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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Claim Objections
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: “in response to the audio recording data does not comprising the cough sound” (line 3) appears that it should be “in response to the audio recording data not comprising the cough sound.”
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: “applied to smart terminal device” (line 1) appears that it should be “applied to a smart terminal device.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim(s) 1-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention, considering all claim elements both individually and in combination as a whole, do not amount to significantly more than a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea).
Claim 1 is a claim to a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter and therefore meets one of the categorical limitations of 35 U.S.C. 101. However, claim 1 meets the first prong of the step 2A analysis because it is directed to a/an abstract idea, as evidenced by the claim language of “detect whether the audio recording data comprises a cough sound,” and “send the audio recording data to a smart terminal device in response to the audio recording data comprising the cough sound, so that the smart terminal device analyzes and collects statistics on cough information about the user based on the audio recording data.” This claim language, under the broadest, reasonable interpretation, encompasses subject matter that may be performed by a human using mental steps or with pen and paper that can involve basic critical thinking, which are types of activities that have been found by the courts to represents abstract ideas (i.e., the mental comparison in Ambry Genetics, or the diagnosing an abnormal condition by performing clinical tests and thinking about the results in Grams). The claim language also meets prong 2 of the step 2A analysis because the above-recited claim language does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. That is, there appears to be no tangible improvement in a technology, effect of a particular treatment or prophylaxis, a particular machine or manufacture that is integrated, or transformation/reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing as a result of this claimed subject matter. As a result, step 2A is satisfied and the second step, step 2B, must be considered.
With regard to the second step, the claim does not appear to recite additional elements that amount to significantly more. The additional elements are “at least one processor,” “one or more memories coupled to the at least one processor and storing programming instructions, wherein the programming instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, enables the apparatus to,” and “activate, in response to a detected vibration signal, a microphone to perform audio recording to obtain audio recording data, wherein the headset is worn around a head and neck region of a user.” However, these elements are not “significantly more” because they are well-known, routine, and/or conventional. The processor and memories are well-known, routine, and/or conventional in view of Alice, Mayo, and Bilski since they are generic computer structures. The activating a microphone in response to a vibration signal and a head configured to be worn around a head or neck region is/are well-known, routine, and/or conventional in view of para [0008] of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0072841 to So. Therefore, these elements do not add significantly more and thus the claim as a whole does not amount to significantly more than a judicial exception.
Additionally, the ordered combination of elements do not add anything significantly more to the claimed subject matter. Specifically, the ordered combination of elements do not have any function that is not already supplied by each element individually. That is, the whole is not greater than the sum of its parts.
In view of the above, independent claim 1 fails to recite patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101. Independent claims 8, 10, and 14 fail to recite patent-eligible subject matter for similar, if not the exact same, reasoning as that of independent claim 1. Dependent claim(s) 2-6, 11-13, and 15-19 fail to cure the deficiencies of independent claim(s) 1, 8, 10, and 14 by merely reciting additional abstract ideas and/or further limitations on abstract ideas already recited. Dependent claim(s) 7 and 9 fail to recite significantly more because these elements are well-known, routine, and/or conventional in view of para [0008] of So. Thus, claim(s) 1-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Section 33(a) of the America Invents Act reads as follows:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no patent may issue on a claim directed to or encompassing a human organism.
Claim(s) 1-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 and section 33(a) of the America Invents Act as being directed to or encompassing a human organism. See also Animals - Patentability, 1077 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 24 (April 21, 1987) (indicating that human organisms are excluded from the scope of patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101).
For claim 1, the claim language “wherein the headset is worn around a head and neck region of a user” encompasses a human organism because it requires the user as part of the claim for the headset to be worn around the head and neck region of the user. The claim is examined as meaning “wherein the headset is configured to be worn around a head and neck region of a user.”
For claim 8, the claim language “wherein the headset is worn around a head and neck region of a user” encompasses a human organism because it requires the user as part of the claim for the headset to be worn around the head and neck region of the user. The claim is examined as meaning “wherein the headset is configured to be worn around a head and neck region of a user.”
For claim 10, the claim language “wherein the headset is worn around a head and neck region of a user” encompasses a human organism because it requires the user as part of the claim for the headset to be worn around the head and neck region of the user. The claim is examined as meaning “wherein the headset is configured to be worn around a head and neck region of a user.”
