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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed July 14th 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Claims 1, 13, 15, and 20 have overcome the rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed April 14th 2026. A second search has been performed to address the material amended in the aforementioned claims. Newly found references Ji (CN 110706268 A) and Yin (US 20220137192 A1) were used for the newly amended claim limitations.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 15, and 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Na (US 20220050206 A1; from applicant’s IDS) in view of Ji (CN 110706268 A) and Yin (US 20220137192 A1).
Regarding claim 1:
Na teaches:
A device comprising:
memory, comprising one or more storage media, storing instructions (Na: computer storage medium that may store instructions [0039]);
at least one processor comprising processing circuitry (Na: the controller 306 includes a timing generator and a processing unit [0039]);
a plurality of sensors comprising a first distance sensor and a second distance sensor (Na: The apparatus includes a distance-refinement system including one or more indirect time-of-flight sensors [0010]);
a camera system including a plurality of cameras (Na: For example, the sensor system can include one or more cameras embedded in a mobile device. [0076]); and
a display system including a first display and a second display, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the wearable device to:
obtain, via the camera system, images (Na: multiple images captured by one or more image sensors over time [0087]) of an external environment (Na: The machine learned model(s) 1216 can receive at least a portion of an image that includes an object in an environment [0087]);
identify, based on the images of the external environment, a distance from a reference position to an external object in the external environment (Na: distance estimation system 110 may use a portion of the image captured by the RGB camera 202 to generate an output that represents a distance between a device 102 and an object 140 [0049]; Na: the distance estimation system 110 (e.g., implemented using an RGB camera coupled with a machine-learned model) determines that a distance between the device 102 and the object 140 to be D1 [0044]; emphasis added);
in case that the distance is greater than or equal to a first range distance and is less than a second range distance greater than the first range distance (Na: the distance refinement system 120 may provide a lower-error distance within the unambiguous range [0043]; see Note 1A),
identify a corrected distance from the reference position to the external object based on the distance (Na: By way of example, based on D1 and known unambiguous range (based on operating frequency of the i-ToF sensors as shown in equation (1)) of the distance refinement system 120, the processing system 130 may determine a long-range and high-depth-resolution distance, Dout [0045]; emphasis added),
first distance information of the external object obtained through the first distance sensor (Na: The method includes determining, by the one or more indirect time-of-flight sensors and based on the second optical signal, a second distance between the two points in the environment. [0009]), and
second distance information of the external object obtained through the second distance sensor (Na: In some implementations, the sensor system 112 can include […] one or more direct time-of-flight (d-ToF) sensors [0031] (emphasis added); when using one or more direct time-of-flight sensors, a first distance can be determined based on a round-trip travel time of light between two points in the environment (e.g., the distance between the device 102 and the object 140). [0032]);
Note 1A: Na teaches that the “unambiguous range” may be characterized by two reference distances: “As example, at a an demodulation frequency of 300 MHz, the unambiguous range of an i-ToF sensor is 50 cm. As such, when operating at 300 MHz, an i-ToF sensor may not be able to differentiate between a distance of 10 cm and a distance of 60 cm” [0042].
Note 1B: Above, the Examiner cited [0045] which teaches that i-ToF and the distance D1 (which may be based on d-ToF or RGB stereo) may be used to generate a corrected distance.
In paragraph [0045], Na further teaches in equations 2 and 3 that:
Dout = D2 + (floor(D1 / unambiguous range)) × (unambiguous range).
(For sake of brevity, equation 2 has been substituted into equation 3).
Na further teaches: “the distance estimation system 110 (e.g., implemented using an RGB camera coupled with a machine-learned model) determines that a distance between the device 102 and the object 140 to be D1. Moreover, the distance refinement system 120 determines that a distance between the device 102 and the object 140 to be D2.” [0044].
The distance D1 may be determined by RGB stereo, or d-ToF: “The distance estimation system 110 may include a sensor system 112 […] The sensor system 112 can include a sensor array […] The sensor array can be a sensor array of an RGB camera. In some implementations, the sensor system 112 can include a stereo camera having a plurality of lenses, a structured light detection system, and/or one or more direct time-of-flight (d-ToF) sensors.” [0031].
Furthermore, the distance D2 may be determined by i-ToF: “The distance refinement system 120 may include one or more i-ToF systems 122” [0033].
In short, the estimation system 110 can contain RGB stereo or d-ToF sensors. Meanwhile, the refinement system may contain i-ToF sensors. Therefore, in equations 2 and 3, Na explicitly teaches that the corrected distance is determined based on d-ToF + i-ToF or RGB stereo + i-ToF.
