DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-17 and 20-22 are pending.
Response to Amendment
Applicants’ response to the last Office Action, dated Aug. 31, 2026, has been entered and made of record. In view of the Applicant’s amendments of the title, the objection to the specification is expressly withdrawn. In view of Applicant’s request, Examiner holds the non-statutory double patenting rejection until such time as the claims are otherwise found to be allowable or it is found to be moot, such as due to amendments to the claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s Argument has been fully considered, and Examiner respectfully submits that the applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
As to claim 1, with no amendment, Applicant argues (Remarks, p. 10)
Thus, Bui recognizes that some solutions in the past have employed eye-tracking techniques. However, the tracking of a user’s eye movement is energy intensive, and thus Bui seeks a solution that is less energy intensive. Yoshinaga discloses a process in which detection is made on the central positions of the pupils from among the face picture, and calculation is made on the eye direction from the central position of the pupil and the eye region. Thus, Yoshinaga teaches a method that Bui explicitly seek to avoid – namely processing image data to determine eye direction. … As a result, examples disclosed herein provide for increased power savings as compared to known examples that rely on, for instance, user presence alone or predefined timeout periods of user inactivity. However, Bui seeks a less power-intensive solution. Thus, the Office has failed to articulate any deficiency of Bui that is being resolved by Yoshinaga, and replacing the solution proposed by Bui with the solution provided by Yoshinaga would result in more power-intensive process that Bui explicitly seeks to avoid.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant misunderstood Bui’s disclosure with respect to “power-intensive solution”, and the combining the teachings of Bui (i.e., determining if user is presence & paying attention) with Yoshinaga (i.e., determining attention level) does not teach away.
Specifically, para. [0021] of Bui recognizes that the tracking of a user’s eye movement only is energy intensive, thus Bui teaches a method of not only tracking user’s eye movement but also determining user’s presence and facial direction (Bui, [0022], “Example systems and methods disclosed herein provide for dynamic power control of a display panel of a user device based on detection of a user's face and a determination of a direction of the user's gaze relative to the user device”; [0064], “The user presence detector 212 analyzes the image data 208 using machine learning model(s) generated during training by the trainer 200. The machine learning model(s) include face detection model(s) 214”). That is, Bui’s method clearly uses “processing image data to determine face – and eye – direction” (Bui, [0023], “Based on the detection of a user face in the FoV of the image sensor(s)”).
In sum, para. [0021] of Bui does not necessarily mean that Bui avoids “making calculation on the eye direction from the central position of the pupil and the eye region” using the captured image, as taught by Yoshinaga, and such calculation can be reasonably adopted for another purpose, e.g., determining attention level, as taught by Yoshinaga. Examiner notes that determining whether a user’s face (thus gaze) is directed toward the display, i.e., paying attention, is not necessarily the same as determining the user’s attention level.
Bui does not explicitly teach determining … “according to images of pupil centers or cornea reflection images of the person captured by the image sensor”. However, Yoshinaga teaches the concept of determining the attention level (Yoshinaga, title, [0007], “an object thereof is to provide a technology being suitable for grasping data of level of attention paid”) of the person whose face is already directed toward the display “according to images of pupil centers or cornea reflection images of the person captured by the image sensor” (Yoshinaga, FIGS. 8-10, [0068], “In a step 51, first of all, detection is made on the central positions of the pupils from among the face picture”).
At the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the “gaze detector 216” taught by Bui to further detect “the central positions of the pupils from among the face picture”, as taught by Yoshinaga, in order to provide “a technology being suitable for grasping data of level of attention paid” (Yoshinaga, [0007]). Please also see the prior Office Action (p. 8).
Accordingly, claim 1 is not allowable.
As to claims 2-8 and 21, they directly or indirectly depend from claim 1, and are not allowable at least for the same reason above (Remarks, p. 11).
As to claim 9, it has not been amended, and is not allowable for the same reason above (Remarks, p. 11).
As to claims 10-15 and 22, they directly or indirectly depend from claim 9, and are not allowable at least for the same reason above (Remarks, p. 11).
As to claim 16, it has been amended to recite the similar features as in claim 1 as discussed above, and is not allowable for the same reason above (Remarks, pp. 11-12).
As to claims 17 and 20, they depend from claim 16, and are not allowable at least for the same reason above (Remarks, p. 11).
Examiner maintains his decision, and provides succinct explanation as described above.
Double Patenting
The non-statutory 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 time-wise 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 claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or 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); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
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 a non-statutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based e-Terminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An e-Terminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about e-Terminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-20 remain rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7 of Patent No. 12,347,395 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because: claim 1 in view of Yoshinaga et al. (US 2007/0247524 A1) teaches them, as provided below.
Application
Patent
1. An adaptive display backlight control system, comprising:
a microcontroller unit;
a human presence sensor, electrically connected with the microcontroller unit, used to sense whether a person is in front of a display;
a human attention sensor, electrically connected with the microcontroller unit, being implemented by an image sensor and an intelligence operator that
determines whether the person in front of the display is paying attention to the display according to images of pupil centers or cornea reflection images of the person captured by the image sensor; and
a backlight regulation module, electrically connected with the microcontroller unit, used to regulate a driving voltage of a backlight module of the display according to a backlight-regulation instruction generated by the microcontroller unit;
wherein the microcontroller unit generates the backlight-regulation instruction being outputted to the backlight regulation module according to a signal generated by the human presence sensor relating to whether the person is present in front of the display and a signal generated by the human attention sensor relating to whether the person is paying attention to the display.
1. An adaptive display backlight control system, comprising:
a microcontroller unit;
a human presence sensor, electrically connected with the microcontroller unit, used to sense whether a person is in front of a display;
a human attention sensor, electrically connected with the microcontroller unit, being implemented by an image sensor and an intelligence operator that defines an operating range in front of the display and determines whether the person in front of the display is paying attention to the display according to images
captured by the image sensor within the operating range; and
a backlight regulation module, electrically connected with the microcontroller unit, used to regulate a driving voltage of a backlight module of the display according to a backlight-regulation instruction generated by the microcontroller unit;
wherein the microcontroller unit generates the backlight-regulation instruction being outputted to the backlight regulation module according to a signal generated by the human presence sensor relating to whether the person is present in front of the display and a signal generated by the human attention sensor relating to whether the person is paying attention to the display.
Patent claim 1 teaches all the limitations but determining … according to the images of “pupil centers or cornea reflection images of the person”.
However, Yoshinaga teaches the concept of determining … according to the images of pupil centers or cornea reflection images of the person (Yoshinaga, FIGS. 8-10, [0068], “In a step 51, first of all, detection is made on the central positions of the pupils from among the face picture”).
At the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the “gaze detector 216” taught by Bui to further detect “the central positions of the pupils from among the face picture”, as taught by Yoshinaga, in order to provide “a technology being suitable for grasping data of level of attention paid” (Yoshinaga, [0007]).
As to claims 2-3, they recite substantially the same limitations as in patent claims 2-3, respectively, and are not allowable.
As to claim 4, it recites substantially the same limitations as in patent claim 1, ll. 11-12, and are not allowable.
As to claims 5-8, they recite substantially the same limitations as in patent claims 4-7, respectively, and are not allowable.
As to claim 9, it differs from claim 1 only in that it is the method for adaptively controlling the display backlight control system of claim 1. It recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 1, and is not allowable for the same reason above. Please see claim 1 for detailed analysis.
As to claim 10, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 2, and is not allowable for the same reason above.
As to claim 11, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 4, and is not allowable for the same reason above.
As to claims 12-15, they recite substantially the same limitations as in claims 5-8, respectively, and are not allowable for the same reason above.
as to claim 16, it differs from claims 1 and 7 only in that it is the method for adaptively controlling the display backlight control system of claims 1 and 7. It recites substantially the same limitations as in combined claims 1 and 7, and is not allowable for the same reason above. Please see claim 1 for detailed analysis.
As to claim 17, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 2, and is not allowable for the same reason above.
As to claims 18-19, they recite substantially the same limitations as in claim 1, ll. 6 and 7-9, respectively, and are not allowable for the same reason above.
As to claim 20, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 4, and is not allowable for the same reason above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office Action.
Claims 1-6, 8-13, 15 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bui et al. (US 2022/0147142 A1) in view of Yoshinaga et al. (US 2007/0247524 A1).
