DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 16-17, and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dabroski et al (WO 2020/101514 A1) in view of Lichtenauer et al (NPL Hiding Correlation-Based Watermark Templates using Secret Modulation), in further view of Renz et al (US 20180079251).
Regarding claim 1, Dabroski discloses a method for producing a printed image for a security feature (abstract A latent image security feature for a security document, comprises a substrate with a convex structure emerging by superimposing at least two images), the method comprising:
printing a printed image designed by a method for designing a first layer of a printed image in a security feature, the security feature comprising an array of optical elements overlaying the printed image (abstract A latent image security feature for a security document, comprises a substrate with a convex structure emerging by superimposing at least two images; pg. 5 lines 6-9 the latent image security feature is made in a document by Intaglio printing technique as an overprint with an opaque ink combined with embossing. The security feature forms a convex structure consisting of convex lines covered with the printing ink), the method comprising:
receiving an original image, the original image comprising rows of pixels extending in an x direction and columns of pixels extending in a y direction (Fig. 1a shows first image P as defined in the form of the first pattern of lines; this has pixels extending in an x direction and columns of pixels extending in a y direction);
Dabroski fails to teach where Lichtenauer teaches selecting a first section of the original image, wherein the first section is selected to include only one portion of the original image (pg. 502 Fig. 2 At embedding the encrypted and encoded message m is allocated in M pixels in the NxN block according to a key. The remaining NxN-M pixels are filled with a pseudo random sequence);
generating a first block by combining the pixels of only the first section with pixels of only the first section mirrored in both the x and y directions (pg. 502 Fig. 2 The block is upsampled and flipped horizontally and vertically to obtain the watermark macro-block b of size 4Nx4N. The tiled watermark (b) shows the symmetry of the macro-block introduced by flipping.);, and
Dabroski further fails to teach where Renz teaches assigning to the first block a location within the first layer of the printed image, the location corresponding to the location of the first section within the original image (Renz ¶58 As seen in FIG. 7, the second image 630 and the first image 620 cooperate at the locations at which they overlap to provide a security feature 650; the first image 620 (and/or layer including the first image 620) and the second image 630 (and/or layer including the second image 630) cooperate to provide the security feature 650 with an optically variable effect).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have implemented the teaching of selecting a first section of the original image, wherein the first section is selected to include only one portion of the original image and generating a first block by combining the pixels of only the first section with pixels of only the first section mirrored in both the x and y directions from Lichtenauer, and the teaching of assigning to the first block a location within the first layer of the printed image, the location corresponding to the location of the first section within the original image from Renz, into the method as disclosed by Dabroski. The motivation for doing this is to provide a solution to the problem of geometrical distortion of watermarked images, and further to improve security for a printed document.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer and Renz disclose method according to claim 1, wherein generating a first block of the printed image comprises:
i) mirroring the pixels of the first section in the x direction, about the right edge of the first section (Lichtenauer pg. 502 Fig. 2 The block is upsampled and flipped horizontally and vertically to obtain the watermark macro-block b of size 4Nx4N. The tiled watermark (b) shows the symmetry of the macro-block introduced by flipping);
ii) mirroring the pixels of the result of step i in the y direction, about the lower edge of the result of step I (Lichtenauer pg. 502 Fig. 2 The block is upsampled and flipped horizontally and vertically to obtain the watermark macro-block b of size 4Nx4N. The tiled watermark (b) shows the symmetry of the macro-block introduced by flipping); or
i) mirroring the pixels of the first section in the y direction, about the lower edge of the first section;
ii) mirroring the pixels of the result of step i in the x direction, about the right edge of the result of step i.
The motivation to combine the references is discussed above in the rejection for claim 1.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer and Renz disclose the method according to claim 1, further comprising: sizing the first block such that the size of the first block relative to the printed image is equal to the size of the first section relative to the original image (Dabroski Fig. 2 and Figs. 5-8 for resultant images; wherein the block is sized equal to the size of the first section relative to the original).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer and Renz disclose the method according to any preceding claim 1, wherein the first and/or further sections is selected to be a square (Dabroski Fig. 2 and Figs. 5-8 for resultant images; wherein the section is a square).
