Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Claims 1-11 and 13-21 are pending, with claims 1, 7, and 15 being independent. Claim 12 has been cancelled. Claims 1, 6, 7, 13, 15, and 20 have been amended. Claim 21 has been added.
Applicant’s arguments, 03/30/2026, and in light of Applicant’s amendment to claims 1, 7 and 15 have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Specifically Applicant asserts that the art of record fails to teach or suggest:
“Yu does not teach or suggest using the collected statistics to generate local gain lookup tables. Therefore, Yu does not teach or suggest generating a plurality of local gain lookup tables (LUTs) based on statistical information, each local gain LUT corresponding to a color channel, and each local gain LUT providing a correlation between gain values and intensity values”.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As presented by the Examiner in the previous office action Yu discloses white balance gain table WB_T generated from the white balance gain estimation circuit 102. The white balance gain table WB_T records mapping between pixel values and white balance (WB) gain values for different color components (R, G, B) ([0028]). Examiner further notes that paragraph [0027] of Yu explicitly recites:
“The white balance gain estimation circuit 102 analyzes N exposure frames IMG_1-IMG_N to obtain N sets of white balance gain settings WB_1-WB_N, respectively, where statistics of different color components (R, G, B) in each exposure frame IMG_n is used for determining one corresponding set of white balance gain settings WB_n. Hence, one set of white balance gain settings WB_n is associated with white balance compensation for an exposure condition in which a sensor module captures one exposure frame”.
Therefore, as the claim is recited, the limitation “a plurality of local gain lookup tables (LUTs) based on statistical information” is met.
Terminal Disclaimer
A terminal disclaimer was filed on 3/27/2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of the patent US 11,653,105 B2 had been reviewed and was accepted.
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 obviousness-type 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); and 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Regarding Claims 1-7, 8, 9-11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21, are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable respectively over claims 1-7, 12, 9-11, 8, 15, 7, 12, 9, 10, 11, 8 and 8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,143,733 B2 (See table infra). Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-7, 8, 9-11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21 of the instant application are obviousness over respective claims 1-7, 12, 9-11, 8, 15, 7, 12, 9, 10, 11, 8 and 8 of U.S. Patent 12,143,733 B2, in that claims 1-7, 12, 9-11, 8, 15, 7, 12, 9, 10, 11, 8 and 8 of the U.S. Patent are broader in scope and contain all the limitations of claims 1-7, 8, 9-11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21 of the instant application. claims 1-7, 8, 9-11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21 of the instant application are therefore not patently distinct from the earlier U.S. Patent claim and such is unpatentable for obvious-type double patenting.
Instant application
US 12,143,733 B2
1. A method, comprising:
generating a plurality of local gain lookup tables (LUTs) based on statistical information, each local gain LUT corresponding to a color channel, and each local gain LUT providing a correlation between gain values and intensity values;
determining a local gain LUT out of the plurality of local gain LUTs that corresponds to the color channel of the pixel; identifying a local gain value corresponding to the determined intensity value of the pixel based on the determined local gain LUT;
and applying the local gain value to the pixel.
1. A method for local automatic white balance (AWB) of wide dynamic range (WDR) images, the method comprising:
collecting statistics for local AWB by an image signal processor (ISP) from a first WDR image generated by the ISP;
receiving, by the ISP, a plurality of local gain lookup tables (LUTs), one for each color channel, wherein the plurality of local gain LUTs is generated using the statistics;
calculating, by the ISP, an intensity value for each pixel; searching, by the ISP, the local gain LUT for the color channel of each pixel to find a local AWB gain value for an intensity range segment that includes the calculated intensity value of that pixel;
and applying, by the ISP, a gain value to each pixel in a second WDR image generated by the ISP based on the local AWB gain value for that pixel.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein determining the intensity value comprises determining the intensity value based on a linear interpolation of two adjacent intensity values.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein determining the intensity value comprises determining the intensity value as a weighted average of an intensity value of the pixel and an intensity value of a neighboring pixel.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein determining the intensity value comprises determining the intensity value as a weighted average of intensity values of pixels in a 1×6 window of pixels in which the pixel is one of two center pixels in the window.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein each local gain LUT of the plurality of local gain LUTs includes multiple entries, and wherein each entry comprises an intensity value and a corresponding local gain value.
