DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on September 12th, 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. The examiner would like to add a note that U.S. references 18/883,274 and 18/883,392 disclosed in the IDS are placed in the non-patent literature section, and should be recognized under U.S. patent publications. The examiner would also like to note that the foreign reference filed June 6th, 2025 appears blank past the drawings. Correction is not mandatory.
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 § 2146 et seq. 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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, & 11 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 & 3 of copending Application No. 18/883,274 (reference application).
18/883,406 (Current application) claim 1
18/883,274 claims 1 & 3
1. One or more non-transitory computer-readable media having stored therein instructions that, when executed, cause one or more processors of an information processing apparatus to execute image processing comprising:
1. One or more non-transitory computer-readable media having stored therein instructions that, when executed, cause one or more processors of an information processing apparatus to execute image processing comprising:
regarding an object except for a first type of object among objects in a virtual space,
performing a first depth test using a first depth buffer and updating the first depth buffer; and
regarding objects in a virtual space, performing a first depth test using a first depth buffer and updating the first depth buffer;
performing drawing in a frame buffer based on a result of the first depth test,
performing drawing in a frame buffer based on a result of the first depth test;
placing a flat surface object in which an image obtained by rendering the first type of object without drawing the first type of object in the frame buffer is set as a texture at a position of the first type of object in the in the virtual space,
3. regarding a second type of object, placing a flat surface object in which an image rendered without performing drawing in the frame buffer is set as a texture at a position of the second type of object in the virtual space;
with respect to each pixel of the frame buffer in which the drawing is performed, using the pixel as a pixel of interest,
with respect to each pixel of the frame buffer in which the drawing is performed, using the pixel as a pixel of interest
based on a depth of the first depth buffer, calculating a direction from a virtual camera to a position in the virtual space relating to the pixel of interest as an incidence direction, and calculating as a ray tracing direction a direction of a ray reflected from the position as a reflection position;
based on a depth of the first depth buffer, calculating a direction from a virtual camera to a position in the virtual space relating to the pixel of interest as an incidence direction, and calculating as a ray tracing direction a direction of a ray reflected from the position as a reflection position;
tracing the ray along the ray tracing direction, and based on the first depth buffer, determining a collision position where the ray collides with an object in the virtual space;
tracing the ray along the ray tracing direction, and if a tracing distance of the ray is less than a second distance smaller than a first distance, based on the depth of the first depth buffer, determining a collision position where the ray collides with an object in the virtual space
if the collision position is determined in a range where the tracing distance of the ray is less than or equal to a first distance, determining a color based on a color of a pixel in the frame buffer relating to the collision position as a reflected appearance color to be added to a color of the pixel of interest;
if the collision position is determined in a range where the tracing distance is less than or equal to the first distance, determining a color based on a color of a pixel in the frame buffer relating to the collision position as a reflected appearance color to be added to a color of the pixel of interest.
if the ray intersects the flat surface object, determining a reflected appearance color to be further added to the color of the pixel of interest based on a color of the texture at an intersection position of the intersection;
3. if the ray intersects the flat surface object, determining a reflected appearance color to be further added to the color of the pixel of interest based on a color of the texture at an intersection position of the intersection;
reflecting the reflected appearance color on the frame buffer; and
3. reflecting the reflected appearance color on the frame buffer;
after reflecting the reflected appearance color, drawing the first type of object in the frame buffer.
3. after reflecting the reflected appearance color, drawing the second type of object in the frame buffer.
Claims 4, 7, & 10 are substantially similar to claim 1 and therefore the provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection is applied.
18/883,406 (Current application) claim 2
18/883,274 claim 3
2. The one or more non-transitory computer-readable media according to claim 1, wherein
3. The one or more non-transitory computer-readable media according to claim 1, wherein
the first type of object is an object having a flat shape.
regarding a second type of object, placing a flat surface object
Claims 5, 8, & 11 are substantially similar to claim 1 and therefore the provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection is applied.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1 & 3 of 18/883,392 teach all the limitations of claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, & 11 of the current application. The first object from the current application is utilized in a way that is encompassed or otherwise performed by the second object or objects of the 18/883,274 application.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Warren Hunt (Pat. Pub. US-20210090322-A1, herein after “Hunt”) in view of Y. Uludag (Pat. Pub. CN-110874858-A, herein after “Uludag”).