Regarding claim 25, the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer and Renz do not specifically disclose a non-transitory computer readable medium, storing computer readable instructions, which when executed, cause a machine comprising a processor to perform the method of claim 1, but a computer readable medium and processor would be obvious in order to perform the steps of the method (e.g. Renz ¶39 method 100, for example, may employ or be performed by structures or aspects of various embodiments (e.g., systems and/or methods)).
Claim(s) 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer and Renz as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of El-Ghoroury (US 20180083423).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer and Renz disclose the method according to claim 3, but fails to teach where El-Ghoroury teaches wherein the first block is sized to be overlaid by exactly one optical element of the array of optical elements (¶82 The micro-optical elements may be sized and the following pixels aligned with the array of micro-optical elements to provide a single micro-optical element for each pixel).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have implemented the teaching of wherein the first block is sized to be overlaid by exactly one optical element of the array of optical elements from El-Ghoroury into the method as disclosed by the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer and Renz. The motivation for doing this is to improve alignment techniques.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer, Renz, El-Ghoroury disclose the method according to claim 4, wherein the array of optical elements comprises rows of optical elements extending in the x direction and columns of optical elements extending in the y direction, further comprising: rotating, by a rotation angle, the first layer of the printed image relative to the array of optical elements, such that respective rows and columns of blocks in the first layer and the rows and columns of the optical elements are offset by the rotation angle (Dabroski page 3 lines 22-24 Preferably, the second image is the first image or a reduced or enlarged copy thereof, preferably rotated by 0 to 360 degrees).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer, Renz, El-Ghoroury disclose the method according to claim 5, wherein the rotation angle is between 0.1° and 5° (Dabroski page 3 lines 22-24 Preferably, the second image is the first image or a reduced or enlarged copy thereof, preferably rotated by 0 to 360 degrees).
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer, Renz, El-Ghoroury as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Hiraoka (US 20100111367).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer, Renz, El-Ghoroury disclose the method according to claim 5, but fails to teach where Hiraoka teaches receiving a further original image (¶75 e.g. each photographed block image); and designing a second layer of the printed image from the further original image, using the steps applied to the original image to design the first layer of the printed image, wherein the rotation angle applied to the first layer of the printed image is different to the rotation angle applied to the second layer of the printed image (¶75 The device 35 then combines the first image region of a first block image photographed by the camera 20 at a first angular position of the block RW and the second image region of a second block image photographed by the camera 20 at a second angular position of the block RW when it has rotated for the angle of 2.theta. from the first angular position.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have implemented the teaching of receiving a further original image and designing a second layer of the printed image from the further original image, using the steps applied to the original image to design the first layer of the printed image, wherein the rotation angle applied to the first layer of the printed image is different to the rotation angle applied to the second layer of the printed image from Hiraoka into the method as disclosed by the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer, Renz, and El-Ghoroury. The motivation for doing this is to improve alignment techniques.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer, Renz, El-Ghoroury, and Hiraoka disclose the method according to claim 9, further comprising compositing the rotated first and second layers to form the printed image (Hiraoka ¶75 The image combining device 35 divides each photographed block image into a first image region and a second image region along an imaginary line in the block image that corresponds to the tentative spin axis TS of the block RW; Image composition as used herein means that two layers having different images are combined together).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have implemented the teaching of compositing the rotated first and second layers to form the printed image from Hiraoka into the method as disclosed by the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer, Renz, and El-Ghoroury. The motivation for doing this is to improve alignment techniques.