For claim 14, the claim language “wherein the headset is worn around a head and neck region of a user” encompasses a human organism because it requires the user as part of the claim for the headset to be worn around the head and neck region of the user. The claim is examined as meaning “wherein the headset is configured to be worn around a head and neck region of a user.”
Dependent claim(s) 2-7, 9, 11-13, and 15-19 fail to cure the deficiencies of independent claim(s) 1, 8, 10, and 14, thus claim(s) 1-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 6-10, 13-14, 17, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0145956 to Goldstein in view of CN 109346075 to Huawei (Examiner’s Note: all citations will be made to the English translation(s) provided that correspond to their foreign counterparts).
For claim 1, Goldstein disclose an apparatus (Abstract), the apparatus comprising:
at least one processor (“computer,” para [0138]); and
one or more memories (“non-transitory tangible computer readable media,” para [0138]) coupled to the at least one processor and storing programming instructions (para [0138]), wherein the programming instructions, when executed by the at least one processor (para [0138]), enables the apparatus to:
activate a microphone (222) (Fig. 2A) (para [0034]) to perform audio recording to obtain audio recording data (para [0034]);
detect whether the audio recording data comprises a cough sound (para [0014]-[0015] and [0073]); and
send the audio recording data to a smart terminal device in response to the audio recording data comprising the cough sound (para [0073]), so that the smart terminal device analyzes and collects statistics (“trending analysis,” para [0111]) on cough information about the user based on the audio recording data (para [0014]-[0015], [0073]-[0075], and [0111]).
Goldstein does not expressly disclose that the apparatus is applied to a headset; and activate, in response to a detected vibration signal, a microphone to perform audio recording to obtain audio recording data, wherein the headset is worn around a head and neck region of a user.
However, Huawei teaches that the apparatus is applied to a headset (see Fig. 1A); and activate, in response to a detected vibration signal, a microphone to perform audio recording to obtain audio recording data (fifth full paragraph on page 4 and/or fourth full paragraph on page 8), wherein the headset is worn around a head and neck region of a user (see Fig. 1A).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan to modify Goldstein such that the apparatus is applied to a headset; and activate, in response to a detected vibration signal, a microphone to perform audio recording to obtain audio recording data, wherein the headset is worn around a head and neck region of a user, in view of the teachings of Huawei, for the obvious advantage of saving power consumption so that the microphone is only activated when there is sound coming from the user.
For claim 4, Goldtein further discloses wherein: the audio recording data comprises audio data and an acquisition time of the audio data (para [0073]); and the cough information comprises at least one of a cough time, a quantity of coughs, a cough frequency, a cough trend, or a cough duration (para [0073]).
For claim 6, Goldstein further discloses wherein the programming instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, enables the apparatus to detect whether the audio recording data comprises the cough sound using a Fisher discriminant algorithm, dynamic time warping, a minimum nearest neighbor algorithm, a hidden Markov model, a Gaussian mixture model, a segment Gaussian model, an artificial neural network, or a support vector machine (para [0073]).
For claim 7, Goldstein further discloses a vibration detector (para [0034]).
For claim 8, Goldstein discloses an apparatus (Abstract), the apparatus comprising:
at least one processor (“computer,” para [0138]); and
one or more memories (“non-transitory tangible computer readable media,” para [0138]) coupled to the at least one processor and storing programming instructions (para [0138]), wherein the programming instructions, when executed by the at least one processor (para [0138]), enables the apparatus to:
send an indication message to a smart terminal device, so that the smart terminal device activates, based on the indication message, a microphone (222) (Fig. 2A) (para [0034]) to perform audio recording to obtain audio recording data (para [0034]), and analyzes and collects statistics (“trending analysis,” para [0111]) on cough information about the user based on the audio recording data in response to a determination that the audio recording data comprises a cough sound (para [0014]-[0015], [0073]-[0075], and [0111]).
Goldstein does not expressly disclose that the apparatus is applied to a headset; detect a vibration signal, wherein the headset is worn around a head and neck region of a user; and that there is a response to the vibration signal.
However, Huawei teaches that the apparatus is applied to a headset (see Fig. 1A); and activate, in response to a detected vibration signal, a microphone to perform audio recording to obtain audio recording data (fifth full paragraph on page 4 and/or fourth full paragraph on page 8), wherein the headset is worn around a head and neck region of a user (see Fig. 1A).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan to modify Goldstein such that the apparatus is applied to a headset; detect a vibration signal, wherein the headset is worn around a head and neck region of a user; and that there is a response to the vibration signal, in view of the teachings of Huawei, for the obvious advantage of saving power consumption so that the microphone is only activated when there is sound coming from the user.
