DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-11 received on 07/15/2024 are considered in this office action. Claims -11 are pending for examination.
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 10/11/2024 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“is provided a surface of the display device” should read “is provided on a surface of the display device”, and
“passing through decorative sheet” should read “passing through the decorative sheet”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) are:
Claims 1, 5-6 and 11: planar transparent member (generic placeholder) that separates an interior of the cabin and a vehicle exterior (function)
Because this/these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Regarding “planar transparent member”, it is interpreted to cover the corresponding structure of a glass plate and equivalents thereof as supported by FIGs. 2 and 8 and pg 6 lines 30-34 of the specification reproduced below:
In place of the configuration where the display device 11 is stacked on the surface of the planar transparent member 9 on the side of the cabin 3, a glass plate constituting the display device 11 may be used also as the planar transparent member 9.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “decorative” in claims 1 and 3 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “decorative” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For examination purposes, the Examiner will interpret “decorative sheet” as “a sheet or cover”, as supported by a portion of the specification which is reproduced below:
the decorative sheet 12 can be used as a cover for the first display device 10
In the vehicle of the disclosure having the above-described configuration, the sheet is a decorative sheet. According to the disclosure, the sheet is configured with a decorative sheet, and therefore the appearance can be improved. In the vehicle above, the decorative sheet has a wood-grain pattern.
According to the disclosure, the sheet is configured with a decorative sheet having a wood effect, and therefore the appearance can be improved. In the vehicle above, the decorative sheet is configured with a wood material
Claim 2 is dependent on claim 1 and cures the deficiencies by reciting wood-grain pattern, thus overcomes the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection.
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 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benz (The F-015 Luxury in Motion), in view of Boulanger et al. (US 10,656,777 B1, hereinafter Boulanger).
Benz and Boulanger are cited in the IDS received on 10/11/2024.
PNG
media_image1.png
362
574
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Benz Modified Figure 3. Annotated Vehicle Cabin
Regarding claim 1, Benz teaches a vehicle (FIGs. 1-3) comprising:
a vehicle body having a cabin (FIG. 1; Modified Figure 3);
a first seat and a second seat arranged in the cabin to face an advancing direction (Modified Figure 3, wherein the first seat and second seat face the front or advancing direction);
a planar transparent member placed on a side surface of the cabin, and that separates an interior of the cabin and a vehicle exterior from each other, the planar transparent member including a first transmittance with respect to visible light (FIG. 1; Modified Figure 3, wherein the “window” corresponds to planar transparent member, and separates an interior of the cabin and a vehicle exterior from each other and has a first transmittance with respect to visible light as shown in FIGs. 1 and 3 which shows the outside); and
a display device placed on the side surface of the cabin and arranged along the planar transparent member, the display device having a plurality of pixels, the display device being capable of emitting the visible light (Modified Figure 3: “Display”, wherein display is located below and along the window, and its shape and complexity of the content shown on the display indicates display device having a plurality of pixels and emitting the visible light to display the contents), wherein
at least a part of the display device is placed on the side surface and between the first seat and the second seat (Modified Figure 3: “Display”, wherein Display is between the seats) and
the first transmittance being high (Modified Figure 3: “Window”, a transparent window made of glass in the vehicle will inherently have a higher transmittance of light compared to a surface which may be partially translucent), but fails to specifically teach a decorative sheet having a second transmittance with respect to visible light is provided a surface of the display device, the second transmittance being smaller than the first transmittance, and there is a case where information can be provided by a display of the plurality of pixels passing through decorative sheet by the display device lighting on, and there is a case of hiding the plurality of pixels by the display device lighting off.
However, Boulanger teaches a decorative sheet having a second transmittance with respect to visible light is provided a surface of the display device (col 3 lines 25-34: “The concealed user interface assembly 100 has a deactivated state (FIG. 1A) and an activated state (FIGS. 1B and 1C). In the deactivated state, only a surface 101 is externally visible. The concealed user interface assembly 100 may be free from visible user interface device components when in the deactivated state. In the activated state, the concealed user interface assembly 100 can display, as examples, a location indication 122 (FIG. 1B), or a user interface 124 (FIG. 1C) by emission of light through the surface 101, as will be explained herein”; col 3 lines 41-58: “The surface 101 is visible from the exterior of the concealed user interface assembly 100 and is exposed to the environment around the concealed user interface assembly 100. The surface 101 is a thin material layer that obstructs visibility of the interface device 202 when the interface device 202 when it is in the deactivated state. When the interface device 202 is in the activated state, at least a portion of the light emitted by the interface device 202 passes through the surface 101. To allow transmission of emitted light, the surface 101 can be formed from a material that is partially translucent at the thickness used for the surface 101, or the surface 101 can be formed from a material having a pore structure that extends through the surface 101. Examples of suitable materials for the seating surface 420 include textile materials, vinyl materials, faux leather materials including polyurethane faux leather materials and polyvinyl chloride faux leather materials, and thin wood veneers.”, wherein “When the interface device 202 is in the activated state, at least a portion of the light emitted by the interface device 202 passes through the surface 101” indicates sheet having a predetermined transmittance with respect to visible light), the second transmittance being smaller than the first transmittance (Boulanger col 3 lines 49-58: “To allow transmission of emitted light, the surface 101 can be formed from a material that is partially translucent at the thickness used for the surface 101, or the surface 101 can be formed from a material having a pore structure that extends through the surface 101. Examples of suitable materials for the seating surface 420 include textile materials, vinyl materials, faux leather materials including polyurethane faux leather materials and polyvinyl chloride faux leather materials, and thin wood veneers.”, wherein transparent window made of glass will inherently have a higher transmittance of light compared to a surface which is partially translucent and made of thin wood veneers), and there is a case where information can be provided by a display of the plurality of pixels passing through decorative sheet by the display device lighting on, and there is a case of hiding the plurality of pixels by the display device lighting off (col 3 lines 25-34: “The concealed user interface assembly 100 has a deactivated state (FIG. 1A) and an activated state (FIGS. 1B and 1C). In the deactivated state, only a surface 101 is externally visible. The concealed user interface assembly 100 may be free from visible user interface device components when in the deactivated state. In the activated state, the concealed user interface assembly 100 can display, as examples, a location indication 122 (FIG. 1B), or a user interface 124 (FIG. 1C) by emission of light through the surface 101, as will be explained herein”; col 15 lines 32-38: “requests display of a particular user interface (e.g., music control, lighting control, or climate control), or requests display of a user interface that includes particular content (e.g., a map, a television show, or a movie)”).
Boulanger is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of in-vehicle display. Therefore, 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 Benz to incorporate the teachings of Boulanger and provide a sheet having a predetermined transmittance with respect to visible light is provided a surface of the display device. Doing so would allow to hide the display when not in use, thus not, only adding to aesthetics, but also preventing distraction (Boulanger col 1 lines 18-22: “Electronic devices have been integrated into a broad array of goods. In some applications, visible user interfaces may detract from the aesthetics of an object, may distract users, or may make users feel less comfortable.”).
Regarding claim 2, Benz in view of Boulanger teaches the vehicle according to claim 1. Boulanger further teaches wherein the decorative sheet has a wood-grain pattern (col 3 lines 41-58: “The surface 101 is visible from the exterior of the concealed user interface assembly 100 and is exposed to the environment around the concealed user interface assembly 100. The surface 101 is a thin material layer that obstructs visibility of the interface device 202 when the interface device 202 when it is in the deactivated state. When the interface device 202 is in the activated state, at least a portion of the light emitted by the interface device 202 passes through the surface 101. To allow transmission of emitted light, the surface 101 can be formed from a material that is partially translucent at the thickness used for the surface 101, or the surface 101 can be formed from a material having a pore structure that extends through the surface 101. Examples of suitable materials for the seating surface 420 include textile materials, vinyl materials, faux leather materials including polyurethane faux leather materials and polyvinyl chloride faux leather materials, and thin wood veneers”, wherein “thin wood veneers” indicates wood-grain pattern).
Regarding claim 3, Benz in view of Boulanger teaches the vehicle according to claim 2. Boulanger further teaches wherein the decorative sheet is configured with a wood material (col 3 lines 41-58: “The surface 101 is visible from the exterior of the concealed user interface assembly 100 and is exposed to the environment around the concealed user interface assembly 100. The surface 101 is a thin material layer that obstructs visibility of the interface device 202 when the interface device 202 when it is in the deactivated state. When the interface device 202 is in the activated state, at least a portion of the light emitted by the interface device 202 passes through the surface 101. To allow transmission of emitted light, the surface 101 can be formed from a material that is partially translucent at the thickness used for the surface 101, or the surface 101 can be formed from a material having a pore structure that extends through the surface 101. Examples of suitable materials for the seating surface 420 include textile materials, vinyl materials, faux leather materials including polyurethane faux leather materials and polyvinyl chloride faux leather materials, and thin wood veneers”).
Regarding claim 4, Benz in view of Boulanger teaches the vehicle according to claim 1. Benz and Boulanger further teaches wherein a number of the plurality of pixels of the display device is at least seven (Benz Modified Figure 3; Boulanger FIG.1A-1C, wherein the graphics displayed on the display shows more than seven pixels).
Regarding claim 5, Benz in view of Boulanger teaches the vehicle according to claim 1. Benz fails to specifically teach wherein an area of the display device is smaller than an area of the planar transparent member.
However, Boulanger teaches wherein an area of the display device is smaller than an area of the planar transparent member (Modified FIG. 14; col 10 lines 15-30: “The panel assembly 1332 includes a panel 1334, which may be a wall, a divider, a door, or a similar structure. In one implementation, the panel 1334 may be a portion of an automobile interior. […] One or more interface devices 1338 are concealed behind the panel surface 1336 in their respective inactive states, and are visible in their respective active states, as previously described with respect to the interface devices 412. When one of the interface devices 1338 is activated, an active area 1340 is defined in the respective one of the interface devices 1338, and the user 414 may view and interact with content that is displayed by the interface devices 1338”, wherein the size of the display may be varied as shown in the multiple interface devices 1338 and 712b).
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 size of the display of Benz in view of Boulanger and incorporate the display of Boulanger and adjust the size of the display. Doing so would allow different sizes of displays to be used in the panel, thus adjusting the size of the display relative to available space or need which results in increased space efficiency and user customization.
PNG
media_image2.png
356
324
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Boulanger Modified FIG. 14
Regarding claim 6, Benz in view of Boulanger teaches the vehicle according to claim 5. Boulanger further teaches wherein the display device is smaller in vertical width than the planar transparent member (Modified FIG. 14, wherein the display size may be adjusted to be smaller in vertical width than the planar transparent member).
Regarding claim 7, Benz in view of Boulanger teaches the vehicle according to claim 6. Boulanger further teaches wherein the display device is configured to display information relating to the vehicle (col 4 lines 53-62: “FIG. 3 is a block diagram that show a system 305 that includes the concealed user interface assembly 100. The system 305 also includes a controller 306, a vision sensor 307 a, an audio sensor 307 b (e.g., a microphone), and an external system 308. As examples, the external system 308 can be a climate control system, an audio playback system, a video display system, a lighting control system, a navigation system, or an automotive control system.”; col 15 lines 32-38: “requests display of a particular user interface (e.g., music control, lighting control, or climate control), or requests display of a user interface that includes particular content (e.g., a map, a television show, or a movie)”).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benz, in view of Boulanger, and further in view of Tesla (The Model S 17" Touchscreen Display).
Tesla was cited in the IDS received on 10/11/2024.
Regarding claim 8, Benz in view of Boulanger teaches the vehicle according to claim 7. Boulanger further teaches wherein the information relating to the vehicle is a set temperature of an air conditioner (col 13 lines 50-52:”comments on temperature, which can be used as a basis for inferring that the user 309 may wish to adjust a climate control setting”), but fails to specifically teach set temperature of an air conditioner.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Tesla teaches wherein the information relating to the vehicle is a set temperature of an air conditioner (Figure 2, wherein information relating to the vehicle is a set temperature of an air conditioner is displayed at the bottom).
Tesla is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of in-vehicle display. Therefore, 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 Benz in view of Boulanger to incorporate the teachings of Tesla and set temperature of an air conditioner. Doing so would allow the driver and passenger to view and change settings related to the operation of the vehicle, thus enhancing user-friendliness and comfort.
PNG
media_image3.png
583
1029
media_image3.png
Greyscale
TESLA Figure 2. Touchscreen
Claims 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Benz, in view of Boulanger, and further in view of CRONIN (US 20180211414 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Benz in view of Boulanger teaches the vehicle according to claim 1. Benz and Boulanger further teaches wherein the display device is a first display device (Benz FIG. 3) and wherein the first display device is configured to display information relating to the predetermined contents (Boulanger col 4 lines 53-62: “FIG. 3 is a block diagram that show a system 305 that includes the concealed user interface assembly 100. The system 305 also includes a controller 306, a vision sensor 307 a, an audio sensor 307 b (e.g., a microphone), and an external system 308. As examples, the external system 308 can be a climate control system, an audio playback system, a video display system, a lighting control system, a navigation system, or an automotive control system. Other types of external systems 308 can be incorporated in the system 305 to allow control by the controller 306; Boulanger col 15 lines 32-38: “requests display of a particular user interface (e.g., music control, lighting control, or climate control), or requests display of a user interface that includes particular content (e.g., a map, a television show, or a movie)””), but fails to specifically teach, the vehicle further comprising: a second display device configured to display predetermined contents, and wherein the first display device is configured to display information relating to the predetermined contents.
