DETAILED ACTION
*Note in the following document:
1. Texts in italic bold format are limitations quoted either directly or conceptually from claims/descriptions disclosed in the instant application.
2. Texts in regular italic format are quoted directly from cited reference or Applicant’s arguments.
3. Texts with underlining are added by the Examiner for emphasis.
4. Texts with
5. Acronym “PHOSITA” stands for “Person Having Ordinary Skill In The Art”.
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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over various claims of U.S. Patent No. US 11,763,559 B2 and US 12,100,207 B2 in view of Yamamoto et al. (US 2019/0019348 A1). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claim of the instant application is either anticipated by, or the obvious variation of, the claim of U.S. Patent No. US 11,763,559 B2 and US 12,100,207 B2, as shown in the table below. Note the difference between the instant application and above cited US patents are the difference between whether the first and second input are from the first user or the second user. Yamatomo teaches the system is for shared mixed environment where any user within the system can make the annotation. Therefore it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Yamatomo and modified above cited US patents to change the inputs from the first user to the second user in order to create a shared virtual environment to the augmented reality environment.
Instant Application:
US 12,100,207 B2
US 11,763,559 B2:
Claim 1. A system comprising:
a wearable device comprising a transmissive display; and
one or more processors configured to execute a method comprising:
presenting a virtual object to a user at a first position via the transmissive display of the wearable device;
in response to a first input provided at a first time by a second user, presenting a virtual annotation at a first displacement from the first position via the transmissive display;
transmitting first data to a remote server, the first data associated with the virtual object, the virtual annotation and the first displacement;
in response to a second input provided at a second time by the second user, presenting the virtual annotation at a second displacement from the first position via the transmissive display, the second displacement different from the first displacement; and
transmitting second data to the remote server, the second data associated with the virtual object, the virtual annotation, and the second displacement; wherein:
the first input is provided via a first annotation menu dynamically presented to the second user at the first time at a fixed orientation relative to an orientation of the second user at the first time, and
the second input is provided via a second annotation menu dynamically presented to the second user at the second time at a fixed orientation relative to an orientation of the second user at the second time.
Claim 1. A system comprising:
a wearable device comprising a transmissive display; and
one or more processors configured to execute a method comprising:
presenting a virtual object to a user at a first position via the transmissive display of the wearable device;
at a first time, receiving a first input from the user;
in response to receiving the first input, presenting a virtual annotation at a first displacement from the first position via the transmissive display;
transmitting first data to a remote server, the first data associated with the virtual object, the virtual annotation, and the first displacement;
at a second time later than the first time, receiving a second input from the user;
in response to receiving the second input, presenting the virtual annotation to the user at a second displacement from the first position via the transmissive display, the second displacement different from the first displacement; and
transmitting second data to the remote server, the second data associated with the virtual object, the virtual annotation, and the second displacement, wherein:
receiving the first input from the user comprises receiving the first input via a first annotation menu dynamically presented to the user at the first time at a fixed orientation relative to an orientation of the user, and
receiving the second input from the user comprises receiving the second input via a second annotation menu dynamically presented to the user at the second time at a fixed orientation relative to an orientation of the user.
Claim 1. A system comprising:
a wearable device comprising a transmissive display; and
one or more processors configured to execute a method comprising:
presenting a virtual object to a first user at a first position via the transmissive display of the wearable device;
receiving a first input from the first user;
in response to receiving the first input, presenting a virtual annotation at a first displacement from the first position via the transmissive display;
transmitting first data to a second user, the first data associated with the virtual annotation and the first displacement;
receiving a second input from the second user;
in response to receiving the second input, presenting the virtual annotation to the first user at a second displacement from the first position via the transmissive display, the second displacement different from the first displacement; and
transmitting second data to a remote server, the second data associated with the virtual object, the virtual annotation, the second displacement, and the first position, wherein:
receiving the first input from the first user comprises receiving the first input via a first annotation menu dynamically presented to the first user at a fixed orientation relative to an orientation of the first user, and
receiving the second input from the second user comprises receiving the second input via a second annotation menu dynamically presented to the second user at a fixed orientation relative to an orientation of the second user.
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
5
5
5
6
6
6
7
7
7
8
8
9
9
9
10
10
10
11
11
11
12
12
13
13
13
14
14
14
15
15
15
16
16
16
17
17
17
18
18
19
19
19
20
20
20
7 or 14
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 of this title, 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.
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.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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, 3-6, 8, 10-13, 15 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto et al. (US 2019/0019348 A1) in view of Gebbie et al. (US 2019/0180506 A1) and Wheeler et al. (US 2013/0106674 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Yamamoto teaches or suggests a system comprising:
a wearable device comprising a transmissive display ([0008]: FIG. 1 is an example implementation of an augmented and/or virtual reality system including a head mounted display in communication with external input devices. [0003]: An augmented reality (AR) and/or virtual reality (VR) system may generate an immersive, three-dimensional (3D) virtual environment. A user may interact with objects in this virtual environment using various electronic devices, such as, for example, a helmet or other head mounted device including a display, glasses or goggles that a user looks through when viewing a display device, one or more handheld electronic devices such as controllers, joysticks and the like, gloves fitted with sensors, keyboards, mouse, and other electronic devices); and
one or more processors (Fig.3: Processor 390 and 309) configured to execute a method comprising:
presenting a virtual object (Fig.7B: the two virtual houses shown on virtual surface 600C) to a user (Fig.7B user 1) at a first position via the transmissive display of the wearable device (Fig.7B and [0034]: [0034] As shown in FIG. 7B, the first user A (or the second user B) may select one of the virtual surfaces 600, for example, the virtual surface 600C, for review by, for example, selecting the virtual surface 600C using one, or both, of the controllers A1, A2. In reviewing the selected virtual surface 600C, the first user A may, for example, enlarge the selected virtual surface 600C, for example, in the manner described above with respect to FIGS. 5D-5E and 6A-6B. The first user A may also add notes, sketches or other annotations to the virtual surface 600C, for example, in the manner described above with respect to FIGS. 5A-5C);
PNG
media_image1.png
425
570
media_image1.png
Greyscale
in response to a first input provided at a first time by a second user (Fig.7B user B), presenting a virtual annotation at a first displacement from the first position via the transmissive display ([0035]: The second user B may view the virtual surface 600C, which has been annotated by the first user A, either substantially at the same time, in the shared virtual environment 550, or at a later time, and may further revise or otherwise annotate the virtual surface 600C);
transmitting first data to a remote server, the first data associated with the virtual object, the virtual annotation and the first displacement (Fig.9 and [0068]: the systems and techniques described here can be implemented in a computing system that includes a back end component (e.g., as a data server), or that includes a middleware component (e.g., an application server), or that includes a front end component (e.g., a client computer having a graphical user interface or a Web browser through which a user can interact with an implementation of the systems and techniques described here), or any combination of such back end, middleware, or front end components. The components of the system can be interconnected by any form or medium of digital data communication (e.g., a communication network). Examples of communication networks include a local area network (“LAN”), a wide area network (“WAN”), and the Internet. It would have been obvious to a PHOSITA that the HMD is a client and it is the HMD user who provides the first data associated with the virtual object, the virtual annotation and the first displacement);
in response to a second input provided at a second time by the second user, presenting the virtual annotation at a second displacement from the first position via the transmissive display, the second displacement different from the first displacement ([0042]: Virtual objects may be moved, for example, from the relatively near field to the relatively far field, in a similar manner. For example, after annotation of the virtual surface 600, the user may wish to move the annotated virtual surface 600 to clear space in the near virtual field for a new task. The user may select the annotated virtual surface 600, the virtual surface 600 representing the selected virtual object in the virtual environment, as shown in FIG. 7J, for example, in the manner described above. Upon detection that the virtual surface 600 has been selected, the user may implement a gesture indicating a desired movement of the selected virtual surface 600. For example, the user implement a rotating or twisting gesture, as shown in FIG. 7K, to move the selected virtual surface 600 away from the user, from the near virtual field toward the far virtual field); and
transmitting second data to the remote server, the second data associated with the virtual object, the virtual annotation, and the second displacement ([0052]: Also, multiple computing devices 1000 may be connected, with each device providing portions of the necessary operations (e.g., as a server bank, a group of blade servers, or a multi-processor system). Also see [0056], [0068]-[0069] and [0077]. It would have been obvious to a PHOSITA that the HMD is a client and it is the HMD user who provides the second data associated with the virtual object, the virtual annotation, and the second displacement);
Yamamoto fails to disclose wherein: the first input is provided via a first annotation menu dynamically presented to the second user at the first time at a fixed orientation relative to an orientation of the second user at the first time, and the second input is provided via a second annotation menu dynamically presented to the second user at the second time at a fixed orientation relative to an orientation of the second user at the second time.
However Gebbie discloses making annotation selection through virtual menu ([0037]: In some embodiments, when a user wants to add an annotation to a virtual object, the user directs the tool (e.g., handheld controller, finger, eye gaze, or similar means) to intersect with the virtual object, the intersection is detected, and the user is provided a menu to draw or attach. The menu options may be programmable into a controller, or provided a virtual menu that appears when the intersection occurs).
Wheeler discloses determining a gaze axis within a field of view of a head-mounted display (HMD), wherein the HMD is configured to display virtual images within the field of view. The method further includes determining a reference axis related to the HMD, adjusting a tracking rate based on the gaze axis and the reference axis, and moving the virtual images within the field of view based on the gaze axis, the reference axis and the tracking rate ([0004]). Wheeler discloses based on detected eye gaze, rotating virtual menu and keeping the menu at a fixed orientation relative to an orientation of the user’s eye gaze direction ([0098]: FIG. 7D illustrates an embodiment 732 where the HMD user may be travelling on the subway car at position 708. At that position 708, the HMD user is traveling forward and also rotating gradually to the left. If the user interface is not corrected by an eye-tracking system, the controller may interpret the HMD movement as an intentional movement to turn left. In general, this motion may lead to rotating the menus to the right. In this case, the photos 720 menu may be moved towards the center of the HMD display 716. However, FIG. 7E illustrates an embodiment 736 that may use an eye-tracking system to correctly determine the actual desired speed of user interface movement. In this case, the HMD user is moving through position 708, while moving forward and rotating to the left. At the same time, an eye gaze point 738 may be determined to remain at the center of the HMD display 716. The eye gaze fixation may cause the menu to not rotate).
PNG
media_image2.png
504
426
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Both Gebbie’s and Wheeler’s applications are related to using head-mounted glass in mixed reality (Gebbie Fig.1A. Wheeler Fig.2). Therefore it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching of Gebbie and Wheeler into that of Yamamoto and to include the limitation of the first input is provided via a first annotation menu dynamically presented to the second user at the first time at a fixed orientation relative to an orientation of the second user at the first time, and the second input is provided via a second annotation menu dynamically presented to the second user at the second time at a fixed orientation relative to an orientation of the second user at the second time in order to allow a user to select a personized annotation even when the user is moving status.
Regarding Claim 3, Yamamoto modified by Gebbie further teaches or suggests wherein the method further comprises exiting a session instance, the session instance configured to store the second data (Yamamoto [0035]: The second user B may view the virtual surface 600C, which has been annotated by the first user A, either substantially at the same time, in the shared virtual environment 550, or at a later time, and may further revise or otherwise annotate the virtual surface 600C. For example, in response to the note left by the first user A, suggesting the addition of a park, the second user B may also select the virtual surface 600E, including park information, as shown in FIG. 7D. The second user B may use the information stored on the virtual surface 600E to further annotate the virtual surface 600C, as shown in FIG. 7E. The further annotated virtual surface 600C may then be available for review by the first user A, either substantially real time in the shared virtual space 550, or at a later time by accessing the virtual surface 600C from storage as shown in FIG. 7F. Gebbie [0084]: FIG. 13A is a flowchart of an embodiment of a method for creating a modified virtual object using an annotation and the virtual object. As shown in FIG. 13A, the virtual object is identified from storage (1341a). For each of one or more annotations, the following steps 1342a through 1344a are carried out. The annotation is identified from storage (1342a) and Fig.13A).