For claim 9, Goldstein further discloses a vibration detector (para [0034]).
For claim 10, Goldstein discloses an apparatus (Abstract) , applied to a smart terminal device (para [0073]), comprising:
at least one processor (“computer,” para [0138]); and
one or more memories (“non-transitory tangible computer readable media,” para [0138]) coupled to the at least one processor and storing programming instructions (para [0138]), wherein the programming instructions, when executed by the at least one processor (para [0138]), enables the apparatus to:
activate a microphone (222) (Fig. 2A) (para [0034]) to perform audio recording to obtain audio recording data (para [0034]);
detect and determine that the audio recording data comprises a cough sound (para [0014]-[0015] and [0073]); and
analyze and collect statistics (“trending analysis,” para [0111]) on cough information about the user based on the audio recording data (para [0014]-[0015], [0073]-[0075], and [0111]).
Goldstein does not expressly disclose receive an indication message sent by a headset, wherein the headset is worn around a head and neck region of a user, and the indication message is generated in response to the headset detecting a vibration signal; in response to the indication message, activate a microphone to perform audio recording to obtain audio recording data.
However, Huawei teaches receive an indication message sent by a headset (see Fig. 1A) (fifth full paragraph on page 4 and/or fourth full paragraph on page 8); wherein the headset is worn around a head and neck region of a user (see Fig. 1A), and the indication message is generated in response to the headset detecting a vibration signal (fifth full paragraph on page 4 and/or fourth full paragraph on page 8); in response to the indication message, activate a microphone to perform audio recording to obtain audio recording data (fifth full paragraph on page 4 and/or fourth full paragraph on page 8).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan to modify Goldstein to include receive an indication message sent by a headset, wherein the headset is worn around a head and neck region of a user, and the indication message is generated in response to the headset detecting a vibration signal; in response to the indication message, activate a microphone to perform audio recording to obtain audio recording data, in view of the teachings of Huawei, for the obvious advantage of saving power consumption so that the microphone is only activated when there is sound coming from the user.
For claim 13, Goldstein further discloses wherein: the audio recording data comprises audio data and an acquisition time of the audio data (para [0073]); and the cough information comprises at least one of a cough time, a quantity of coughs, a cough frequency, a cough trend, or cough duration (para [0073]).
For claim 14, Goldstein discloses a method (Abstract), comprising:
activating a microphone (222) (Fig. 2A) (para [0034]) to perform audio recording to obtain audio recording data (para [0034]);
detecting whether the audio recording data comprises a cough sound (para [0014]-[0015] and [0073]); and
sending the audio recording data to a smart terminal device in response to the audio recording data comprising the cough sound (para [0073]), so that the smart terminal device analyzes and collects statistics (“trending analysis,” para [0111]) on cough information about the user based on the audio recording data (para [0014]-[0015], [0073]-[0075], and [0111]).
Goldstein does not expressly disclose that the method is applied to a headset; and activating, in response to a detected vibration signal, a microphone to perform audio recording to obtain audio recording data, wherein the headset is worn around a head and neck region of a user.
However, Huawei teaches that the method is applied to a headset (see Fig. 1A); and activating, in response to a detected vibration signal, a microphone to perform audio recording to obtain audio recording data, wherein the headset is worn around a head and neck region of a user (fifth full paragraph on page 4 and/or fourth full paragraph on page 8), wherein the headset is worn around a head and neck region of a user (see Fig. 1A).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan to modify Goldstein such that the method is applied to a headset; and activating, in response to a detected vibration signal, a microphone to perform audio recording to obtain audio recording data, wherein the headset is worn around a head and neck region of a user, in view of the teachings of Huawei, for the obvious advantage of saving power consumption so that the microphone is only activated when there is sound coming from the user.
For claim 17, Goldstein further discloses wherein: the audio recording data comprises audio data and an acquisition time of the audio data (para [0073]); and the cough information comprises at least one of a cough time, a quantity of coughs, a cough frequency, a cough trend, or a cough duration (para [0073]).
For claim 19, Goldstein further discloses wherein detecting whether the audio recording data comprises the cough sound comprises using a Fisher discriminant algorithm, dynamic time warping, a minimum nearest neighbor algorithm, a hidden Markov model, a Gaussian mixture model, a segment Gaussian model, an artificial neural network, or a support vector machine (para [0073]).