In regard to claims 1, 4, 7, & 10, Hunt teaches [o]ne or more non-transitory computer-readable media having stored therein instructions that “a computer-readable non-transitory storage medium or media may include one or more semiconductor-based or other integrated circuits” (Hunt, ¶ [0079]), when executed, cause one or more processors of an information processing apparatus to execute image processing comprising “memory 1404 includes main memory for storing instructions for processor 1402 to execute or data for processor 1402 to operate on” (Hunt, ¶ [0074]):
regarding an object except for a first type of object among objects in a virtual space “A surface may correspond to one or more objects that are expected to move/translate, skew, scale, distort, or otherwise change in appearance together, as one unit, as a result of a change in perspective” (Hunt, ¶ [0005]) where virtual objects are represented by detected surfaces,
performing a first depth test using a first depth buffer and updating the first depth buffer “As the rendering system performs visibility test against each object in 3D space, the depth buffer may be updated to track the closest object that is visible” (Hunt, ¶ [0039]) where a visibility test is read as a depth test, which checks to see if a surface of an object is within range/ visible; and
performing drawing in a frame buffer based on a result of the first depth test “Based on the depth buffer, the rendering engine may, for each pixel, sample a texture associated with the closest object visible through that pixel to determine the pixel's color” (Hunt, ¶ [0039]) where objects are rendered based on the results of the visibility test,
placing a flat surface object in which an image obtained by rendering the first type of object without drawing the first type of object in the frame buffer is set as a texture at a position of the first type of object in the in the virtual space “the control block 1210 may receive an input data stream 1260 from a primary rendering component and initialize a pipeline in the display engine 1200 to finalize the rendering for display. In particular embodiments, the input data stream 1260 may comprise data and control packets from the primary rendering component. The data and control packets may include information such as one or more surfaces comprising texture data and position data and additional rendering instructions” (Hunt, ¶ [0063]) where rendering instructions can be received at the control block as texture data and position data. The control block may distribute data as needed, and is not limited to displaying, or drawing, before rendering the objects/surfaces,
with respect to each pixel of the frame buffer in which the drawing is performed, using the pixel as a pixel of interest “A computing system rendering the view would need to perform visibility tests against each polygon from each pixel to determine visual information (e.g., color and transparency information) associated with each visible polygon” (Hunt, ¶ [0026]) where each pixel has a visibility test for rendering, therefore having each pixel the pixel of focus, or interest, at least once,
Hunt fails to explicitly teach based on a depth of the first depth buffer, calculating a direction from a virtual camera to a position in the virtual space relating to the pixel of interest as an incidence direction, and calculating as a ray tracing direction a direction of a ray reflected from the position as a reflection position;
tracing the ray along the ray tracing direction, and based on the first depth buffer, determining a collision position where the ray collides with an object in the virtual space;
if the collision position is determined in a range where the tracing distance of the ray is less than or equal to a first distance, determining a color based on a color of a pixel in the frame buffer relating to the collision position as a reflected appearance color to be added to a color of the pixel of interest;
if the ray intersects the flat surface object, determining a reflected appearance color to be further added to the color of the pixel of interest based on a color of the texture at an intersection position of the intersection;
reflecting the reflected appearance color on the frame buffer; and
after reflecting the reflected appearance color, drawing the first type of object in the frame buffer.
Uludag teaches based on a depth of the first depth buffer “To perform ray travels by optimizing, by a processor accessing the z-buffer value of depth of the object in the screen space” (Uludag, Page 9), calculating a direction from a virtual camera to a position in the virtual space relating to the pixel of interest as an incidence direction “602 ray incident parallel reflected light 600 is reflected from the surface 604. Because surface 600 has a smooth surface, [it is] reflected by the ray 604, as incident light 602. reflection of the result is from the surface of the mirror-like surface” (Uludag, Page 7) where a direction from a view is reflected odd od a surface, producing an incidence direction, and once reflected, an angle of incidence, based on the pixel of interest, and calculating as a ray tracing direction a direction of a ray reflected from the position as a reflection position “calculating the different reflection information for different frames” (Uludag, Page 12) where the ray information is calculated for the angle from the viewer, the distance to the surface, and the reflection position;
PNG
media_image1.png
353
666
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Uludag, Fig. 6, depicting a sun projecting rays (item 602), which are reflected from surface (item 600) below, and produce reflection rays (item 604) which are observed.
PNG
media_image2.png
313
798
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Uludag, Fig. 24, depicting a viewing through an ellipse (item 2410) which casts rays that are reflected on a pixel of interest (item 2402) and collide with object (item 2404). Additionally, rays may observe the reflection of object below (item 2406).
tracing the ray along the ray tracing direction, and based on the first depth buffer “z-buffer if the level at step 1108, the processor finds that intersect in the next pixel position, then at step 1114, the processor determines whether the current level is the original” (Uludag, Page 10) where a z-buffer, or depth buffer, is used to determine if a ray has intersected an object, if not, the ray continues, determining a collision position where the ray collides with an object in the virtual space “At step 1322, for each ray by ray tracing, the processor determines whether the ray tracing by ray intersected with the object in the 3D scene” (Uludag, Page 12) where the ray that is traced is checked for intersection with an object, which is read as a collision;
if the collision position is determined in a range where the tracing distance of the ray is less than or equal to a first distance, determining a color based on a color of a pixel in the frame buffer relating to the collision position as a reflected appearance color to be added to a color of the pixel of interest “the point 1206 is a ray traveling reaches the point of viewport 1212 edge. In some cases, a ray by ray tracking 1208 and the object (such as object 1210). from ray tracing ray at the position of 1208 and object 1210 point of intersection 1214 of color information may be stored in a buffer to calculate the color of reflection at a pixel associated with point 1202” (Uludag, Page 11) where if a ray tracing line reflection travels too far, an objects information will not be reached (i.e. it will be out of range and therefore the color information will not be used);
PNG
media_image3.png
421
542
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Uludag, Fig. 12, depicting a view direction leading to point (item 1202) and reflection ray (item 1204). The view range (item 1206) is passed by the reflected ray (item 1208) and collides with an object (item 1210) at a point (item 1214), however, since the object is out of range, it is not reflected, only objects within the set distance are reflected, this is sometimes referred to as a render distance.
if the ray intersects the flat surface object, determining a reflected appearance color to be further added to the color of the pixel of interest based on a color of the texture at an intersection position of the intersection “the processor can access and the pixel position of the object 802, the color of the object, data corresponding to orientation of the object and/or surface texture information (e.g. roughness value), and the like. based on the data about the object, it can make one or more ray travels to determine at the pixel 802 is shown of the reflected color” (Uludag, Page 8) where the reflected pixel color is influenced by the object’s color, orientation, and texture information;
reflecting the reflected appearance color on the frame buffer “temporary data storage device 114 is a RAM and stores the partial data generated during video game play, and a part thereof may also be reserved for frame buffer” (Uludag, Page 5) where a frame buffer may store relevant data; and
after reflecting the reflected appearance color, drawing the first type of object in the frame buffer “frame buffer, the depth buffer, the polygon list, texture storage device and/or presented as the video game for the rendered image of the required or can be used for other data portion of rendering image as a video game display” (Uludag, Page 5) after information is stored in the frame buffer, it is then rendered and displayed.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of performing depth tests on objects in a virtual space for visualization taught by Hunt with the method of reflecting an objects color based on distance, texture, and position taught by Uludag to produce a system capable of reflecting an object’s color on a surface based on its proximity, orientation, color, and the surface’s texture. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to create virtual object reflections for virtual objects that do not pass a threshold distance.
In regard to claim 4, claim 1 is substantially similar to claim 4 hence the rejection analysis for claim 1 is also applied to claim 4 which recites [a]n information processing system comprising: one or more processors that execute image processing comprising: regarding an object except for a first type of object among objects in a virtual space (Hunt, ¶ [0074] & [0079]),
performing a first depth test using a first depth buffer and updating the first depth buffer (Hunt, ¶ [0039]); and
performing drawing in a frame buffer based on a result of the first depth test (Hunt, ¶ [0039]),
placing a flat surface object in which an image obtained by rendering the first type of object without drawing the first type of object in the frame buffer is set as a texture at a position of the first type of object in the in the virtual space (Hunt, ¶ [0063]),
with respect to each pixel of the frame buffer in which the drawing is performed, using the pixel as a pixel of interest (Hunt, ¶ [0026]),
based on a depth of the first depth buffer, calculating a direction from a virtual camera to a position in the virtual space relating to the pixel of interest as an incidence direction, and calculating as a ray tracing direction a direction of a ray reflected from the position as a reflection position (Uludag, Pages 7, 9, & 12);
tracing the ray along the ray tracing direction, and based on the first depth buffer, determining a collision position where the ray collides with an object in the virtual space (Uludag, Pages 10 & 12);
if the collision position is determined in a range where the tracing distance of the ray is less than or equal to a first distance, determining a color based on a color of a pixel in the frame buffer relating to the collision position as a reflected appearance color to be added to a color of the pixel of interest (Uludag, Page 11);
if the ray intersects the flat surface object, determining a reflected appearance color to be further added to the color of the pixel of interest based on a color of the texture at an intersection position of the intersection (Uludag, Page 8);
reflecting the reflected appearance color on the frame buffer (Uludag, Page 5); and
after reflecting the reflected appearance color, drawing the first type of object in the frame buffer (Uludag, Page 5).
In regard to claim 7, claim 1 is substantially similar to claim 7 hence the rejection analysis for claim 1 is also applied to claim 7 which recites [a]n image processing method comprising: regarding an object except for a first type of object among objects in a virtual space (Hunt, ¶ [0074] & [0079]),
performing a first depth test using a first depth buffer and updating the first depth buffer (Hunt, ¶ [0039]); and
performing drawing in a frame buffer based on a result of the first depth test (Hunt, ¶ [0039]),
placing a flat surface object in which an image obtained by rendering the first type of object without drawing the first type of object in the frame buffer is set as a texture at a position of the first type of object in the in the virtual space (Hunt, ¶ [0063]),
with respect to each pixel of the frame buffer in which the drawing is performed, using the pixel as a pixel of interest (Hunt, ¶ [0026]),
based on a depth of the first depth buffer, calculating a direction from a virtual camera to a position in the virtual space relating to the pixel of interest as an incidence direction, and calculating as a ray tracing direction a direction of a ray reflected from the position as a reflection position (Uludag, Pages 7, 9, & 12);
tracing the ray along the ray tracing direction, and based on the first depth buffer, determining a collision position where the ray collides with an object in the virtual space (Uludag, Pages 10 & 12);
if the collision position is determined in a range where the tracing distance of the ray is less than or equal to a first distance, determining a color based on a color of a pixel in the frame buffer relating to the collision position as a reflected appearance color to be added to a color of the pixel of interest (Uludag, Page 11);
if the ray intersects the flat surface object, determining a reflected appearance color to be further added to the color of the pixel of interest based on a color of the texture at an intersection position of the intersection (Uludag, Page 8);
reflecting the reflected appearance color on the frame buffer (Uludag, Page 5); and
after reflecting the reflected appearance color, drawing the first type of object in the frame buffer (Uludag, Page 5).
In regard to claim 10, claim 1 is substantially similar to claim 10 hence the rejection analysis for claim 1 is also applied to claim 10 which recites [a]n information processing apparatus comprising: one or more processors that execute image processing comprising (Hunt, ¶ [0074] & [0079]):
regarding an object except for a first type of object among objects in a virtual space (Hunt, ¶ [0005]),
performing a first depth test using a first depth buffer and updating the first depth buffer (Hunt, ¶ [0039]); and
performing drawing in a frame buffer based on a result of the first depth test (Hunt, ¶ [0039]),
placing a flat surface object in which an image obtained by rendering the first type of object without drawing the first type of object in the frame buffer is set as a texture at a position of the first type of object in the in the virtual space (Hunt, ¶ [0063]),
with respect to each pixel of the frame buffer in which the drawing is performed, using the pixel as a pixel of interest (Hunt, ¶ [0026]),
based on a depth of the first depth buffer, calculating a direction from a virtual camera to a position in the virtual space relating to the pixel of interest as an incidence direction, and calculating as a ray tracing direction a direction of a ray reflected from the position as a reflection position (Uludag, Pages 7, 9, & 12);
tracing the ray along the ray tracing direction, and based on the first depth buffer, determining a collision position where the ray collides with an object in the virtual space (Uludag, Pages 10 & 12);
if the collision position is determined in a range where the tracing distance of the ray is less than or equal to a first distance, determining a color based on a color of a pixel in the frame buffer relating to the collision position as a reflected appearance color to be added to a color of the pixel of interest (Uludag, Page 11);
if the ray intersects the flat surface object, determining a reflected appearance color to be further added to the color of the pixel of interest based on a color of the texture at an intersection position of the intersection (Uludag, Page 8);
reflecting the reflected appearance color on the frame buffer (Uludag, Page 5); and
after reflecting the reflected appearance color, drawing the first type of object in the frame buffer (Uludag, Page 5).
In regard to claims 2, 5, 8, & 11, Hunt in view of Uludag teach [t]he one or more non-transitory computer-readable media according to claim 1, wherein
the first type of object is an object having a flat shape “the first ray-casting process may be used to generate a 2D representation of an object that is to be displayed within a view of a scene” (Hunt, ¶ [0034]) where the ray casting methods can be performed on 2D, or flat objects.
In regard to claim 5, claim 2 is substantially similar to claim 5 hence the rejection analysis for claim 2 is also applied to claim 5 which recites [t]he image processing system according to claim 4, wherein
the first type of object is an object having a flat shape (Hunt, ¶ [0034]).
In regard to claim 8, claim 2 is substantially similar to claim 8 hence the rejection analysis for claim 2 is also applied to claim 8 which recites [t]he image processing method according to claim 7, wherein
the first type of object is an object having a flat shape (Hunt, ¶ [0034]).
In regard to claim 11, claim 2 is substantially similar to claim 11 hence the rejection analysis for claim 2 is also applied to claim 11 which recites [t]he image processing apparatus according to claim 10, wherein
the first type of object is an object having a flat shape (Hunt, ¶ [0034]).
In regard to claims 3, 6, 9, & 12, Hunt in view of Uludag teach [t]he one or more non-transitory computer-readable media according to claim 2, wherein
the first type of object is a player character object controlled based on an operation input “I/O device 106 may include any device for interacting with the console 102, including but not limited to the video game controller, joy stick, a keyboard, a mouse, a keypad, a VR (virtual reality) earphone or equipment and so on” (Uludag, Page 5), additionally, “ray tracing is then used to try to find ray intersect, i.e., for the main reflection. the disclosed embodiments may be used in real-time or near real-time of the application (such as a video game)” (Uludag, Page 4) where video games are known to have playable characters or objects.
In regard to claim 6, claim 3 is substantially similar to claim 6 hence the rejection analysis for claim 3 is also applied to claim 6 which recites [t]he image processing system according to claim 5, wherein
the first type of object is a player character object controlled based on an operation input (Uludag, Pages 4 & 5).
In regard to claim 9, claim 3 is substantially similar to claim 9 hence the rejection analysis for claim 3 is also applied to claim 9 which recites [t]he image processing method according to claim 8, wherein
the first type of object is a player character object controlled based on an operation input (Uludag, Pages 4 & 5).
In regard to claim 12, claim 3 is substantially similar to claim 12 hence the rejection analysis for claim 3 is also applied to claim 12 which recites [t]he image processing apparatus according to claim 11, wherein
the first type of object is a player character object controlled based on an operation input (Uludag, Pages 4 & 5).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. John Howson (Pat. Pub. US-20190088002-A1) teaches ray tracing as well as intersection testing for virtual objects (Abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAIDEN ALEXANDER USSERY whose telephone number is (571)272-1192. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday* 7:30AM - 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, Tammy Goddard can be reached at (571) 272-7773. 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.
/C.A.U./Examiner, Art Unit 2611
Prosecution Insights