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 .
DETAILED ACTION
1.This action is response to application filed on 04/21/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Double patenting
2. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A non-statutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claims would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
3. A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on non-statutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
4. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
5. Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
6. Claims 1, 4-7, 8, 11-13 and 14, 17-19 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4-7 of U.S. Patent # 11,966,317. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both of them describe a similar method for operating a mode for controlling an electronic device based upon number of persons obtained from image data.
The current application 19184810
US Patent No. 11,966,317
Explanation
1.A method for controlling an electronic device, the method comprising:
obtaining, by the electronic device, image data regarding persons around the electronic device;
identifying, by the electronic device, a number of persons based on the obtained image data;
determining, by the electronic device, a user mode of the electronic device based on the identified number of persons; and
performing, by the electronic device, an operation of the electronic device based on the determined user mode.
4. The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining a relationship between persons in the obtained image data.
5. The method of claim 4, wherein the relationship is determined based on facial features of the persons.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the image data is obtained by a camera of the electronic device.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein the electronic device comprises a smartphone.
1.A method for controlling an electronic device, the method comprising:
obtaining, by the electronic device, image data regarding persons around the electronic device;
providing, by the electronic device, a display based on the obtained image data;
identifying, by the electronic device, a number of persons in the obtained image data;
determining, by the electronic device, a user mode of the electronic device based on the identified number of persons; and
performing, by the electronic device, a camera-related operation of the electronic device according to the determined user mode.
4. The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining a relationship between persons in the obtained image data.
5. The method of claim 4, wherein the relationship is determined based on facial features of the persons.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the image data is obtained by a camera of the electronic device.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein the electronic device comprises a smartphone.
Similar remarks apply to the instant claims 8, 11-13 and 14, 17-19.
7. Claims 1+2, 8+9, and 14+15 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1of U.S. Patent # 12,298,879. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both of them describe a similar method for operating a mode for controlling an electronic device based upon number of persons obtained from image data.
The current application 19184810
US Patent No. 12,298,879
Explanation
1.A method for controlling an electronic device, the method comprising:
obtaining, by the electronic device, image data regarding persons around the electronic device;
identifying, by the electronic device, a number of persons based on the obtained image data;
determining, by the electronic device, a user mode of the electronic device based on the identified number of persons; and
performing, by the electronic device, an operation of the electronic device based on the determined user mode.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: based on identification that the number of persons being singular, determining, by the electronic device, a first user mode; and based on identification that the number of persons being plural, determining, by the electronic device, a second user mode different from the first user mode.
1. A method for controlling an electronic device, the method comprising: obtaining, by the electronic device, an image regarding at least one person around the electronic device; analyzing, by the electronic device, the image to determine a number of persons in the image; based on determining the number of persons in the image to be one person, determining, by the electronic device, a first service to be provided to the one person based on a context of the one person, and providing, by the electronic device, the first service; and based on determining the number of persons in the image to be a plurality of persons, determining, by the electronic device, a second service to be provided to the plurality of persons based on a relationship between the plurality of persons, and providing, by the electronic device, the second service.
Similar remarks apply to the instant claims 8+9, and 14+15.
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.
8. Claims 1-3, 6, 8-10, 14-16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tong (CN 109508583 A) in view of Hattori et al. (WO-2018167851-A1)
Regarding claim 1:
A method for controlling an electronic device, the method comprising:
obtaining, by the electronic device, image data regarding persons around the electronic device: (the captured image is analyzed to obtain the number of people (a total of how many people) in the image: Tong, abstract; page 2; page 3);
identifying, by the electronic device, a number of persons based on the obtained image data: (the image analyzing and processing to obtain the number of people (a total of how many people), or crowd density distribution (which persons gathering more, higher density), Tong: page 3);
determining, by the electronic device, a user mode of the electronic device based on the identified number of persons: (the image analyzing and processing to obtain some people distribution feature included in the image, for example, counting the number of people (a total of how many people), or crowd density distribution (which persons gathering more, higher density), thereby determining the important monitoring of the scene area: Tong; page 7).
However, Tong does not explicitly teach performing, by the electronic device, an operation of the electronic device based on the determined user mode.
In similar art, Hattori teaches the foreground map generation unit converts the image coordinates of the contact point of the person information acquired so far into road surface coordinates, and then converts the foreground image to a plurality of positions where the density of the persons becomes a predetermined value in the road surface coordinate system. For example, the road surface coordinate grid is set at an interval of 50 cm in the road surface coordinate system. That is, the whole grid is 4 [m .sup.2 ]. Assuming that the crowd density at the congestion level 1 is 1 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges four persons in the grid. If the crowd density at crowd level 2 is 2 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges 8 persons in the grid. Assuming that the crowd density at the congestion level 3 is 4 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges 16 persons in the grid (Hattori page 9).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Hattori’s ideas into Tong’s system in order to provide an efficient image processing device (Hattori, abstract).
Regarding claim 2:
In addition to the rejection claim 1, Tong-Hattori further teaches based on identification that the number of persons being singular, determining, by the electronic device, a first user mode; and based on identification that the number of persons being plural, determining, by the electronic device, a second user mode different from the first user mode: (Hattori teaches the foreground map generation unit converts the image coordinates of the contact point of the person information acquired so far into road surface coordinates, and then converts the foreground image to a plurality of positions where the density of the persons becomes a predetermined value in the road surface coordinate system. For example, the road surface coordinate grid is set at an interval of 50 cm in the road surface coordinate system. That is, the whole grid is 4 [m .sup.2 ]. Assuming that the crowd density at the congestion level 1 is 1 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges four persons in the grid. If the crowd density at crowd level 2 is 2 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges 8 persons in the grid. Assuming that the crowd density at the congestion level 3 is 4 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges 16 persons in the grid (Hattori page 9).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Hattori’s ideas into Tong’s system in order to provide an efficient image processing device (Hattori, abstract).
Regarding claim 3:
In addition to the rejection claim 1, Tong-Hattori further teaches the operation performed by the electronic device comprises driving a component of the electronic device: (the road surface coordinate grid is set at an interval of 50 cm in the road surface coordinate system. That is, the whole grid is 4 [m .sup.2 ]. Assuming that the crowd density at the congestion level 1 is 1 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges four persons in the grid. If the crowd density at crowd level 2 is 2 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges 8 persons in the grid. Assuming that the crowd density at the congestion level 3 is 4 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit 2044 randomly arranges 16 persons in the grid: Hattori page 9).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Hattori’s ideas into Tong’s system in order to provide an efficient image processing device (Hattori, abstract).
Regarding claim 6:
In addition to the rejection claim 1, Tong-Hattori further teaches the image data is obtained by a camera of the electronic device (image captured by camera: Tong abstract).
Regarding claim 8:
An electronic device comprising:
a display; a camera (Tong, abstract); and a processor comprising processing circuity configured to:
obtain image data regarding persons around the electronic device, using the camera: (the captured image is analyzed to obtain the number of people (a total of how many people) in the image: Tong, abstract; page 2; page 3);
identify a number of persons based on the obtained image data: (the image analyzing and processing to obtain the number of people (a total of how many people), or crowd density distribution (which persons gathering more, higher density), Tong: page 3);
determine a user mode of the electronic device based on the identified number of persons: (the image analyzing and processing to obtain some people distribution feature included in the image, for example, counting the number of people (a total of how many people), or crowd density distribution (which persons gathering more, higher density), thereby determining the important monitoring of the scene area: Tong; page 7).
However, Tong does not explicitly teach control an operation of the electronic device based on the determined user mode.
In similar art, Hattori teaches the foreground map generation unit converts the image coordinates of the contact point of the person information acquired so far into road surface coordinates, and then converts the foreground image to a plurality of positions where the density of the persons becomes a predetermined value in the road surface coordinate system. The crowd foreground image is generated by pasting. For example, the road surface coordinate grid is set at an interval of 50 cm in the road surface coordinate system. That is, the whole grid is 4 [m .sup.2 ]. Assuming that the crowd density at the congestion level 1 is 1 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges four persons in the grid. If the crowd density at crowd level 2 is 2 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges 8 persons in the grid. Assuming that the crowd density at the congestion level 3 is 4 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit 2044 randomly arranges 16 persons in the grid (Hattori page 9).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Hattori’s ideas into Tong’s system in order to provide an efficient image processing device (Hattori, abstract).
Regarding claim 9:
In addition to the rejection claim 8, Tong-Hattori further teaches based on identification that the number of persons being singular, determine a first user mode; and based on identification that the number of persons being plural, determine a second user mode different from the first user mode: (Hattori teaches the foreground map generation unit converts the image coordinates of the contact point of the person information acquired so far into road surface coordinates, and then converts the foreground image to a plurality of positions where the density of the persons becomes a predetermined value in the road surface coordinate system. For example, the road surface coordinate grid is set at an interval of 50 cm in the road surface coordinate system. That is, the whole grid is 4 [m .sup.2 ]. Assuming that the crowd density at the congestion level 1 is 1 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges four persons in the grid. If the crowd density at crowd level 2 is 2 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges 8 persons in the grid. Assuming that the crowd density at the congestion level 3 is 4 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges 16 persons in the grid (Hattori page 9).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Hattori’s ideas into Tong’s system in order to provide an efficient image processing device (Hattori, abstract).
Regarding claim 10:
In addition to the rejection claim 8, Tong-Hattori further teaches the operation controlled by the processor comprises driving a component of the electronic device: (the road surface coordinate grid is set at an interval of 50 cm in the road surface coordinate system. That is, the whole grid is 4 [m .sup.2 ]. Assuming that the crowd density at the congestion level 1 is 1 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges four persons in the grid. If the crowd density at crowd level 2 is 2 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges 8 persons in the grid. Assuming that the crowd density at the congestion level 3 is 4 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit 2044 randomly arranges 16 persons in the grid: Hattori page 9).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Hattori’s ideas into Tong’s system in order to provide an efficient image processing device (Hattori, abstract).
Regarding claim 14:
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions which, when executed by a processor of an electronic device, configure the processor to perform operations comprising:
obtaining, by the electronic device, image data regarding persons around the electronic device: (the captured image is analyzed to obtain the number of people (a total of how many people) in the image: Tong, abstract; page 2; page 3);
identifying, by the electronic device, a number of persons based on the obtained image data: (the image analyzing and processing to obtain the number of people (a total of how many people), or crowd density distribution (which persons gathering more, higher density), Tong: page 3);
determining, by the electronic device, a user mode of the electronic device based on the identified number of persons: (the image analyzing and processing to obtain some people distribution feature included in the image, for example, counting the number of people (a total of how many people), or crowd density distribution (which persons gathering more, higher density), thereby determining the important monitoring of the scene area: Tong; page 7).
However, Tong does not explicitly teach performing, by the electronic device, an operation of the electronic device based on the determined user mode.
In similar art, Hattori teaches the foreground map generation unit converts the image coordinates of the contact point of the person information acquired so far into road surface coordinates, and then converts the foreground image to a plurality of positions where the density of the persons becomes a predetermined value in the road surface coordinate system. The crowd foreground image is generated by pasting. For example, the road surface coordinate grid is set at an interval of 50 cm in the road surface coordinate system. That is, the whole grid is 4 [m .sup.2 ]. Assuming that the crowd density at the congestion level 1 is 1 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges four persons in the grid. If the crowd density at crowd level 2 is 2 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges 8 persons in the grid. Assuming that the crowd density at the congestion level 3 is 4 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit 2044 randomly arranges 16 persons in the grid (Hattori page 9).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Hattori’s ideas into Tong’s system in order to provide an efficient image processing device (Hattori, abstract).
Regarding claim 15:
In addition to the rejection claim 14, Tong-Hattori further teaches based on identification that the number of persons being singular, determining a first user mode; and based on identification that the number of persons being plural, determining a second user mode different from the first user mode: (Hattori teaches the foreground map generation unit converts the image coordinates of the contact point of the person information acquired so far into road surface coordinates, and then converts the foreground image to a plurality of positions where the density of the persons becomes a predetermined value in the road surface coordinate system. For example, the road surface coordinate grid is set at an interval of 50 cm in the road surface coordinate system. That is, the whole grid is 4 [m .sup.2 ]. Assuming that the crowd density at the congestion level 1 is 1 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges four persons in the grid. If the crowd density at crowd level 2 is 2 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges 8 persons in the grid. Assuming that the crowd density at the congestion level 3 is 4 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges 16 persons in the grid (Hattori page 9).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Hattori’s ideas into Tong’s system in order to provide an efficient image processing device (Hattori, abstract).
Regarding claim 16:
In addition to the rejection claim 14, Tong-Hattori further teaches driving a component of the electronic device: (the road surface coordinate grid is set at an interval of 50 cm in the road surface coordinate system. That is, the whole grid is 4 [m .sup.2 ]. Assuming that the crowd density at the congestion level 1 is 1 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges four persons in the grid. If the crowd density at crowd level 2 is 2 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit randomly arranges 8 persons in the grid. Assuming that the crowd density at the congestion level 3 is 4 [person / m .sup.2 ], the foreground map generation unit 2044 randomly arranges 16 persons in the grid: Hattori page 9).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Hattori’s ideas into Tong’s system in order to provide an efficient image processing device (Hattori, abstract).
Regarding claim 19:
In addition to the rejection claim 14, Tong-Hattori further teaches the image data is obtained by a camera of the electronic device (image captured by camera: Tong abstract).
9. Claims 4-5, 11-12, 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tong-Hattori in view of Atsumi (JP 2019111625 A)
Regarding claim 4:
Tong-Hattori discloses the invention substantially as disclosed in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach determining a relationship between persons in the obtained image data.
In similar art, Atsumi teaches the image analysis unit determines that the person appearing in the acquired image does not match the facial feature of the registrant, the determination unit determines the relationship between the person appearing in the acquired image and the registrant (Atsumi pages 6 and 9).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Atsumi’s ideas into Tong-Hattori’s system in order to save resources and development time by implying Atsumi’s ideas into Tong-Hattori’s system.
Regarding claim 5:
In addition to the rejection claim 4, Tong-Hattori-Atsumi further teaches the relationship is determined based on facial features of the persons: (Atsumi teaches the image analysis unit determines that the person appearing in the acquired image does not match the facial feature of the registrant, the determination unit determines the relationship between the person appearing in the acquired image and the registrant: Atsumi pages 6 and 9).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Atsumi’s ideas into Tong-Hattori’s system in order to save resources and development time by implying Atsumi’s ideas into Tong-Hattori’s system.
Regarding claim 11:
Tong-Hattori discloses the invention substantially as disclosed in claim 8, but does not explicitly teach determining a relationship between persons in the obtained image data.
In similar art, Atsumi teaches the image analysis unit determines that the person appearing in the acquired image does not match the facial feature of the registrant, the determination unit determines the relationship between the person appearing in the acquired image and the registrant (Atsumi pages 6 and 9).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Atsumi’s ideas into Tong-Hattori’s system in order to save resources and development time by implying Atsumi’s ideas into Tong-Hattori’s system.
Regarding claim 12:
In addition to the rejection claim 11, Tong-Hattori-Atsumi further teaches the relationship is determined based on facial features of the persons: (Atsumi teaches the image analysis unit determines that the person appearing in the acquired image does not match the facial feature of the registrant, the determination unit determines the relationship between the person appearing in the acquired image and the registrant: Atsumi pages 6 and 9).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Atsumi’s ideas into Tong-Hattori’s system in order to save resources and development time by implying Atsumi’s ideas into Tong-Hattori’s system.
Regarding claim 17:
Tong-Hattori discloses the invention substantially as disclosed in claim 14, but does not explicitly teach determining a relationship between persons in the obtained image data.
In similar art, Atsumi teaches the image analysis unit determines that the person appearing in the acquired image does not match the facial feature of the registrant, the determination unit determines the relationship between the person appearing in the acquired image and the registrant (Atsumi pages 6 and 9).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Atsumi’s ideas into Tong-Hattori’s system in order to save resources and development time by implying Atsumi’s ideas into Tong-Hattori’s system.
Regarding claim 18:
In addition to the rejection claim 17, Tong-Hattori-Atsumi further teaches the relationship is determined based on facial features of the persons: (Atsumi teaches the image analysis unit determines that the person appearing in the acquired image does not match the facial feature of the registrant, the determination unit determines the relationship between the person appearing in the acquired image and the registrant: Atsumi pages 6 and 9).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify Atsumi’s ideas into Tong-Hattori’s system in order to save resources and development time by implying Atsumi’s ideas into Tong-Hattori’s system.
10.Claims 7, 13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tong-Hattori in view of AGUILAR-GAMEZ GAMALIEL et al. (WO 2017214400 A1)
Regarding claim 7:
Tong-Hattori discloses the invention substantially as disclosed in claim 1, but does not explicitly teach the electronic device comprises a smartphone.
In similar art, AGUILAR-GAMEZ GAMALIEL teaches the video is generated by smartphone (page 4).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify AGUILAR-GAMEZ GAMALIEL’s ideas into Tong-Hattori’s system in order to save resources and development time by implying AGUILAR-GAMEZ GAMALIEL’s ideas into Tong-Hattori’s system.
Regarding claim 13:
Tong-Hattori discloses the invention substantially as disclosed in claim 8, but does not explicitly teach the electronic device comprises a smartphone.
In similar art, AGUILAR-GAMEZ GAMALIEL teaches the video is generated by smartphone (page 4).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify AGUILAR-GAMEZ GAMALIEL’s ideas into Tong-Hattori’s system in order to save resources and development time by implying AGUILAR-GAMEZ GAMALIEL’s ideas into Tong-Hattori’s system.
Regarding claim 20:
Tong-Hattori discloses the invention substantially as disclosed in claim 14, but does not explicitly teach a smartphone.
In similar art, AGUILAR-GAMEZ GAMALIEL teaches the video is generated by smartphone (page 4).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify AGUILAR-GAMEZ GAMALIEL’s ideas into Tong-Hattori’s system in order to save resources and development time by implying AGUILAR-GAMEZ GAMALIEL’s ideas into Tong-Hattori’s system.
Conclusions
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAN DAI T TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)272-7959. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00 Am to 3:00 PM.
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, Follansbee John A can be reached on 571-272-3964. 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.
/LAN DAI T TRUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2444
Prosecution Insights