Claim(s) 7-8, 11-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer and Renz as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zhu et al (US 20170372494).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer and Renz disclose the method according to claim 1, including the same generating and assigning steps applied to the first section and first block (Dabroski page 3 lines 1-9 superimposing at least two images; Renz ¶58 As seen in FIG. 7, the second image 630 and the first image 620 cooperate at the locations at which they overlap to provide a security feature 650; the first image 620 (and/or layer including the first image 620) and the second image 630 (and/or layer including the second image 630) cooperate to provide the security feature 650 with an optically variable effect) but fails to teach where Zhu teaches selecting further sections of the original image; and, for each further section: generating a block, and assigning to the block a location within the printed image, the location corresponding to the respective location of the section in the original image (¶71-72 The video object plane or region can be part of a larger image that includes multiple objects or regions of a scene; For example, FIG. 6b shows a pair (651) of macroblocks of an interlaced video frame. The pair (651) of macroblocks includes alternating lines from a top field and bottom field of the interlaced video frame).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have implemented the teaching of selecting further sections of the original image; and, for each further section: generating a block, and assigning to the block a location within the printed image, the location corresponding to the respective location of the section in the original image from Zhu into the method as disclosed by the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer and Renz. The motivation for doing this is to improve image processing.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer, Renz, and Zhu disclose the method according to claim 7, wherein each block corresponds to one optical element in the array (Zhu ¶134 For example, the graphics primitive stores, as one of its attributes, an array of residual values for an 8×8 block, 16×16 block, or other size of block; ¶135 A graphics primitive can include other and/or additional attributes. For example, an attribute of the graphics primitive can indicate a shape for the point (e.g., rectangle, square, circle); the parameter is a lighting parameter normally used for fog or other special effects).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have implemented the teaching of wherein each block corresponds to one optical element in the array from Zhu into the method as disclosed by the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer and Renz. The motivation for doing this is to improve image processing.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer and Renz disclose the method according to claim 1, but fail to teach where Zhu teaches wherein the original image is an interlaced image (¶14 the current picture is an interlaced video frame having a top field and a bottom field; ¶71 For interlaced video, a picture can be an interlaced video frame or video field).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have implemented the teaching of wherein the original image is an interlaced image from Zhu into the method as disclosed by the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer and Renz. The motivation for doing this is to improve image processing.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer, Renz, and Zhu disclose the method according to claim 11, wherein an interlaced image is generated by interlacing an input image, and wherein interlacing an input image comprises: generating a plurality of frames of a multi-frame image, each frame comprising the input image at a different location within the frame (Zhu ¶71 For interlaced video, a picture can be an interlaced video frame or video field. FIG. 6a shows an example of interlaced video frame (601), which includes alternating lines from a top field and a bottom field; The video object plane or region can be part of a larger image that includes multiple objects or regions of a scene); defining an arrangement of the plurality of frames, the arrangement comprising a grid (¶71 two complementary interlaced video fields are encoded together as a single video frame (601) or separately encoded as two fields, including a top field (602) and a bottom field (603); e.g. this is a grid form; The video object plane or region can be part of a larger image that includes multiple objects or regions of a scene); and interlacing the frames with one another according to the positions of the frames in the grid (Zhu ¶14 & ¶71 ¶71 For interlaced video, a picture can be an interlaced video frame or video field).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have implemented the teaching of wherein an interlaced image is generated by interlacing an input image, and wherein interlacing an input image comprises: generating a plurality of frames of a multi-frame image, each frame comprising the input image at a different location within the frame; defining an arrangement of the plurality of frames, the arrangement comprising a grid; and interlacing the frames with one another according to the positions of the frames in the grid from Zhu into the method as disclosed by the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer and Renz. The motivation for doing this is to improve image processing.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer, Renz, and Zhu disclose the method according to claim 12, wherein the first section is selected to include only one portion of each interlaced frame (Zhu ¶71 The video object plane or region can be part of a larger image that includes multiple objects or regions of a scene).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have implemented the teaching of wherein the first section is selected to include only one portion of each interlaced frame from Zhu into the method as disclosed by the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer and Renz. The motivation for doing this is to improve image processing.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer and Renz disclose the method according to claim 1, but fails to teach where Zhu teaches wherein the original image is a multi-frame image comprising a plurality of frames, and wherein the first section of the original image comprises one frame of the multi-frame image (¶14 & ¶71 the current picture is an interlaced video frame having a top field and a bottom field; The video object plane or region can be part of a larger image that includes multiple objects or regions of a scene).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have implemented the teaching of wherein the original image is a multi-frame image comprising a plurality of frames, and wherein the first section of the original image comprises one frame of the multi-frame image from Zhu into the method as disclosed by the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer and Renz. The motivation for doing this is to improve image processing.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer, Renz, and Zhu disclose the method according to claim 7, wherein the original image is a multi-frame image comprising a plurality of frames, and wherein the first section of the original image comprises one frame of the multi-frame image (Zhu ¶71 video object plane or region can be part of a larger image that includes multiple objects or regions of a scene); wherein each further section comprises a distinct frame of the multi-frame image (Zhu ¶71 two complementary interlaced video fields are encoded together), the method further comprising: interlacing the plurality of generated blocks (¶71 For interlaced video, a picture can be an interlaced video frame or video field; ¶183 an interlaced video frame can be encoded as a single frame or as separate fields, as explained with reference to FIG. 6a. Or, groups of blocks can be selectively encoded in frame mode or field mode, as explained with reference to FIG. 6b).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have implemented the teaching of wherein the original image is a multi-frame image comprising a plurality of frames, and wherein the first section of the original image comprises one frame of the multi-frame image; wherein each further section comprises a distinct frame of the multi-frame image; the method further comprising: interlacing the plurality of generated blocks from Zhu into the method as disclosed by the combination of Dabroski, Lichtenauer and Renz. The motivation for doing this is to improve image processing.
Claim(s) 18-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dabroski et al (WO 2020/101514 A1) in view of Lichtenauer et al (NPL Hiding Correlation-Based Watermark Templates using Secret Modulation).
Regarding claim 18, Dabroski teaches a security document comprising a security feature, the security feature comprising an array of optical elements overlaying a printed image (abstract A latent image security feature for a security document, comprises a substrate with a convex structure emerging by superimposing at least two images), the printed image comprising:
a first layer, the first layer comprising a first block (page 3 lines 1-9 superimposing at least two images),
Dabroski fails to teach where Lichtenauer teaches the first block comprising pixels of only a first section of an original image mirrored in both x and y directions, wherein the first section is selected to include only one portion of the original image (pg. 502 Fig. 2 At embedding the encrypted and encoded message m is allocated in M pixels in the NxN block according to a key. The remaining NxN-M pixels are filled with a pseudo random sequence. The block is upsampled and flipped horizontally and vertically to obtain the watermark macro-block b of size 4Nx4N. The tiled watermark (b) shows the symmetry of the macro-block introduced by flipping.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have implemented the teaching of the first block comprising pixels of only a first section of an original image mirrored in both x and y Lichtenauer, wherein the first section is selected to include only one portion of the original image from Lichtenauer into the method as disclosed by Dabroski. The motivation for doing this is to provide a solution to the problem of geometrical distortion of watermarked images.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Dabroski and Lichtenauer teaches the security document according to claim 18, wherein the first layer further comprises:
one or more further blocks, each further block comprising pixels of a respective further section of the original image mirrored in both x and y directions (Lichtenauer pg. 502 A smaller part of the block contains a pseudo random sequence that is known by the watermark detector. This ‘pilot signal’ is necessary to find the orientation and/or translation of the watermark blocks; Fig. 2 The remaining NxN-M pixels are filled with a pseudo random sequence. The block is upsampled and flipped horizontally and vertically to obtain the watermark macro-block b of size 4Nx4N. The tiled watermark (b) shows the symmetry of the macro-block introduced by flipping). The motivation to combine the references is discussed above in the rejection for claim 18.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Dabroski and Lichtenauer teaches the security document according to claim 18, further comprising:
a second layer, the second layer comprising a second block, the second block comprising pixels of a first section of a second original image (Dabroski page 3 lines 1-5 A latent image security feature for a security document, according to the first invention, comprises a substrate with a convex structure emerging by superimposing at least two images; where superimposing comprises a layering images) mirrored (Dabroski page 3 lines 21-32 Preferably, the second image is…a mirror image) in both x and y directions (Lichtenauer Fig. 2 The block is upsampled and flipped horizontally and vertically to obtain the watermark macro-block b of size 4Nx4N. The tiled watermark (b) shows the symmetry of the macro-block introduced by flipping). The motivation to combine the references is discussed above in the rejection for claim 18.
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Dabroski and Lichtenauer teaches the security document according to claim 18, wherein the first layer and/or second layer is rotated relative to the x and y directions by a rotation angle (Dabroski page 3 lines 22-24 Preferably, the second image is the first image or a reduced or enlarged copy thereof, preferably rotated by 0 to 360 degrees).
Regarding claim 22, Dabroski a security feature (Dabroski page 1 technical field: security features protecting valuable documents against counterfeiting, in particular including banknotes, passports, bank cards, and other documents having some value) comprising:
an array of identical optical elements overlaying a printed image, (Dabroski abstract A latent image security feature for a security document, comprises a substrate with a convex structure emerging by superimposing at least two images; Fig. 2 and Figs. 5-8 for resultant images) the printed image comprising:
a first layer, the first layer comprising a first block (page 3 lines 1-9 superimposing at least two images).
Dabroski fails to teach where Lichtenauer the first block comprising pixels of a first section of only an original image mirrored in both x and y directions, wherein the first section is selected to include only one portion of the original image (pg. 502 Fig. 2 At embedding the encrypted and encoded message m is allocated in M pixels in the NxN block according to a key. The remaining NxN-M pixels are filled with a pseudo random sequence; The block is upsampled and flipped horizontally and vertically to obtain the watermark macro-block b of size 4Nx4N. The tiled watermark (b) shows the symmetry of the macro-block introduced by flipping).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have implemented the teaching of the first block comprising pixels of a first section of only an original image mirrored in both x and y directions, wherein the first section is selected to include only one portion of the original image from Lichtenauer into the method as disclosed by Dabroski. The motivation for doing this is to provide a solution to the problem of geometrical distortion of watermarked images
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Dabroski and Lichtenauer teaches the security feature of claim 22, wherein the first layer further comprises: one or more further blocks, each further block comprising pixels of a respective further section of the original image mirrored in both x and y directions (Lichtenauer pg. 502 A smaller part of the block contains a pseudo random sequence that is known by the watermark detector. This ‘pilot signal’ is necessary to find the orientation and/or translation of the watermark blocks; Fig. 2 The remaining NxN-M pixels are filled with a pseudo random sequence. The block is upsampled and flipped horizontally and vertically to obtain the watermark macro-block b of size 4Nx4N. The tiled watermark (b) shows the symmetry of the macro-block introduced by flipping). The motivation to combine the references is discussed above in the rejection for claim 22.
Regarding claim 24, the combination of Dabroski and Renz disclose the security document of claim 23, wherein the security document is one of a banknote, a passport, a driver’s license, and an identification card (Dabroski pg. 1 technical field: relates to the field of security features protecting valuable documents against counterfeiting, in particular including banknotes, passports, bank cards, and other documents having some value).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/5/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, the applicant argues that Lichtenauer teaches watermark templates and that the NxN block shown in Fig. 2 pertains to a watermark rather than “only one portion of an original image” as recited. Regarding this argument, the examiner respectfully disagrees.
Claim 1 does not limit the “original image” to any particular semantic content (e.g. photographic scene, artwork, or non-watermark data). Under BRI consistent with the specification, an “original image” encompasses any pixel-based image composed of rows and columns of pixels. Lichtenauer discloses allocating an encrypted and encoded messaged in an NxN block of pixels (pg. 502 & Fig. 2). That NxN block constitutes a defined subset of image pixels arranged in rows and columns. The NxN block is therefore a “first section” comprising a portion of an image. The claim does not require that the selected section be cropped from a larger photographic scene, nor does it exclude watermark image data. The structural limitation is satisfied by Lichtenauer’s explicit disclosure of selecting and defining the NxN pixel block.
Lichtenauer expressly teaches that the NxN block is upsampled and flipped horizontally and vertically to obtain a macro-block, as discussed in pg. 502 and corresponding Fig. 2. The macro-block is formed by combining the original NxN block, a horizontally flipped version, a vertically flipped version, and a horizontally and vertically flipped version. Thus, the macro-block is generated exclusively from the original NxN block and is mirrored versions. This directly corresponds to “generating a first block by combining the pixels of only the first section with pixels of the only first section mirrored in both the x and y directions”. Similar arguments are presented for claims 18 and 22, and those arguments are not persuasive for similar reasons as discussed above for claim 1.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN KY whose telephone number is (571)272-7648. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Vincent Rudolph can be reached at 571-272-8243. 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.
/KEVIN KY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2671