Chauvin teaches in [0049] that processing for the various method steps (steps 600-900) of dynamically using different report rates ([0085-0086]) can be performed using processors in the optical navigation device (peripheral device), or external to the optical navigation device, or a combination of both. Thus, this teaching of Chauvin in combination with the teaching of Oguchi to process data in an input device of host computer depending on the operating status (i.e., load as number of processes occurring in the host computer at Machine translation, page 10, second paragraph of Oguchi) of the host computer teaches ” dynamically using different report rates to report the displacement data from the optical navigation device to a host device to be externally coupled to optical navigation device through a specific communication interface in response to a result of the microcontroller detecting environment signal interference or a result of the microcontroller detecting a loading of the host device; wherein the displacement data is transmitted from the optical navigation device to the host device based on a different report rate, dynamically determined by the microcontroller, in response to a different loading condition of the
host device”.
In response to applicant's argument that Oguchi is nonanalogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, Oguchi is reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, namely how to select either a host computer or an input device to perform processing based on how much the host computer is being used (Oguchi, machine translation, page 4, paragraph 5). Therefore, since Oguchi is solving a problem similar to that contemplated by the inventor, the Examiner consider Oguchi to be analogous art.
Thus, based on the combined teachings of Chauvin and Oguchi, the Examiner believes it is proper to combine the teachings of these prior art references. For similar reasons, arguments with respect to method claim 15 is considered unpersuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 4-5, 10, 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chauvin et al. (US 2021/037678, hereinafter “Chauvin”) in view of Oguchi et al. (JP H08289166, hereinafter “Oguchi”, machine translation enclosed). Regarding claim 1, Chauvin discloses an optical navigation device, comprising (Fig. 4, [0072], mouse 404): an optical sensor, for generating at least one image frame to obtain displacement data and used for transmitting the displacement data into a microcontroller for optical navigation, wherein the displacement is a relative displacement between the optical navigation device and an adjacent working surface (Fig. 4A, [0008, 0050, 0074, 0085-0086, 0089], optical sensor to a tracked movement of the mouse with respect to an underlying surface to obtain displacement data into a microcontroller or processor 410 for optical navigation such as 2D or 3D mouse movement); and the microcontroller, coupled to the optical sensor, for dynamically using different report rates to report the displacement data to a host device to be externally coupled to optical navigation device through a specific communication interface in response to a result of detecting environment signal interference or a result of a loading of the host device (Fig. 4A, [0085-0086] microcontroller 410 is coupled to optical sensor and reports displacement data via wireless communications protocol between mouse 404 and dongle 400 as a specific communication interface that is connected to host computer 402 which receives displacement data; [0043], report rate is dynamically controlled at reduced report rate of 4-10 ms or increased report rate of 1 ms; [0005, 0041-0042, 0044], wireless interference, jitter or signal interference causes wireless data or reports to be corrupted and to reduce a report rate from a higher 1 ms to a lower report rate); and, the microcontroller is arranged to periodically detecting whether signal interference occurs, is arranged to automatically use a higher report rate to report the displacement data if detecting that no signal interferences occur, and is arranged to automatically use a lower report rate to report the displacement data if detecting that the signal interference occurs (Fig. 4A, [0085-0086] microcontroller 410 is coupled to optical sensor and reports displacement data via wireless communications protocol between mouse 404 and dongle 400 as a specific communication interface that is connected to host computer 402; [0043], report rate is dynamically controlled at reduced report rate of 4-10 ms or increased report rate of 1 ms or faster; [0005, 0041-0042, 0044], wireless interference, jitter or signal interference causes wireless data or reports to be corrupted and to automatically reduce a report rate from a higher report rate of 1 ms to an automatic lower report rate which happens when microcontroller detects lost wireless packets periodically).
Chauvin does not explicitly disclose in the embodiment of Fig. 4 to report the displacement data from the optical navigation device to a host device; wherein the displacement data is transmitted from the optical navigation device to the host device based on a different report rate, dynamically determined by the microcontroller. However, Chauvin further teaches that processors may be local to the peripheral device to perform the various processes of the system including processes such as reporting displacement data to a host device, wherein the displacement data is transmitted from the optical navigation device to the host device based on a different report rate, dynamically determined by the microcontroller (Fig. 2, [0049, 0085-0086], processor 210 may be local to the peripheral device, external to the peripheral device, or a combination thereof, and can control all operations of the input device 130 including methods 600-900). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical navigation device of Chauvin to have a microcontroller in the in the optical navigation device report the displacement data from the optical navigation device to a host device, wherein the displacement data is transmitted from the optical navigation device to the host device based on a different report rate, dynamically determined by the microcontroller, such as further taught by Chauvin, because such a modification produces a predictable result of providing reporting of displacement data to a host device using a processor that is provided in the optical navigation device. Chauvin does not explicitly disclose the microcontroller, coupled to the optical sensor, for dynamically using different report rates to report the displacement data to a host device to be externally coupled to optical navigation device through a specific communication interface in response to a result of the microcontroller detecting environment signal interference or a result of the microcontroller detecting a loading of the host device; wherein the displacement data is transmitted from the optical navigation device to the host device based on a different report rate, dynamically determined by the microcontroller, in response to a different loading condition of the host device.
Oguchi teaches to process digital data in an input device or host computer depending on the operating status of the host computer (Machine translation, page 10, second paragraph “the calculated color conversion information, the color correction information stored in the image input device, and the color conversion information from the standard color system to the image output device are stored. Depending on the number of processes being executed by the host computer, it is possible to select either the host computer or the image input device, and to select the place to perform the combining process according to the operating status of the host computer.”) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical navigation device of Chauvin to have a microcontroller in the optical navigation device coupled to the optical sensor, for dynamically using different report rates to report the displacement data to a host device to be externally coupled to optical navigation device through a specific communication interface in response to a result of the microcontroller detecting environment signal interference or a result of the microcontroller detecting a loading of the host device, wherein the displacement data is transmitted from the optical navigation device to the host device based on a different report rate, dynamically determined by the microcontroller, in response to a different loading condition of the host device, such as taught by Oguchi, for the purpose of improving processing efficiency (Oguchi, machine translation, page 10, second paragraph). Regarding claim 4, Chauvin as modified by Oguchi discloses the optical navigation device of claim 1, wherein the microcontroller is arranged to periodically detecting whether signal interference occurs, and is arranged to use a specified report rate as a target report rate to report the displacement data in a default setting; and, the microcontroller is arranged to decrease the target report rate if detecting that the signal interference occurs and then is arranged to increase the decreased target report rate back to the specific report rate if detecting that no signal interferences occur (Fig. 4A, [0085-0086] microcontroller 410 is coupled to optical sensor and reports displacement data via wireless communications protocol between mouse 404 and dongle 400 as a specific communication interface that is connected to host computer 402; [0043], report rate is dynamically controlled at reduced report rate of 4-10 ms or increased report rate of 1 ms or faster; [0005, 0041-0042, 0044], wireless interference, jitter or signal interference causes wireless data or reports to be corrupted and to reduce a report rate from a higher 1 ms to a lower report rate while interference is detected, which is then dynamically increased when no signal interference is detected).
Regarding claim 5, Chauvin as modified by Oguchi discloses the optical navigation device of claim 4, wherein the specific report rate is a highest report rate negotiated between the optical navigation device and the host device in advance (Fig. 4A, [0085-0086] microcontroller 410 is coupled to optical sensor and reports displacement data via wireless communications protocol between mouse 404 and dongle 400 as a specific communication interface that is connected to host computer 402; [0043], report rate is dynamically controlled at increased specific report rate of 1 ms or faster in advance; [0005, 0041-0042, 0044], wireless interference, jitter or signal interference causes wireless data or reports to be corrupted and to reduce a report rate from a highest specific 1 ms report rate to a lower report rate).
Regarding claim 10, Chauvin discloses a method of an optical navigation device, comprising (Fig. 4, [0072], mouse 404): providing an optical sensor to generate at least one image frame to obtain displacement data (Fig. 4A, [0008, 0050, 0074, 0085-0086, 0089], optical sensor to a tracked movement of the mouse with respect to an underlying surface to obtain displacement data into a microcontroller or processor 410 for optical navigation such as 2D or 3D mouse movement); transmitting the displacement data into a microcontroller for optical navigation, the displacement being a relative displacement between the optical navigation device and an adjacent working surface (Fig. 4A, [0008, 0050, 0074, 0085-0086, 0089], optical sensor to a tracked movement of the mouse with respect to an underlying surface to obtain displacement data into a microcontroller or processor 410 for optical navigation such as 2D or 3D mouse movement); and dynamically using different report rates to report the displacement data to a host device to be externally coupled to optical navigation device through a specific communication interface in response to a result of detecting environment signal interference or a result of a loading of the host device (Fig. 4A, [0085-0086] microcontroller 410 is coupled to optical sensor and reports displacement data via wireless communications protocol between mouse 404 and dongle 400 as a specific communication interface that is connected to host computer 402 which receives displacement data; [0043], report rate is dynamically controlled at reduced report rate of 4-10 ms or increased report rate of 1 ms; [0005, 0041-0042, 0044], wireless interference, jitter or signal interference causes wireless data or reports to be corrupted and to reduce a report rate from a higher 1 ms to a lower report rate); periodically detecting whether signal interference occurs (Chauvin, Fig. 4A, [0085-0086] microcontroller 410 is coupled to optical sensor and reports displacement data via wireless communications protocol between mouse 404 and dongle 400 as a specific communication interface that is connected to host computer 402; [0043], report rate is dynamically controlled at reduced report rate of 4-10 ms or increased report rate of 1 ms or faster; [0005, 0041-0042, 0044], wireless interference, jitter or signal interference causes wireless data or reports to be corrupted and to automatically reduce a report rate from a higher report rate of 1 ms to an automatic lower report rate which happens when microcontroller detects lost wireless packets periodically); automatically using a higher report rate to report the displacement data if detecting that no signal interferences occur (Chauvin, Fig. 4A, [0085-0086] microcontroller 410 is coupled to optical sensor and reports displacement data via wireless communications protocol between mouse 404 and dongle 400 as a specific