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 Amendment
The Amendment filed June 25, 2026, has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 25, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues, on page 11, that “Hoche does not anticipate amended claim 1. Hartrumpf and Spilman fail to cure the deficiencies of the Hoche”. It is respectfully pointed to the applicant that Hartrumpf teaches the amended limitations wherein the reflected measuring light is provided by reflection of the measuring light at the object and by retro-reflection of the measuring light by the support structure (fig. 2, claim20, [0154], [0184]). Hartrumpf teaches the amended claim 1 as detailed below.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“light emitting unit” in claims 1, 3-4, 7, 9, 11, 15 and 18-20.
“light receiving unit” in claims 1, 4-5, 7, 9, 11, 15 and 18-20.
“a polarisation selecting unit” in claims 1, 3-7 and 11.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 14 recites the broad recitation “embodied as a coordinate measuring machine”, and the claim also recites “in particular as a vision machine” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Hartrumpf (US20190170636A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hartrumpf teaches a measuring device for imaging an object (Abstract), the measuring device comprising: a light emitting unit (1) configured to emit polarised measuring light, a light receiving unit (3) configured to receive and detect reflected measuring light ([0078]-[0081], figs. 2) , and a support structure comprising a retro-reflective layer (2) and a polarisation state manipulation layer (K2) ([0172]), wherein the support structure provides: retro-reflecting of the measuring light and changing a polarisation state of the measuring light such that the polarisation state of incident measuring light is different relative to the polarisation state of retro-reflected measuring light ([0111], [0172]), a polarisation selecting unit (5, k4) configured to provide reflected measuring light with a first polarisation state and/or reflected measuring light with a second polarisation state for reception with the light receiving unit, wherein the reflected measuring light is provided by reflection of the measuring light at the object and by retro-reflection of the measuring light by the support structure ([0079], [0094], [0154]).
Regarding claim 4, Hartrumpf, teaches the measuring device according to claim 1, wherein: the light emitting unit, the support structure and the light receiving unit define a beam path for the measuring light (fig. 2), wherein the polarisation selecting unit is arranged along the beam path: between the light emitting unit and the support structure or between the support structure and the light receiving unit (fig. 2), wherein the measuring device comprises a first (K3) polariser arranged along the beam path between the light emitting unit and the support structure and/or a second polariser arranged along the beam path between the support structure and the light receiving unit (fig. 2, [0093]).
Regarding claim 5, Hartrumpf teaches the measuring device according to claim 1, wherein: the polarisation selecting unit is provided as a polarising beam splitter (5) providing separation of reflected measuring light with a first polarisation state and of reflected measuring light with a second polarisation state ([0079], [0082], [0094]) and the light receiving unit comprises two sensor units one of which configured and arranged to detect measuring light of the first polarisation state and one of which configured and arranged to detect measuring light of the second polarisation state ([0104] detector 3 comprising three individual detectors).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 15-16 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hartrumpf (US20190170636A1).
Regarding claim 15, Hartrumpf teaches a method for imaging an object by means of a measuring device according to claim 1, wherein the method comprises: illuminating the object by directing measuring light to the object by means of the light emitting unit, receiving and detecting measuring light reflected at the support structure and reflected by the object by means of the light receiving unit ([0078]-[0081], figs. 2), and capturing a first image and a second image of the object by means of the light receiving unit, wherein receiving and detecting the measuring light is provided by: selecting measuring light with a first polarisation state, capturing the first image by capturing reflected measuring during selecting measuring light with the first polarisation state, selecting measuring light with a second polarisation state and capturing the second image by capturing reflected measuring during selecting measuring light with the second polarisation state ([0187], [0225],[0237]), but fails to disclose providing the object on the support structure.
However, providing the object on the support structure is a matter of design choice.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hartrumpf by incorporating providing the object on the support structure for a compact device.