Claim(s) 2, 11, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldstein in view of Huawei, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application 2022/0338756 to Dzhekiev et al. (hereinafter “Dzhekiev”).
For claim 2, Goldstein further discloses wherein the programming instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further enables the apparatus to: compare a similarity between the audio recording data and cough sound data (para [0073]), wherein the cough sound data comprises previously recorded cough sound data of the user (para [0073]).
Goldstein and Huawei do not expressly disclose in response to the similarity between the audio recording data and the cough sound data being greater than or equal to a threshold, determine that the audio recording data comprises the cough sound; and in response to the similarity between the audio recording data and the cough sound data being less than the threshold, determine that the audio recording data does not comprise the cough sound.
However, Dzhekiev teaches in response to the similarity between the audio recording data and the cough sound data being greater than or equal to a threshold, determine that the audio recording data comprises the cough sound; and in response to the similarity between the audio recording data and the cough sound data being less than the threshold, determine that the audio recording data does not comprise the cough sound (para [0627).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan to modify Goldstein to include in response to the similarity between the audio recording data and the cough sound data being greater than or equal to a threshold, determine that the audio recording data comprises the cough sound; and in response to the similarity between the audio recording data and the cough sound data being less than the threshold, determine that the audio recording data does not comprise the cough sound, in view of the teachings of Dzhekiev, because such a decision tree is a suitable way to classify coughs, which is what Goldstein already wants to do.
For claim 11, Goldstein further discloses wherein the programming instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further enables the apparatus to: compare a similarity between the audio recording data and cough sound data (para [0073]), wherein the cough sound data comprises previously recorded cough sound data of the user (para [0073]).
Goldstein and Huawei do not expressly disclose in response to the smart terminal device determining that the similarity between the audio recording data and the cough sound data is greater than or equal to a threshold, determine that the audio recording data comprises the cough sound.
However, Dzhekiev teaches in response to the smart terminal device determining that the similarity between the audio recording data and the cough sound data is greater than or equal to a threshold, determine that the audio recording data comprises the cough sound (para [0627).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan to modify Goldstein to include in response to the smart terminal device determining that the similarity between the audio recording data and the cough sound data is greater than or equal to a threshold, determine that the audio recording data comprises the cough sound, in view of the teachings of Dzhekiev, because such a decision tree is a suitable way to classify coughs, which is what Goldstein already wants to do.
For claim 15, Goldstein further discloses comparing a similarity between the audio recording data and cough sound data a (para [0073]), wherein the cough sound data comprises previously recorded cough sound data of the user (para [0073]).
Goldstein and Huawei do not expressly disclose in response to the similarity between the audio recording data and the cough sound data being greater than or equal to a threshold, determine that the audio recording data comprises the cough sound; and in response to the similarity between the audio recording data and the cough sound data being less than the threshold, determine that the audio recording data does not comprise the cough sound.
However, Dzhekiev teaches in response to the similarity between the audio recording data and the cough sound data being greater than or equal to a threshold, determine that the audio recording data comprises the cough sound; and in response to the similarity between the audio recording data and the cough sound data being less than the threshold, determine that the audio recording data does not comprise the cough sound (para [0627).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan to modify Goldstein to include in response to the similarity between the audio recording data and the cough sound data being greater than or equal to a threshold, determine that the audio recording data comprises the cough sound; and in response to the similarity between the audio recording data and the cough sound data being less than the threshold, determine that the audio recording data does not comprise the cough sound, in view of the teachings of Dzhekiev, because such a decision tree is a suitable way to classify coughs, which is what Goldstein already wants to do.
Claim(s) 3, 12, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldstein in view of Huawei, and further in view of CN 111557664 to Guangdong (Examiner’s Note: all citations will be made to the English translation(s) provided that correspond to their foreign counterparts).
For claim 3, Goldstein further discloses wherein the programming instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further enables the apparatus to: send the audio recording data to the smart terminal device, so that the smart terminal device analyzes and collects the statistics on the cough information based on the audio recording data (para [0014]-[0015], [0073]-[0075], and [0111]).
Goldstein and Huawei do not expressly disclose wherein the programming instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further enables the apparatus to: record vibration data corresponding to the detected vibration signal; and send the vibration data to the smart terminal device, so that the smart terminal device analyzes and collects the statistics on the cough information based on the vibration data.