communication interface that is connected to host computer 402; [0043], report rate is dynamically controlled at reduced report rate of 4-10 ms or increased report rate of 1 ms or faster; [0005, 0041-0042, 0044], wireless interference, jitter or signal interference causes wireless data or reports to be corrupted and to automatically reduce a report rate from a higher report rate of 1 ms to an automatic lower report rate which happens when microcontroller detects lost wireless packets periodically); and automatically using a lower report rate to report the displacement data if detecting that the signal interference occurs (Chauvin, Fig. 4A, [0085-0086] microcontroller 410 is coupled to optical sensor and reports displacement data via wireless communications protocol between mouse 404 and dongle 400 as a specific communication interface that is connected to host computer 402; [0043], report rate is dynamically controlled at reduced report rate of 4-10 ms or increased report rate of 1 ms or faster; [0005, 0041-0042, 0044], wireless interference, jitter or signal interference causes wireless data or reports to be corrupted and to automatically reduce a report rate from a higher report rate of 1 ms to an automatic lower report rate which happens when microcontroller detects lost wireless packets periodically). Chauvin does not explicitly disclose in the embodiment of Fig. 4 to report the displacement data from the optical navigation device to a host device; wherein the displacement data is transmitted from the optical navigation device to the host device based on a different report rate, dynamically determined by the microcontroller. However, Chauvin further teaches that processors may be local to the peripheral device to perform the various processes of the system including processes such as reporting displacement data to a host device, wherein the displacement data is transmitted from the optical navigation device to the host device based on a different report rate, dynamically determined by the microcontroller (Fig. 2, [0049, 0085-0086], processor 210 may be local to the peripheral device, external to the peripheral device, or a combination thereof, and can control all operations of the input device 130 including methods 600-900). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical navigation device of Chauvin to have a microcontroller in the in the optical navigation device report the displacement data from the optical navigation device to a host device, wherein the displacement data is transmitted from the optical navigation device to the host device based on a different report rate, dynamically determined by the microcontroller, such as further taught by Chauvin, because such a modification produces a predictable result of providing reporting of displacement data to a host device using a processor that is provided in the optical navigation device. Chauvin does not explicitly disclose dynamically using different report rates to report the displacement data to a host device to be externally coupled to optical navigation device through a specific communication interface in response to a result of using the microcontroller to detect environment signal interference or a result of using the microcontroller to detect a loading of the host device; wherein the displacement data is transmitted from the optical navigation device to the host device based on a different report rate, dynamically determined by the microcontroller, in response to a different loading condition of the host device.
Oguchi teaches to process digital data in an input device or host computer depending on the operating status of the host computer (Machine translation, page 10, second paragraph “the calculated color conversion information, the color correction information stored in the image input device, and the color conversion information from the standard color system to the image output device are stored. Depending on the number of processes being executed by the host computer, it is possible to select either the host computer or the image input device, and to select the place to perform the combining process according to the operating status of the host computer.”) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of an optical navigation device of Chauvin to have a microcontroller in the optical navigation device perform the step of dynamically using different report rates to report the displacement data to a host device to be externally coupled to optical navigation device through a specific communication interface in response to a result of using the microcontroller to detect environment signal interference or a result of using the microcontroller to detect a loading of the host device, wherein the displacement data is transmitted from the optical navigation device to the host device based on a different report rate, dynamically determined by the microcontroller, in response to a different loading condition of the host device, such as taught by Oguchi, for the purpose of improving processing efficiency (Oguchi, machine translation, page 10, second paragraph).
Regarding claim 13, Chauvin as modified by Oguchi discloses the method of claim 10, further comprising: periodically detecting whether signal interference occurs (Chauvin, [0005, 0041-0042, 0044], wireless interference, jitter or signal interference causes wireless data or reports to be corrupted and to reduce a report rate from a higher 1 ms to a lower report rate while interference is detected periodically, which is then dynamically increased when no signal interference is detected); using a specified report rate as a target report rate to report the displacement data in a default setting (Chauvin, [0043], report rate is dynamically controlled at increased target report rate of 1 ms or faster when no signal interference occurs at a default setting); and decreasing the target report rate if detecting that the signal interference occurs and then increasing the decreased target report rate back to the specific report rate if detecting that no signal interferences occur (Chauvin, [0043], report rate is dynamically controlled at reduced report rate of 4-10 ms or increased report rate of 1 ms or faster; [0005, 0041-0042, 0044], wireless interference, jitter or signal interference causes wireless data or reports to be corrupted and to reduce a report rate from a higher 1 ms to a lower report rate while interference is detected, which is then dynamically increased back to target report rate when no signal interference is detected).
