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 claim(s) 1, 9, and 16 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
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) is/are: “the plurality of lens units is configured to implement a stereoscopic image” in claims 1-15.
Review of the specification indicates the following:
- review of the specification on ¶42 discloses a “lens unit” can be formed of a “lenticular lens, but is not limited to the example”. Additionally, review of the specification on ¶87 and 95 indicates that the claimed “lens unit” includes a “plurality of lenticular lenses having a hemispherical shape”.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/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 limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1,4,6,9-10,12,16-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HA; Young Sang (US 20220221803 A1) in view of BAEK; SOOMIN et al. (US 20200295308 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Ha teaches,
A stereoscopic image display device, (¶48 and fig. 1, “stereoscopic image display device” such as display device 1 depicted in fig. 1) comprising:
a display panel (¶48-50 and fig. 1, “display panel DP” as part of display device 1 depicted in fig. 1) configured to display an image, (¶48-50,66, and fig. 1, “light rays generated by each pixel” of the display panel DP forms a “light field” to “display an image”) and including a plurality of pixel areas (¶65-66 and fig. 2, display panel DP includes “active area AA” in which a “plurality of pixels PX” are driven to provides “light to display an image” depicted in fig. 2) spaced apart from one another (¶65-66,80, and fig. 3, “active area AA may be an area” in which the plurality of pixels PX, that include “a plurality of subpixels SPX”, are arranged sequentially “to display an image and/or a video” as depicted in fig. 3) and a non-pixel area (¶65-66 and fig. 2, display panel DP includes “non-active area NAA” depicted in fig. 2) around the plurality of pixel areas; (¶65-66 and fig. 2, “non-active area NAA disposed around the active area AA” as depicted in fig. 2) and
a plurality of lens units (¶48-50,57-58, and fig. 1, “lens LS” that is one of “lenses LS” as part of display device 1 depicted in fig. 1) disposed in the plurality of pixel areas, (¶48 and fig. 1, lens LS that is one of “lenses LS”) and disposed to be inclined at a preset angle from the display panel, (¶57,63, fig. 4 and 1, “lenses LS may be slanted lenses inclined” with respect to “the second direction Y in a plan view” as depicted in fig. 1, that corresponds to “short sides in the second direction Y” of “display panel DP” as depicted in fig. 1)
a plurality of micro light emitting diodes (LEDs) (¶62, “micro light emitting diodes”) independently disposed in the plurality of pixel areas, (¶62,65-66, and fig. 3, “display panel DP” which uses a “micro light emitting diode display panel, which uses micro light emitting diodes” such that the active area AA of the display panel DP is an area of “a plurality of pixels PX”)
wherein the plurality of lens units (¶89 and fig. 3, “number of subpixels SPX overlapped by one lens LS”) is configured to implement a stereoscopic image, (¶89 and fig. 3, subpixels SPX overlapped by one lens LS provides a “stereoscopic image and a viewing angle control image” such as “three view images VI1 through VI3” depicted in fig. 3) and
wherein a number of the plurality of lens units (¶57-58 and fig. 3, “lenses LS” of an optical member OM depicted in fig. 3) in a pixel area of the plurality of pixel areas (¶57-58,62-68, and fig. 3, lenses LS arranged at “predetermined intervals to form a lens array” over display panel DP with active are AA with “a plurality of pixels PX”) corresponds to a number of the plurality of micro light emitting diodes (LEDs) in the pixel area. (¶62-68,80, and fig. 3, “lenses LS” which overlap display panel DP of “micro light emitting diodes” of active area AA of a plurality of pixels PX that includes three of “a plurality of subpixels SPX” that correspond to each “lens LS” as depicted in fig. 3)
The prior art Ha expresses a non-active area NAA that is an area of pixels that are not driven and surrounds the active area AA. In arrangements of the prior art, it is expressly not comprised of pixels or not driven pixels. The prior art further specifies the non-active area NAA is an area in which no image and/or video is displayed. In other words, the pixels in the non-active area NAA being non-driven pixels do not function as pixels and are tantamount to not being like the driven pixels in the active area AA. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the stereoscopic display with non-active area NAA arrangements of Ha to create an embodiment similar to what is claimed since the arrangements of the pixel area and non-pixel are is similar since the non-pixel area is disposed around the pixel area. The combined arrangement of the stereoscopic display with the various possible non-active area allow for an area that can help in the process of alignment between an optical member and the display panel.
But does not explicitly teach,
a non-pixel area around each pixel area
That is, as can be seen in the prior Ha, fig. 3 discloses display pixel areas spaced apart from one another when the figure depicts an arrangement of sets of sub pixels SPX in groupings of pixels PX. Additionally, fig. 2 discloses the entire active area AA surrounded by the non-active area NAA. These two disclosures in combination teach something similar to the claimed display including the plurality of pixel areas spaced apart from one another and a non-pixel area around the plurality of pixel areas, which lacks teaching the particular arrangement of a non-pixel area around each pixel area of the plurality of pixel areas.
However, Baek teaches additionally,
a plurality of pixel areas (¶59 and fig. 2, “each pixel area PA of the display panel DP” with multiple iterations of “light emission area PXA and a non-light emission area NPXA” as depicted in fig. 2) spaced apart from one another (¶59 and fig. 2, multiple iterations of pixel area PA with “light emission are PXA” as depicted in fig. 2) and a non-pixel area (¶59 and fig. 2, multiple iterations of pixel area PA with “non-light emission are NPXA” as depicted in fig. 2) around each pixel area of the plurality of pixel areas; (¶59 and fig. 2, pixel area PA where “the non-light emission area NPXA is a light shield area that is adjacent to the light emission area PXA” positioned between apparent NPXA areas as depicted in fig. 2)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the stereoscopic display of Ha with the display device of Baek which positions pixels between non-light emission areas. This arrangement supports improvements in quality of virtual images.
Regarding claim 4, Ha with Baek teaches the limitations of claim 1,
Ha teaches additionally,
the plurality of lens units includes a plurality of lenticular lenses (¶58 and 57, “lenses LS may be a lenticular lens” arranged at predetermined intervals to form “a lens array”) having a semi-circle shape. (¶58, “lenses LS may be a lenticular lens having a semi-cylindrical shape”)
Regarding claim 6, Ha with Baek teaches the limitations of claim 1,
an adhesive layer (¶73 and fig. 1, “coupling member CM” depicted in fig. 1) disposed between the display panel and the lens unit of the plurality of lens units, (¶73 and fig. 1, “coupling member CM may be interposed between the display panel DP” with lenses LS “and the optical member OM” as depicted in fig. 1)
wherein the adhesive layer includes (¶73 and fig. 1, “coupling member CM may include an optically clear adhesive or an optically clear resin”) an optically clear adhesive (OCA) (¶73 and fig. 1, “optically clear adhesive”) or an optically clear resin (OCR). (¶73 and fig. 1, “optically clear resin”)
Regarding claim 9, it is the stereoscopic image display device similar to the combination of disclosures of stereoscopic image display device claim 1.
Ha teaches additionally,
wherein the plurality of lens units (¶55, “lenses LS”) is disposed outside of the display panel, (¶55 and 67, lenses LS may overlap “non-active area NAA” disposed to the “surrounding four edges of the active area AA”)
The prior art Ha expresses a non-active area NAA that is an area of pixels that are not driven and surrounds the active area AA. In arrangements of the prior art, it is expressly not comprised of pixels or not driven pixels. The prior art further specifies the non-active area NAA is an area in which no image and/or video is displayed. In other words, the pixels in the non-active area NAA being non-driven pixels do not function as pixels and are tantamount to not being like the driven pixels active area AA. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the stereoscopic display with non-active area NAA arrangements of HA to create an embodiment similar to what is claimed since the arrangements of the pixel are and non-pixel are is similar since the non-pixel area is disposed around the pixel area. The combined arrangement of the stereoscopic display with the various possible non-active are allow for an area that can help in the process of alignment between an optical member and the display panel. Refer to rejection of claim 1 to teach the limitations of claim 9.
Regarding claim 10, Ha with Baek teaches the limitations of claim 9,
Ha teaches additionally,
plurality of lens units (¶57,63,91-92, fig. 4 and 1, “lenses LS” as depicted in fig. 1) is disposed to be inclined at a preset angle (¶57,63,91-92, fig. 4 and 1, “lenses LS may be slanted lenses inclined” with respect to “the second direction Y in a plan view” as depicted in fig. 1) with respect to a major axis direction (¶92-92 and fig. 4, lenses LS “inclined at the first angle θ1 with respect to the second direction Y” in a range from “greater than about 0 degrees and less than about 45 degrees”) of a subpixel provided in the display panel. (¶57,63,80, fig. 4 and 3, “lenses LS may be slanted lenses inclined” with respect to “the second direction Y in a plan view” as depicted in fig. 1, that corresponds to “short sides in the second direction Y” of “display panel DP” in which a plurality of pixels are arranged that include “a plurality of subpixels SPX” as depicted in fig. 3)
Regarding claim 12, dependent on claim 9, it is the stereoscopic image display device similar to claim 4, dependent on claim 1. Refer to rejection of claim 4 to teach the limitations of claim 12.
Regarding claim 16, Ha teaches,
A stereoscopic image display device, (¶48 and fig. 1, “stereoscopic image display device” such as display device 1 depicted in fig. 1) comprising:
a display panel (¶48-50,77, fig. 1 and 3, “display panel DP” as part of display device 1 depicted in fig. 1 includes “a substrate SUB and a plurality of pixels PX”) configured to display an image, (¶48-50,66, and fig. 1, “light rays generated by each pixel” of the display panel DP forms a “light field” to “display an image”) and including a plurality of pixel areas (¶65-66 and fig. 2, display panel DP includes “active area AA” in which a “plurality of pixels PX” are driven to provides “light to display an image” depicted in fig. 2) spaced apart from one another (¶65-66,80, and fig. 3, “active area AA may be an area” in which the plurality of pixels PX, that include “a plurality of subpixels SPX”, are arranged sequentially “to display an image and/or a video” as depicted in fig. 3) and a non-pixel area (¶65-66 and fig. 2, display panel DP includes “non-active area NAA” depicted in fig. 2) around the plurality of pixel areas; (¶65-66 and fig. 2, “non-active area NAA disposed around the active area AA” as depicted in fig. 2)
a plurality of micro light emitting diodes (LEDs) (¶62, “micro light emitting diodes”) independently disposed in the plurality of pixel areas; (¶62,65-66, and fig. 3, “display panel DP” which uses a “micro light emitting diode display panel, which uses micro light emitting diodes” such that the active area AA of the display panel DP is an area of “a plurality of pixels PX”) and
a plurality of lenticular lenses (¶48-52 and fig. 1, “plurality of lenses LS” as part of display device 1 of “lenticular lens LS” depicted in fig. 1) disposed in the plurality of pixel areas, (¶48 and fig. 1, “barrier or a lenticular lens LS, is disposed on a display panel DP”)
wherein the plurality of lenticular lenses (¶89,52, and fig. 1, “number of subpixels SPX overlapped by one lens LS” of the “plurality of lenses LS” depicted in fig. 1) are configured to implement a stereoscopic image, (¶89 and fig. 3, subpixels SPX overlapped by one lens LS provides a “stereoscopic image and a viewing angle control image” such as “three view images VI1 through VI3” depicted in fig. 3) and
wherein a number of the plurality of lenticular lenses (¶57-58 and fig. 3, “lenses LS” of an optical member OM depicted in fig. 3) in a pixel area of the plurality of pixel areas (¶57-58, 62-68, and fig. 3, lenses LS arranged at “predetermined intervals to form a lens array” over display panel DP with active are AA with “a plurality of pixels PX”) corresponds to a number of the plurality of micro light emitting diodes (LEDs) in the pixel area. (¶62-68,80, and fig. 3, “lenses LS” which overlap display panel DP of “micro light emitting diodes” of active area AA of a plurality of pixels PX that includes three of “a plurality of subpixels SPX” that correspond to each “lens LS” as depicted in fig. 3)
The prior art Ha expresses a non-active area NAA that is an area of pixels that are not driven and surrounds the active area AA. In arrangements of the prior art, it is expressly not comprised of pixels or not driven pixels. The prior art further specifies the non-active area NAA is an area in which no image and/or video is displayed. In other words, the pixels in the non-active area NAA being non-driven pixels do not function as pixels and are tantamount to not being like the driven pixels active area AA. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the stereoscopic display with non-active area NAA arrangements of HA to create an embodiment similar to what is claimed since the arrangements of the pixel are and non-pixel are is similar since the non-pixel area is disposed around the pixel area. The combined arrangement of the stereoscopic display with the various possible non-active are allow for an area that can help in the process of alignment between an optical member and the display panel.
But does not explicitly teach,
a non-pixel area around each pixel area
That is, as can be seen in the prior Ha, fig. 3 discloses display pixel areas spaced apart from one another when the figure depicts an arrangement of sets of sub pixels SPX in groupings of pixels PX. Additionally, fig. 2 discloses the entire active area AA surrounded by the non-active area NAA. These two disclosures in combination teach something similar to the claimed display including the plurality of pixel areas spaced apart from one another and a non-pixel area around the plurality of pixel areas, which lacks teaching the particular arrangement of a non-pixel area around each pixel area of the plurality of pixel areas.
However, Baek teaches additionally,
including a plurality of pixel areas (¶59 and fig. 2, “each pixel area PA of the display panel DP” with multiple iterations of “light emission area PXA and a non-light emission area NPXA” as depicted in fig. 2) spaced apart from one another (¶59 and fig. 2, multiple iterations of pixel area PA with “light emission are PXA” as depicted in fig. 2) and a non-pixel area (¶59 and fig. 2, multiple iterations of pixel area PA with “non-light emission are NPXA” as depicted in fig. 2) around each pixel area of the plurality of pixel areas; (¶59 and fig. 2, pixel area PA where “the non-light emission area NPXA is a light shield area that is adjacent to the light emission area PXA” positioned between apparent NPXA areas as depicted in fig. 2)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the stereoscopic display of Ha with the display device of Baek which positions pixels between non-light emission areas. This arrangement supports improvements in quality of virtual images.
Regarding claim 17, Ha with Baek teaches the limitations of claim 16,
Ha teaches additionally,
plurality of lenticular lenses is inclined at a preset angle (¶57,63,91-92, fig. 4 and 1, “lenses LS may be slanted lenses inclined” with respect to “the second direction Y in a plan view” as depicted in fig. 1) from the display panel. (¶57,63, fig. 4 and 1, “lenses LS may be slanted lenses inclined” with respect to “the second direction Y in a plan view” as depicted in fig. 1, that corresponds to “short sides in the second direction Y” of “display panel DP” as depicted in fig. 1)
Regarding claim 18, dependent on claim 16, it is the stereoscopic image display device similar to claim 4, dependent on claim 1. Refer to rejection of claim 4 to teach the limitations of claim 18.
Regarding claim 19, Ha with Baek teaches the limitations of claim 16,
Ha teaches additionally,
the plurality of micro LEDs (¶76-79,62, and fig. 3, “a plurality of pixels PX” which may be “micro light emitting diodes” disposed on the “substrate SUB” which face “the optical member OM” as depicted in fig. 3) is disposed between the display panel (¶76-79 and fig. 3, “display panel DP” which includes “a plurality of pixels PX disposed on the substrate SUB” and under “lenses LS” as depicted in fig. 3) and the plurality of lenticular lenses. (¶76-79,58, and fig. 3, “a plurality of pixels PX disposed on the substrate SUB” and under “lenses LS”, that is a “lenticular lens array”, as depicted in fig. 3)
Regarding claim 20, dependent on claim 16, it is the stereoscopic image display device similar to claim 6, dependent on claim 1. Refer to rejection of claim 6 to teach the limitations of claim 20.
Claim(s) 5,11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HA; Young Sang (US 20220221803 A1) in view of BAEK; SOOMIN et al. (US 20200295308 A1) in view of Raymond; Mark A. et al. (US 9786253 B2)
Regarding claim 5, Ha with Baek teaches the limitations of claim 1,
Ha teaches additionally,
preset angle is an angle with an inclination (¶57,63,91-92, fig. 4 and 1, “lenses LS may be slanted lenses inclined” with respect to “the second direction Y in a plan view” as depicted in fig. 1) in a range of degrees with respect to a major axis direction (¶92-92 and fig. 4, lenses LS “inclined at the first angle θ1 with respect to the second direction Y” in a range from “greater than about 0 degrees and less than about 45 degrees”) of a subpixel provided in the display panel. (¶57,63,80, fig. 4 and 3, “lenses LS may be slanted lenses inclined” with respect to “the second direction Y in a plan view” as depicted in fig. 1, that corresponds to “short sides in the second direction Y” of “display panel DP” in which a plurality of pixels are arranged that include “a plurality of subpixels SPX” as depicted in fig. 3)
but does not explicitly teach,
a range of approximately -25° to +25°
However, Raymond teaches additionally,
preset angle (15:51-67,16:1-3, and fig. 9-10, “angle, θ,” depicted in fig. 9-10) is an angle with an inclination in a range of approximately -25° to +25° (15:51-67,16:1-3, and fig. 9-10, “lenses 1010 applied on the screen in an 18.435 degree angle, θ” as depicted in fig. 10) with respect to a major axis direction (15:51-67,16:1-3, and fig. 9-10, angle of Line 920 “relative to vertical” to be 18.435 degrees depicted in fig. 9, which corresponds to “lenses 1010 applied on the screen in an 18.435 degree angle, θ” depicted in fig. 10) of a subpixel provided in the display panel. (15:51-67,16:1-3, and fig. 9-10, “Line 920 illustrates a lens direction relative to vertical to be 18.435 degrees (shown as angle, θ, in Fig. 9)” corresponding to “RGB pixels 914” depicted in fig. 9)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the stereoscopic display of Ha with the display device of Baek with the lens angle of Raymond which matches the lens angle with the display angle. This allows for a conversion program to use lenses of the screen to match the angle of the RGB pixel arrangement in a process that is less susceptible to flicker.
Regarding claim 11, dependent on claim 10, includes claim language similar to limitations found in claim 5, dependent on claim 1. Refer to rejection of claim 5 to teach the limitations of claim 11.
Claim(s) 7-8,14-15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over HA; Young Sang (US 20220221803 A1) in view of BAEK; SOOMIN et al. (US 20200295308 A1) in view of Tsai; Jie-Ting et al. (US 20200395517 A1)
Regarding claim 7, Ha with Baek teaches the limitations of claim 1,
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 7,
However, Tsai teaches additionally,
a plurality of anti-reflection layers (¶34 and fig. 2, “first anti-reflective coating 51” depicted in fig. 2 of “a second anti-reflective coating 52 disposed on the side opposite to the first anti-reflective coating 51”) disposed on the plurality of lens units. (¶34, and fig. 2, first anti-reflective coating 51 “disposed on the cover 4” depicted in fig. 2)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the stereoscopic display of Ha with the display device of Baek with the coating of Tsai which disposes an anti-reflective coating on a cover. This allows for improved light extraction efficiency.
Regarding claim 8, Ha with Baek in view of Tsai teaches the limitations of claim 7,
Tsai teaches additionally,
an anti-reflection layer (¶34 and 40, “first anti-reflective coating 51“) of the plurality of anti-reflection layers (¶34 and fig. 2, first anti-reflective coating 51 of “a second anti-reflective coating 52 disposed on the side opposite to the first anti-reflective coating 51”) has a refractive index in a range of approximately 1.3 to 1.5. (¶34 and 40, “refractive index of the first anti-reflective coating 51 is 1.35”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the stereoscopic display of Ha with the display device of Baek with the coating of Tsai which disposes an anti-reflective coating on a cover. This allows for improved light extraction efficiency.
Regarding claim 14, dependent on claim 9, it is the stereoscopic image display device similar to claim 7, dependent on claim 1. Refer to rejection of claim 7 to teach the limitations of claim 14.
Regarding claim 15, dependent on claim 14, it is the stereoscopic image display device similar to claim 8, dependent on claim 7. Refer to rejection of claim 8 to teach the limitations of claim 15.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JIMMY S LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7322. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 10AM-8PM 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, Joseph G. Ustaris can be reached at (571) 272-7383. 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 G USTARIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2483
/JIMMY S LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2483