Regarding claim 16, Hartrumpf teaches a computer program product embodied in a non-transitory computer-readable medium, which, when executed by a controlling and processing unit and/or a controller, causes the automatic execution and controlling of the steps of the method according to claim 15 ([0049]).
Regarding claim 19-20, Hartrumpf teaches a method for imaging an object by means of a measuring device according to claims 4-5, wherein the method comprises, illuminating the object by directing measuring light to the object by means of the light emitting unit, receiving and detecting measuring light reflected at the support structure and reflected by the object by means of the light receiving unit ([0078]-[0081], figs. 2), and capturing a first image and a second image of the object by means of the light receiving unit, wherein receiving and detecting the measuring light is provided by: selecting measuring light with a first polarisation state, capturing the first image by capturing reflected measuring during selecting measuring light with the first polarisation state, selecting measuring light with a second polarisation state and capturing the second image by capturing reflected measuring during selecting measuring light with the second polarisation state ([0187], [0225],[0237]), but fails to disclose providing the object on the support structure.
However, providing the object on the support structure is a matter of design choice.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hartrumpf by incorporating providing the object on the support structure for a compact device.
Claims 3, 6-12, 14, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hartrumpf (US20190170636A1) in view Hoche (DE 102011078833 A1)
Regarding claim 3, Hartrumpf, teaches the measuring device according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein: the light emitting unit is configured to emit measuring light of the first polarisation state and/or measuring light of the second polarisation state, wherein the measuring light of the first polarisation state and the measuring light of the second polarisation state are providable simultaneously or successively, the light emitting unit comprises at least two light sources one of which is configured to emit measuring light of the first polarisation state and the other one is configured to emit measuring light of the second polarisation state, and/or the polarisation selecting unit is configured to control the light emitting unit such that either measuring light of the first polarisation state or measuring light of the second polarisation state is emitted.
However, Hoche which relates to a measuring device for imaging an object, thus from the same field of endeavor, teaches the light emitting unit is configured to emit measuring light of the first polarisation state and/or measuring light of the second polarisation state, wherein the measuring light of the first polarisation state and the measuring light of the second polarisation state are providable simultaneously or successively, the light emitting unit comprises at least two light sources one of which is configured to emit measuring light of the first polarisation state and the other one is configured to emit measuring light of the second polarisation state, and/or the polarisation selecting unit is configured to control the light emitting unit such that either measuring light of the first polarisation state or measuring light of the second polarisation state is emitted ([0084]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hartrumpf by incorporating wherein: the light emitting unit is configured to emit measuring light of the first polarisation state and/or measuring light of the second polarisation state, wherein the measuring light of the first polarisation state and the measuring light of the second polarisation state are providable simultaneously or successively, the light emitting unit comprises at least two light sources one of which is configured to emit measuring light of the first polarisation state and the other one is configured to emit measuring light of the second polarisation state, and/or the polarisation selecting unit is configured to control the light emitting unit such that either measuring light of the first polarisation state or measuring light of the second polarisation state is emitted in order to achieve controllable polarization state illumination simply without moving part.
Regarding claim 6, Hartrumpf teaches the measuring device according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the polarisation selecting unit is configured to provide selecting either reflected measuring light with a first polarisation state or with a second polarisation state by: selectively providing emitting of the measuring light with a first polarisation state or with a second polarisation state by changing an emitting selection state of the polarisation selecting unit and/or selectively providing transmitting of reflected measuring light only of the first polarisation state or of the second polarisation state by changing a transmission selection state of the polarisation selecting unit.
However, Hoche teaches the polarisation selecting unit is configured to provide selecting either reflected measuring light with a first polarisation state or with a second polarisation state by: selectively providing emitting of the measuring light with a first polarisation state or with a second polarisation state by changing an emitting selection state of the polarisation selecting unit and/or selectively providing transmitting of reflected measuring light only of the first polarisation state or of the second polarisation state by changing a transmission selection state of the polarisation selecting unit ( [0080]-[0081]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hartrumpf by incorporating wherein the polarisation selecting unit is configured to provide selecting either reflected measuring light with a first polarisation state or with a second polarisation state by: selectively providing emitting of the measuring light with a first polarisation state or with a second polarisation state by changing an emitting selection state of the polarisation selecting unit and/or selectively providing transmitting of reflected measuring light only of the first polarisation state or of the second polarisation state by changing a transmission selection state of the polarisation selecting unit in order to achieve controllable polarization state illumination simply without moving part.