However, CRONIN teaches wherein the display device is a first display device (FIG. 16; para. [0090]: “the display device 110 as a transparent display may also be disposed in any of the areas corresponding to the other car windows of the autonomous vehicle 1.”), the vehicle further comprising: a second display device configured to display predetermined contents (FIG. 19; para. [0150]: “Therefore, the processor 120 may control the display device 110 disposed on the roof car window 405 viewed by the eyes of the passenger 1910 to display the movie”; para. [0114]: “plurality of virtual driving environment images 1310, 1320, and 1330 corresponding to the point 1305 are successively displayed on display devices 110 disposed in the front car window area, the left car window area, and the right car window area,”, wherein the roof car window is simply an example, and other displays may be used), and
wherein the first display device is configured to display information relating to the predetermined contents (FIG. 8; FIG. 18; para. [0034]: “FIG. 18 is a diagram showing a UI for selecting content to display on a display device”; para. [0148]: “FIG. 19 is a diagram showing an embodiment of displaying a movie on a display device”; para. [0099]: “For example, the processor 120 may display the UI 710 on the display device 110 or on a separate display”, wherein the UI may be displayed in a different screen).
CRONIN is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of in-vehicle display. Therefore, 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 Benz in view of Boulanger to incorporate the teachings of CRONIN and incorporate a window display to present virtual driving environment image. Doing so would result in virtual driving environment image or video content to replace an actual driving environment is provided to a passenger via a display device disposed on a car window area of an autonomous vehicle, thereby providing a more realistic experience of a virtual driving environment to the passenger (CRONIN para. [0017]), and further allow the driver to control the window display using the concealed user interface as taught by Boulanger.
Regarding claim 10, Benz in view of Boulanger and further in view of CRONIN teaches the vehicle according to claim 9. CRONIN further teaches wherein the information relating to the predetermined contents has a title of the predetermined contents (FIG. 7; FIG. 8; FIG. 18; para. [0102]: “The passenger may select any one of a plurality of virtual realities via the UI 810. In other words, the passenger may select a virtual reality corresponding to any one of Rocky Mountains, Amazon Rainforest, Saharan Safari, Grand Canyon, Hawaiian volcanoes, Big Sur (California), and Rolling Irish Hill via the UI 810”; para. [0147]: “The processor 120 may provide a UI 1810 for selecting content to be displayed on the display device 110 to a passenger. In other words, the processor 120 may provide the UI 1810 for selecting YouTube, Movie Library, or Netflix. Furthermore, the processor 120 may provide the UI 1810 for selecting images captured by the image sensor 228 installed on a car window or provide the UI 1810 for selecting virtual driving environment images to the passenger”, wherein the virtual realities and “YouTube, Movie Library, or Netflix” are examples corresponding to title of the predetermined contents).
Regarding claim 11, Benz in view of Boulanger and further in view of CRONIN teaches the vehicle according to claim 9. CRONIN further teaches wherein the second display device includes a predetermined transmittance with respect to the visible light and is stacked on the planar transparent member (FIG. 5; FIG. 9; FIG. 15; para. [0089]: “The display device 110 may be a transparent display disposed in an area corresponding to a car window 501 of the autonomous vehicle 1. In other words, the display device 110 may be a transparent display 502 closely adhered to a surface of the car window 501. For example, the display device 110 may include a flexible thin-film type device capable of transmitting light therethrough and display a highly-bright image. The device may be any one of an LCD, an LED, and a transparent organic light-emitting diode (TOLED)”; para. [0090]: “the display device 110 as a transparent display may also be disposed in any of the areas corresponding to the other car windows of the autonomous vehicle 1”, wherein “flexible thin-film type device capable of transmitting light therethrough” indicates predetermined transmittance with respect to the visible light).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. SUZUKI (WO 2016002145 A1) teaches assimilated display which appears to assimilate to the surrounding instrument panel having the operation unit provided therein.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW S KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-7356. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8AM - 5PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, James J Lee can be reached on (571) 270-5965. 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.
/ANDREW SANG KIM/Examiner, Art Unit 3668