Regarding claim 14, Chauvin as modified by Oguchi discloses the method of claim 13, wherein the specific report rate is a highest report rate negotiated between the optical navigation device and the host device in advance (Chauvin, Fig. 4A, [0085-0086] microcontroller 410 is coupled to optical sensor and reports displacement data via wireless communications protocol between mouse 404 and dongle 400 as a specific communication interface that is connected to host computer 402; [0043], report rate is dynamically controlled at reduced report rate of 4-10 ms or increased report rate of 1 ms or faster; [0005, 0041-0042, 0044], wireless interference, jitter or signal interference causes wireless data or reports to be corrupted and to reduce a report rate from a highest 1 ms report rate to a lower report rate).
Claims 3 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chauvin in view of Oguchi as applied to claims 1, 4-5, 10 and 13-14, and further in view of Zhang et al. (US 2023/0117661, hereinafter “Zhang”). Regarding claim 3, Chauvin as modified by Oguchi discloses the optical navigation device of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the microcontroller is arranged to automatically use a higher report rate to report the displacement data if receiving the host device’s indication signal indicating a light loading condition, and is arranged to automatically use a lower report rate to report the displacement data if receiving the host device’s indication signal indicating a heavy loading condition. Zhang teaches wherein the microcontroller is arranged to automatically use a higher report rate to report the displacement data if receiving the host device’s indication signal indicating a light loading condition, and is arranged to automatically use a lower report rate to report the displacement data if receiving the host device’s indication signal indicating a heavy loading condition (Figs. 1 and 3A, abstract, Steps S10-14, [0002-0004, 0026-0038], host computer 1 receives software from microprocessor of peripheral device 2 or mouse to gate hardware real-time load information C1 and peripheral device input information C2; after judging in step S12 that a threshold has been reached, a data report rate change command I is issued to device 2 to perform a data report rate adjustment; [0038], dynamically changes the data report rate based on information in peripheral device such that a high report rate is used if a low loading condition exists (below threshold) and a lower report rate is used if a high loading condition exists (at or above threshold)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical navigation device of Chauvin and Oguchi to have wherein the microcontroller is arranged to automatically use a higher report rate to report the displacement data if receiving the host device’s indication signal indicating a light loading condition, and is arranged to automatically use a lower report rate to report the displacement data if receiving the host device’s indication signal indicating a heavy loading condition, such as taught by Zhang, for the purpose of ensuring the host computer performs processing of the sent data report rate and conserving power of the mouse (Zhang, [0004]). Regarding claim 12, Chauvin as modified by Oguchi discloses the method of claim 10, but does not explicitly disclose further comprising: automatically using a higher report rate to report the displacement data if receiving the host device’s indication signal indicating a light loading condition; and automatically using a lower report rate to report the displacement data if receiving the host device’s indication signal indicating a heavy loading condition.
Zhang teaches wherein the microcontroller is arranged to automatically use a higher report rate to report the displacement data if receiving the host device’s indication signal indicating a light loading condition, and is arranged to automatically use a lower report rate to report the displacement data if receiving the host device’s indication signal indicating a heavy loading condition (Figs. 1 and 3A, abstract, Steps S10-14, [0002-0004, 0026-0038], host computer 1 receives software from microprocessor of peripheral device 2 or mouse to gate hardware real-time load information C1 and peripheral device input information C2; after judging in step S12 that a threshold has been reached, a data report rate change command I is issued to device 2 to perform a data report rate adjustment; [0038], dynamically changes the data report rate based on information in peripheral device such that a high report rate is used if a low loading condition exists (below threshold) and a lower report rate is used if a high loading condition exists (at or above threshold)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Chauvin and Oguchi to include steps of automatically using a higher report rate to report the displacement data if receiving the host device’s indication signal indicating a light loading condition, and automatically using a lower report rate to report the displacement data if receiving the host device’s indication signal indicating a heavy loading condition, such as taught by Zhang, for the purpose of ensuring the host computer performs processing of the sent data report rate and conserving power of the mouse (Zhang, [0004]).
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 JOSEPH PATRICK FOX whose telephone number is (571)270-3877. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:30 EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Patrick Edouard can be reached on 571-272-7603. 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.
JOSEPH PATRICK FOX
Examiner
Art Unit 2622
/J.P.F/Examiner, Art Unit 2622
/PATRICK N EDOUARD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2622