Na further teaches that RGB stereo, d-ToF (direct time of flight) and i-ToF (indirect time of flight) may be simultaneously included in one system: “3D image sensors, or depth sensors, may utilize principles such as stereo, direct time-of-flight (d-ToF), and indirect ToF (i-ToF) techniques” [0004]. Therefore, the Examiner submits that it would be obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to determine a corrected depth “Dout” based on i-ToF, d-ToF and RGB stereo.
Na fails to explicitly teach:
A wearable device comprising:
a plurality of sensors comprising a first distance sensor having a first measurable distance and a second distance sensor having a second measurable distance greater than the first measurable distance;
in case that the distance is greater than or equal to a first reference distance and is less than a second reference distance greater than the first reference distance,
modify, based on the corrected distance, the images of the external environment including the external object such that a visual object image corresponding to the external object appears as being positioned at a depth according to the corrected distance; and
display, via the display system, the modified images of the external environment.
Ji teaches:
A wearable device (Ji: The embodiment of the invention further claims a VR/AR glasses or VR/AR helmet, wherein VR/AR comprises a distance adjusting device, Pg. 5, par. 5) comprising:
modify, based on the corrected distance (Ji: for example, the second distance between the object and the user is 80cm, calculating the pupil region to a first distance of the screen is 1.5cm, then modifying the second distance, the correction result is 80cm-1.5cm=78.5cm, Pg. 3, par. 2), the images of the external environment including the external object such that a visual object image corresponding to the external object appears as being positioned at a depth according to the corrected distance (Ji: able to realize the image for presenting 3 D modelling the corresponding distance modifications. comfort with using time lifting for AR glasses used by the user, the scene modeling and actual distance deviation occurs, such that human eyes see the real object distance and the virtual imaging distance is substantially consistent, Pg. 2, par. 2); and
display, via the display system, the modified images of the external environment (Ji: realize the image seen in the display of VR/AR glasses or VR/AR helmet user is more consistent with the actual distance, Pg. 5, par. 6).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Ji with Na. Displaying objects based on a corrected distance through a head mounted display, as in Ji, would benefit the Na teachings because doing so would “[avoid] user dizziness and feeling in the using process, and improves the use experience of the user.” (Ji, Pg. 3, par. 3)
Na in view of Ji still fails to explicitly teach:
a plurality of sensors comprising a first distance sensor having a first measurable distance and a second distance sensor having a second measurable distance greater than the first measurable distance;
in case that the distance is greater than or equal to a first reference distance and is less than a second reference distance greater than the first reference distance,
Yin teaches:
a plurality of sensors (Yin: TOF 3-D ranging sensors are based on determining, either directly (direct TOF (DTOF)) or indirectly (indirect TOF (ITOF)), the delay between the light pulses emitted by an illuminator and a received reflected signal detected by a TOF 3-D ranging sensor [0001]) comprising a first distance sensor having a first measurable distance and a second distance sensor having a second measurable distance greater than the first measurable distance (Yin: The DTOF approach is typically used in applications requiring long (kilometers) range measurements with very high depth resolution, whereas the ITOF approach is mainly used in applications requiring short to medium (tens of meters) range measurements with depth resolutions of few centimeters. [0064]; see Note 1C);
in case that the distance is greater than or equal to a first reference distance and is less than a second reference distance greater than the first reference distance (see Note 1C),
Note 1C: Yin teaches in [0002] that DTOF may be utilized for distances measured in kilometers (1000+ meters) while ITOF may be utilized in scenarios requiring only tens of meters.
Because Na teaches utilizing ITOF, DTOF, and RGB stereo to determine a depth as discussed in Note 1B, the Examiner submits that it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to determine a corrected depth, a first distance, and a second distance, in case that the distance is greater than or equal to a first reference distance (tens of meters) and is less than a second reference distance greater than the first reference distance (kilometers), as while neither the ITOF or DTOF sensor is operating in their optimal range, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that multiple levels of sampling by different sensors would increase the resolution: “To overcome sensor uncertainty or errors, the use of multiple types of sensors may be combined to yield more accurate results” (Na, [0006]).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Yin with Na in view of Ji because Yin teaches properties of the DTOF and ITOF sensors by Na that are already known in the art.
Regarding claim 2:
Na in view of Ji and Yin teaches:
The wearable device of claim 1 (as shown above), wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the wearable device to:
in case that the distance (Na: the processing system 130 may receive a distance measurement of 1 m from the distance estimation system 110 [0047]) is less than the first reference distance (Yin: the ITOF approach is mainly used in applications requiring short to medium (tens of meters) range measurements with depth resolutions of few centimeters [0002]; see Note 1C), identify the corrected distance from the reference position to the external object based on the distance and the first distance information (see Note 2A).
Note 2A: Yin teaches in [0002] that ITOF is best utilized when the distance is within tens of meters. Na contemplates that the distance (D1) may be 1m. Furthermore, in Note 1B, it was shown that it would be obvious for a PHOSITA to determine a corrected depth based on a combination of RGB stereo, i-ToF, and d-ToF. Therefore, the Examiner submits that it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the distance (D1) and the first distance information (the distance determined by the ITOF sensor) to identify a corrected distance.
Regarding claim 3:
Na in view of Ji and Yin teaches:
The wearable device of claim 2 (as shown above), wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the wearable device to:
in case that the distance is greater than or equal to the second reference distance and is less than a third reference distance greater than the second reference distance (Yin: The DTOF approach is typically used in applications requiring long (kilometers) range measurements with very high depth resolution [0002]), identify the corrected distance from the reference position to the external object based on the distance and the second distance information (Na: the processing system 130 may combine distance information from both the distance estimation system 110 and the distance refinement system 120, and determine a distance between the device 102 and the object 140 with high accuracy and long range. [0043]).
Note 3A: Yin teaches in [0002] that DTOF is best utilized when the distance is at or exceeds a kilometer. In Note 1B, it was shown that it would be obvious for a PHOSITA to determine a corrected depth based on a combination of RGB stereo, i-ToF, and d-ToF. Therefore, the Examiner submits that it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the distance (D1) and the second distance information (the distance determined by the DTOF sensor) to identify a corrected distance.
Regarding claim 14:
Na in view of Ji and Yin teaches:
The wearable device of claim 1 (as shown above), wherein
each of the plurality of cameras comprises a red-green-blue (RGB) camera (Na: For instance, a depth-sensing system can leverage a distance estimation from a sensor of a first type (e.g., RGB camera) [0027]), wherein the first distance sensor comprises an indirect-time of flight (I-ToF) sensor (Na: and a refined distance estimation from a sensor of a second type (e.g., an indirect time-of-flight sensor) [0027]), and wherein the second distance sensor comprises a direct-time of flight (D-ToF) sensor (Na: the sensor system 112 can include […] one or more direct time-of-flight (d-ToF) sensors. [0031]).
Regarding claim 15:
Claim 15 is substantially similar to claim 1 and is therefore rejected for similar reasons. Claim 15 contains the following notable differences:
Claim 15 claims a method instead of a wearable device. In the rejection of claim 1 it was shown that Na in view of Ji and Yin teaches the claimed wearable device, and therefore Na in view of Ji and Yin would also teach the corresponding method.
Regarding claim 16:
Claim 16 is substantially similar to claim 2 and is therefore rejected for similar reasons. Claim 16 contains the following notable differences:
Claim 16 claims a method instead of a wearable device. In the rejection of claim 2 it was shown that Na in view of Ji and Yin teaches the claimed wearable device, and therefore Na in view of Ji and Yin would also teach the corresponding method.
Regarding claim 17:
Claim 17 is substantially similar to claim 3 and is therefore rejected for similar reasons. Claim 17 contains the following notable differences:
Claim 17 claims a method instead of a wearable device. In the rejection of claim 3 it was shown that Na in view of Ji and Yin teaches the claimed wearable device, and therefore Na in view of Ji and Yin would also teach the corresponding method.
Regarding claim 20:
Claim 20 is substantially similar to claim 1 and is therefore rejected for similar reasons. Claim 20 contains the following notable differences:
Claim 20 claims a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium instead of a wearable device. Na teaches a computer readable medium: “The memory 1208 can include one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media” [0082]; “The memory 1208 can also store computer-readable instructions 1212 that can be executed by the one or more processors 1206” [0084].
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Na (US 20220050206 A1; from applicant’s IDS) in view of in view of Ji (CN 110706268 A), Yin (US 20220137192 A1), and Li (US 10855896 B1).
Regarding claim 7:
Na in view of Ji and Yin teaches:
The wearable device of claim 1 (as shown above),
Na in view of Ji and Yin fails to teach:
wherein a period of obtaining the images through the camera system has a first time interval, wherein a period of obtaining the first distance information through the first distance sensor has a second time interval longer than the first time interval, and wherein a period of obtaining the second distance information through the second distance sensor has a third time interval longer than the second time interval.
Li teaches:
wherein a period of obtaining the images through the camera system has a first time interval, wherein a period of obtaining the first distance information through the first distance sensor has a second time interval longer than the first time interval, and wherein a period of obtaining the second distance information through the second distance sensor has a third time interval longer than the second time interval (Li: As shown in FIG. 4, a duration of each capture interval 4101, 4151, 4201 associated with the first gate is different than a duration of each capture interval 4102, 4152, 4202 associated with the second gate, which is also different than a duration of each capture interval 4103, 4153, 4203 associated with the third gate, and so on. (49); Fig. 4, see Note 7A).
Note 7A: In Fig. 4, Li showcases that capture interval 4102 is shorter than capture interval 4101, and that capture interval 410n is longer than capture interval 4102.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Li with Na in view of Ji and Yin. Including a time interval between each capture, as in Li, would benefit the Na in view of Ji and Yin teachings by mitigating motion blur effects that occur due to high framerates: “the time-of-flight methods for depth sensing feature motion blur when capturing moving objects due to a relatively high number of image frames required to estimate the depth” (Li, paragraph (4)).
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Na (US 20220050206 A1; from applicant’s IDS) in view of Ji (CN 110706268 A), Yin (US 20220137192 A1), and Han (US 20160014400 A1).
Regarding claim 11:
Na in view of Ji and Yin teaches:
The wearable device of claim 1 (as shown above), wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the wearable device to:
Na in view of Ji and Yin fails to teach:
obtain a saliency map in which at least a portion of an image is visually highlighted according to likelihood of a gaze of a user of the wearable device being positioned;
identify a weight region based on the saliency map; and
determine a first weight for the first distance information and a second weight for the second distance information for the weight region, wherein the first weight and the second weight are used for identifying the corrected distance.
Han teaches:
obtain a saliency map (Han: the controlling unit 140 may analyze the image based on an algorithm which is preset in the input image, generate a saliency image (or a saliency map image) [0088]) in which at least a portion of an image is visually highlighted (Han: Fig. 4; see Note 11A) according to likelihood of a gaze of a user of the wearable device being positioned (Han: the controlling unit 140 may extract the saliency region of the user through recognizing a gaze (i.e., gaze recognition) of the user [0090]);
identify a weight region based on the saliency map (Han: The controlling unit 140 may determine an object which becomes a target of a depth value adjustment based on depth map information and saliency map information having information on the saliency region. [0097]; see Note 11B); and
determine a first weight for the first distance information and a second weight for the second distance information for the weight region, wherein the first weight and the second weight are used for identifying the corrected distance (Han: a re-adjusted depth value P3′ of a specific object in a frame at t=3 may be calculated based on the following Mathematical expression. […] where, Pt and Pt+k each represent a depth value of specific object at t and t+k, and Wt+k, which is a weight applied to a depth value at t+k, may be determined by taking account of various factors. [0140]; see Note 11C).
Note 11A: Fig. 4 of Han showcases a saliency image 340 that showcases that the foreground elements may be highlighted (light grey) as opposed to the background elements (dark grey).
Note 11B: The specification of the present application recites: “For example, the region of interest may be referred to as a weight region.” [0105]. Therefore, the Examiner interprets the “salient region” taught by Han to be analogous to a weight region.
Note 11C: Na teaches an optical signal for the first and second distance measurement: “The distance-estimation system can be configured to receive a first optical signal and determine a first distance between two points in an environment. The distance-refinement system can be configured to receive a second optical signal and determine a second distance between the two points in the environment.” (Abstract). Na further teaches that: “The distance estimation system 710 is configured to receive an optical signal, and based on the optical signal, provide an electrical signal (e.g., a digital image) that can be used to estimate a distance between the device 702 and the object 140.” That is, the optical signals for both distance measurements are converted into image data or frames.
Han teaches that for any frame, a weight may be generated in order to determine a depth correction: “a re-adjusted depth value P3′ of a specific object in a frame at t=3 may be calculated based on the following Mathematical expression. […] where, Pt and Pt+k each represent a depth value of specific object at t and t+k, and Wt+k, which is a weight applied to a depth value at t+k, may be determined by taking account of various factors.”
Therefore, the Examiner understands Na in view of Ji, Yin, and Han to teach or at least suggest generation of weights for both the first and second distance information to generate a corrected distance.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Han with Na in view of Ji and Yin. Utilizing a saliency map for determining weights to adjust the distance in an image, as in Han, would benefit the Na in view of Ji and Yin teachings by enabling the display to adjust a 3D view based on a gaze and position of the user to prevent visual fatigue: “views 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 1, 2, 3, . . . , as illustrated in FIGS. 1A and 1B, has a problem that dead zones may occur depending on a viewing position. Here, the dead zone means a position at which the viewing position of the viewer is switched from the view 7 to the view 1, and since serious crosstalk occurs at this position due to a sharp change (jumping phenomenon) of disparity, the 3D image may not be viewed and visual fatigue may be caused to the user” (Han, [0012]).
Regarding claim 12:
Na in view of Ji, Yin, and Han teaches:
The wearable device of claim 11 (as shown above), wherein
the weight region is identified based on the distance and the saliency map or
is identified based on a gaze region according to the gaze (Han: the controlling unit 140 may extract the saliency region of the user through recognizing a gaze (i.e., gaze recognition) of the user [0090]) and the saliency map (Han: the controlling unit 140 may analyze the image based on an algorithm which is preset in the input image, generate a saliency image (or a saliency map image), and extract a saliency region of the user based on the generated saliency image [0088]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 13, 18, and 19 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 4:
Claim 4 recites: “in case that the distance is greater than or equal to the third reference distance, display, through the display system, one or more generated images such that the visual object image appears as being positioned at the depth according to the distance.” (emphasis added)
Na teaches that their method may be implemented on a mobile device with a screen: “the one or more cameras and the three-dimensional sensor array can be embedded in a backside of the mobile device that is on an opposite side of a screen of the mobile device” [0076]. However, Na does not explicitly teach displaying an object at the third reference distance.
Previously cited prior art Schultz teaches displaying objects at specific depths; however, Schultz only teaches displaying an object such that the distance is less than a specific distance, rather than greater or equal to. Schultz also does not teach displaying based on a third reference distance as described in the claims.
Therefore, Na in view of Ji and Yin fails to teach the limitations of claim 4.
Guo (CN 114935976 A) teaches: “obtaining the distance between the human eye to the display screen 1 is the preset third distance information when the pupil hole in the human eye of the first actual offset” (Pg. 9, par. 10). See also Fig. 4.
However, Guo does not teach displaying any image or object at a distance corresponding to the third distance information on the screen of the user device, but rather adjusts the refresh rate of the screen.
The Examiner notes that claim 18 contains similar limitations to claim 4, and therefore is allowable for the same reasons cited above.
Regarding claim 8:
Claim 8 recites: “wherein, in case that the distance is less than the first reference distance, the corrected distance is calculated based on the first distance information in a frame when the first time interval is overlapped with the second time interval, and wherein, in case that the distance is less than the first reference distance, the corrected distance is adjusted from the distance by using the first distance information in another frame when the first time interval is not overlapped with the second time interval.” (emphasis added)
Na in view of Ji, Yin, and Han fails to teach the limitations of claim 8.
Khan (NPL: Temporally Consistent Online Depth Estimation Using Point-Based Fusion) teaches: “We generate temporally consistent depth maps for each RGB video frame t by fusing the projected depth from a prior point cloud dt p with the estimated depth dt.” However, Khan does not teach calculating the corrected distance based on an overlapping or non-overlapping time interval or frame rate.
Regarding claim 9:
Claim 9 recites: “wherein, in case that the distance is greater than or equal to the first reference distance and is less than the second reference distance, the corrected distance is identified by applying a third weight to the first distance information and by applying a fourth weight to the second distance information, wherein the first weight is greater than the second weight, and wherein the third weight is less than the fourth weight.”
Na in view of Ji and Yin fails to teach the first weight being greater than the second weight and the third weight being less than the fourth weight, in case that the distance is greater than or equal to the first reference distance and is less than the second reference distance. Furthermore, none of the prior art searched or on the record teaches the limitations of claim 9.
Regarding claim 13:
Claim 13 recites: “wherein, in case that the distance is greater than or equal to the first reference distance and is less than the second reference distance, the corrected distance is identified by applying a first weight to the first distance information, applying a second weight to the second distance information, and applying a third weight to the distance, and wherein the third weight is greater than the first weight and the second weight.”
Na in view of Jin and Yin fails to teach the limitations above.
Xu (CN 111385558 A) teaches “In particular embodiments, respectively gives the first precision and the second precision and the third precision of different values (comprising the first weight, the second weight and the third weight), […] so that deep measuring precision of the TOF camera shooting module group 20 can adjust based on the condition of the actual evaluation to satisfy different application scene demands.” (Pg. 6, par. 14).
However, Xu fails to explicitly teach that “the third weight is greater than the first weight and the second weight” as claimed.
Claims 5, 6, 10, and 19 are dependent on at least one of 4, 9, or 18 and are therefore allowable for the same reasons cited above.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VINCENT ALEXANDER PROVIDENCE whose telephone number is (571)270-5765. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30-5:00.
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, King Poon can be reached at (571)270-0728. 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.
/VINCENT ALEXANDER PROVIDENCE/Examiner, Art Unit 2617 /KING Y POON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2617
Prosecution Insights