However, Guangdong teaches recording vibration data corresponding to the detected vibration signal (fifth through eighth paragraphs on page 5); and integrating the vibration information with the audio recording data to analyze the cough information (fifth through eighth paragraphs on page 5).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan to modify Goldstein wherein the programming instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further enables the apparatus to: record vibration data corresponding to the detected vibration signal; and send the vibration data to the smart terminal device, so that the smart terminal device analyzes and collects the statistics on the cough information based on the vibration data, in view of the teachings of Guangdong, for the obvious advantage of “so that the accuracy of judgement is greatly improved” (see eighth paragraph on page 5 of Guangdong).
For claim 12, Goldstein further discloses wherein the programming instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further enables the apparatus to: analyze and collect the statistics on the cough information based on the audio recording data (para [0014]-[0015], [0073]-[0075], and [0111]).
Goldstein and Huawei do not expressly disclose wherein the programming instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further enables the apparatus to: receive vibration data sent by the headset, wherein the vibration data is data that corresponds to the detected vibration signal and that is recorded by the headset; and analyze and collect the statistics on the cough information based on the audio recording data and the vibration data.
However, Guangdong teaches receive vibration data sent by the headset (fifth through eighth paragraphs on page 5), wherein the vibration data is data that corresponds to the detected vibration signal and that is recorded by the headset (fifth through eighth paragraphs on page 5); and integrating the vibration information with the audio recording data to analyze the cough information (fifth through eighth paragraphs on page 5).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan to modify Goldstein wherein the programming instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further enables the apparatus to: receive vibration data sent by the headset, wherein the vibration data is data that corresponds to the detected vibration signal and that is recorded by the headset; and analyze and collect the statistics on the cough information based on the audio recording data and the vibration data, in view of the teachings of Guangdong, for the obvious advantage of “so that the accuracy of judgement is greatly improved” (see eighth paragraph on page 5 of Guangdong).
For claim 16, Goldstein further discloses sending the audio recording data to the smart terminal device, so that the smart terminal device analyzes and collects the statistics on the cough information based on the audio recording data (para [0014]-[0015], [0073]-[0075], and [0111]).
Goldstein and Huawei do not expressly disclose recording vibration data corresponding to the detected vibration signal; and sending the vibration data to the smart terminal device, so that the smart terminal device analyzes and collects the statistics on the cough information based on the vibration data.
However, Guangdong teaches recording vibration data corresponding to the detected vibration signal (fifth through eighth paragraphs on page 5); and integrating the vibration information with the audio recording data to analyze the cough information (fifth through eighth paragraphs on page 5).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan to modify Goldstein to include recording vibration data corresponding to the detected vibration signal; and sending the vibration data to the smart terminal device, so that the smart terminal device analyzes and collects the statistics on the cough information based on the vibration data, in view of the teachings of Guangdong, for the obvious advantage of “so that the accuracy of judgement is greatly improved” (see eighth paragraph on page 5 of Guangdong).
Claim(s) 5 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldstein in view of Huawei, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0009806 to Taylor et al. (hereinafter “Taylor”).
For claim 5, Goldstein and Huawei do not expressly disclose wherein the programming instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further enables the apparatus to: in response to the audio recording data not comprising the cough sound, delete the audio recording data.
However, Taylor teaches wherein the programming instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further enables the apparatus to: in response to the audio recording data not comprising the cough sound, delete the audio recording data (para [0016], ]0018], and [0025]).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan to modify Goldstein wherein the programming instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further enables the apparatus to: in response to the audio recording data not comprising the cough sound, delete the audio recording data, in view of the teachings of Taylor, for the obvious advantage of removing artifacts that may affect the cough determination.
For claim 18, Goldstein does not expressly disclose deleting the audio recording data in response to the audio recording data not comprising the cough sound.
However, Taylor teaches deleting the audio recording data in response to the audio recording data not comprising the cough sound (para [0016], ]0018], and [0025]).
It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan to modify Goldstein to include deleting the audio recording data in response to the audio recording data not comprising the cough sound, in view of the teachings of Taylor, for the obvious advantage of removing artifacts that may affect the cough determination.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL LEE CERIONI whose telephone number is (313) 446-4818. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM PT.
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, Jennifer Robertson can be reached at (571) 272-5001. 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.
/DANIEL L CERIONI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights