DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending for examination.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 07/02/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Zhang et al, US 20240259588 A1 (Zhang).
Regarding Claim 20, Claim 20 claims a product by process claim limitation where the product is the bitstream and the process is the method steps to generate the bitstream. MPEP §2113 recites “Product-by-Process claims are not limited to the manipulations of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps”. Thus, the scope of the claim is the storage medium storing the bitstream (with the structure implied by the method steps). The structure includes the information and samples manipulated by the steps.
“To be given patentable weight, the printed matter and associated product must be in a functional relationship. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated”. MPEP §2111.05(I)(A). When a claimed “computer-readable medium” merely serves as a support for information or data, no functional relationship exists. MPEP §2111.05(III).
The memory storing the claimed bitstream in Claim 20 merely services as a support for the storage of the bitstream and provides no functional relationship between the stored bitstream and storage medium. Therefore, the bitstream, which scope is implied by the method steps, is non-functional descriptive material and given no patentable weight. MPEP §2111.05(III). Thus, the claim scope is just a storage medium storing data and is anticipated by Zhang which recites a storage medium storing a bitstream.
Zhang discloses, a bitstream of compressed video data, including a computer readable storage medium storing the compressed non-transitory video data (Zhang [0016]– The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium stores instructions that cause a processor to perform a method... Zhang [0017]– The non-transitory computer-readable recording medium stores a bitstream…).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9-12, 15, and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al, US 2009/0232215 A1 (Park), in view of Andersson et al, US 20110026599 A1 (Andersson).
Regarding Claim 1, Park teaches a decoding method, applied to a decoder (Park [0060]– Coding in the present invention should be under stood as the concept for including both encoding and decoding), wherein the method comprises:
determining a first template of a current block, and determining a matching template and a reference block (Park Fig. 5– template and current block; neighboring template and reference block; Park Fig. 4 S410– Perform template matching between reference block corresponding to current block and current block);
determining model parameters according to the first template and the matching template (Park Fig. 1(d); 1(c)– Template region of 16 x 8 block; Template region of 8 x 16 block; Park Fig. 4 S410– Perform template matching between reference block corresponding to current block and current block);
determining a prediction value of the current block according to the filtered reference block (Park [0045]– and to obtain a prediction value of the current block using the intra prediction mode of the template region as the intra prediction mode of the current block);
and determining a reconstructed value of the current block according to the prediction value of the current block (Park [0072]– The current block is then reconstructed using a pixel value of the current block according to the obtained intra prediction mode of the current block and the received residual of the current block).
However, Park does not explicitly disclose performing filtering on the reference block according to the model parameters to determine a filtered reference block.
Andersson teaches performing filtering on the reference block according to the model parameters to determine a filtered reference block (Andersson [0046]– the pixels of the reference pixel block are filtered with the adaptive filter to get the filtered property values).
Therefore, it 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 to modify Park to incorporate performing filtering to determine a filtered reference block as taught by Andersson.
One would be motivated to combine Andersson’s adaptive filtering techniques to enhance prediction accuracy by generating a filtered reference block for prediction.
Regarding Claim 2, Park, in combination, further discloses the method of Claim 1, further comprising wherein determining the first template of the current block comprises: determining a template type of the current block (Park [0116]– it is able to check whether to perform template matching for each type of a macroblock... Information on a macroblock type (mb type) is received);
and determining the first template of the current block according to the template type of the current block (Park [0117]– if a type of a current macroblock is 16*8 or 8* 16, it is able receive flag information (tm active flags ImbPartIdx) indicating whether to perform template matching on each partition).
Regarding Claim 3, Park in combination, further discloses the method according to Claim 2, wherein determining the template type of the current block comprises: determining the template type of the current block (Park [0116]– it is able to check whether to perform template matching for each type of a macroblock... Information on a macroblock type (mb type) is received).
However, Park does not explicitly disclose according to reference samples of the current block, wherein the reference samples of the current block comprise at least one of: left neighboring reference samples of the current block, top neighboring reference samples of the current block, top-left neighboring reference samples of the current block, bottom-left neighboring reference samples of the current block, or top-right neighboring reference samples of the current block.
Andersson teaches according to reference samples of the current block (Andersson Fig. 2; [0040]– the template 16 comprises neighboring and adjacent pixels 18 positioned prior the pixels 14 of the pixel block 12 in the encoding/decoding order...If another encoding/decoding order is employed, the position of the template 16 relative the pixel block 12 is preferably updated...);
wherein the reference samples of the current block comprise at least one of: left neighboring reference samples of the current block, top neighboring reference samples of the current block, top-left neighboring reference samples of the current block, bottom-left neighboring reference samples of the current block, or top-right neighboring reference samples of the current block (Andersson Fig. 2; [0040]– include pixels 18 positioned above and diagonally to the upper left of the pixel block).
Therefore, it 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 to modify Park to incorporate determining a template type based on reference samples of the current block as taught by Andersson.
One would be motivated to combine Andersson’s incorporation of reference samples in the selection of a template type to improve the accuracy of template selection based on neighboring reconstructed samples.
Regarding Claim 5, Park, in combination, further discloses the method of Claim 1, further comprising wherein determining the matching template and the reference block comprises: performing template matching (Park [0017]– performing a template matching between a current block and a candidate reference block to find a reference block corresponding to a current block) within a preset search region according to the first template to determine the matching template (Park Fig. 5 [0048]– calculate each pixel value difference between template regions of the specified blocks and a template region of the current block; Park [0049]– blocks neighboring to the reference block);
and determining the reference block according to the matching template (Park [0054]– candidate reference block minimizing the pixel value difference as a reference block corresponding to the current block).
Regarding Claim 7, Park, in combination, further discloses the method of Claim 6, further comprising wherein performing the search within the preset search region based on the first template to determine the target block vector comprises: performing a first search within the preset search region according to a search step corresponding to the first search, to determine the target block vector (Park Fig. 4 S450; [0024]– obtains a motion vector of a current block using a conventional block matching algorithm).
Regarding Claim 9, Park and Andersson teach the method of Claim 1, as outlined above.
However, Park does not explicitly disclose further comprising: the model parameters comprising coefficients of a target filter; and determining the coefficients of the target filter according to a sample reference value in the first template and a sample reference value in the matching template.
Andersson teaches further comprising: the model parameters comprising coefficients of a target filter (Andersson [0058]– The adjustable filter parameters, such as filter coefficients of at least one of the filter taps);
and determining the coefficients of the target filter according to a sample reference value in the first template and a sample reference value in the matching template (Andersson [0046]– pixels in the template and in the reference template are then employed in step S3 for determining at least one adaptive filter).
Therefore, it 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 to modify Park to incorporate determining coefficients of the target filter according to sample reference values as taught by Andersson.
One would be motivated to combine Andersson’s coefficient determination technique to improve prediction accuracy by generating adaptive filter coefficients for filtering a reference block.
Regarding Claim 10, Park and Andersson teach the method of Claim 9, as outlined above.
However, Park does not explicitly disclose further comprising: that the coefficients of the target filter are coefficients used by the target filter in a case where a first error between an output value of the sample reference value in the matching template after being processed by the target filter and the sample reference value in the first template meets a first condition.
Andersson teaches further comprising: that the coefficients of the target filter are coefficients used by the target filter in a case where a first error between an output value of the sample reference value in the matching template after being processed by the target filter and the sample reference value in the first template meets a first condition (Andersson [0046]– pixels in the template and in the reference template are then employed in step S3 for determining at least one adaptive filter; Andersson [0058]– The adjustable filter parameters, such as filter coefficients ...of the adaptive filter are then determined in step S12 by minimizing an error value).
Therefore, it 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 to modify Park to incorporate the usage of coefficients by a target filter based on an error value of the processed sample reference value in the matching template and the sample reference value in the first template as taught by Andersson.
One would be motivated to combine Andersson’s coefficient determination technique to improve prediction accuracy by adaptively selecting filter coefficients based on prediction error.
Regarding Claim 11, Park and Andersson teach the method of Claim 9, as outlined above.
However, Park does not explicitly disclose wherein determining the coefficients of the target filter according to the sample reference value in the first template and the sample reference value in the matching template comprises: determining an autocorrelation parameter according to the sample reference value in the matching template; determining a cross-correlation parameter according to the sample reference value in the first template and the sample reference value in the matching template; and determining the coefficients of the target filter according to the autocorrelation parameter and the cross-correlation parameter.
Andersson teaches wherein determining the coefficients of the target filter according to the sample reference value in the first template and the sample reference value in the matching template comprises: determining an autocorrelation parameter according to the sample reference value in the matching template (Andersson [0059]– A is the autocorrelation matrix);
determining a cross-correlation parameter according to the sample reference value in the first template and the sample reference value in the matching template (Andersson [0059]– b is the cross correlation vector);
and determining the coefficients of the target filter according to the autocorrelation parameter and the cross-correlation parameter (Andersson [0059]– Ax=b. A is the autocorrelation matrix and b is the cross correlation vector...and x are the filter parameters for the adaptive filter).
Therefore, it 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 to modify Park to incorporate an autocorrelation matrix and cross correlation vector to determine target filter coefficients as taught by Andersson.
One would be motivated to combine Andersson’s filter coefficient determination technique to improve prediction accuracy by determining target filter coefficients from autocorrelation and cross-correlation parameters.
Regarding Claim 12, Park and Andersson teach the method of Claim 9, as outlined above.
However, Park does not explicitly disclose wherein performing filtering on the reference block according to the model parameters to determine the filtered reference block comprises: performing filtering on the reference block according to the model parameters to determine a first output value of the target filter; and determining the filtered reference block based on the first output value of the target filter.
Andersson teaches wherein performing filtering on the reference block according to the model parameters to determine the filtered reference block comprises: performing filtering on the reference block according to the model parameters to determine a first output value of the target filter (Andersson [0050]– the pixels of the reference pixel block are filtered with the adaptive filter to get the filtered property values);
and determining the filtered reference block based on the first output value of the target filter (Andersson [0050]– the pixels of the reference pixel block are filtered with the adaptive filter to get the filtered property values).
Therefore, it 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 to modify Park to incorporate determining the filtered reference block based on the target filter output as taught by Andersson.
One would be motivated to combine Andersson’s reference block filtering technique to improve the accuracy of the filtered reference block used for prediction.
Regarding Claim 15, Park and Andersson teach the method of Claim 12, as outlined above.
However, Park does not explicitly disclose wherein determining the filtered reference block based on the first output value of the target filter comprises: determining a first offset value; and performing an addition operation according to the first output value and the first offset value to determine the filtered reference block.
Andersson teaches wherein determining the filtered reference block based on the first output value of the target filter comprises: determining a first offset value (Andersson [0118]– an offset determiner 190 determines a DC offset);
and performing an addition operation according to the first output value and the first offset value to determine the filtered reference block (Andersson [0103]– P=RV+IF*P R +AF*P R +DC offset).
Therefore, it 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 to modify Park to incorporate utilizing an offset to determine the filtered reference block as taught by Andersson.
One would be motivated to combine Andersson’s offset technique to reduce prediction error by applying an offset to the filter output.
Regarding Claim 17, Park teaches A encoding method, applied to an encoder (Park [0060]– Coding in the present invention should be under stood as the concept for including both encoding and decoding), wherein the method comprises:
determining a first template of a current block, and determining a matching template and a reference block (Park Fig. 5– template and current block; neighboring template and reference block; Park Fig. 4 S410– Perform template matching between reference block corresponding to current block and current block);
determining model parameters according to the first template and the matching template (Park Fig. 1(d); 1(c)– Template region of 16 x 8 block; Template region of 8 x 16 block; Park Fig. 4 S410– Perform template matching between reference block corresponding to current block and current block);
determining a prediction value of the current block according to the filtered reference block (Park [0045]– and to obtain a prediction value of the current block using the intra prediction mode of the template region as the intra prediction mode of the current block);
However, Park does not explicitly disclose performing filtering on the reference block according to the model parameters to determine a filtered reference block; and determining a prediction residual of the current block according to the prediction value of the current block.
Andersson teaches performing filtering on the reference block according to the model parameters to determine a filtered reference block (Andersson [0046]– the pixels of the reference pixel block are filtered with the adaptive filter to get the filtered property values);
and determining a prediction residual of the current block according to the prediction value of the current block (Andersson [0067]– the residual pixel block comprising the respective residual values for the pixels is defined as: RV=P−IF*P R −AF*P R; IF*PR represents the prediction value).
Therefore, it 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 to modify Park to incorporate performing filtering to determine a filtered reference block and determine a prediction residual as taught by Andersson.
One would be motivated to combine Andersson’s adaptive filtering techniques to enhance prediction accuracy by generating a filtered reference block for prediction.
Regarding Claim 18, Park and Andersson teach the method of Claim 17, as outlined above.
However, Park does not explicitly disclose further comprising: the model parameters comprising coefficients of a target filter; and determining the coefficients of the target filter according to a sample reference value in the first template and a sample reference value in the matching template.
Andersson teaches further comprising: the model parameters comprising coefficients of a target filter (Andersson [0058]– The adjustable filter parameters, such as filter coefficients of at least one of the filter taps);
and determining the coefficients of the target filter according to a sample reference value in the first template and a sample reference value in the matching template (Andersson [0046]– pixels in the template and in the reference template are then employed in step S3 for determining at least one adaptive filter).
Therefore, it 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 to modify Park to incorporate determining coefficients of the target filter according to sample reference values as taught by Andersson.
One would be motivated to combine Andersson’s coefficient determination technique to improve prediction accuracy by generating adaptive filter coefficients for filtering a reference block.
Regarding Claim 19, Park and Andersson teach the method of Claim 18, as outlined above. However, Park does not explicitly disclose wherein performing filtering on the reference block according to the model parameters to determine the filtered reference block comprises: performing filtering on the reference block according to the model parameters to determine a first output value of the target filter; and determining the filtered reference block based on the first output value of the target filter.
Andersson teaches wherein performing filtering on the reference block according to the model parameters to determine the filtered reference block comprises: performing filtering on the reference block according to the model parameters to determine a first output value of the target filter (Andersson [0050]– the pixels of the reference pixel block are filtered with the adaptive filter to get the filtered property values);
and determining the filtered reference block based on the first output value of the target filter (Andersson [0050]– the pixels of the reference pixel block are filtered with the adaptive filter to get the filtered property values).
Therefore, it 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 to modify Park to incorporate determining the filtered reference block based on the target filter output as taught by Andersson.
One would be motivated to combine Andersson’s reference block filtering technique to improve the accuracy of the filtered reference block used for prediction.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park, in view of Andersson, and further in view of Jiang et al, US 20220094910 A1 (Jiang).
Regarding Claim 4, Park and Andersson teach the method of Claim 3, as outlined above.
However, Park does not explicitly disclose wherein determining the template type of the current block comprises: if the left neighboring reference samples of the current block, the top neighboring reference samples of the current block, and the top-left neighboring reference samples of the current block are all available, determining the template type of the current block to be a first value; if the left neighboring reference samples of the current block are available, determining the template type of the current block to be a second value; or if the top neighboring reference samples of the current block are available, determining the template type of the current block to be a third value.
Jiang teaches wherein determining the template type of the current block comprises: if the left neighboring reference samples of the current block, the top neighboring reference samples of the current block, and the top-left neighboring reference samples of the current block are all available, determining the template type of the current block to be a first value (Jiang Fig. 10; [0137]– the searching template of the second type that includes a coding block...and reference pixels...within two columns on a left side of the coding block 1010, and 16 reference pixels within two rows on an upper side of the coding block 1010);
if the left neighboring reference samples of the current block are available, determining the template type of the current block to be a second value;
or if the top neighboring reference samples of the current block are available, determining the template type of the current block to be a third value.
Therefore, it 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 to modify Park to incorporate determining a first, second or third value based on template type as taught by Jiang.
One would be motivated to combine Jiang’s incorporation of a specified template type value to improve prediction accuracy by selecting a template type based on the available neighboring reference samples.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park, in view of Andersson, and further in view of Zhang et al, US 20240259588 A1 (Zhang).
Regarding Claim 6, Park and Andersson teach the method of Claim 5, as outlined above.
However, Park does not explicitly disclose wherein performing template matching within the preset search region according to the first template to determine the matching template comprises: performing a search within the preset search region based on the first template to determine a target block vector, and determining the matching template according to the target block vector.
Zhang teaches wherein performing template matching within the preset search region according to the first template to determine the matching template comprises: performing a search within the preset search region based on the first template to determine a target block vector (Zhang [0007]– determining a block vector candidate list based on the respective template matching costs), and determining the matching template according to the target block vector (Zhang [0007]– determining...respective template matching costs of a plurality of block vector candidates).
Therefore, it 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 to modify Park to incorporate determining a target block vector and matching as taught by Jiang.
One would be motivated to combine Zhang’s incorporation of a target block vector and matching template to improve the accuracy of template matching through target block vector candidate evaluation.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park, in view of Andersson, and further in view of Kodama, US 20180144452 A1 (Kodama).
Regarding Claim 13, Park and Andersson teach the method of Claim 12 as outlined above.
However, Park does not explicitly disclose wherein performing filtering on the reference block according to the model parameters to determine the first output value of the target filter comprises: calculating a product of a sample reconstructed value of the reference block and a corresponding coefficient of the target filter; and setting the first output value of the target filter to be equal to a sum of n products, wherein n represents a number of the coefficients of the target filter, and n is a positive integer.
Kodama teaches wherein performing filtering on the reference block according to the model parameters to determine the first output value of the target filter comprises: calculating a product of a sample reconstructed value of the reference block and a corresponding coefficient of the target filter (Kodama Fig. 5; [0061]– the filter operation unit 12 executes the product-sum operation S=Σ(T(z % 5, z÷5)*C(z)); where T() is the tap data (sample reconstructed value) and C(z) is the corresponding filter coefficient);
and setting the first output value of the target filter to be equal to a sum of n products (Kodama [0061]– the filter operation unit 12 executes the product-sum operation S=Σ(T(z % 5, z÷5)*C(z)) to perform the filter processing; S is the result of summing the products), wherein n represents a number of the coefficients of the target filter (Kodama [0061]– In the case of FIG. 5...the number of tap data (M) of the filter tap is equal to the number of filter coefficients), and n is a positive integer (Kodama [0054]– the filter tap supply unit 11 ...generates M (M: a natural number) pieces of the tap data).
Therefore, it 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 to modify Park to incorporate the sum of products calculation as taught by Kodama.
One would be motivated to combine Kodama’s incorporation of a sum of products calculation to improve filtering accuracy by generating a filter output from weighted sample values.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park, in view of Andersson, and further in view of Hu et al, US 20200314423 A1 (Hu).
Regarding Claim 16, Park and Andersson teach the method of Claim 1 as outlined above.
However, Park does not explicitly disclose wherein determining the prediction value of the current block according to the filtered reference block comprises: performing a clipping operation on the filtered reference block to determine the prediction value of the current block.
Hu teaches wherein determining the prediction value of the current block according to the filtered reference block comprises: performing a clipping operation on the filtered reference block to determine the prediction value of the current block (Hu [0020]– Clipping the input values...when the video coder multiplies the input values by corresponding filter coefficients; Hu [0018]– A video decoder may apply an ALF to a CTB after reconstructing the CTB from one or more prediction blocks and residual data).
Therefore, it 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 to modify Park to incorporate a clipping operation as taught by Hu.
One would be motivated to combine Hu’s incorporation of a clipping operation to improve prediction accuracy by preventing filtered values from exceeding valid limits.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 14 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The various claimed limitations mentioned in the claims are not taught or suggested by the prior art taken either singly or in combination, with emphasize that it is each claim, taken as a whole, including the interrelationships and interconnections between various claimed elements make them allowable over the prior art of record. The various claimed limitations mentioned including the interrelationships and all of the limitations of the base claim and the elements with respect to
performing the search within the preset search region based on the first template to determine the target block vector comprises: performing a first search within the preset search region according to a search step corresponding to the first search, to determine a first block vector, and determining an initial matching template according to the first block vector; and determining a first search region according to the initial matching template, to determine the target block vector, wherein a search step corresponding to the first search is greater than a search step corresponding to the second search, and the first search region is smaller than the preset search region.
performing filtering on the reference block according to the model parameters to determine the first output value of the target filter comprises: determining a first value of a sample reconstructed value of the reference block under a first mapping relationship; calculating a product of the first value and a corresponding coefficient of the target filter; and setting the first output value of the target filter to be equal to a sum of n products, wherein n represents a number of the coefficients of the target filter, and n is a positive integer.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTIAN P MCFALL whose telephone number is (571)270-0773. The examiner can normally be reached Monday Friday, 8 a.m. 5 p.m. ET..
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, Joseph G. Ustaris can be reached at (571) 272-7383. 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.
/C.P.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2483
/AMIR SHAHNAMI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2483
Prosecution Insights