Regarding Claim 4, Yamamoto further teaches or suggests concurrently with presenting the virtual annotation to the user, presenting a second virtual annotation to the user, the second virtual annotation different from the virtual annotation ([0035]: The second user B may view the virtual surface 600C, which has been annotated by the first user A, either substantially at the same time, in the shared virtual environment 550, or at a later time, and may further revise or otherwise annotate the virtual surface 600C. For example, in response to the note left by the first user A, suggesting the addition of a park, the second user B may also select the virtual surface 600E, including park information, as shown in FIG. 7D. The second user B may use the information stored on the virtual surface 600E to further annotate the virtual surface 600C, as shown in FIG. 7E. The further annotated virtual surface 600C may then be available for review by the first user A, either substantially real time in the shared virtual space 550, or at a later time by accessing the virtual surface 600C from storage as shown in FIG. 7F).
Regarding Claim 5, Yamamoto further teaches or suggests wherein presenting the virtual object comprises presenting the virtual object at a first size, wherein the virtual object comprises target dimension data, and wherein the method further comprises: in response to a third input provided at a third time by the second user, presenting the virtual object at a second size to the user, wherein the second size is associated with the target dimension data; and transmitting third data to the remote server, the third data associated with the second size ([0016]: The annotations received on virtual surfaces may be stored and saved for future reference by the user, and/or by a subsequent user, and may be updated, further annotated, and/or otherwise revised, by the user and/or the subsequent user. A size and/or shape of the virtual notation surface may be adjusted in response to user manipulation. The ability to re-size and/or re-shape these virtual notation surfaces may allow the virtual surfaces to be adapted to a relatively large input scale of a particular virtual marking implement, and may also allow the resulting annotations on the virtual surfaces to be displayed at a reduced scale having improved granularity by further adjusting the size and/or scale of the virtual notation surface after entry of the annotation).
Regarding Claim 6, Yamamoto modified by Gebbie further teaches or suggests in response to a third input provided at a third time by the second user, presenting a virtual location indicator to the user, wherein the virtual location indicator is associated with a virtual comment; and transmitting third data to the remote server, the third data associated with the virtual location indicator (Yamamoto Fig.7C, notice comment “add park”. Gebbie Fig. 11B: notice comment “Raise this line” and [0036]: This disclosure relates to different virtual collaborative environments for adding annotations (also referred to as “notations”) to multi-dimensional virtual objects. Such annotations can include text, recorded audio, recorded video, an image, a handwritten note, a drawing, a document (e.g., PDF, Word, other), movement by the virtual object, a texture or color mapping, an emoji, an emblem and other items).
PNG
media_image3.png
387
608
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claims 8 and 10-13, Claims 8 and 10-13 are in similar scopes to Claims 1 and 3-6 except in the format of “method”. Therefore the rejections to Claims 1 and 3-6 are also applied to Claims 8 and 10-13.
Regarding Claims 15 and 17-19, Claims 15 and 17-19 are in similar scopes to Claims 1 and 4-6 except in the format of “non-transitory computer-readable medium”. Therefore the rejections to Claims 1 and 4-6 are also applied to Claims 15 and 17-19.
Claims 2, 9 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto et al. (US 2019/0019348 A1) in view of Gebbie et al. (US 2019/0180506 A1) and Wheeler et al. (US 2013/0106674 A1) as applied to Claims 1, 8 and 15 above, and further in view of Cooper et al. (US 2020/0225904 A1).
Regarding Claim 2, Yamamoto further discloses wherein presenting the virtual object comprises presenting the virtual object based on a first application configured to run on the wearable device (Fig.9 and [0058]: The processor may provide, for example, for coordination of the other components of the device 1050, such as control of user interfaces, applications run by device 1050, and wireless communication by device 1050).
But Yamamoto modified by Gebbie fails to explicitly disclose wherein presenting the virtual annotation comprises presenting the virtual annotation based on data from a plugin library, the plugin library configured to be accessed by multiple applications configured to run on the wearable device.
However Cooper, in the same field of endeavor, teaches or suggests presenting the virtual annotation comprises presenting the virtual annotation based on data from a plugin library, the plugin library configured to be accessed by multiple applications configured to run on the wearable device ([0021]: The server 140 and mobile device 110 may be connected to a plurality of plugin servers 145 that may communicate with the server 140 and mobile device 110 to perform object recognition and determination of supplemental content/follow-up functionality. Access to the plugin servers 145 may be configured by the server 140 in communication with the mobile device 110, upon which the user may have installed one or more applications or plugins that indicate the plugins should be consulted during certain AR processes. Upon detection of authorization of the plugins, the plugins are activated (150). The system may then obtain (152) sensor data, such as camera data from the camera(s) 106. The system may then send (154) the sensor data to a plugin server to determine if the plugin server may identify any objects based on the sensor data. If an object is identified, identification data may be sent from a plugin server 145 to the server 140 or directly to the mobile device 110. If identification data was created by the server 140 or mobile device 110, rather than a plugin server 145, identification data may be sent (156) to a different plugin server to see if the new plugin server may identify supplemental content related to the identification data. [0102]: A user may have a large library of applications that feature plugins). Therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Cooper into that of Yamamoto as modified and to add the limitation of wherein presenting the virtual annotation comprises presenting the virtual annotation based on data from a plugin library, the plugin library configured to be accessed by multiple applications configured to run on the wearable device in order to expand the extended reality capabilities as suggested by Cooper (Abstract).
Regarding Claim 9, Claim 9 is in similar scope to Claim 2 except in the format of “method”. Therefore the rejection to Claim 2 is also applied to Claim 9.
Regarding Claim 16, Claim 16 is in similar scope to Claim 2 except in the format of “non-transitory computer-readable medium”. Therefore the rejection to Claim 2 is also applied to Claim 16.
Claims 7, 14 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamamoto et al. (US 2019/0019348 A1) in view of Gebbie et al. (US 2019/0180506 A1) and Wheeler et al. (US 2013/0106674 A1) as applied to Claims 1, 8 and 15 above, and further in view of Chen et al. (US 2017/0352196 A1).
Regarding Claim 7, Yamamoto modified by Gebbie and further teaches or suggests receiving an indication to present the first annotation menu to the user via the transmissive display (Gebbie [0037]: In some embodiments, when a user wants to add an annotation to a virtual object, the user directs the tool (e.g., handheld controller, finger, eye gaze, or similar means) to intersect with the virtual object, the intersection is detected, and the user is provided a menu to draw or attach. The menu options may be programmable into a controller, or provided a virtual menu that appears when the intersection occurs).
But Yamamoto as modified does not explicitly disclose determining whether a view of the first annotation menu is occluded by the virtual object; and in response to determining that the view of the first annotation menu is occluded by the virtual object, repositioning the first annotation menu such that the first annotation menu is not occluded by the virtual object.
However Chen disclosed a skilled person before the effective filing date of the claimed invention had already known to reposition a blocked annotation to avoid occlusion ([0021]: In some embodiments, annotations that would otherwise be occluded can be offset (e.g., relocated) and linked to their corresponding object, for instance, by a line (e.g., line segment)). Therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Chen into that of Yamamoto as modified and to add the limitation of determining whether a view of the first annotation menu is occluded by the virtual object; and in response to determining that the view of the first annotation menu is occluded by the virtual object, repositioning the first annotation menu such that the first annotation menu is not occluded by the virtual object in order to allow users to see the annotation menu clearly.
Regarding Claim 14, Claim 14 is in similar scope to Claim 7 except in the format of “method”. Therefore the rejection to Claim 7 is also applied to Claim 14.
Regarding Claim 20, Claim 20 is in similar scope to Claim 7 except in the format of “non-transitory computer-readable medium”. Therefore the rejection to Claim 7 is also applied to Claim 20.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YINGCHUN HE whose telephone number is (571)270-7218. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00 MT.
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, Xiao M Wu can be reached at 571-272-7761. 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.
/YINGCHUN HE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2613
Prosecution Insights