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 .
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 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.
Claims status
Claims 1-21 are pending as the applicant filed on 09/17/2025.
Citation of Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. See MPEP 707.05. Although the prior art discloses several unclaimed, some claimed limitation. The closest Prior Art of record are considered to be defined by:
Knoblach et al. (US 8644789 B2) described a system to control a power source of a lighter-than-air platform, the system comprising: a power source including a battery configured to provide power to the lighter-than-air platform; a processor configured to control flight, radio transmission, or both, of the lighter-than-air platform; and a discharge circuit configured to discharge the battery to prevent radio transmission from the lighter-than-air platform, wherein the processor is configured to intermittently send a signal to the discharge circuit to prevent the battery from discharging, and wherein, responsive to the processor ceasing to send said signal, the discharge circuit discharges the battery, wherein the processor is confi ()gured to cease sending said signal to the discharge circuit in response to one or more conditions associated with the lighter-than-air platform being satisfied, said one or more conditions being selected from the group consisting of a geographic position, an altitude range, a platform velocity, a descent rate, an ascent rate, and a loss of command and control communications.
Ambs (US 6161495 A) described a marine vessel having backup power storage in the event of primary power source failure. The invention applies to different marine vessels and is particularly suited to vessels used in marine seismic operations. A rotating mass energy storage provides stored energy which can be distributed to the vessel following primary power source failure. A pulsed generator charges the energy storage means, and the pulsed generator can comprise a homopolar generator or a compensated pulsed alternator. The primary power source can recharge the energy storage means, and a sensor and controller can control different functions related to the control and operation of the primary power source and the energy storage means
Betzner (US 9465078 B2) described a method of controlling a seismic data acquisition unit based on battery performance information, comprising: receiving, by one or more processors of the seismic data acquisition unit, environmental condition information indicative of environmental conditions of the seismic data acquisition unit during a usage period; receiving, by the one or more processors, operating parameter information indicative of one or more operating parameters of a battery powering the seismic data acquisition unit during the usage period, the operating parameter information determined based on the battery performance information that corresponds to a battery performance model developed for the battery powering the seismic data acquisition unit; comparing, by the one or more processors, the environmental condition information to the operating parameter information to determine to disable acquisition of seismic data; and controlling, by the one or more processors, based on the comparing the environmental condition information to the operating parameter information, a component of the seismic data acquisition unit to disable acquisition of seismic data.
Rigsby (US 2015/0323693 A1) described a method for marine seismic data collection, comprising: operating an array of sensor nodes in an idle mode, wherein the idle mode is configured to conserve power consumption by the sensor nodes; determining whether seismic data is expected at one or more of the sensor nodes in the array based on proximity to a vessel configured to generate a signal for communication with the sensor nodes, wherein the proximity is determined within a predefined distance of the vessel based on the signal received from the vessel; in response to determining that seismic data is expected, selectively operating the one or more sensor nodes in an active mode; and collecting the seismic data with the one or more sensor nodes while selectively operating in the active mode, wherein sensor nodes within the predefined distance of the vessel are operating in the active mode and other sensor nodes in the array are operating in the idle mode.
Isfeldt (US 2016/0028238 A1) described a seismic sensor node, comprising: on-board electronics for seismic sensing; and an on-board inductive element for generating an electrical current through inductance with an inductive battery device; and a detachable inductive battery device coupled to the seismic sensor node, the detachable inductive battery device comprising: a battery cell configured to store charge for use by the seismic sensor node; a first inductive element coupled to the battery cell, the first inductive element configured to receive current from the battery cell and emit a responsive magnetic field for powering the seismic sensor node through inductance.
Rigsby (US 9121969 B2) described a method for conducting seismic surveys, comprising: deploying a plurality of autonomous sensor nodes on a seabed, wherein the sensor nodes are initiated to operate in an idle mode; initiating operation of a seismic source boat, wherein the seismic source boat is configured to generate a signal to the sensor nodes; and selectively adjusting a mode of operation of one or more of the sensor nodes from the idle mode to an active mode based on a proximity of the one or more sensor nodes to the seismic source boat, wherein the proximity of the one or more sensor nodes is determined within a predefined distance of the seismic source boat based on the signal received from the seismic source boat and sensor nodes within the predefined distance of the seismic source boat are in the active mode; and adjusting other sensor nodes no longer within the predefined distance from the seismic source boat to operate in the idle mode.
Moldoveanu (US 2019/0107639 A1) described a marine seismic acquisition system comprising: a frame that comprises a central longitudinal axis and members that define orthogonal planes that intersect along the central longitudinal axis; a data interface operatively coupled to the frame; hydrophones operatively coupled to the frame; a buoyancy engine operatively coupled to the frame wherein the buoyancy engine comprises at least one mechanism that controls buoyancy of at least the frame, the hydrophones and the buoyancy engine; and at least one inertial motion sensor operatively coupled to the frame that generates frame orientation data, wherein the hydrophones, the buoyancy engine and the at least one inertial motion sensor are operatively coupled to the data interface.
Brizard (US 2015/0336645 A1 ) described an autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV) for recording seismic signals during a marine seismic survey, the AUV comprising: a body having a flush shape; a buoyancy system located inside the body and configured to control a buoyancy of the AUV while underwater; a processor connected to the buoyancy system and configured to select one of plural phases for the buoyancy system at different times of the seismic survey, wherein the plural phases include a neutral buoyancy, a positive buoyancy and a negative buoyancy; a propulsion system configured to guide the AUV to a target position on the sea bottom; and a seismic sensor for recording seismic signals.
Marc (US 2017/0315248 A1) described a system to acquire blended seismic signals, comprising: a plurality of seismic sources of a survey region that activate based on a ratio of a dither time to a shot interval that is less than or equal to ½, wherein the dither time indicates a delay between two shots from two different seismic sources of the plurality of seismic sources and the shot interval indicates a delay between two shots from an individual seismic source of the plurality of seismic sources; a plurality of seismic sensor units deployed at a plurality of positions in the survey region to record seismic signals generated in response to activation of the plurality of seismic sources, wherein at least one of the plurality of seismic sensor units includes: at least one geophone disposed within the at least one of the plurality of seismic sensor units to continuously operate while on the ocean bottom to record seismic signals; at least one clock disposed within the at least one of the plurality of seismic sensor units; at least one power source disposed within the at least one of the plurality of seismic sensor units; at least one memory disposed within the at least one of the plurality of seismic sensor units to store seismic data while on the ocean bottom; at least one accelerometer disposed within the at least one of the plurality of seismic sensor units; one or more processors to deblend, based on the timing function that includes the ratio of the dither time to the shot interval that is less than or equal to ½, the seismic signals recorded by the plurality of seismic sensors to generate data representing subsurface structures indicative of oil or gas.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Claim 1, Step 1 the claim is a process (or machine) (Yes),
Step 2A Prong One, does the claim recite an abstract idea? current claim related to a method for marine seismic data collection, comprising:
deploying a first multiplicity of marine seismic devices in a first array, each marine seismic device having positioned onboard a respective battery system and a respective battery monitoring device; operating the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices in the first array in accordance with a first marine seismic survey plan so as to place a first load on each respective battery system;
monitoring, using each respective battery monitoring device while operating the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices, a battery discharge rate of each respective battery system determining, using the monitored battery discharge rate of each respective marine seismic device, a discharge rate range associated with the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices, retrieving the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices which is an abstract idea of mental process (MPEP 2106.04(a)) or data gathering equivalent to mathematical concept or mathematical manipulation function (MPEP 2106.04 (a) (2) (concept need not be expressed in mathematical symbols, because "[w]ords used in a claim operating on data to solve a problem can serve the same purpose as a formula), (OR Mathematical Concepts and Mental Processes)
Step 2A Prong One: Yes.
Step 2A Prong Two, is the claim directed to an abstract idea? In other words, does claim recite additional elements that integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application? the additional elements of assembling, using at least a portion of the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices based on the determined discharge rate range, a second multiplicity of marine seismic devices for a second array; deploying the second multiplicity of marine seismic devices in the second array in accordance with a second marine seismic survey plan are recited at a high level of generality and merely amount to a particular field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)) and/or insignificant post-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)), this does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application,
Step 2A Prong Two: NO.
Step 2B, Does the claim recite additional element that amount to significantly more than the Judicial exception? the additional element of operating the second multiplicity of marine seismic devices in the second array in accordance with the second marine seismic survey plan so as to place a second load on each respective battery system appears to be field of use (See MPEP 2106.05(h) and MPEP 2106.05(f)) and/or merely amounts to insignificant extra-solution output of the results (see MPEP 2106.05(g)) and therefore fails to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more. Step 2B: No. claim 1 not eligible.
Claim 7, Step 1 the claim is a process (or machine) (Yes),
Step 2A Prong One, does the claim recite an abstract idea? current claim related to a method for marine seismic data collection, comprising:
deploying a first multiplicity of marine seismic devices in a first array, each marine seismic device having positioned onboard a respective battery system and a respective battery monitoring device; operating the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices in the first array in accordance with a first marine seismic survey plan so as to place a first load on each respective battery system;
monitoring, using each respective battery monitoring device while operating the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices, a battery discharge rate of each respective battery system; retrieving the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices; determining, using the monitored discharge rate of each respective battery system of the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices, an estimated remaining battery life of each respective battery system of the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices which is an abstract idea of mental process (MPEP 2106.04(a)) or data gathering equivalent to mathematical concept or mathematical manipulation function (MPEP 2106.04 (a) (2) (concept need not be expressed in mathematical symbols, because "[w]ords used in a claim operating on data to solve a problem can serve the same purpose as a formula), (OR Mathematical Concepts and Mental Processes)
Step 2A Prong One: Yes.
Step 2A Prong Two, is the claim directed to an abstract idea? In other words, does claim recite additional elements that integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application? the additional elements of assembling, from the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices based on the estimated remaining battery life of each respective battery system of the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices, a second multiplicity of marine seismic devices for a second array;
deploying the second multiplicity of marine seismic devices in the second array in accordance with a second marine seismic survey plan are recited at a high level of generality and merely amount to a particular field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)) and/or insignificant post-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)), this does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application,
Step 2A Prong Two: NO.
Step 2B, Does the claim recite additional element that amount to significantly more than the Judicial exception? the additional element of operating the second multiplicity of marine seismic devices in the second array in accordance with the second marine seismic survey plan so as to place a second load on each respective battery system appears to be field of use (See MPEP 2106.05(h) and MPEP 2106.05(f)) and/or merely amounts to insignificant extra-solution output of the results (see MPEP 2106.05(g)) and therefore fails to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more. Step 2B: No. claim 7 not eligible.
Claim 14, Step 1 the claim is a process (or machine) (Yes),
Step 2A Prong One, does the claim recite an abstract idea? current claim related to a method for marine seismic data collection, comprising:
operating a plurality of marine seismic devices, each powered by a battery system positioned onboard each respective marine seismic device, in a first seismic survey operation; monitoring, during the first seismic survey operation and using a battery monitoring device positioned onboard each respective marine seismic device, a battery discharge value associated with each respective battery system; determining, using a central processor remote from the plurality of marine seismic devices and first battery data associated with the monitored battery discharge values, an estimated remaining battery life of each respective battery system after completion of the first seismic survey operation;
identifying, using the central processor, an operation parameter associated with a second seismic survey operation, the operation parameter defining an expected deployment duration and an expected battery depletion rate; determining, using the central processor and based on a comparison of the estimated remaining battery lives and the expected battery depletion rate, an expected battery life utilization of each respective battery system during the second seismic survey operation which is an abstract idea of mental process (MPEP 2106.04(a)) or data gathering equivalent to mathematical concept or mathematical manipulation function (MPEP 2106.04 (a) (2) (concept need not be expressed in mathematical symbols, because "[w]ords used in a claim operating on data to solve a problem can serve the same purpose as a formula), (OR Mathematical Concepts and Mental Processes)
Step 2A Prong One: Yes.
Step 2A Prong Two, is the claim directed to an abstract idea? In other words, does claim recite additional elements that integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application? the additional elements of determining, using the central processor and based on a comparison of the expected battery life utilization of each respective battery system during the second seismic survey operation and the expected deployment duration associated with the second seismic survey operation, whether each respective battery system should be are recited at a high level of generality and merely amount to a particular field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)) and/or insignificant post-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)), this does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application,
Step 2A Prong Two: NO.
Step 2B, Does the claim recite additional element that amount to significantly more than the Judicial exception? the additional element of redeployed in the respective marine seismic device in the second seismic survey operation; or replaced prior to operation of the plurality of marine seismic devices in the second seismic survey operation; and operating the plurality of marine seismic devices in the second seismic survey operation appears to be field of use (See MPEP 2106.05(h) and MPEP 2106.05(f)) and/or merely amounts to insignificant extra-solution output of the results (see MPEP 2106.05(g)) and therefore fails to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more. Step 2B: No. claim 14 not eligible.
Claim 21, Step 1 the claim is a process (or machine) (Yes),
Step 2A Prong One, does the claim recite an abstract idea? current claim related to a method for marine seismic data collection, comprising:
deploying a first multiplicity of marine seismic devices in a first array, each marine seismic device having positioned onboard a respective battery system;
operating the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices in the first array in accordance with a first marine seismic survey plan so as to place a first load on each respective battery system; monitoring a battery discharge rate of each respective battery system; determining, using the monitored battery discharge rate of each respective marine seismic device, a discharge rate range associated with the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices; retrieving the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices; assembling, using at least a portion of the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices based on the determined discharge rate range, a second multiplicity of marine seismic devices for a second array; which is an abstract idea of mental process (MPEP 2106.04(a)) or data gathering equivalent to mathematical concept or mathematical manipulation function (MPEP 2106.04 (a) (2) (concept need not be expressed in mathematical symbols, because "[w]ords used in a claim operating on data to solve a problem can serve the same purpose as a formula), (OR Mathematical Concepts and Mental Processes)
Step 2A Prong One: Yes.
Step 2A Prong Two, is the claim directed to an abstract idea? In other words, does claim recite additional elements that integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application? the additional elements of deploying the second multiplicity of marine seismic devices in the second array in accordance with a second marine seismic survey plan are recited at a high level of generality and merely amount to a particular field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)) and/or insignificant post-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)), this does not integrate the Judicial Exception into a practical application,
Step 2A Prong Two: NO.
Step 2B, Does the claim recite additional element that amount to significantly more than the Judicial exception? the additional element of operating the second multiplicity of marine seismic devices in the second array in accordance with the second marine seismic survey plan so as to place a second load on each respective battery system appears to be field of use (See MPEP 2106.05(h) and MPEP 2106.05(f)) and/or merely amounts to insignificant extra-solution output of the results (see MPEP 2106.05(g)) and therefore fails to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or amount to significantly more. Step 2B: No. claim 21 not eligible.
As to the depends claims:
Claim 2, removing one or more marine seismic devices of the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices having monitored battery discharge rates that fall outside the determined discharge rate range associated with the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices.
Claim 3, wherein the remaining marine seismic devices of the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices, having monitored battery discharge rates that fall within the determined discharge rate range, are used to assemble the second multiplicity of marine seismic devices for the second array.
Claim 4. identifying one or more marine seismic devices from the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices having monitored battery discharge rates that fall outside the determined discharge rate range; and
replacing the respective batteries of each of the one or more marine seismic devices identified as having monitored battery discharge rates that fall outside the determined discharge rate range;
wherein the one or more marine seismic devices, the respective batteries of which have been replaced, are used to assemble the second multiplicity of marine seismic devices for the second array.
Claim 5, determining, using the monitored battery discharge rate of each respective battery system, an estimated remaining battery life of each respective marine seismic device of the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices; wherein assembling the second multiplicity of marine seismic devices comprises removing one or more marine seismic devices of the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices having estimated remaining battery lives less than a maximum operation duration associated with the second marine seismic survey plan.
Claim 6, determining, using the monitored battery discharge rate of each respective battery system of each respective marine seismic device of the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices, an estimated remaining battery capacity of each respective marine seismic device of the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices; wherein assembling the second multiplicity of marine seismic devices comprises removing one or more marine seismic devices of the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices having estimated remaining battery capacities less than an expected battery capacity depletion associated with the second marine seismic survey plan.
Claim 8, identifying a maximum duration associated with the operation of the second multiplicity of marine seismic devices in accordance with the second marine seismic survey plan; wherein assembling the second multiplicity of marine seismic devices comprises removing one or more marine seismic devices of the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices having estimated remaining battery lives less than the identified maximum duration associated with the operation of the second multiplicity of marine seismic devices in accordance with the second marine seismic survey plan.
Claim 9, a first portion of marine seismic devices of a first type and a second portion of marine seismic devices of a second type that is different from the first type.
Claim 10, determining, using the monitored discharge rate of each respective battery system of the first portion of the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices, an average battery discharge rate associated with the first type of marine seismic device; and determining, using the monitored discharge rate of each respective battery system of the second portion of the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices, an average battery discharge rate associated with the second type of marine seismic device; wherein the average battery discharge rate associated with the first type of marine seismic device is greater than the average battery discharge rate associated with the second type of marine seismic device.
Claim 11 identifying a maximum duration associated with the operation of the second multiplicity of marine seismic devices in accordance with the second marine seismic survey plan; an identifying one or more marine seismic devices of the first portion of the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices having estimated remaining battery lives less than the identified maximum duration associated with the second marine seismic survey plan.
Claim 12determining, using the monitored discharge rate of each respective battery system of the second portion of the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices, that an estimated remaining battery life of each battery system of the identified one or more marine seismic devices would be greater than the identified maximum duration associated with the second marine seismic survey plan if each battery system of the identified one or more marine seismic devices were redeployed in the second type of marine seismic device in the second array; wherein assembling the second multiplicity of marine seismic devices for the second array comprises redeploying each battery system of the identified one or more marine seismic devices in the second type of marine seismic device for the second array.
Claim 13 determining, using the monitored discharge rate of each respective battery system of the second portion of the first multiplicity of marine seismic devices, that an estimated remaining battery life of each battery system of the identified one or more marine seismic devices would be less than the identified maximum duration associated with the second marine seismic survey plan if each battery system of the identified one or more marine seismic devices were deployed in the second type of marine seismic device in the second array; wherein assembling the second multiplicity of marine seismic devices for the second array comprises removing each battery system of the identified one or more marine seismic devices having estimated remaining battery lives less than the identified maximum duration associated with the second marine seismic survey plan.
Claim 15, aggregating the first battery data associated with the respective battery discharge values; determining an average battery discharge value associated with the plurality of marine seismic devices; and identifying one or more battery systems having battery discharge values that deviate from the average battery discharge value by more than a predefined threshold, wherein the estimated remaining battery life of each of the identified one or more battery systems is adjusted based on the respective deviation of the respective battery discharge value from the average battery discharge value.
Claim 16, wherein the central processor executes a machine learning model trained on historical battery data and historical operation parameters to improve the accuracy of the expected battery depletion rate.
Claim 17, replacing one or more battery systems in response to one or more redeployment decisions comprising determinations that the one or more respective battery systems should be replaced prior to operation of the plurality of marine seismic devices in the second seismic survey operation.
Claim 18, determining, in response to one or more redeployment decisions comprising determinations that one or more respective battery systems should be replaced prior to operation of the plurality of marine seismic devices in the second seismic survey operation, whether each of the one or more respective battery systems would be suitable for redeployment for the second seismic survey operation in one or more marine seismic devices of the plurality of marine seismic devices that is a different type of device from the respective marine seismic device in which each of the one or more respective battery systems was deployed for the first seismic survey operation.
Claim 19, redeploying for the second seismic survey operation the one or more respective battery systems in the one or more marine seismic devices of the plurality of marine seismic devices that is a different type of device from the respective marine seismic device in which each of the one or more respective battery systems was deployed for the first seismic survey operation.
Claim 20, displaying, via a graphical user interface associated with the central processor, the redeployment decisions for each respective battery system.
The above depend claims recite further data characterization and mathematical concepts that are part of the abstract idea, above dependent claims not eligible as well.
Double Patenting
4. 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. See 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) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent is shown to be commonly owned with this application. See 37 CFR 1.130(b).
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).
Claims 1-21 are provisionally rejected under the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-21 of an related Application No. 19/048,270now US patent 12,422,492. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the limitations of the claims in the current application are encompassed in the previous application. The latter pending application encompasses the same process as the pending application and is a slightly different version of the previous application because of rearrangement of the claims language.
Note: There were a restriction on 19/048,270 but the restricted claims not related to present claims.
Contact information
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tung Lau whose telephone number is (571)272-2274, email is Tungs.lau@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Tuesday-Friday 7:00 AM-5:00 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, TURNER SHELBY, can be reached on 571-272-6334. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll- free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272- 1000.
Contact information
4. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tung Lau whose telephone number is (571)272-2274, email is Tungs.lau@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Tuesday-Friday 7:00 AM-5:00 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, TURNER SHELBY, can be reached on 571-272-6334. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll- free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272- 1000.
/TUNG S LAU/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
Technology Center 2800
November 17, 2025