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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: typos as follows.
Paragraph 55 “440-8” is repeated.
Paragraph 93 “560 of fig. 6” should read “560 of fig. 5”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the at least one visual object overlapped to the position." in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This is because it is unclear what “position” is being referred to here since this is the first mention of a “position”.
Note. Most likely these claims depend on some dependent claim or are missing elements.
In order to fix this issue, dependency should be reviewed and any first instance of an element
should be made clear that it’s a first instance and should be referred to as “a” or “an” instead of
“the”, and if multiple instances exist, further instances should be further distinguished for example by saying “first”, “second”, and/or “third” etc.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 9-13, 15 and 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugden et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9,201,243), hereinafter referenced as Sugden, in view of Wang et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11,107,293), hereinafter referenced as Wang.
Regarding claim 1, Sugden teaches A wearable device, comprising: a camera; a sensor; (col. 9, lines 66-67 teach “it is to be understood that the HMD device may include additional and/or alternative sensors, cameras,”); a display (fig. 5 shows display 500); memory comprising one or more storage media storing instructions (col. 10, lines 64-67 teach “Data-holding subsystem 704 may include one or more physical, non-transitory, devices configured to hold data and/or instructions executable by the logic subsystem to implement the herein described methods and processes” and col. 11, lines 4-6 teach “Data-holding subsystem 704 may include removable media and/or built-in devices. Data-holding subsystem 704 may include optical memory devices”); this shows 704 acts as memory with storage media that has instructions; and at least one processor comprising processing circuitry, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the wearable device to: (col. 10, lines 15-16 teach “the HMD device 106 may be a computing system, such as computing system 700”, and lines 50-51 teach “logic subsystem may include one or more processors that are configured to execute software instructions”); this shows processor as part of HMD/wearable device executes the instructions; display, in a state in which the wearable device is attached to a user, a visual object in a field-of-view (FoV) of the user using the display (col. 8, lines 65-67 “a location at which gaze lines projected from the user's eyes intersect the external display may be used to determine an object at which the user is gazing (e.g. a virtual object displayed on an external display).”); this shows displaying when HMD/wearable device is attached to user, a visual object at which user is gazing therefore in FoV of the user using the display; obtain, from the camera and the sensor, motion information indicating a motion associated with the user (col. 3, lines 51-54 teach “sensor input capturing a hand and/or arm gesture of the user, by inward facing sensor input capturing an eye gesture of a user, by motion data capturing a head (or body) gesture of the user,” and col. 6, lines 54-56 teach “at 402, receiving sensor input. As described above with respect to FIG. 3, the sensor input may include image sensor input, motion sensor input,”); sensor input capturing motion data and the sensor input including image sensor input and motion sensor input shows motion information/data indicating motion of user is obtained from camera(image sensor) and sensor (the motion sensor);
However Sugden fails to teach identify whether the motion indicated by the motion information corresponds to a preset motion in object information associated with the visual object; and change, based on identifying that the motion corresponds to the preset motion, the visual object displayed in the FoV, based on object information matched to the preset motion.
However, Wang teaches identify whether the motion indicated by the motion information corresponds to a preset motion in object information associated with the visual object (Wang, abstract teaches “assign the at least one predetermined interactive characteristic to the virtual object in the virtual environment” and claim 3 teaches “when the at least one interactive input of the tracking result of the tracking unit meets the first predetermined interactive characteristic or the second predetermined interactive characteristic.”); predetermined interactive characteristic shows preset motion in object information associated with the virtual object and determining when input of tracking result is meeting the predetermined interactive characteristic shows identifying whether motion indicated by motion information (from tracking result) corresponds (is meeting) to the preset motion (predetermined interactive characteristic); and change, based on identifying that the motion corresponds to the preset motion, the visual object displayed in the FoV, based on object information matched to the preset motion (Wang, claim 2 teaches “a tracking unit coupled to the processing unit and configured to track at least one of hands of a user, eyes of the user and a remote controller operated by the user, so as to generate a tracking result with at least one interactive input.” and claim 3 teaches “virtual object is manipulated according to the at least one interactive input of the tracking result of the tracking unit when the at least one interactive input of the tracking result of the tracking unit meets the first predetermined interactive characteristic or the second predetermined interactive characteristic”); virtual object manipulated/changed shows the aforementioned visual/virtual object displayed in FoV would be changed based on object information (such as first predetermined interactive characteristic) matched to preset motion which is a result/based on identifying that the motion of user from tracking corresponds to the preset motion from first predetermined interactive characteristic. Wang is considered to be analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor of object manipulation after checking whether user motion corresponds to preset object motion. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sugden’s invention with the manipulation and interaction techniques of Wang to effectively improve the user's interactive experience (Wang, col. 9, lines 29-30). This would be done due to the more natural occurrence of virtual object due to manipulation.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Sugden and Wang teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the wearable device to: identify, based on identifying that the motion corresponding to the preset motion is associated with a first external electronic device, a second external electronic device included in frames of the camera (Sugden, col. 9, lines 31-33 teach “Motion data may be used, potentially along with eye-tracking glint data and outward-facing image data, for gaze detection”, col. 10, lines 17-21 teach “computing system 700 may be a computing system separate from the HMD device 106, but communicatively coupled to HMD device 106. Further, the HMD device 106 may be communicatively coupled with other computing devices, such as network-accessible services for determining location,”, cols. 12-13, lines 65-67 and lines 1-5 teach “Computing system 700 may be configured to communicate with remote computing systems, such as a location service 714, a virtual object warehouse 716, and/or any other suitable remote computing system. The location service 714 may receive information from computing system 700, use the information to determine the location of the computing system 700, and provide the location information to the computing system 700” and col. 8, lines 65-67 teach “a location at which gaze lines projected from the user's eyes intersect the external display may be used to determine an object at which the user is gazing (e.g. a virtual object displayed on an external display)”); since computing system 700 (which has location determined for it) is separate from HMD, the external display (display subsystem 706) of and along with computing subsystem would be the second external electronic device which is coupled/corresponding to HMD/first external electronic device, this second external electronic device is identified because a location of it which user gazes (with example listed as virtual object displayed on external display meaning this location is also in the FoV thus included in frames of the camera) is used in a determination, and this is based on identifying user gazing (and motion data thereof) which is considered preset (pre-configured for gaze) motion associated with a first external electronic device(the HMD); and change, based on the object information, the visual object overlapped to the second external electronic device in the FoV (Sugden, col. 3, lines 43-46 teach “intent of the user to interact with the virtual object then may be determined, for example, from sensor input indicating that the user's gaze 108 is directed at the object for a threshold amount of time” and col. 4, lines 35-37 teach “a virtual object may be executed in response to a user looking at the object and manifesting an intent to interact with the object”); this shows changing visual/virtual object (based on/using object information) by execution which would be the virtual/visual object overlapped to the second external electronic device in the FoV since this happens due to intent to interact which is part of the aforementioned gaze.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Sugden and Wang teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the wearable device to: cease to, based on identifying the second external electronic device occluded by the visual object in the FoV, display the visual object based on the object information or change a transparency of the visual object (Sugden, col. 2, lines 35-38 teach “the see-through display may be configured so that user 104 is able to view a real object in physical space 100 through one or more partially transparent pixels that are displaying a virtual object.”); this shows ceasing to display virtual/visual object by changing transparency (transparency would need to be changed to make the pixel partially transparent) and this would be based on the aforementioned identification of second external electronic device occluded by the visual object in the FoV because in a scenario, that identified second external electronic device would be the physical/real object here and virtual/visual object on it(occluding it in the FoV) would be made partially transparent.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Sugden and Wang teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the wearable device to: change, based on identifying an external object changed by the motion, the visual object linked to the external object (Sugden, col. 3, lines 1-10 teach “when the user 104 looks at a real object that has an associated executable virtual object through the HMD device 106, an indication may be given to the user that the real object includes an associated virtual object. For example, an icon, sound or light emitted by the HMD device 106, or other notification appearing near or on the real object may be displayed on the see-through display of the HMD device. In such cases, user intent to interact with the executable virtual object may be determined prior to launching the virtual object” and ); executable virtual/visual object means it would change, this is linked to (associated with) real/external object, and the change is based on identifying external/real object changed by the motion since happens when user looks at real object which changes perspective/view of the external/real object also having a notification appear on it.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Sugden and Wang teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the wearable device to: identify the object information matched to the visual object based on an application for providing the visual object (Wang, col. 1, lines 49-52 teach “provide a head mounted display system capable of assigning at least one predetermined interactive characteristic to a virtual object in a virtual environment” and abstract teaches “processing unit, create a virtual object in a virtual environment”); this shows assigning object information (the interactive characteristic) to visual/virtual object which means this object information/interactive characteristic must be identified to properly match/assign it to the correct virtual/visual object, and this is based on application for providing the visual/virtual object due to abstract mentioning processing unit creating virtual object in virtual environment. The same motivations used in claim 1 apply here in claim 9.
