DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Specification
2. Content of Specification
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION: See 37 CFR 1.72(a) and MPEP § 606. The title of the invention should be placed at the top of the first page of the specification unless the title is provided in an application data sheet. The title of the invention should be brief but technically accurate and descriptive, preferably from two to seven words. It may not contain more than 500 characters.
3. The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. Claims 1-4, 6, 8-15, 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jesus et al. (US 20210248805 A1), hereinafter Jesus, in view of Benthin et al. (US 20190318445 A1), hereinafter Benthin.
Regarding claim 1, Jesus teaches a method of operating a graphics processing system when performing tile-based rendering, in which a render output is divided into a plurality of tiles for rendering purposes (paragraph 87, tile-based rendering graphics processing system), the method comprising: generating a packet comprising primitives to be processed for a render output (Fig. 6, paragraph 94, wherein primitive blocks comprising one or more primitives is identified in the rendering space, which is interpreted as generating a packet comprising primitives to be processed for a render output); generating a bounding box to be used to identify whether the packet should be processed for respective regions of the render output (paragraph 96, wherein bounding boxes encompassing all of the primitives of a primitive block is defined, which is interpreted as generating a bounding box for a packet; paragraph 145, determining a coverage mask indicating which tiles to be rendered overlap or intersect with the bounding box of the primitive block, which is interpreted as identifying whether the packet should be processed for respective regions of the tile render output); and encoding in the packet: bounding boxes to be used to identify whether primitives in the packet should be processed for a region of the render output (Fig. 18, paragraph 129-130, wherein storing primitive block entry data including bounding box data into a block entry represented by bits is interpreted as encoding data within the packet).
Jesus does not teach wherein one or more of the bounding boxes encoded in the packet are encoded relative to a reference bounding box.
Benthin teaches wherein one or more of the bounding boxes encoded in the packet are encoded relative to a reference bounding box (Fig. 20, paragraph 191, wherein child bounding boxes are defined relative to a parent bounding box; paragraph 231, wherein a parent node can consist of child nodes that contain leaf primitive data; paragraph 162, wherein child bounding boxes are encoded relative to a reference parent bounding box, which is interpreted as encoding bounding boxes in the packet relative to a reference bounding box).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Jesus to incorporate Benthin for this method of performing tile-based rendering. Jesus discusses tile-based rendering by identifying primitive blocks and their respective bounding boxes, in order to group primitives and their bounding boxes together for faster processing. Similarly, Benthin also teaches a method to accelerate graphics rendering including tile-based rendering systems by constructing a bounding volume hierarchy and checking the bounding boxes of parent nodes to determine whether to traverse to child nodes. Both Jesus and Benthin discuss ways of encoding packets of bounding boxes, with Jesus identifying primitive blocks and their bounding boxes, and Benthin constructing a BVH to determine the bounding boxes of primitives. As both references discuss analogous art for tile-based rendering, it would be obvious to combine them.
Regarding claim 2, Jesus in view of Benthin discusses the method of claim 1. Additionally, Benthin teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the bounding boxes encoded in the packet to be used to identify whether primitives in the packet should be processed for a region of the render output (Fig. 21, paragraph 193, wherein determining whether to traverse encoded nodes during the rendering process in a region represented by bounding volumes is interpreted as using encoded bounding boxes to identify whether primitives in the packet should be processed should be processed for a region of the render output, wherein a parent node of the BVH and its child nodes of primitives is interpreted as a packet) comprise: a bounding box associated with a sub-set of plural primitives of a set of plural primitives of the packet to be used to identify whether the sub-set of primitives should be processed for a region of the render output (Fig. 21, paragraph 193, wherein determining whether to traverse a child node of a parent node based on its bounding box is interpreted as identifying whether a sub-set of primitives within a child node of a set of primitives of the parent node should be processed for a region of the render input); and bounding boxes associated with primitives in the sub-set of primitives to be used to identify whether respective ones of the primitives in the sub-set of primitives should be processed for a region of the render output (Fig. 21, paragraph 193, wherein traversing child nodes to test child bounding volumes within the child node suggests using bounding boxes associated with primitives in the sub-set of primitives to identify which primitives should be processed for a region of the render output).
The motivation to combine would be the same as that set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 3, Jesus in view of Benthin discloses the method of claim 1. Additionally, Benthin teaches the method of claim 1, comprising using a plurality of different reference bounding boxes for relatively encoding bounding boxes in the packet (paragraph 162, wherein child bounding boxes are encoded relative to a reference parent bounding box; Fig. 16B paragraph 167, wherein a tree can have multiple child nodes with different parent nodes, which suggests that it uses a plurality of different parent reference bounding boxes for encoding child bounding boxes).
The motivation to combine would be the same as that set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 4, Jesus in view of Benthin discloses the method of claim 1. Additionally, Benthin teaches the method of claim 1, comprising using, as a reference bounding box for encoding another bounding box in the packet, at least one of: a predetermined, default bounding box; and a bounding box that has been derived based on one or more of the primitives that the packet comprises (Fig. 16A, paragraph 164, wherein a bounding box is constructed for each object in a scene which is interpreted as constructing a bounding box for primitives, and wherein parent bounding boxes can be constructed around groupings of the object bounding boxes, which is interpreted as a bounding box derived based on one or more primitives of a packet).
The motivation to combine would be the same as that set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 6, Jesus in view of Benthin discloses the method of claim 1. Additionally, Benthin teaches the method of claim 1, comprising: relatively encoding in the packet bounding boxes for plural respective sub-sets of plural primitives of the packet independently of one another, such that the decoding of bounding boxes for a sub-set of primitives does not require the decoding of bounding boxes for any other sub-set of primitives in the packet (Fig. 16B, paragraph 162, wherein child bounding boxes are encoded relative to a parent bounding box, which is interpreted as relatively encoding sub-sets of plural primitives of the packet, wherein a child node can consist of multiple primitives; paragraph 157-158, wherein a parent node contains individual pointers to separate child nodes, which suggests that child nodes are encoded separately and do not require decoding of other child nodes, which is interpreted as decoding sub-sets of primitives not requiring the decoding of other sub-set of primitives in the packet).
The motivation to combine would be the same as that set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 8, Jesus in view of Benthin discloses the method of claim 1. Additionally, Benthin teaches the method of claim 1, comprising: encoding in the packet other data to be used for processing the primitives that the packet relates to (Fig. 18, paragraph 170, wherein additional bounding box data can be encoded as part of nodes of a BVH, wherein a parent node of the BVH and its child nodes of primitives is interpreted as a packet, and is interpreted as encoding in the packet other bounding box data for processing primitives); wherein the other data to be used for processing the primitives that the packet relates to comprises: a set of higher level data for a set of primitives in the packet, together with plural sets of lower level data, each for a respective sub-set of one or more primitives in the set of primitives that the higher level data is for (Fig. 18, paragraph 172-173, wherein a node can be encoded to store a reference to a higher level parent node bounding box, and a reference to lower level child node bounding boxes, wherein the parent node can be defined as a set of primitives in a packet of primitives, and the child node is interpreted as a respective sub-set of primitives in the set of primitives, and is interpreted as having other data comprising a set of higher level data for a set of primitives, and sets of lower level data for a sub-set of one or more primitives in the set of primitives).
The motivation to combine would be the same as that set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 9, Jesus teaches a method of operating a graphics processing system when performing tile-based rendering, in which a render output is divided into a plurality of tiles for rendering purposes (paragraph 87, tile-based rendering graphics processing system), and in which packets are provided comprising primitives to be processed for a render output (paragraph 205, wherein information is outputted for primitives blocks identifying them as being relevant for rendering, and wherein a primitive block is interpreted as a packet of primitives), the method comprising: using bounding boxes associated with packets for a render output to identify whether any of the packets should be read for a region of the render output (paragraph 216, wherein its determined whether a primitive block is relevant to rendering the current tile based on its bounding box information, which is interpreted as using bounding boxes associated with packets to identify if the packet should be read for a region of the render output); and for a packet it is identified should be read for a region of the render output: using the bounding boxes decoded from the packet to identify whether primitives in the packet should be processed for the region of the render output (Fig. 18, paragraph 142-143, wherein the bounding box coordinates within the primitive block entry in memory is used to define the area of the rendering space covered by a tile group, which is interpreted as using decoded bounding boxes from the packet to identify whether primitives in the packet should be processed for a given region of the render output); and processing primitives in the packet it is identified should be processed for the region of the render output (Fig. 2, paragraph 9-10, wherein the rasterization logic renders primitives retrieved from primitive blocks for a given tile stored in memory, which is interpreted as processing primitives in the packet identified as needing to be processed for a region of the render output).
Jesus does not teach decoding one or more bounding boxes encoded in the packet using a reference bounding box.
Benthin teaches decoding one or more bounding boxes encoded in the packet using a reference bounding box (Fig. 20, paragraph 191, wherein child bounding boxes are defined relative to a parent bounding box; paragraph 231, wherein a parent node can consist of child nodes that contain leaf primitive data; paragraph 162, wherein child bounding boxes are encoded relative to a reference parent bounding box; paragraph 199, wherein nodes of a BVH can be decoded, which suggests being able to decode the bounding boxes encoded in a packet).
The motivation to combine would be the same as that set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 10, Jesus in view of Benthin discloses the method of claim 9. Additionally, Benthin teaches the method of claim 9, comprising: when a packet comprises plural sub-sets of primitives, each comprising a group of plural primitives (paragraph 231, wherein a parent node can consist of child nodes that contain leaf primitive data, which is interpreted as a packet comprising plural sub-sets of primitives), decoding bounding boxes associated with primitives in a sub-set of primitives using one or more primitive bounding boxes associated with one or more other primitives in the same sub-set of primitives or using a sub-set bounding box associated with the sub-set of primitives (Fig. 21, paragraph 193, wherein a parent bounding volume can be retrieved to determine if its child node bounding volumes should be traversed, which is interpreted as decoding bounding boxes associated with primitives in a sub-set of primitives by using a sub-set bounding box associated with the sub-set of primitives, wherein the child node can consist of a sub-set of primitives, and the parent bounding box is interpreted as a sub-set bounding box associated with that sub-set of primitives).
The motivation to combine would be the same as that set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 11, Jesus in view of Benthin discloses the method of claim 9. Additionally, Benthin teaches the method of claim 9, comprising: in the case where there is no bounding box explicitly encoded in a packet for a primitive, using a reference bounding box for the primitive as the bounding box for the primitive (paragraph 162, wherein child bounding boxes are encoded relative to a reference parent bounding box, which is interpreted as child bounding boxes not being explicitly encoded and using a reference bounding box for the primitives of the child node).
The motivation to combine would be the same as that set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 12, Jesus teaches a graphics processor operable to perform tile-based rendering, in which a render output is divided into a plurality of tiles for rendering purposes (paragraph 87, tile-based rendering graphics processing system; paragraph 221, wherein the tasks are executed on a processor), the graphics processor comprising: a packet generating circuit configured to generate a packet comprising primitives to be processed for a render output (Fig. 6, paragraph 94, wherein primitive blocks comprising one or more primitives is identified in the rendering space, which is interpreted as generating a packet comprising primitives to be processed for a render output); generating a bounding box to be used to identify whether the packet should be processed for respective regions of the render output (paragraph 96, wherein bounding boxes encompassing all of the primitives of a primitive block is defined, which is interpreted as generating a bounding box for a packet; paragraph 145, determining a coverage mask indicating which tiles to be rendered overlap or intersect with the bounding box of the primitive block, which is interpreted as identifying whether the packet should be processed for respective regions of the tile render output); and encoding in the packet: bounding boxes to be used to identify whether primitives in the packet should be processed for a region of the render output (Fig. 18, paragraph 129-130, wherein storing primitive block entry data including bounding box data into a block entry represented by bits is interpreted as encoding data within the packet).
Jesus does not teach wherein one or more of the bounding boxes encoded in the packet are encoded relative to a reference bounding box.
Benthin teaches wherein one or more of the bounding boxes encoded in the packet are encoded relative to a reference bounding box (Fig. 20, paragraph 191, wherein child bounding boxes are defined relative to a parent bounding box; paragraph 231, wherein a parent node can consist of child nodes that contain leaf primitive data; paragraph 162, wherein child bounding boxes are encoded relative to a reference parent bounding box, which is interpreted as encoding bounding boxes in the packet relative to a reference bounding box).
The motivation to combine would be the same as that set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 13, Jesus in view of Benthin discusses the graphics processor of claim 12. Additionally, Benthin teaches the graphics processor of claim 12, wherein the bounding boxes encoded in the packet to be used to identify whether primitives in the packet should be processed for a region of the render output (Fig. 21, paragraph 193, wherein determining whether to traverse encoded nodes during the rendering process in a region represented by bounding volumes is interpreted as using encoded bounding boxes to identify whether primitives in the packet should be processed should be processed for a region of the render output, wherein a parent node of the BVH and its child nodes of primitives is interpreted as a packet) comprise: a bounding box associated with a sub-set of plural primitives of a set of plural primitives of the packet to be used to identify whether the sub-set of primitives should be processed for a region of the render output (Fig. 21, paragraph 193, wherein determining whether to traverse a child node of a parent node based on its bounding box is interpreted as identifying whether a sub-set of primitives within a child node of a set of primitives of the parent node should be processed for a region of the render input); and bounding boxes associated with primitives in the sub-set of primitives to be used to identify whether respective ones of the primitives in the sub-set of primitives should be processed for a region of the render output (Fig. 21, paragraph 193, wherein traversing child nodes to test child bounding volumes within the child node suggests using bounding boxes associated with primitives in the sub-set of primitives to identify which primitives should be processed for a region of the render output).
The motivation to combine would be the same as that set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, Jesus in view of Benthin discloses the graphics processor of claim 12. Additionally, Benthin teaches the graphics processor of claim 12, comprising using a plurality of different reference bounding boxes for relatively encoding bounding boxes in the packet (paragraph 162, wherein child bounding boxes are encoded relative to a reference parent bounding box; Fig. 16B paragraph 167, wherein a tree can have multiple child nodes with different parent nodes, which suggests that it uses a plurality of different parent reference bounding boxes for encoding child bounding boxes).
The motivation to combine would be the same as that set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 15, Jesus in view of Benthin discloses the graphics processor of claim 12. Additionally, Benthin teaches the graphics processor of claim 12, wherein the packet processing circuit is configured to use, as a reference bounding box for encoding another bounding box in the packet, at least one of: a predetermined, default bounding box; and a bounding box that has been derived based on one or more of the primitives that the packet comprises (Fig. 16A, paragraph 164, wherein a bounding box is constructed for each object in a scene which is interpreted as constructing a bounding box for primitives, and wherein parent bounding boxes can be constructed around groupings of the object bounding boxes, which is interpreted as a bounding box derived based on one or more primitives of a packet).
The motivation to combine would be the same as that set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 17, Jesus in view of Benthin discloses the graphics processor of claim 12. Additionally, Benthin teaches the graphics processor of claim 12, wherein the packet processing circuit is configured to: encode in the packet other data to be used for processing the primitives that the packet relates to (Fig. 18, paragraph 170, wherein additional bounding box data can be encoded as part of nodes of a BVH, wherein a parent node of the BVH and its child nodes of primitives is interpreted as a packet, and is interpreted as encoding in the packet other bounding box data for processing primitives); wherein the other data to be used for processing the primitives that the packet relates to comprises: a set of higher level data for a set of primitives in the packet, together with plural sets of lower level data, each for a respective sub-set of one or more primitives in the set of primitives that the higher level data is for (Fig. 18, paragraph 172-173, wherein a node can be encoded to store a reference to a higher level parent node bounding box, and a reference to lower level child node bounding boxes, wherein the parent node can be defined as a set of primitives in a packet of primitives, and the child node is interpreted as a respective sub-set of primitives in the set of primitives, and is interpreted as having other data comprising a set of higher level data for a set of primitives, and sets of lower level data for a sub-set of one or more primitives in the set of primitives).
The motivation to combine would be the same as that set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 18, Jesus teaches a graphics processor operable to perform tile-based rendering, in which a render output is divided into a plurality of tiles for rendering purposes (paragraph 87, tile-based rendering graphics processing system; paragraph 221, wherein the tasks are executed on a processor), the graphics processor operable to process packets comprising respective sets of primitives to be processed for a render output (paragraph 205, wherein information is outputted for primitives blocks identifying them as being relevant for rendering, and wherein a primitive block is interpreted as a packet of primitives), the graphics processor comprising: a processing circuit configured to process primitives for a render output; and a packet reading circuit configured to: use bounding boxes associated with packets for a render output to identify whether any of the packets should be read for a region of the render output (paragraph 216, wherein its determined whether a primitive block is relevant to rendering the current tile based on its bounding box information, which is interpreted as using bounding boxes associated with packets to identify if the packet should be read for a region of the render output); and when it is identified that a packet should be read for a region of a render output being generated: use the bounding boxes decoded from the packet to identify whether primitives in the packet should be processed for the region of the render output (Fig. 18, paragraph 142-143, wherein the bounding box coordinates within the primitive block entry in memory is used to define the area of the rendering space covered by a tile group, which is interpreted as using decoded bounding boxes from the packet to identify whether primitives in the packet should be processed for a given region of the render output); and provide to the processing circuit for processing, any primitives in the packet it is identified should be processed for the region of the render output (Fig. 2, paragraph 9-10, wherein the rasterization logic renders primitives retrieved from primitive blocks for a given tile stored in memory, which is interpreted as processing primitives in the packet identified as needing to be processed for a region of the render output).
Jesus does not teach decoding one or more bounding boxes encoded in the packet using a reference bounding box.
Benthin teaches decoding one or more bounding boxes encoded in the packet using a reference bounding box (Fig. 20, paragraph 191, wherein child bounding boxes are defined relative to a parent bounding box; paragraph 231, wherein a parent node can consist of child nodes that contain leaf primitive data; paragraph 162, wherein child bounding boxes are encoded relative to a reference parent bounding box; paragraph 199, wherein nodes of a BVH can be decoded, which suggests being able to decode the bounding boxes encoded in a packet).
The motivation to combine would be the same as that set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 19, Jesus in view of Benthin discloses the graphics processor of claim 18. Additionally, Benthin teaches the graphics processor of claim 18, wherein the packet reading circuit is configured to: when a packet comprises plural sub-sets of primitives, each comprising a group of plural primitives (paragraph 231, wherein a parent node can consist of child nodes that contain leaf primitive data, which is interpreted as a packet comprising plural sub-sets of primitives), decoding bounding boxes associated with primitives in a sub-set of primitives using one or more primitive bounding boxes associated with one or more other primitives in the same sub-set of primitives or using a sub-set bounding box associated with the sub-set of primitives (Fig. 21, paragraph 193, wherein a parent bounding volume can be retrieved to determine if its child node bounding volumes should be traversed, which is interpreted as decoding bounding boxes associated with primitives in a sub-set of primitives by using a sub-set bounding box associated with the sub-set of primitives, wherein the child node can consist of a sub-set of primitives, and the parent bounding box is interpreted as a sub-set bounding box associated with that sub-set of primitives).
The motivation to combine would be the same as that set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 20, Jesus in view of Benthin discloses the graphics processor of claim 18. Additionally, Benthin teaches the graphics processor of claim 18, wherein the packet reading circuit is configured to: in the case where there is no bounding box explicitly encoded in a packet for a primitive, using a reference bounding box for the primitive as the bounding box for the primitive (paragraph 162, wherein child bounding boxes are encoded relative to a reference parent bounding box, which is interpreted as child bounding boxes not being explicitly encoded and using a reference bounding box for the primitives of the child node).
The motivation to combine would be the same as that set forth for claim 1.
7. Claims 5, 7, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jesus in view of Benthin as applied to claims 1, 12 above, and further in view of Hakura (US 20140118365 A1), hereinafter Hakura.
Regarding claim 5, Jesus in view of Benthin discloses the method of claim 1. Additionally, Hakura teaches the method of claim 1, comprising relatively encoding bounding boxes for primitives of a group of plural primitives of the packet based on a sequence for the primitives in the group of plural primitives (Fig. 5, 6A-6F, paragraph 89-90, wherein determining bounding boxes for a series of primitives by determining an accumulated bounding box for each subsequent primitive is interpreted as determining bounding boxes for a group of plural primitives based on a sequence for the primitives Fig. 2 paragraph 52, paragraph 90-91, wherein the accumulated bounding box is sent to the crossbar unit which may store the data into memory, which is interpreted as encoding the bounding boxes); wherein a primitive bounding box for a primitive in the sequence of primitives is used as a reference bounding box for encoding the primitive bounding box for another primitive in the sequence of primitives (Fig. 5, 6A-6F, paragraph 89-90, wherein a new accumulated bounding box is generated based on the current accumulated bounding box when receiving a new primitive in a series of multiple primitives, which is interpreted as using a primitive bounding box as a reference bounding box for the bounding boxes for another primitive in a sequence of primitives).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Jesus in view of Benthin with the teachings of Hakura. Jesus discusses tile-based rendering by identifying primitive blocks and their respective bounding boxes, in order to group primitives and their bounding boxes together for faster processing. Similarly, Benthin also teaches a method to accelerate graphics rendering including tile-based rendering systems by constructing a bounding volume hierarchy and checking the bounding boxes of parent nodes to determine whether to traverse to child nodes. Additionally, Hakura also teaches a method for tile-based rendering involving accumulating bounding boxes for groups of primitives in order to accelerate rendering by determining whether tiles are empty and shouldn’t be included in rendering. All three references discuss ways to determine bounding boxes for groups of primitives and discuss analogous methods of accelerating rendering processes for tile-based rendering. Because of that, it would be obvious to combine these references.
Regarding claim 7, Jesus in view of Benthin discloses the method of claim 1. Additionally, Hakura teaches the method of claim 1, comprising in the case where a bounding box is the same as the reference bounding box that it is to be encoded relative to, not encoding the bounding box in the packet (Fig. 5, 6A-6F, paragraph 97, wherein if a primitive is in the same cache tile as a previous primitive, it is added to the current accumulated bounding box instead of generating a new bounding box for that primitive, which is interpreted as if the bounding box of the current primitive is the same as the previous primitive, not encoding the new bounding box).
The motivation to combine would be the same as that set forth for claim 5.
Regarding claim 16, Jesus in view of Benthin discloses the graphics processor of claim 12. Additionally, Hakura teaches the graphics processor of claim 12, wherein the packet processing circuit is configured to, in the case where a bounding box is the same as the reference bounding box that it is to be encoded relative to, not encoding the bounding box in the packet (Fig. 5, 6A-6F, paragraph 97, wherein if a primitive is in the same cache tile as a previous primitive, it is added to the current accumulated bounding box instead of generating a new bounding box for that primitive, which is interpreted as if the bounding box of the current primitive is the same as the previous primitive, not encoding the new bounding box).
The motivation to combine would be the same as that set forth for claim 5.
Conclusion
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORDAN W YICK whose telephone number is (571)272-4063. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Said Broome can be reached at (571) 272-2931. 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.
/JORDAN WAN YICK/Examiner, Art Unit 2612
/Said Broome/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2612
Prosecution Insights