As to claim 1, Bui teaches an adaptive display backlight control system (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0029], “system 100” comprising “backlight 110”), comprising:
a microcontroller unit (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0029], “processor 109”);
a human presence sensor (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0036], “display panel controller 130 of FIG. 1 serves to process the image data generated by the image sensor(s) 114”), electrically connected with the microcontroller unit (Bui, see FIGS. 1-3, [0029], “processor 109”), used to sense whether a person is in front of a display (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0036], “to determine whether the user 106 is present within the imaging FoV 116”);
a human attention sensor (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0047], “based on the analysis of the gaze of the user 106, the display panel controller 130 determines”), electrically connected with the microcontroller unit (Bui, see FIGS. 1-3, [0029], “processor 109”), being implemented by an image sensor and an intelligence operator that determines whether the person in front of the display is paying attention to the display (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0024], “if two eyes are detected in the image data, examples disclosed herein determine that the user is looking at the display screen”; Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0047], “whether the user 106 is attentive to the display screen 108 (e.g., paying attention to content on the display screen 108)”) according to images of pupil centers or cornea reflection images of the person captured by the image sensor (Yoshinaga, FIGS. 8-10, [0068], “In a step 51, first of all, detection is made on the central positions of the pupils from among the face picture”); and
a backlight regulation module (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0071], “backlight manager 220” controlled by “backlight rule(s) 224” according to “gaze detector 216”), electrically connected with the microcontroller unit (Bui, see FIGS. 1-3, [0029], “processor 109”), used to regulate a driving voltage of a backlight module (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0072], “backlight 110”) of the display (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0072], “display screen 108”) according to a backlight-regulation instruction (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0072], “backlight rule(s) 224”) generated by the microcontroller unit (Bui, see FIGS. 1-3, [0029], “processor 109”);
wherein the microcontroller unit (Bui, see FIGS. 1-3, [0029], “processor 109”) generates the backlight-regulation instruction (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0072], “backlight rule(s) 224”) being outputted to the backlight regulation module (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0071], “backlight manager 220”) according to a signal generated by the human presence sensor (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0081], “user presence detector 212”) relating to whether the person is present in front of the display (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0081], “detects a face in the imaging FoV 116”) and a signal generated by the human attention sensor (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0083], “gaze detector 216”) relating to whether the person is paying attention to the display (Bui, FIGS. 1-5, [0084], “display panel controller 130 determines that the user is attentive based on a direction of a gaze of the user relative to the image sensor(s) 114 of FIGS. 1 and 2 (e.g., as determined based on the image data 208 and the face detection model(s) 214)”).
Bui does not teach determining … “according to images of pupil centers or cornea reflection images of the person captured by the image sensor”.
However, Yoshinaga teaches the concept of determining … according to images of pupil centers or cornea reflection images of the person captured by the image sensor (Yoshinaga, FIGS. 8-10, [0068], “In a step 51, first of all, detection is made on the central positions of the pupils from among the face picture”).
At the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the “gaze detector 216” taught by Bui to further detect “the central positions of the pupils from among the face picture”, as taught by Yoshinaga, in order to provide “a technology being suitable for grasping data of level of attention paid” (Yoshinaga, [0007]).
As to claim 2, Bui teaches the adaptive display backlight control system according to claim 1, further comprising an ambient light sensor (Bui, FIGS. 1-2, [0058], “ambient light sensor(s) 144”), electrically connected with the microcontroller unit (Bui, see FIGS. 1-3, [0029], “processor 109”), used to determine information of an ambient light around the display and enable the microcontroller unit to further regulate the driving voltage being outputted to the backlight module according to signals generated by the ambient light sensor (Bui, FIGS. 1-2, [0058], “measure illuminance and generate data indicative of light (e.g., intensity) in the surrounding environment in which the user device 104 is located. In the example of FIG. 1, if data from the ambient light sensor(s) 144 indicates that the room is dark or dimly lit, the display panel controller 130 instructs the backlight 110 to gradually dim or increase brightness to account for an increased sensitivity of the user 106 to changes in brightness in a dark environment”).
As to claim 3, Bui teaches the adaptive display backlight control system according to claim 1, wherein the human presence sensor is implemented by a proximity sensor for determining whether the person is in front of the display (Bui, [0021], “As another example, some devices include proximity sensors that detect user presence relative to the device”).
At the time of effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the “image sensor(s) 114” taught by Bui to be further configured to operate in association with another “proximity sensor”, as taught by Bui, in order to increase the accuracy while lowering cost.
As to claim 4, Bui teaches the adaptive display backlight control system according to claim 1, wherein the intelligence operator defines an operating range in front of the display (Bui, FIG. 1, [0048], “when the user 106 is in the display FoV 132, the example display panel controller 130 of FIG. 1 determines a user field of view 138 based on a position of the user 106 within the display FoV 132 (e.g., based on x and y coordinates within the display FoV 132) and an angle of a face of the user 106 relative to the image sensor(s) 114 of the user device 104”) and the images of pupil centers or the cornea reflection images of the person are captured by the image sensor within the operating range (Bui, FIG. 1, [0024], e.g., “ if two eyes are detected in the image data, examples disclosed herein determine that the user is looking at the display screen”).
As to claim 5, Bui teaches the adaptive display backlight control system according to claim 1,wherein, when the microcontroller unit determines that the person is present in front of the display according to the signal generated by the human presence sensor (Bui, FIG. 3, [0081], “user presence detector 212” → “face detected” → “backlight and panel on (default %) 222, 224”) and determines that the person is paying attention to the display according to the signal generated by the human attention sensor (Bui, FIG. 3, [0084], “gaze detector 216” → “face detect” → “backlight on (default %) 224”), the microcontroller unit generates the backlight-regulation instruction (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0072], “backlight rule(s) 224”) for controlling the backlight regulation module (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0071], “backlight manager 220”) to drive the backlight module to emit a normal backlight (Bui, FIGS. 3-4, “backlight on (default %)”).
As to claim 6, Bui teaches the adaptive display backlight control system according to claim 1, wherein, when the microcontroller unit determines that the person is present in front of the display according to the signal generated by the human presence sensor (Bui, FIG. 3, [0081], “user presence detector 212” → “face detected” → “backlight and panel on (default %) 222, 224”) and determines that the person is not paying attention to the display according to the signal generated by the human attention sensor (Bui, FIG. 3, [0084], “gaze detector 216” → “face turn 45°” → “backlight dim (90% of default) 224”), the microcontroller unit generates the backlight-regulation instruction for controlling the backlight regulation module (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0071], “backlight manager 220”) to drive the backlight module to emit a regulated backlight (Bui, FIG. 3, “backlight dim (90% of default) 224”).
As to claim 8, Bui teaches the adaptive display backlight control system according to claim 1, wherein, when the microcontroller unit determines that the person is not present in front of the display according to the signal generated by the human presence sensor (Bui, FIG. 3, [0081], “user presence detector 212” → “no face detected” → “backlight and panel off (0%) 222, 224”), the microcontroller unit generates the backlight-regulation instruction for controlling the backlight regulation module (Bui, FIGS. 1-3, [0071], “backlight manager 220”) to drive the backlight module to emit a backlight under a power-saving mode or turn off the backlight of the display (Bui, FIG. 3, [0081], “backlight and panel off (0%) 222, 224”).
As to claim 9, it differs from claim 1 only in that it is the method for adaptively controlling the display backlight control system of claim 1. It recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 1, and Bui in view of Yoshinaga teaches them. Examiner renders the same motivation as in claim 1. Please see claim 1 for detailed analysis.
As to claim 10, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 2, and Bui teaches them. Please see claim 2 for detailed analysis.
As to claim 11, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 4, and Bui teaches them. Please see claim 4 for detailed analysis.
As to claims 12-13, they recite substantially the same limitations as in claims 5-6, respectively, and Bui teaches them. Please see claims 5-6 for detailed analysis.
As to claim 15, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 8, and Bui teaches them. Please see claim 8 for detailed analysis.
As to new claim 21, Bui teaches the adaptive display backlight control system according to claim 1, wherein the human attention sensor is controlled not to function when the human presence sensor does not sense that the person is in front of the display (Bui, FIG. 3, [0081], “when the user presence detector 212 does not detect a face in the imaging FoV 116, the rule(s) 222, 224 indicate that the panel electronics 112 and the backlight 110 of the display panel 102 should be turned off”; FIG. 5, [0086], “at time t3, the user presence detector 212 of the display panel controller 130 of FIGS. 1 and 2 determines that the user is not present based on the image data 208 and the face detection model(s) 214. As such, the panel electronics manager 218 instructs the panel electronics 112 to turn off … turning off the display panel and/or putting the user device to sleep”).
As to new claim 22, Bui teaches the method according to claim 9, comprising:
controlling the human attention sensor to function only when the human presence sensor senses that the person is in front of the display (Bui, FIG. 3, [0081], “when the user presence detector 212 does not detect a face in the imaging FoV 116, the rule(s) 222, 224 indicate that the panel electronics 112 and the backlight 110 of the display panel 102 should be turned off”; FIG. 5, [0086], “at time t3, the user presence detector 212 of the display panel controller 130 of FIGS. 1 and 2 determines that the user is not present based on the image data 208 and the face detection model(s) 214. As such, the panel electronics manager 218 instructs the panel electronics 112 to turn off … turning off the display panel and/or putting the user device to sleep”).
Claims 7, 14, 16-17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bui et al. (US 2022/0147142 A1) in view of Yoshinaga et al. (US 2007/0247524 A1) and Ooi et al. (US 2016/0335989 A1).
As to claim 7, Bui teaches the adaptive display backlight control system according to claim 6, wherein the adaptive display backlight control system determines whether the person is not paying attention to the display (Bui, FIG. 1, [0024], e.g., “ if two eyes are detected in the image data, examples disclosed herein determine that the user is looking at the display screen”).
Bui does not teach “wherein the adaptive display backlight control system uses a timer to set up a non-attention time and a light-dimming time; when it is determined that a time that the person is not paying attention to the display reaches the non-attention time, the backlight regulation module is regulated according to a ratio within the light-dimming time until the backlight module is turned off”.
However, Ooi teaches the concept of a timer (Ooi, FIG. 6, [0093], “timer”) to set up a non-presence time (Ooi, FIG. 6, [0093], “has face been detected S123?” → NO → e.g., “between 10 seconds and 30 seconds”) and a light-dimming time (Ooi, FIG. 6, [0108], e.g., “ T1 seconds” or “T2 seconds”);
when it is determined that a time that the person is not present in front of the display reaches the non-presence time (Ooi, FIG. 6, [0093], “has face been detected S123?” → NO → e.g., “between 10 seconds and 30 seconds”), the backlight regulation module is regulated according to a ratio within the light-dimming time until the backlight module is turned off (Ooi, FIG. 6, [0093], “power consumption is steadily suppressed up to about half, for example, by decreasing the brightness of the display panel 102” until “turning main power off S129”).
At the time of effective filing date, given that Bui teaches the concept of determining whether the person is not paying attention to the display in association with the user’s presence in front of the display determined by images captured by the image sensor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the “gaze detector 216” taught by Bui to further comprise the “timer” to be associated with the attention determination, as taught by Ooi, in order to provide a display device and a control method “capable of efficiently executing the power save control with a high degree of accuracy by combining the user's moving body detection and face detection” (Ooi, [0008]).
As to claim 14, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 7, and Ooi teaches them. Examiner renders the same motivation as in claim 7. Please see claim 7 for detailed analysis.
As to claim 16, it differs from claims 1 and 7 only in that it is the method for adaptively controlling the display backlight control system of the combined claims 1 and 7. It recites substantially the same limitations as in the combined claims 1 and 7, and Bui in view of Yoshinaga and Ooi teaches them. Examiner renders the same motivations as in claim 1 and 7. Please see claims 1 and 7 for detailed analysis.
As to claim 17, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 2, and Bui teaches them. Please see claim 2 for detailed analysis.
As to claim 20, it recites substantially the same limitations as in claim 4, and Bui teaches them. Please see claim 4 for detailed analysis.
Conclusion
The prior arts made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
Yang (US 2009/0262052 A1) teaches the concept of “turning on or off the backlight module in accordance with the first and the second signal” (Abs.); and
Oba et al. (US 2011/0135114 A1) teaches the concept of “face detection unit for detecting a face included in the image captured by the image capturing unit” (Abs.).
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD J HONG whose telephone number is (571) 270-7765. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM EST.
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, Chanh Nguyen can be reached on (571) 272-7772. 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.
Sep. 30, 2026
/RICHARD J HONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2623
***