6. The method of claim 1, further comprising: collecting first statistic information from one image using a first set of bits; and collecting second statistical information from another image using a second set of bits, wherein the statistical information includes the first and second statistical information
2. The method of claim 1, wherein, for each pixel of the multiple pixels of the WDR image that has a calculated intensity value between two adjacent intensity values in the local gain LUT, the identifying further comprises: applying linear interpolation between the two adjacent intensity values to identify the corresponding local gain value for the pixel.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the calculating further comprises: calculating the intensity value as a weighted average of an intensity value of the pixel and an intensity value of at least one neighboring pixel.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the calculating further comprises: calculating the intensity value as a weighted average of intensity values of pixels in a 1×6 window of pixels in which the pixel is one of two center pixels in the window.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein each local gain LUT of the plurality of local gain LUTs includes multiple entries, and wherein each entry comprises an intensity value and a corresponding local gain value.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one WDR image from which the statistics are collected includes multiple WDR images, and wherein the collecting statistics further comprises: collecting first statistics from one WDR image of the multiple WDR images using a first bit range; and collecting second statistics from another WDR image of the multiple WDR images using a second bit range.
7. A system, comprising
generate a plurality of local gain lookup tables (LUTs) based on statistical information, each local gain LUT corresponding to a color channel, and each local gain LUT providing a correlation between gain values and intensity values;
determine an intensity value for a pixel of the image; determine a local gain LUT out of the plurality of local gain LUTs corresponding to the color channel associated with the pixel; determine a local gain value based on the local gain LUT using the determined intensity value of the pixel; and apply the local gain value to the pixel.
7. A system comprising: an image signal processor (ISP) configured to receive images and to output processed images, the ISP further configured to collect statistics from at least one image of the images received; a processor coupled to the ISP, the processor configured to generate, based on the statistics, a plurality of local gain lookup tables (LUTs), one for each color channel represented in the at least one image; and a memory coupled to the ISP and the processor, the memory configured to store the plurality of local gain LUTs, wherein the ISP is further configured to process each image to be output including, for each pixel of multiple pixels of the image:
calculating an intensity value; determining a local gain LUT of the plurality of local gain LUTs corresponding to the color channel associated with the pixel; determining a local gain value based on the local gain LUT using the calculated intensity value of the pixel;
and applying the local gain value to the pixel.
8. The system of claim 7, wherein, to determine the intensity value, the processor is configured to execute the program instructions to determine the intensity value based on a linear interpolation of two adjacent intensity values.
9. The system of claim 7, wherein to determine the intensity value, the processor is configured to execute the program instructions to determine the intensity value as a weighted average of an intensity value of the pixel and an intensity value of a neighboring pixel.
10. The system of claim 7, wherein to determine the intensity value, the processor is configured to execute the program instructions to determine the intensity value as a weighted average of intensity values of pixels in a 1×6 window of pixels in which the pixel is one of two center pixels in the window.
11. The system of claim 7, wherein each local gain LUT includes multiple intensity varespectively corresponding the multiple intensity values.
13. The system of claim 7, wherein the statistic information includes first statistical information and second statistical information, and wherein the first statistic information is collected from one image using a first set of bits and the second statistical information is collected from another image using a second set of bits.
14. The system of claim 7, wherein the system is a system-on-a-chip (SoC).
21. (New) The system of claim 7, wherein the statistical information includes a first set of bits based on a pixel, wherein the pixel includes a second set of bits,
12. The system of claim 11, wherein, for each pixel having a calculated intensity value between two adjacent intensity values in the local gain LUT, the ISP is configured to determine the local gain value based on linear interpolation between the two adjacent intensity values.
9. The system of claim 7, wherein to calculate the intensity value, the ISP is configured to calculate the intensity value as a weighted average of an intensity value of the pixel and an intensity value of at least one neighboring pixel.
10. The system of claim 7, wherein to calculate the intensity value, the ISP is configured to calculate the intensity value as a weighted average of intensity values of pixels in a 1×6 window of pixels in which the pixel is one of two center pixels in the window.
