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 .
Acknowledgement
Acknowledgement is made of applicant’s amendment made on 06/15/2026. Applicant’s submission filed has been entered and made of record.
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-13 are pending.
Response to Applicant’s Arguments
In response to “More specifically, in the first embodiment (for example), the second audio signal Yp and the third audio signal Yh are used to generate an audio signal Z that is used for playback through a sound output device 15 (see paragraphs [0018] and [0034]-[0040] of the specification as filed). In this way, the second audio signal Yp containing percussive components and the third audio signal Yh containing non-percussive components can be processed separately and appropriately to obtain a desired output result (see paragraphs [0036] and [0037] of the specification as filed). Thus, the second audio signal Yp is ultimately used to generate an output audio signal (audio signal Z) and the output audio signal is used to control the sound output device 15 to play back the sound achieved by the notch filter processing. As discussed at the Interview, controlling the sound output device to play back (reproduce) the processed audio signal (output audio signal) constitutes a practical application of the signal processing”.
Under Prong (2) of Step 2A, the goal is to determine whether the claim is directed to the recited exception by evaluating whether the claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application of the exception. See MPEP 2106.04II(A).
In particular, evaluating integration into a practical application requires identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception and evaluating those additional elements, individually and in combination, to determine whether they integrate the exception into a practical application, using one or more of the considerations laid out by the Supreme Court and the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”). See MPEP 2106.04(d).
According to the Supreme Court, a patent may issue for the means or method of producing a certain result, or effect, and not for the result or effect produced. Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 182 n. 7 (1981). Therefore, the focus is on whether the claim “focus on a specific means or method that improves the relevant technology or are instead directed to a result or effect that itself is the abstract idea and merely invoke generic processes and machinery”. Enfish, L.L.C. v. Microsoft Corp., 822 F.3d 1327, 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2016).
For example, in Enfish, the CAFC found it relevant to ask whether claims were directed to an improvement to computer functionality versus being directed to an abstract idea. Enfish, 822 F.3d at 1335. To that extent, the CAFC found that the claims were specifically directed to a self-referential table for a computer database. Id. at 1337. In particular, the claim language required a four step algorithm specifically directed to a self-referential table for a computer database that improved upon prior art information search and retrieval systems by employing a flexible, self-referential table to store data. Id. at 1336-37.
Therefore, the focus of the claims was on a specific asserted improvement in computer capabilities (i.e., the self-referential table for a computer database), not on economic or other tasks for which a computer was used in its ordinary capacity. Id. at 1336. See also MPEP 2106.04(d)I (“an improvement in the functioning of a computer or an improvement to other technology or technical field, as discussed in MPEP 2106.04(d)(1) and 2106.05(a)”).
In the instant application, claims 1, 6, 8, and 13 recite “using the second audio signal to generate an output audio signal; and driving a sound output device to reproduce sound based on the output audio signal” apply the steps of claims 1, 6, 8, and 13 to the sound output device such that the claims specifically asserted an improved sound output computer system that can separate particular acoustic components of an audio signal with high accuracy while reducing processing delays. See specification, US 2024/0420721 A1 at ¶5.
This is akin to the specifically asserted improvement in computer database search and retrieval functions of Enfish because the claims are focused on a specifically asserted improvement in computer capabilities (i.e., sound reproduction capability of a computer system), not merely on using the computer as a tool to implement notch filters.
Therefore, claims 1-13 are patent eligible.
In response to “However, Bathgate does not disclose or suggest changing the problematic ranges 220 and, thus, does not disclose or suggest changing thecenter frequencies… Bathgate appears to merely suppress the peak of a problematicrange 220 whenever it is determined that the amplitude of the signal in one of the problematic ranges 220 exceeds a threshold (see paragraphs [0059] and [0061] of Bathgate)”.
In view of such amendment to claims 1, 6, 8, and 13, anticipation rejection under Bathgate has been withdrawn. Upon further search and consideration, please see details of a new combination of references set forth below.