Regarding claim 7, Hartrumpf, when modified by Hoche, teaches the measuring device according to claim 6, wherein the polarisation selecting unit: is provided as a controller to control the light emitting unit, or is provided by the light emitting unit, or comprises a moveable polarising filter element for filtering emitted measuring light or reflected measuring light, in particular arranged rotatable about the optical axis or linearly moveable, or is provided as a switchable optical element, in particular as a liquid crystal device, or is provided as a polariser which is combined with a sensor unit of the light receiving unit and provides pixel-selective detection of reflected measuring light of the first and the second polarisation state (Hoche: [0080] The first polarizer is rotatable about the optical axis).
Regarding claim 8, Hartrumpf teaches the measuring device according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the measuring light of the first polarisation state comprises linear polarisation of a first orientation and the measuring light of the second polarisation state comprises linear polarisation of a second orientation orthogonal to the first orientation.
However, Hoche teaches wherein the measuring light of the first polarisation state comprises linear polarisation of a first orientation and the measuring light of the second polarisation state comprises linear polarisation of a second orientation orthogonal to the first orientation ([0089] the oscillation direction of which, however, is rotated by 90° with respect to the oscillation direction of the incoming linearly polarized light).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hartrumpf by incorporating wherein the measuring light of the first polarisation state comprises linear polarisation of a first orientation and the measuring light of the second polarisation state comprises linear polarisation of a second orientation orthogonal to the first orientation to improve contrast.
Regarding claim 9, Hartrumpf teaches the measuring device according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the light emitting unit comprises polarised filtering of the first orientation and the light receiving unit comprises polarised filtering of the second orientation orthogonal to the first orientation.
However, Hoche teaches wherein the light emitting unit comprises polarised filtering of the first orientation and the light receiving unit comprises polarised filtering of the second orientation orthogonal to the first orientation ([0084], [0089]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hartrumpf by incorporating wherein the light emitting unit comprises polarised filtering of the first orientation and the light receiving unit comprises polarised filtering of the second orientation orthogonal to the first orientation to improve contrast.
Regarding claim 10, Hartrumpf teaches the measuring device according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein: the polarisation state manipulation layer provides circular polarisation of measuring light by passing the polarisation state manipulation layer, in particular wherein the polarisation state manipulation layer comprises a 1/4 waveplate or 1/4 foil, and/or the retro-reflective layer comprises a retro-reflective foil, in particular a micro-sphere retroreflector foil.
However, Hoche teaches wherein: the polarisation state manipulation layer provides circular polarisation of measuring light by passing the polarisation state manipulation layer, in particular wherein the polarisation state manipulation layer comprises a λ/4 waveplate or λ/4 foil, and/or the retro-reflective layer comprises a retro-reflective foil, in particular a micro-sphere retroreflector foil ([0089]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hartrumpf by incorporating wherein: the polarisation state manipulation layer provides circular polarisation of measuring light by passing the polarisation state manipulation layer, in particular wherein the polarisation state manipulation layer comprises a 1/4 waveplate or 1/4 foil, and/or the retro-reflective layer comprises a retro-reflective foil, in particular a micro-sphere retroreflector foil in order to improve contrast.