11. The system of claim 7, wherein each local gain LUT includes multiple intensity values and multiple local gain values respectively corresponding the multiple intensity values.
8. The system of claim 7, wherein the at least one image from which the statistics are collected includes multiple images, and wherein to collect the statistics, the ISP is configured to collect first statistics from one image of the multiple images using a first bit range and second statistics from another image of the multiple images using a second bit range.
15. The system of claim 7, wherein the system includes a system-on-a-chip (SoC).
8. The system of claim 7, wherein the at least one image from which the statistics are collected includes multiple images, and wherein to collect the statistics, the ISP is configured to collect first statistics from one image of the multiple images using a first bit range and second statistics from another image of the multiple images using a second bit range.
15.
generate a plurality of local gain lookup tables (LUTs) based on statistical information, each local gain LUT corresponding to a color channel, and each local gain LUT providing a correlation between gain values and intensity values;
determine an intensity value for a pixel of the image; determine a local gain LUT out of the plurality of local gain LUTs corresponding to the color channel associated with the pixel; determine a local gain value based on the local gain LUT using the determined intensity value of the pixel; and determine the local gain value to the pixel.
7. A system comprising: an image signal processor (ISP) configured to receive images and to output processed images, the ISP further configured to collect statistics from at least one image of the images received; a processor coupled to the ISP, the processor configured to generate, based on the statistics, a plurality of local gain lookup tables (LUTs), one for each color channel represented in the at least one image; and a memory coupled to the ISP and the processor, the memory configured to store the plurality of local gain LUTs, wherein the ISP is further configured to process each image to be output including, for each pixel of multiple pixels of the image:
calculating an intensity value; determining a local gain LUT of the plurality of local gain LUTs corresponding to the color channel associated with the pixel; determining a local gain value based on the local gain LUT using the calculated intensity value of the pixel;
and applying the local gain value to the pixel.
16.
17.
18.
19. values and multiple local gain values respectively corresponding the multiple intensity values.
20. the statistical information includes first and second statistical information, and wherein the first statistic information is collected from one image using a first set of bits and the second statistical information is collected from another image using a second set of bits.
12. The system of claim 11, wherein, for each pixel having a calculated intensity value between two adjacent intensity values in the local gain LUT, the ISP is configured to determine the local gain value based on linear interpolation between the two adjacent intensity values.
9. The system of claim 7, wherein to calculate the intensity value, the ISP is configured to calculate the intensity value as a weighted average of an intensity value of the pixel and an intensity value of at least one neighboring pixel.
10. The system of claim 7, wherein to calculate the intensity value, the ISP is configured to calculate the intensity value as a weighted average of intensity values of pixels in a 1×6 window of pixels in which the pixel is one of two center pixels in the window.
11. The system of claim 7, wherein each local gain LUT includes multiple intensity values and multiple local gain values respectively corresponding the multiple intensity values.
8. The system of claim 7, wherein the at least one image from which the statistics are collected includes multiple images, and wherein to collect the statistics, the ISP is configured to collect first statistics from one image of the multiple images using a first bit range and second statistics from another image of the multiple images using a second bit range.
Claims 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 (a) as being unpatentable over US 12,143,733 B2 (hereinafter “Hua”) as applied above, in view of Examiner’s Official Notice.
Regarding claims 15-20, US 12,143,733 B2 does not disclose a non-transitory computer readable medium storing program instructions that, when executed by a processor.
Nevertheless, Official Notice is taken regarding embodying/translating the functionality associated with a circuitry-based apparatus as/into a program stored on a non-transitory computer-readable medium; a concept that is well-known and accepted in the camera art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have embodied the steps taught by Hua being stored as an instruction on non-transitory computer-readable storage medium in order to allow for portability of the functionality; i.e., downloading it to a plurality of cameras being manufactured or downloading it to add to existing firmware functionality to a similar device.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 (a) as being unpatentable over US 12,143,733 B2 (hereinafter “Hua”) as applied above, in view of Case Law In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 21, US 12,143,733 B2 discloses wherein the statistical information includes a first set of bits based on a pixel, wherein the pixel includes a second set of bits (see claim 8); except wherein a number of bits in the first set of bits is smaller than a number of bits in the second set of bits.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrive to wherein a number of bits in the first set of bits is smaller than a number of bits in the second set of bits, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
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 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 1-3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu et al. (US 20140064613 A1, hereinafter “Wu”), in view of Yu et al. (US 20220078324 A1, hereinafter “Yu”).
Regarding claim 1, Wu teaches a method (Fig. 1), comprising:
generating a plurality of local gain lookup tables (LUTs) , each local gain LUT corresponding to a color channel ([0021]-[0022]: input image IMG_I in a color space. A local brightness adjustment circuit 110 performs a local brightness adjustment upon the received input image IMG_I to generate local brightness gain relation LBG corresponds to the input image IMG_I), and each local gain LUT providing a correlation between gain values and intensity values ([0024]-[0025]&[0049]: the local brightness gain relation LBG is derived from the gain information of the current frame. A control parameter generation circuit 230 may provide at least one image control parameter lookup table, and generate the at least one image control parameter PR_I according to the at least one image parameter lookup table and the brightness gain.);
determining an intensity value for a pixel of an image ([0027]: a maximum pixel value of the pixel P_i in the RGB color space may be used as the brightness value Bi of the pixel P_i. Next, an average brightness value of all pixel values in the image block IB_i is substituted into the curve functions to obtain a plurality of brightness values.);
determining a local gain LUT out of the plurality of local gain LUTs that corresponds to the color channel of the pixel ([0027]-[0028]&[0049]: The obtained brightness values are compared to a predetermined brightness value (e.g. a brightness level comfortable to user's eyes) to find a specific brightness value closest to the predetermined brightness value from the brightness values. the local brightness adjustment circuit 210 may calculate a ratio (e.g. a brightness gain Gi) between a brightness value (e.g. the brightness value Bi) of the image unit (e.g. the pixel P_i) before the local brightness adjustment and a brightness value (e.g. the brightness value Bi') of the image unit (e.g. the pixel P_i) after the local brightness adjustment, thereby obtaining the local brightness gain relation LBG.);
identifying a local gain value corresponding to the determined intensity value of the pixel based on the determined local gain LUT ([0025], [0047]&[0049]: control parameter generation circuit 230 may generate at least one image control parameter corresponding to each image unit according to the local brightness gain relation LBG (e.g. a brightness gain of each image unit in the adjusted image IMG_A/the image to be processed IMG_P). the control parameter generation circuit 230 may refer to the built-in image control parameter lookup table to generate the at least one image control parameter PR_I corresponding to the received local brightness gain relation LBG.);
and applying the local gain value to the pixel ([0049]: the control parameter generation circuit 230 may refer to the built-in image control parameter lookup table to generate the at least one image control parameter PR_I corresponding to the received local brightness gain relation LBG. Next, the image enhancement circuit 220 may perform image enhancement according to the at least one image control parameter PR_I.).
Wu does not teach generating a plurality of local gain lookup tables (LUTs) based on statistical information.
However, Yu discloses generating a plurality of local gain lookup tables (LUTs) based on statistical information ([0028]: white balance gain table WB_T generated from the white balance gain estimation circuit 102. The white balance gain table WB_T records mapping between pixel values and white balance (WB) gain values for different color components (R, G, B).).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate generating a plurality of local gain lookup tables (LUTs) based on statistical information as taught by Yu into Wu method. The suggestion/ motivation for doing so would be to provide statistics of different color components (R, G, B) be jointly considered for determining a corresponding set of white balance gain settings (Yu: [0031]).
Regarding claim 2, Wu and Yu combination teaches the method of claim 1, in addition Wu discloses wherein determining the intensity value comprises determining the intensity value based on a linear interpolation of two adjacent intensity values ([0027]-[0028]: performing the local brightness adjustment upon a single pixel by referring to an image block there surrounding.).
Regarding claim 3, Wu and Yu combination teaches the method of claim 1, in addition Wu discloses wherein determining the intensity value comprises determining the intensity value as a weighted average of an intensity value of the pixel and an intensity value of a neighboring pixel ([0027]: a maximum pixel value of the pixel P_i in the RGB color space may be used as the brightness value Bi of the pixel P_i. Next, an average brightness value of all pixel values in the image block IB_i is substituted into the curve functions to obtain a plurality of brightness values.).
Regarding claim 5, Wu and Yu combination teaches the method of claim 1, in addition Yu discloses wherein each local gain LUT of the plurality of local gain LUTs includes multiple entries, and wherein each entry comprises an intensity value and a corresponding local gain value ([0028]: white balance gain table WB_T generated from the white balance gain estimation circuit 102. The white balance gain table WB_T records mapping between pixel values and white balance (WB) gain values for different color components (R, G, B).).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu and Yu combination as applied above, in view of Cote et al. (US 20120081385 A1, hereinafter “Cote”), and further in view of Case Law In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 4, Wu and Yu combination teaches the method of claim 1, in addition Wu discloses wherein determining the intensity value comprises determining the intensity value as a weighted average of intensity values of pixels in a as illustrated by Fig. 3, [0026]-[0027]: Obtain an average brightness value of all pixel values in an image block (e.g. the image block IB_i) surrounding the pixel P_i).
Wu and Yu combination does not teach wherein the window of pixels is 1×6 window.
However, Cote discloses wherein the window of pixels is horizontal window of 1x7 (Fig. 105, [0493]&[0516]: an average gradient is calculated as the difference between the current pixel and the average of its surrounding pixels using a set of horizontal pixels P0 to P6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate wherein the window of pixels is 1×6 window, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. The suggestion/ motivation for doing so would be to reduce the appearance of certain artifacts (Cote: [0526]).
Claims 7-9, 11, 15-17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 (a) as being unpatentable over the Wu and Yu combination as applied above, in view of Examiner’s Official Notice (E.O.N).
Regarding claim 7, claim 7 has been analyzed and rejected with regard to claim 1 except a memory configured to store program instructions; and a processor configured to execute the program instructions.
Nevertheless, Official Notice is taken regarding embodying/translating the functionality associated with a circuitry-based apparatus as/into a program stored on a non-transitory computer-readable medium; a concept that is well-known and accepted in the camera art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have embodied the steps taught by Wu being stored as an instruction on non-transitory computer-readable storage medium in order to allow for portability of the functionality; i.e., downloading it to a plurality of cameras being manufactured or downloading it to add to existing firmware functionality to a similar device.
Regarding claim 8, claim 8 has been analyzed with regard to claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons as used above.
Regarding claim 9, claim 9 has been analyzed with regard to claim 3 and is rejected for the same reasons as used above.
Regarding claim 11, claim 11 has been analyzed with regard to claim 5 and is rejected for the same reasons as used above.
Regarding claim 15, claim 15 has been analyzed with regard to claims 1&2 and is rejected for the same reasons as used above.
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 has been analyzed with regard to claim 3 and is rejected for the same reasons as used above.
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 has been analyzed with regard to claim 3 and is rejected for the same reasons as used above.
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 has been analyzed with regard to claim 5 and is rejected for the same reasons as used above.
Claims 10 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu, Yu, and E.O.N combination as applied above, and further in view of in view of Cote et al. (US 20120081385 A1, hereinafter “Cote”).
Regarding claim 10, claim 10 has been analyzed with regard to claim 4 and is rejected for the same reasons as used above.
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 has been analyzed with regard to claim 4 and is rejected for the same reasons as used above.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the Wu, Yu and Examiner’s Official Notice (E.O.N) combination as applied above, in view of Cote et al. (US 20120081385 A1, hereinafter “Cote”).
Regarding claim 14, Wu, Yu and (E.O.N) combination teaches the system of claim 7, except wherein the system is a system-on-a-chip (SoC).
However, Cote discloses wherein the system is a system-on-a-chip (SoC) ([0269]: providing a system-on-chip processing device).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate wherein the system is a system-on-a-chip (SoC) as taught by Cote into Wu and Yu combination. The suggestion/ motivation for doing so would be to offer a better performance, lower power, smaller size, and reduced cost.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDELAAZIZ TISSIRE whose telephone number is (571)270-7204. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 8 AM to 5 PM.
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, Ye Lin can be reached on 571-272-7372. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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.
/ABDELAAZIZ TISSIRE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2638
Prosecution Insights