Regarding claim 10, Sugden teaches A method for a wearable device, the method comprising: displaying, in a state in which the wearable device is attached to a user, a plurality of visual objects in a field-of-view (FoV) of the user using a display of the wearable device (col. 2, lines 3-7 teach “When the person visits the location with an interactive device, such as a head-mounted see-through display device, the person may discover that one or more virtual objects are associated with one or more corresponding real objects at the location”); this shows displaying to user using wearable device (HMD of fig. 5) a plurality of visual objects in FoV of the user using display of HMD/wearable device;
identifying, based on identifying a preset motion associated with a first external electronic device based on a sensor in the wearable device, a location in the FoV of a second external electronic device corresponding to the first external electronic device (col. 9, lines 31-33 teach “Motion data may be used, potentially along with eye-tracking glint data and outward-facing image data, for gaze detection”, col. 10, lines 17-21 teach “computing system 700 may be a computing system separate from the HMD device 106, but communicatively coupled to HMD device 106. Further, the HMD device 106 may be communicatively coupled with other computing devices, such as network-accessible services for determining location,”, cols. 12-13, lines 65-67 and lines 1-5 teach “Computing system 700 may be configured to communicate with remote computing systems, such as a location service 714, a virtual object warehouse 716, and/or any other suitable remote computing system. The location service 714 may receive information from computing system 700, use the information to determine the location of the computing system 700, and provide the location information to the computing system 700” and col. 8, lines 65-67 teach “a location at which gaze lines projected from the user's eyes intersect the external display may be used to determine an object at which the user is gazing (e.g. a virtual object displayed on an external display)”); since computing system 700 (which has location determined for it) is separate from HMD, the external display (display subsystem 706) of and along with computing subsystem would be the second external electronic device which is coupled/corresponding to HMD/first external electronic device, this second external electronic device has location identified because a location which user gazes (with example listed as virtual object displayed on external display meaning this location is also in the FoV) is used in a determination, and this is based on identifying user gazing (and motion data thereof) which is considered preset (pre-configured for gaze) motion associated with a first external electronic device based on a sensor in the wearable device since the sensors in the HMD/first electronic device tracks this.
However, Sugden fails to teach and changing at least one visual object associated with the location in the FoV among the plurality of visual objects, based on object information corresponding to the at least one visual object
However, Wang teaches
and changing at least one visual object associated with the location in the FoV among the plurality of visual objects, based on object information corresponding to the at least one visual object (Wang, claim 2 teaches “a tracking unit coupled to the processing unit and configured to track at least one of hands of a user, eyes of the user and a remote controller operated by the user, so as to generate a tracking result with at least one interactive input.” and claim 3 teaches “virtual object is manipulated according to the at least one interactive input of the tracking result of the tracking unit when the at least one interactive input of the tracking result of the tracking unit meets the first predetermined interactive characteristic or the second predetermined interactive characteristic”); virtual object manipulated/changed shows one of the aforementioned visual/virtual object displayed in FoV would be changed based on object information (such as first predetermined interactive characteristic).
Wang is considered to be analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor of object manipulation after checking whether user motion corresponds to preset object motion. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sugden’s invention with the manipulation and interaction techniques of Wang to effectively improve the user's interactive experience (Wang, col. 9, lines 29-30). This would be done due to the more natural occurrence of virtual object due to manipulation.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Sugden and Wang teaches wherein the displaying comprises: identifying, based on an application executed by a processor in the wearable device, the object information with respect to the plurality of visual objects (Wang, col. 1, lines 49-52 teach “provide a head mounted display system capable of assigning at least one predetermined interactive characteristic to a virtual object in a virtual environment” and abstract teaches “processing unit, create a virtual object in a virtual environment”); this shows assigning object information (the interactive characteristic) to visual/virtual objects which means this object information/interactive characteristic must be identified to properly match/assign it to the correct virtual/visual object, and this is based on application executed by processor due to abstract mentioning processing unit creating virtual object in virtual environment; and displaying, based on the object information, the plurality of visual objects (Sugden, col. 2, lines 3-6 teach “When the person visits the location with an interactive device, such as a head-mounted see-through display device, the person may discover that one or more virtual objects”); this shows displaying the plurality of visual/virtual objects and would be based on the object information aforementioned when viewed in combination since Wang has the object information (the interactive characteristic) assigned to visual/virtual objects. The same motivations used in claim 10 apply here in claim 11.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Sugden and Wang teaches wherein the identifying comprises: obtaining frames which are outputted from a camera in the wearable device and including at least portion of the FoV (Sugden, col. 8 lines 44-46 teach “system 500 further comprises one or more outward facing image sensors 506 configured to acquire images of a background scene being viewed by a user”); this shows identifying is done from acquired images/frames (output from image sensor/camera in HMD/wearable device) of scene viewed by user thus including FoV; and identifying the location in the FoV of the second external electronic device based on the frames (Sugden, col. 9, lines 31-33 teach “Motion data may be used, potentially along with eye-tracking glint data and outward-facing image data, for gaze detection”, cols. 12-13, lines 65-67 and lines 1-5 teach “Computing system 700 may be configured to communicate with remote computing systems, such as a location service 714, a virtual object warehouse 716, and/or any other suitable remote computing system. The location service 714 may receive information from computing system 700, use the information to determine the location of the computing system 700, and provide the location information to the computing system 700” and col. 8, lines 65-67 teach “a location at which gaze lines projected from the user's eyes intersect the external display may be used to determine an object at which the user is gazing (e.g. a virtual object displayed on an external display)”); computing system 700/second external electronic device has location identified because a location which user gazes (with example listed as virtual object displayed on external display[which is of the computing system] meaning this location is also in the FoV) is used in a determination, and this is based on the frames because uses the same outward-facing image data (that’s aforementioned to be obtained as frames from camera) for gaze detection.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Sugden and Wang teaches wherein the changing comprises: identifying, based on the frames, the at least one visual object overlapped to the position (Sugden, col. 8, lines 65-67 teach “a location at which gaze lines projected from the user's eyes intersect the external display may be used to determine an object at which the user is gazing (e.g. a virtual object displayed on an external display)”); this shows identifying/determining virtual/visual object overlapped (displayed on) external display of computing device meaning at the location/position thereof where the computing device/second external electronic device is located, and this is based on the frames since uses gaze detection that’s acquired from image/frames data as aforementioned above.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Sugden and Wang teaches wherein the changing comprises: changing, based on a portion of the object information matched to the at least one visual object and the preset motion, a function to render the visual object in the display (Sugden, col. 9, lines 61-63 teach “objects displayed on the external display screen (e.g. a list of user interface controls locations and identities/functions)” and Wang, claim 2 teaches “a tracking unit coupled to the processing unit and configured to track at least one of hands of a user, eyes of the user and a remote controller operated by the user, so as to generate a tracking result with at least one interactive input.” and claim 3 teaches “virtual object is manipulated according to the at least one interactive input of the tracking result of the tracking unit when the at least one interactive input of the tracking result of the tracking unit meets the first predetermined interactive characteristic or the second predetermined interactive characteristic”); virtual object manipulated/changed shows the aforementioned visual/virtual object displayed would be changed (which changes the function from Sugden associated to render and display such) based on object information matched to virtual/visual object and preset motion(such as first predetermined interactive characteristic). The same motivations used in claim 10 apply here in claim 15.
Regarding claim 16, the method claim 16 recites similar limitations as device claim 1, and thus is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 17, the method claim 17 recites similar limitations as device claim 2, and thus is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 18, the method claim 18 recites similar limitations as device claim 3, and thus is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 19, the method claim 19 recites similar limitations as device claim 4, and thus is rejected under similar rationale.
Claim(s) 5-8, 14 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Sugden and Wang as applied to claims 1, 4, 12 and 16 above, and further in view of Wong et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 9,341,849), hereinafter referenced as Wong.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Sugden and Wang fails to explicitly teach wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the wearable device to: change, based on at least one of a position or a shape of the external object being changed by the motion, the visual object.
However, Wong explicitly teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the wearable device to: change, based on at least one of a position or a shape of the external object being changed by the motion, the visual object (Wong, col. 21, lines 25-28 teach “virtual objects that are moved from position to position within the viewing region may be shown successively at intermediate positions, to portray a pattern similar to the movement of a physical object.”); this shows changing visual/virtual object by moving it and is based on external/physical object movement (position change of such) which results from the motion. Wong is considered to be analogous art because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor of physical object positioning in relation to virtual objects while user is in HMD environments. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Sugden and Wang with the positioning and shaping techniques of Wong to provide a less cluttered view of the physical objects through the substantially transparent display (Wong, abstract). This would lead to better user experience due to more aesthetically pleasing display from less cluttered view.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Sugden, Wang and Wong teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the wearable device to: identify, based on frames which are outputted from the camera, at least one of the position, or the shape of the external object linked to the visual object (Wong, col. 15, lines 7-9 teach “data received from the one or more distance sensors may further be used to determine the position of the physical object around the HMD”); this shows identifying/determining position of physical/external object which is linked to visual object as aforementioned and image sensor (camera) from the above combination would be used as the distance sensor described here since that’s what receives the frames/images of physical object thus based on such. The same motivations used in claim 5 apply here in claim 6.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Sugden, Wang and Wong teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the wearable device to: identify, based on frames which are outputted from the camera, a position relationship between the visual object and an external object linked to the visual object (Wong, col. 15, lines 16-22 teach “the position determination may be used to track the portion of the HMD that overlays the physical object. For example, if the direction of the vector between the HMD and the physical object is slightly left and below the direction of a vector representing the forward direction of the HMD, then the object may be most obscured by virtual objects in the lower left section of the HMD”); this shows a position relationship identified (from using direction of vector and seeing if virtual object obscures physical object) between visual/virtual object and physical/external object which is linked to visual object as aforementioned and would be from camera since that’s what provides the frames/images of physical object thus based on such; and identify, by comparing the identified position relationship and the object information, whether the motion corresponds to the preset motion (Wong, col. 15, lines 22-25 teach “Determination of the overlaying portion may help enable the HMD to determine the most appropriate collision-avoidance actions to be applied in response” and lines 29-32 teach “an object's relative movement may be used as a basis for adjusting the determined distance of the object that will be used to initiate a collision-avoidance action”); collision-avoidance shows identification whether motion corresponds to preset motion (to avoid collision) and this is done by the aforementioned step of comparing identified position relationship and object information such as which object would be colliding. The same motivations used in claim 5 apply here in claim 7.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Sugden, Wang and Wong teaches wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the wearable device to: identify the external object indicated by the object information from the frames (Sugden, col. 4, lines 18-19 teach “gaze location analysis may be used to determine the real object at which the user is currently gazing”, col. 6, lines 58-60 teach “determine a location and field of view of the user of the device, and may be used to identify real objects in the field of view of the use”, and col. 8 lines 44-46 teach “system 500 further comprises one or more outward facing image sensors 506 configured to acquire images of a background scene being viewed by a user”); identifying real/external object (that is indicated by object information since determination of real object is made which would require the object information) is done here from acquired images/frames of scene viewed by user.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Sugden, Wang and Wong teaches wherein the identifying comprises: identifying, based on identifying the preset motion to correspond to releasing contact between the user and the first external electronic device, the location in the FoV of the second external electronic device. (Wong, col. 17, lines 22-26 teach “Such an embodiment may also use other bases for activation, but only after the HMD surpasses the movement threshold. Some embodiments may be configured to begin detecting physical objects only after determining that the HMD is in motion.”); this shows the identifying of location in the FoV of the second external electronic device (aforementioned, cited and explained in claim 12 above) would be based on identifying preset motion (surpassing movement threshold) to correspond to releasing contact between user and first external electronic device because HMD/first external electronic device begins detecting physical objects only after determining HMD is in motion, therefore would end detection once not in motion (released contact between the user and the first external electronic device) in order to be able to begin again once in motion. The same motivations used in claim 5 apply here in claim 14.
Regarding claim 20, the method claim 20 recites similar limitations as device claim 5, and thus is rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kim et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2011/0096072) paragraph 17 teaches “sensing signal for sensing a position and a movement of a user and for sensing a position and a movement of a manipulation object manipulating the 3D virtual object…whether a contact between the 3D virtual object and the manipulation object is created, and generating a predetermined reaction corresponding to the predetermined movement and the contact; and outputting the 3D virtual object where the generated reaction is applied”; this shows after a manipulation object such as user hand [shows information indicating motion associated with user] manipulates 3d virtual object by movement of user, and output is a changed 3D object due to reaction applied [shows changed visual object based on the motion corresponding to preset/predetermined movement/motion].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAUMAN U AHMAD whose telephone number is (703)756-5306. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Kee Tung can be reached at (571) 272-7794. 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.
/N.U.A./Examiner, Art Unit 2611
/KEE M TUNG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2611
Prosecution Insights