In response to “Specifically, Applicant has amended claim 6 to recite the feature of updating a first stop frequency of each of the plurality of first stages in accordance with the output signal of each of the plurality of first stages, respectively, and the feature of updating a second stop frequency each of a plurality of second stages in accordance with the output signal of each of the plurality of second stages, respectively. Applicant has further amended to recite that the each of the first stop frequency and the second stop frequency defines a stop band of frequencies to be suppressed” and “Also, Bathgate does not appear to disclose dividing the frequency domain into two frequency bands and executing notch filtering separately with respect to each of the two frequency bands as now clearly recited in claim 6. Therefore, claim 6 is not obvious over Bathgate”.
According to the specification, US 2024/0420721 A1 at ¶101: “In a specific example (Aspect 7) of Aspect 6, the first frequency band is a frequency band on a lower frequency side than the second frequency band…”. In other words, a first frequency band may be a lower frequency band and a second frequency band may be a higher frequency band, however defined.
Bathgate discloses identifying problematic frequency ranges 220 (¶54) to implement AGC routine to notch out problematic areas 220 that are identified by using a set of filter coefficients to attenuate only within the problematic frequency ranges 220 (¶56) by cascading one or more notch filters (¶57).
Specifically, given N problem areas where N = 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, determine N notch filters such that each of these problem areas 220 has a dedicated notch filter (¶58):
PNG
media_image1.png
510
745
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Here, N problem areas correspond to N predetermined frequency ranges of relatively high degree of nonlinear distortions described by respective distortion bandwidth with corresponding frequency intervals around respective center frequencies at which electronic device creates a relatively increased degree of nonlinear distortions (¶19).
The reason for determining N cascading notch filters for each of these problem areas is because such non-linear distortion caused by various mechanic and acoustic factors (¶54) cannot be reliably removed by echo cancelling unit 209 / echo suppressor 210 that determined the presence of echo within a plurality of spectral bands or frequency bins (¶44), which are frequency bands.
In other words, when echo cancelling unit 209 / echo suppressor 210 divided frequency domain audio signal into a plurality of frequency bands to suppress echoes therein (¶¶44-45), Automatic Gain Controller routine attenuate the audio band of the received signal with energy above a programmable threshold to reduce the non-linear distortion by identifying problematic areas / frequency intervals 220 within the respective frequency bands and configure a cascade of notch filters (¶57) to dedicate a notch filter for each of these problem areas 220 (¶58).
Therefore, Bathgate teaches dividing audio signal in the frequency domain into a plurality of frequency bands / spectral bands / frequency bins from lower frequencies to higher frequencies to suppress echo (¶44) and then identifying frequency intervals / problem areas 220 (Fig. 2b and ¶45, ¶57) within said frequency bands / audio bands to configure a cascade of notch filters to remove non-linear distortions therein (¶¶57-58).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 103 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-5 and 8-13 are rejected under 35 USC 103(a) as being unpatentable over Bathgate et al. (US 2013/0336494 A1) in view of Klinkby (US 8379894 B2).