Regarding claim 11, Hartrumpf teaches the measuring device according to claim 1, wherein the measuring device comprises a controlling and processing unit configured to control at least the polarisation selecting unit and the light receiving unit ([0049], [0050]), detect reflected measuring light by controlling the polarisation selecting unit to select measuring light with the first polarisation state and correspondingly capture a first image by means of the light receiving unit ([0187], [0225]), and detect reflected measuring light by controlling the polarisation selecting unit to select measuring light with the second polarisation state and correspondingly capture a second image by means of the light receiving unit ([0237]), but fails to disclose the controlling and processing unit comprises an image capturing functionality configured to: emit the measuring light by controlling the light emitting unit.
However, Hoche teaches the controlling and processing unit comprises an image capturing functionality configured to: emit the measuring light by controlling the light emitting unit ([0057]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hartrumpf by incorporating the controlling and processing unit comprises an image capturing functionality configured to: emit the measuring light by controlling the light emitting unit to enable automated coordinated operation.
Regarding claim 12, Hartrumpf, when modified by Hoche, teaches the measuring device according to claim 11, wherein: the first image and the second image each cover at least a part of the object and of the support structure, wherein each image covers a common region of the object, and/or
the detected reflected measuring light is partly reflected at the object and partly reflected by the support structure, wherein the measuring light reflected at the object comprises a polarisation state different from a polarisation state of measuring light reflected by the support structure ( Hoche: [0054] the camera system has a depth-of-field large enough to simultaneously image both the object and the retroreflective surface. Thus any , in any image captured, both the object and the support structure are in focus appear in image).
Regarding claim 14, Hartrumpf teaches the measuring device according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the measuring device is embodied as a coordinate measuring machine, in particular as a vision machine.
However, Hoche teaches wherein the measuring device is embodied as a coordinate measuring machine, in particular as a vision machine ([0045] detecting markings on or in a transparent object, using a camera system and a retroreflective support structure, capturing images for measurement purposes falls within the definition of a vision machine)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hartrumpf by incorporating wherein the measuring device is embodied as a coordinate measuring machine, in particular as a vision machine to provide precise measurement of objects.
Regarding claim 18, Hartrumpf, when modified by Hoche teaches a method for imaging an object by means of a measuring device according to claim 3, wherein the method comprises: illuminating the object by directing measuring light to the object by means of the light emitting unit, receiving and detecting measuring light reflected at the support structure and reflected by the object by means of the light receiving unit ([0078]-[0081], figs. 2), and capturing a first image and a second image of the object by means of the light receiving unit, wherein receiving and detecting the measuring light is provided by: selecting measuring light with a first polarisation state, capturing the first image by capturing reflected measuring during selecting measuring light with the first polarisation state, selecting measuring light with a second polarisation state and capturing the second image by capturing reflected measuring during selecting measuring light with the second polarisation state([0187], [0225],[0237]), but fails to disclose providing the object on the support structure.
However, providing the object on the support structure is a matter of design choice.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hartrumpf and Hoche by incorporating providing the object on the support structure for a compact device
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hartrumpf (US20190170636A1) in view of Hoche (DE 102011078833 A1) as evidenced by Spilman (US 20070115551 A1)
Regarding claim 13, Hartrumpf, when modified by Hoche teaches the measuring device according to claim 11, but fails to disclose wherein the controlling and processing unit comprises an image processing functionality configured to subtract image information of the first image from image information of the second image, in particular wherein the image information comprises: pixel-related values concerning colour and/or brightness of the pixels and/or image region-related information, in particular contrast.
However, the use of image subtraction by removing common background is a well-known technique in image processing as disclosed by Spilman ([0102]) .
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hartrumpf and Hoche by incorporating wherein the controlling and processing unit comprises an image processing functionality configured to subtract image information of the first image from image information of the second image, in particular wherein the image information comprises: pixel-related values concerning colour and/or brightness of the pixels and/or image region-related information, in particular contrast for enhancing contrast.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMED DOUMBIA whose telephone number is (571)272-8266. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00 PM ET.
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, Michelle Iacoletti can be reached at 571-272-3995. 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.
/MOHAMED DOUMBIA/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/Michael A Lyons/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights