`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`13/792,704
`
`03/11/2013
`
`TOI'u MATSUNOBU
`
`201370386151
`
`1871
`
`52349
`
`759°
`
`07’10’2018
`
`WENDEROTH, LIND & PONACK L.L.P.
`1030 15th Street, NW.
`Suite 400 East
`
`Washington, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 20005-1503
`UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
`
`LOTFL KYLE M
`
`2489
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`07/10/2018
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`
`following e—mail address(es):
`eoa @ wenderoth. com
`kmiller @ wenderoth.eom
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`
`
`Off/09 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`13/792,704
`Examiner
`KYLE M LOTFI
`
`Applicant(s)
`MATSUNOBU et al.
`Art Unit
`AIA Status
`2489
`No
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 the correspondence address -
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`|f NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on 3/26/2018.
`[:1 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a). This action is FINAL.
`
`2b) C] This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)[:] Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Expat/7e Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`5)
`Claim(s)
`
`1—2,4,6—10,12 and 14—16 is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`E] Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(s) 1—2,4,6—10,12 and 14—16 is/are rejected.
`
`[:1 Claim(s)
`
`is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[j Claim(s)
`9
`* If any claims have been determined aflowabte. you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`10)[:] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11)[:] The drawing(s) filed on
`
`is/are: a)D accepted or b)l:] objected to by the Examiner.
`
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12):] Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)D All
`
`b)I:J Some”
`
`c)C] None of the:
`
`1.[:]
`
`Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.[:]
`
`Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3.[:] Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1) C] Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`2) E] Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date_
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) C] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) CI Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20180702
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
`
`The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`In view of the claim amendments, which now recite ”determining first offset information for a
`
`sample adaptive offset lSAOl for a current region;”, the rejection under 35 USC 101 is withdrawn,
`
`because the claim language is tied to a specific technology of sample adaptive offset in video coding.
`
`Applicant's arguments filed 8/24/2017 with respect to the rejection of claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 14,
`
`and 15 under 35 USC 103(a) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. As the applicant
`
`states on page 7:
`
`”In McRo, the Court stated that the appropriate inquiry should be whether the claim focuses on
`
`"a specific means or method that improves the relevant technology or are instead directed to a result or
`
`effect that itself is the abstract idea and merely invoke generic processes and machinery." In this
`
`instance, the examiner finds that the claim language does not merely invoke generic processes and
`
`machinery, but instead recites features that are directed to an improvement in video coding technology,
`
`and specifically to improving the accuracy of sample adaptive offset application.
`
`The applicant argues with respect to claim 1:
`
`Based on a review of Chong, the reference at best discloses or suggests coding a merge
`
`instruction in the case that offset information of neighbor partitions is the same as the
`
`offset information of the current partition; and coding one of the prediction instructions
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 3
`
`in the case that the offset information of the neighbor partitions is not the same as the
`
`offset information of the current partition.
`
`The examiner agrees with this assessment. Chong discloses checking the offset information, i.e.
`
`”determining whether or not the first offset information is the same as second offset information for the
`
`SAC for a neighboring region of the current region;”, but takes different steps from those claimed in
`
`response to this check, for which the examiner has cited Minoo. The applicant further argues with
`
`respect to claim 1:
`
`Based on a review of Minoo, the reference only discloses interpolation of a pixel rather
`
`than interpolation of an offset value, as recited in independent claims 1 and 9. In other
`
`words, Minoo fails to disclose interpolation of an offset value for the sample adaptive
`
`offset (SAO).
`
`The examiner disagrees, however, that Minoo fails to disclose interpolation of an offset value
`
`for the SAC. Minoo discloses in [0130] using multipass SAO filtering in which SAO fpixel values are in
`
`turn used to interpolate a neighbor pixel value. Minoo discloses in [0073] that the interpolated pixel
`
`value operates as a limit defined by a function (e.g. average) of its neighbors.
`
`In the instance where
`
`multipass SAO is used, these neighbors contain SAO values themselves, from a previous pass or passes.
`
`Thereby the third offset value is interpolated from neighboring offset values in the case of multipass
`
`SAO.
`
`In this context, it is important to note that Minoo discloses in [0134]: ”Additionally, it should be
`
`appreciated that any of the E0 and BO modifications may be applied as part of the multipass process.”
`
`These aspects of Minoo taken together disclose performing SAO interpolation between pixel locations
`
`adjacent to a current region, in order to obtain an offset value for the current region.
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 4
`
`Additionally, the claims recite: ”a pixel included in a region which is included in the current
`
`region and which is in a neighborhood of the neighboring region”, however the claims do not provide
`
`any further limitations on the location and size of a "neighborhood of the neighboring region”, beyond
`
`that it ”includes a plurality of lines.” However, ”a neighborhood of a neighboring region” might
`
`reasonably be construed to encompass the entirety of the claimed current region, since the current
`
`region is defined as being a neighbor of the neighboring region.
`
`Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness
`
`rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set
`forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented
`and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the
`invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains.
`Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
`
`Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 14, and 15 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(3) as being
`
`unpatentable over Chang et al., U.S. Publication 2012/0287988 A1, "Chong", in view of Minoo et al.,
`
`US 2013/0177068 A1.
`
`Regarding claim 1, Chong teaches an image coding method of coding an image on a per-region
`
`basis, the image coding method comprising (See [0033], lines 11-17, ”Previous coding standards...”.
`
`Chong describes that HEVC, unlike H.264, permits different offset values, i.e. sample adaptive offsets to
`
`be applied to different pixels or blocks.):
`
`determining first offset information for a sample adaptive offset (SAO) to be used for applying
`
`offset to a current region (See figure 9, step 120, as described in lines 7-10 of [0103].);
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 5
`
`determining whether or not the first offset information is the same as second offset
`
`information for the SAO for a neighboring region of the current region (See [0038], lines 3-7, where
`
`Chong discloses comparing the offset information of the current partition with offset information of one
`
`or more neighbor partitions.);
`
`Chong does not disclose:
`
`
`when the first offset information is different from the second offset information,
`
`(i) determining a third offset value for the SAO for a pixel included in a region which is part of
`
`the current region and which is in a neighborhood of the neighboring region by interpolating a first
`
`offset value for the SAO included in the first offset information and a second offset value for the SAO
`
`included in the second offset information, the region including a plurality of lines ([0069] discloses that
`
`interpolation of a current offset | is performed using a weighted combination of its two neighbors. The
`
`region in which the third offset value is included includes a plurality of lines, including two neighboring
`
`lines from which the interpolation is performed.)
`
`(ii) adding the third offset value to a reconstructed signal of the pixel included in the region in
`
`the neighborhood of the neighboring region, among reconstructed signals obtained by coding pixel
`
`signals of the current region and decoding the coded pixel signals ([0130] discloses that after a first
`
`SAO process, a second SAO pass may be performed in which decoded+deblocked+SAO values from the
`
`first pass are used for classification in the second pass; pixel+offset values of a pixel are used to
`
`interpolate the current pixel offset value, 3*O, in the manner of fig. 7 for edge offset.), and
`
`(iii) adding the first offset value to a reconstructed signal of a pixel included in a region which
`
`is included in the current region and which is other than the region in the neighborhood of the
`
`neighboring region (As disclosed in [0072], the interpolated, third offset value" serves to limit a first
`
`offset "0", insofar as the offset applied is C, if C does not pass 0, and 0 if C passes 0. Thus certain of the
`
`pixels within a block will be offset by first value 0, and others by C, which is a third depending on the
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 6
`
`values of L and R relative to C. Note as disclosed in [0134]; ”Additionally, it should be appreciated that
`
`any of the E0 and BO modifications may be applied as part of the multipass process.” Thus the
`
`interpolation in [0072] is compatible with a multipass SAO filter.); and
`
`coding the first offset information (See [0079]).
`
`It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was
`
`made to perform interpolation of an offset value from neighboring offset values, as disclosed in Minoo
`
`in the context of multipass SAO filtering, and to perform said filtering in response to the determination
`
`steps, disclosed in Chong, of comparing a current offset information with neighboring offset
`
`information, because doing so has the potential to decrease distortion in the decoded image (Minoo
`
`[0130]), and in general offers the potential to improve visual quality and coding efficiency (Minoo
`
`[0132]).
`
`Regarding claim 2, the combination of Chong, in view of Minoo discloses all of the limitations of
`
`claim 1, upon which depends claim 2. This combination, specifically Chong, further discloses: the image
`
`coding method according to Claim 1, wherein the first offset information includes a total number of
`
`blocks in the current region, the blocks sharing the first offset information (See [0079]. Chong
`
`describes three different scenarios with respect to figure 6 of neighbor partitions sharing the same
`
`offset as a current partition.),
`
`and the total number of blocks which share the first offset information includes at least one of
`
`(i) a total number of horizontally successive blocks which share the first offset information and (ii) a
`
`total number of vertically successive blocks which share the first offset information (See [0082], where
`
`Chong describes that SAO unit 43 signals a neighbor partition index whose offset value is to be used is
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 7
`
`signaled in coding the video data, and that this signaling depends on the number of available merge
`
`candidates).
`
`Regarding claim 4, the combination of Chong in view of Minoo discloses the limitations of claim
`
`1, upon which depends claim 4. This combination, specifically Chong, further discloses: the image
`
`coding method according to Claim 1, wherein, in the determining, (i) in the case where a difference
`
`between the first offset information between the current block and the neighboring block is smaller
`
`than a threshold, it is determined that the offset information is the same between the current block
`
`and the neighboring block (As disclosed in [0084], pred_type 0 uses a threshold level of difference when
`
`comparing neighbor and current offset values to determine whether the two are close enough-
`
`threshold level of difference- to make it worth sending a residual), and (ii) in the case where the
`
`difference is larger than the threshold, it is determined that the offset information is different
`
`between the current block and the neighboring block, and the image coding method further comprises
`
`inserting the threshold into a coded stream (If the difference between offsets exceeds this threshold,
`
`the current offset may be sent without residual prediction.).
`
`Regarding claim 6, the combination of Chong, in view of Minoo discloses all of the limitations of
`
`claim 1, upon which depends claim 6. This combination, specifically Chong, further discloses: the image
`
`coding method according to Claim 1, wherein the offset information includes a total number of lines
`
`for specifying a pixel for which an offset value is to be adjusted (See [0085], lines where Chong
`
`describes that in pred_type 0, neighbor partition index values are signaled in the bitstream so that
`
`neighbor partition values may be used).
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 8
`
`Regarding claim 7, the combination of Chong, in view of Minoo discloses all of the limitations of
`
`claim 1, upon which depends claim 7. This combination, specifically Chong, further discloses: the image
`
`coding method according to Claim 1, wherein the first offset information includes weighting factors
`
`(Chong discloses using different offset groups which are grouped according to offset bands, which are
`
`based on intensity value. See [0036]), and
`
`the weighting factors are such that an offset value is further decreased for a pixel at a shorter
`
`distance from the boundary with the neighboring region (See [0034]).
`
`Regarding claim 9, Chong teaches an image decoding method ofcoding an image on a per-
`
`region basis, the image coding method comprising (See [0033], lines 11-17, ”Previous coding
`
`standards...”. Chong describes that HEVC, unlike H.264, permits different offset values, i.e. sample
`
`adaptive offsets to be applied to different pixels or blocks.):
`
`obtaining offset information for a sample adaptive offset (5A0) of a current region (See figure
`
`9, step 120, as described in lines 7-10 of [0103].);
`
`determining whether or not the first offset information is the same as second information for
`
`the SAO between for a neighboring region of the current region (See [0038], lines 3-7, where Chong
`
`discloses comparing the offset information of the current partition with offset information of one or
`
`more neighbor partitions.);
`
`Chong does not disclose:
`
`
`when the first offset information is different from the second offset information,
`
`(i) determining a third offset value for the SAO for a pixel included in a region which is part of
`
`the current region and which is in a neighborhood of the neighboring region by interpolating a first
`
`offset value for the SAO included in the first offset information and a second offset value for the SAO
`
`included in the second offset information, the region including a plurality of lines ([0069 discloses that
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 9
`
`interpolation of a current offset | is performed using a weighted combination of its two neighbors. The
`
`region in which the third offset value is included includes a plurality of lines, including two neighboring
`
`lines from which the interpolation is performed.)
`
`(ii) adding the third offset value to a reconstructed signal of the pixel included in the region in
`
`the neighborhood of the neighboring region, among reconstructed signals obtained by coding pixel
`
`signals of the current region and decoding the coded pixel signals ([0130] discloses that after a first
`
`SAO process, a second SAO pass may be performed in which decoded+deblocked+SAO values from the
`
`first pass are used for classification in the second pass; pixel+offset values of a pixel are used to
`
`interpolate the current pixel offset value, I, in the manner of fig. 7 for edge offset.), and
`
`(iii) adding the first offset value to a reconstructed signal of a pixel included in a region which
`
`is included in the current region and which is other than the region in the neighborhood of the
`
`neighboring region (As disclosed in [0072], the interpolated, third offset value" serves to limit a first
`
`offset "0", insofar as the offset applied is C is C does not pass 0, and 0 if C passes 0. Thus certain of the
`
`pixels within a block will be offset by first value 0, and others by C, depending on the values of L and R
`
`relative to C. Note as disclosed in [0134]; ”Additionally, it should be appreciated that any of the E0 and
`
`BO modifications may be applied as part of the multipass process.” Thus the interpolation in [0072] is
`
`compatible with a multipass SAO filter.); and
`
`It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was
`
`made to perform interpolation of an offset value from neighboring offset values, as disclosed in Minoo
`
`in the context of multipass SAO filtering, and to perform said filtering in response to the determination
`
`steps, disclosed in Chong, of comparing a current offset information with neighboring offset
`
`information, because doing so has the potential to decrease distortion in the decoded image (Minoo
`
`[0130]), and in general offers the potential to improve visual quality and coding efficiency (Minoo
`
`[0132]).
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 10
`
`Regarding claim 10, the combination of Chong, in view of Minoo discloses all of the limitations
`
`of claim 9, upon which depends claim 10. This combination, specifically Chong, further discloses: the
`
`image decoding method according to Claim 9, wherein the offset information includes a total number
`
`of blocks in the current region, the blocks sharing the offset information (See [0079]. Chong describes
`
`three different scenarios with respect to figure 6 of neighbor partitions sharing the same offset as a
`
`current partition.),
`
`and the total number of blocks which share the offset information includes at least one of (i) a
`
`total number of horizontally successive blocks which share the offset information and (ii) a total
`
`number of vertically successive blocks which share the offset information (See [0082], where Chong
`
`describes that SAO unit 43 signals a neighbor partition index whose offset value is to be used is signaled
`
`in coding the video data, and that this signaling depends on the number of available merge candidates).
`
`Regarding claim 12, the combination of Chong in view of Minoo discloses the limitations of claim
`
`9, upon which depends claim 12. This combination, specifically Chong, further discloses: the image
`
`coding method according to Claim 9, wherein, in the determining, (i) in the case where a difference in
`
`the offset information between the current block and the neighboring block is smaller than a
`
`threshold, it is determined that the offset information is the same between the current block and the
`
`neighboring block (As disclosed in [0084], pred_type 0 uses a threshold level of difference when
`
`comparing neighbor and current offset values to determine whether the two are close enough-
`
`threshold level of difference- to make it worth sending a residual), and (ii) in the case where the
`
`difference is larger than the threshold, it is determined that the offset information is different
`
`between the current block and the neighboring block (If the difference between offsets exceeds this
`
`threshold, the current offset may be sent without residual prediction.) and, the image decoding method
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 11
`
`further comprises obtaining the threshold from a coded stream ([0086] ”offset type and offset values
`
`are signaled in the bitstream.”).
`
`Regarding claim 14, the combination of Chong, in view of Minoo discloses all of the limitations
`
`of claim 14, upon which depends claim 11. This combination, specifically Chong, further discloses: the
`
`image decoding method according to Claim 11, wherein the offset information includes a total number
`
`of lines for specifying a pixel for which an offset value is to be adjusted (See [0085], lines where Chong
`
`describes that in pred_type 0, neighbor partition index values are signaled in the bitstream so that
`
`neighbor partition values may be used).
`
`Regarding claim 15, the combination of Chong, in view of Minoo discloses all of the limitations
`
`of claim 11, upon which depends claim 15. This combination, specifically Chong, further discloses: the
`
`image decoding method according to Claim 11, wherein the offset information includes weighting
`
`factors (Chong discloses using different offset groups which are grouped according to offset bands,
`
`which are based on intensity value. See [0036].), and
`
`the weighting factors are such that an offset value is further decreased for a pixel at a shorter
`
`distance from the boundary with the neighboring region (See [0034]).
`
`Claims 8 and 16 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(3) as being unpatentable over
`
`Chong, in view of Minoo, and further in view of Van der Auwera, et al., U.S. Publication 2013/0101031
`
`A1.
`
`Regarding claim 8, the combination of Chong, in view of Minoo discloses all of the limitations of
`
`claim 1, upon which depends claim 8. This combination does not disclose: the image coding method
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 12
`
`according to Claim 1, wherein the offset information includes weighting factors, and the weighting
`
`factors are such that an offset value having a larger absolute value is further decreased.
`
`However, Van der Auewere discloses this limitation in an analogous art.
`
`In [0149], Van der
`
`Auwera discloses that when the absolute value of the difference between horizontal or vertical
`
`components is at least one, the boundary strength between two coding units is set to 1, versus 0 when
`
`the absolute value of this difference is less than 1.
`
`It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was
`
`made to adjust a strength of a boundary value based on the absolute value of a difference of boundary
`
`value strength criteria, as described in van der Auwera, for the purpose of allowing a video decoder to
`
`apply deblocking and edge offset filtering which are most appropriate for a given coding unit within a
`
`frame (See Van der Auwera, [0025]).
`
`Regarding claim 16, the combination of Chong in view of Minoo teaches all of the limitations of
`
`claim 9, upon which depends claim 16. Chong does not disclose: the image decoding method according
`
`to Claim 9, wherein the offset information includes weighting factors, and the weighting factors are
`
`such that an offset value having a larger absolute value is further decreased.
`
`However, Van der Auewere discloses this limitation in an analogous art.
`
`In [0149], Van der
`
`Auwera discloses that when the absolute value of the difference between horizontal or vertical
`
`components is at least one, the boundary strength between two coding units is set to 1, versus 0 when
`
`the absolute value of this difference is less than 1.
`
`It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was
`
`made to adjust a strength of a boundary value based on the absolute value of a difference of boundary
`
`value strength criteria, as described in van der Auwera, for the purpose of allowing a video decoder to
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 13
`
`apply deblocking and edge offset filtering which are most appropriate for a given coding unit within a
`
`frame (See Van der Auwera, [0025]).
`
`Conclusion
`
`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 extension fee 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.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
`
`should be directed to KYLE M LOTFI whose telephone number is (571)272-8762. The examiner can
`
`normally be reached on 9:00-5:00.
`
`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,
`
`Jorge Ortiz-Criado can be reached on 571-272-7624. The fax phone number for the organization where
`
`this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ ChargeStill Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site