Regarding Claims 1, 8, and 13, Bathgate discloses an audio processing system (¶24, electronic device comprising a reception unit configured to receive an audio input signal for rendering at the electronic device) comprising:
an electronic controller including at least one processor (¶25 and claim 12, a processor / computer executing software program on the electronic device) configured to acquire a first audio signal (¶56, receive signal 311) including percussive components (Figs. 2b and 4, ¶41, energy or power of emitted audio signal at non-harmonic frequencies other than the local maxima 221) and non-percussive components (Figs. 2b and 4, ¶41, energy or power of emitted audio signal at particular fundamental frequency f comprising local maxima 221 lie within frequency ranges 220),
serially execute a plurality of stages of adaptive notch filter processing on the first audio signal, thereby generating a second audio signal in which the non-percussive components in the first audio signal are suppressed (Fig. 4 and ¶57, cascading one or more notch filters to provide shaped response filter 412; per ¶56, filter 412 as a frequency dependent AGC filter 412 using a set of filter coefficients to attenuate signal 311 within problematic frequency ranges 220, which corresponds to local maxima 221 per ¶41);
using the second audio signal to generate an output audio signal (¶¶45-46, make use of automatic gain controller to apply a gain to the received signal to reduce amount of distortions; ¶57, AGC routine starts attenuating when energy in the audio band of the received signal 311 is above a programmable threshold by cascading one or more notch filters); and
driving a sound output device to reproduce sound based on the output audio signal (¶46, generate attenuated receive signal 313 when being rendered by transceiver 204),
each of the plurality of stages of the adaptive notch filter processing having an input signal and an output signal (¶58, the N notch filters may be designed such that the energy of the signal components of the received signal 311 (input signal), which lie within the problem area 220, is attenuated (attenuated output signal)) and corresponding stop frequency, the stop frequency defining a stop band of frequencies to be suppressed (¶58, a dedicated notch filter determined for each problem area described by respective center frequency; i.e., the stop frequency of each notch filter corresponds to the center frequency of the corresponding problem area).
Bathgate does not teach the stop frequency of each of the plurality of stages being updated in accordance with the output signal of each of the plurality of stages, respectively.
Klinkby discloses a hearing aid for reducing acoustic feedback (Abstract) using a plurality of stages of adaptive notch filters (Col 5, Rows 63-65, it is known to use a series of notch filters) wherein stop frequency of each of a plurality of stages of adaptive notch filter being updated in accordance with output signal of each of the plurality of stages notch filters respectively (Col 6, Rows 29-45, c(n) is the adaptive notch frequency of the notch filter that is adapted in accordance to output ef(n) of respective notch filter based on frequency adaptation equation 4; see also Col 10, Rows 38-42, adaptive notch filter output signal ef1(n)):
PNG
media_image2.png
265
517
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would’ve been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure the cascade of notch filters in Bathgate with narrow-band filter configuration of Klinkby (compare Klinkby, Col 5, Rows 63-65, narrowband filtering with Bathgate, ¶58, “the N notch filters may be designed such that the energy of the signal components of the received signal 311, which lie within the problem area 220, is attenuated, whereas the energy of the signal components of the received signal 311, which lie outside of the problem area, remains substantially unchanged”) where the stop frequency of each of the plurality of stages being updated in accordance with the output signal of each of the plurality of stages, respectively in order to achieve satisfactory feedback cancellation in case of a static signal composition (Klinkby, Col 10, Rows 38-47).
Further regarding claim 13, Bathgate discloses non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a program that causes a computer system to execute the process of claims 1 and 8 (¶26).
Regarding Claims 2 and 9, Bathgate discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to control the stop frequency in each of the plurality of stages of the adaptive notch filter processing in accordance with the output signal of the respective one of the plurality of stages such that the stop frequency approaches a frequency of non-percussive components in the input signal of each of the plurality of stages, respectively (¶56, the frequency dependent AGC filter 412 is adapted to attenuate the receive signal 311 relatively more within the problematic frequency ranges 220 corresponding to maxima 221 (see Figs. 2b and 4); ¶58, each problem area 220 described by a center frequency (w0, w1, w2 in Fig. 4) and configure a dedicated notch filter to model each of the problem areas 220; ¶59, the notch filters provide attenuation at the respective center frequencies w0, w1, w2).
Regarding Claims 3 and 10, Bathgate discloses wherein the non-percussive components contain a plurality of harmonic components (¶40, acoustic signal comprises signal power at higher harmonic frequencies of fundamental frequency f; Fig. 2a and Fig. 4 show at least the fundamental frequency, the second harmonic, and the third harmonic; compare Fig. 2 of the specification), and the at least one processor is configured to control the stop frequency of each of the plurality of stages such that the stop frequency approaches a frequency corresponding to one of the plurality of harmonic components in the input signal of the respective one of the plurality of stages (¶¶40-41, determine total harmonic distortion (THD) of the audio signal at the fundamental frequency f and from energy or power of the audio signal at all the higher and lower harmonic (and possibly non-harmonic) frequencies; ¶56, the frequency dependent AGC filter 412 is adapted to attenuate the receive signal 311 relatively more within the problematic frequency ranges 220 corresponding to maxima 221 (see Figs. 2b and 4); ¶58, each problem area 220 described by a center frequency (w0, w1, w2 in Fig. 4) and configure a dedicated notch filter to model each of the problem areas 220; ¶59, the notch filters provide attenuation at the respective center frequencies w0, w1, w2).
Regarding Claims 4 and 11, Bathgate discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to control the stop frequency of each of the plurality of stages of the adaptive notch filter processing such that frequencies of a plurality of stopbands that includes the stopband are arranged on a frequency axis at equal intervals, and the plurality of stages of the adaptive notch filter processing have the plurality of stopbands, respectively (¶52, Figs 2b and 3 shows bumps representing problem areas 220 or predetermined frequency range where each problem area 220 is described by center frequencies w0, w1, w2 (i.e., each problem area 220 corresponds to a predetermined frequency range {i.e., equal interval} centered at w0, w1, w2 respectively); ¶¶56-57, apply a cascading one or more notch filters to attenuate problematic frequency ranges 220 centered at w0, w1, w2; see Fig. 4).
Regarding Claims 5 and 12, Bathgate discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to subtract the second audio signal from the first audio signal, thereby generating a third audio signal (¶56, Fig. 4, apply frequency dependent AGC filter 412 (i.e., second audio signal) to signal 311 (i.e., first audio signal) in AGC filter unit 404 to yield the attenuated receive signal 413).
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 USC 103(a) as being unpatentable over Bathgate et al. (US 2013/0336494 A1) in view of Yasutomo et al. (“A study on Convergence Characteristics of Subband Adaptive Digital notch Filters Based on Pole-Location control”) and Klinkby (US 8379894 B2).
Regarding Claim 6, Bathgate discloses an audio processing method realized by a computer system (¶24, electronic device comprising a reception unit configured to receive an audio input signal for rendering at the electronic device), the method comprising:
generating, from a first audio signal (¶56, receive signal 311; e.g., ¶40, acoustic signal emitted by speaker 204 which is excited by a sinusoid at a particular fundamental frequency f, comprising signal power at the fundamental frequency f and at higher harmonic frequencies of the fundamental frequency f) containing percussive components (Figs. 2b and 4, ¶41, energy or power of emitted audio signal at non-harmonic frequencies other than the local maxima 221) and non-percussive components (Figs. 2b and 4, ¶41, energy or power of emitted audio signal at particular fundamental frequency f comprising local maxima 221 lie within frequency ranges 220, the local maxima 221 lie within frequency ranges 220, the frequency range 220 having a certain bandwidth / frequency interval around the center frequency within which total harmonic distortion “THD” (f) curve 206 exhibits a relative elevation leading to the local maximum 221), a first band signal in a first frequency band (¶44, echo cancelling unit 209 / echo suppressor 210 determined level or power of audio signals in a plurality of spectral bands or frequency bins cannot reliably remove non-linear distortion; ¶46 and ¶¶58-57, apply AGC routine to implement a cascade of one or more notch filters to attenuate non-linear distortions for respective frequency ranges / problem areas 220 N = 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 when energy in the audio band (i.e., spectral bands / frequency bins) of the received signal 311 is above a programmable threshold; Fig. 2a, a first plurality of frequency ranges 220 within respective spectral band or frequency bin), and a second band signal in a second frequency band (Fig. 2a, a second plurality of frequency ranges 220 within respective spectral band or frequency bin);
serially executing a plurality of stages of first adaptive notch filter (Fig. 4 and ¶57, cascading one or more notch filters to provide shaped response filter 412) processing on the first band signal, thereby generating a third band signal in which the non-percussive components in the first band signal are suppressed (¶56, filter 412 as a frequency dependent AGC filter 412 using a set of filter coefficients to attenuate signal 311 within problematic frequency ranges 220, which corresponds to local maxima 221 per ¶41; e.g., configuring a first notch filter to filter the first local maxima 221 and a second notch filter to filter the second local maxima 221 in Fig. 2b);
serially executing a plurality of stages of second adaptive notch filter processing on the second band signal (Fig. 4 and ¶57, cascading one or more notch filters to provide shaped response filter 412), thereby generating a fourth band signal in which the non-percussive components in the second band signal are suppressed (¶56, filter 412 as a frequency dependent AGC filter 412 using a set of filter coefficients to attenuate signal 311 within problematic frequency ranges 220, which corresponds to local maxima 221 per ¶41; e.g., configuring a third notch filter to filter the third local maxima 221 and a fourth notch filter to filter the fourth local maxima 221 in Fig. 2b); and
synthesizing the third band signal and the fourth band signal, thereby generating a second audio signal (¶56, apply frequency dependent AGC filter 412 to receive signal 311 in an AGC filter unit 404 to yield attenuated receive signal 413);
using the second audio signal to generate an output audio signal (¶¶45-46, make use of automatic gain controller to apply a gain to the received signal to reduce amount of distortions; ¶57, AGC routine starts attenuating when energy in the audio band of the received signal 311 is above a programmable threshold by cascading one or more notch filters); and
driving a sound output device to reproduce sound based on the output audio signal (¶46, generate attenuated receive signal 313 when being rendered by transceiver 204),
each of the plurality of first stages of the first adaptive notch filter processing having a first input signal and a first output signal (¶58, the N notch filters may be designed such that the energy of the signal components of the received signal 311 (input signal), which lie within the problem area 220, is attenuated (attenuated output signal)) and corresponding first stop frequency, the first stop frequency defining a first stop band of frequencies to be suppressed (¶58, a dedicated notch filter determined for each problem area described by respective center frequency; i.e., the stop frequency of each notch filter corresponds to the center frequency of the corresponding problem area),
each of the plurality of second stages of the second adaptive notch filter processing having a second input signal and a second output signal (¶58, the N notch filters may be designed such that the energy of the signal components of the received signal 311 (input signal), which lie within the problem area 220, is attenuated (attenuated output signal)) and corresponding second stop frequency, the second stop frequency defining a second stop band of frequencies to be suppressed (¶58, a dedicated notch filter determined for each problem area described by respective center frequency; i.e., the stop frequency of each notch filter corresponds to the center frequency of the corresponding problem area).
Further, the second frequency band is inherently or obviously different from the first frequency band in Bathgate.
For example, Yasutomo discloses adaptive notch filters with improved estimation accuracy (Abstract) that serially executing a plurality of first stages of first adaptive notch filter processing on a first band signal, serially executing a plurality of second stages of second adaptive notch filter processing on a second band signal (p. 144, “Figure 1 shows the configuration of a multiple adaptive notch filter consisting of a series of adaptive notch filters using second-order all-pass filters…”; p. 145, “The cutoff frequency for band division is based on half the highest frequency of the input signal, and the input signal is divided into a low-band side and a high-band side”; i.e., configure a first series of adaptive notch filters for low-band side and a second series of adaptive notch filters for high-band side).
If not inherent, then it would’ve been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure the first frequency band of Bathgate as the low band side (lower frequency bands) and the second frequency band of Bathgate as the high band side (higher frequency bands) in order to have the advantage of having notch filters being orthogonal and simple to configure (Yasutomo, Abstract) when attenuating energy above the programmable threshold (Bathgate, ¶57) in the respective frequency bands / audio band of the received signal 311 (in the low band side and the high band side).
Bathgate does not teach the first stop frequency of each of the plurality of stages being updated in accordance with the first output signal of each of the plurality of first stages, respectively and the second stop frequency of each of the plurality of stages being updated in accordance with the second output signal of each of the plurality of second stages, respectively.
Klinkby discloses a hearing aid for reducing acoustic feedback (Abstract) using a plurality of stages of adaptive notch filters (Col 5, Rows 63-65, it is known to use a series of notch filters) wherein stop frequency of each of a plurality of stages of adaptive notch filter being updated in accordance with output signal of each of the plurality of stages notch filters respectively (Col 6, Rows 29-45, c(n) is the adaptive notch frequency of the notch filter that is adapted in accordance to output ef(n) of respective notch filter based on frequency adaptation equation 4; see also Col 10, Rows 38-42, adaptive notch filter output signal ef1(n)):
PNG
media_image2.png
265
517
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would’ve been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure the plurality of first stages of first adaptive notch filter and the plurality of second stages of second adaptive notch filter in Bathgate with adaptive notch filter configuration of Klinkby (compare Klinkby, Col 5, Rows 63-65, narrowband filtering with Bathgate, ¶58, “the N notch filters may be designed such that the energy of the signal components of the received signal 311, which lie within the problem area 220, is attenuated, whereas the energy of the signal components of the received signal 311, which lie outside of the problem area, remains substantially unchanged”) such that the first stop frequency of each of the plurality of first stages being updated in accordance with the first output signal of each of the plurality of first stages, respectively, and the second stop frequency of each of the plurality of second stages being updated in accordance with the second output signal of each of the plurality of second stages, respectively in order to achieve satisfactory feedback cancellation in case of a static signal composition (Klinkby, Col 10, Rows 38-47).
Regarding Claim 7, Bathgate discloses wherein the first frequency band is lower than the second frequency band (Fig. 2b, the first two frequency intervals 220 and corresponding local maxima 221 being lower in frequency than the second two frequency intervals 220 and corresponding local maxima 221; compare Yasutomo, p. 145, “…and the input signal is divided into a low-band side and a high-band side” where low band side is lower than the high band side).
Bathgate does not suggest that the number of the plurality of stages of the first adaptive notch filter processing is greater than the number of the plurality of stages of the second adaptive notch filter processing.
Bathgate does suggest that the number of frequency intervals corresponding to problem areas may comprise five different frequency intervals (¶52, in case of N problem areas (e.g., N = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5)).
Applying the established function of cascading one or more notch filters with respective filter coefficients to attenuate receive signal 311 within the problematic frequency ranges / intervals (¶¶56-57), the plurality of frequency intervals / problematic frequency ranges 220 can be predictably divided as follows:
(1) first frequency band comprises frequency intervals N = 1, 2, 3 and second frequency band comprises frequency intervals N = 4, 5; or
(2) first frequency band comprises frequency intervals N = 1, 2 and second frequency band comprises frequency intervals N = 3, 4, 5,
In scenario (1), the first frequency band would require a cascade of 3 notch filters with respective filter coefficients to attenuate frequency intervals 220 at N = 1, 2, 3 and the second frequency band would require a cascade of 2 notch filters with respective filter coefficients to attenuate frequency intervals 220 at N = 4, 5 such that the number of the plurality of stages of the first adaptive notch filter processing (notch filters for N = 1, 2, 3) being greater than the number of the plurality of stages of the second adaptive notch filter processing (notch filters for N = 4, 5).
It would’ve been obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to apply the cascade of one or more notch filters such that the number of the plurality of stages of the first adaptive notch filter processing is greater than the number of the plurality of stages of the second adaptive notch filter processing in order to attenuate problematic frequency ranges / intervals (Bathgate, ¶56) when the number of N problematic frequency ranges / intervals are N = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 (Bathgate, ¶52).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds 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 extension fee 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 examiner Richard Z. Zhu whose telephone number is 571-270-1587 or examiner’s supervisor Hai Phan whose telephone number is 571-272-6338. Examiner Richard Zhu can normally be reached on M-Th, 0730:1700.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/RICHARD Z ZHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2654 08/25/2026
Prosecution Insights