DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/29/2025 has been entered.
Status of Claims
This is a Non-Final Action for Request for Continued Examination (RCE) application Serial No. 17/466,039. Claim(s) 1-8 have been examined and fully considered. Claim(s) 1 and 7-8 have been amended.
Claim(s) 1-8 are pending in Instant Application.
Response to Arguments/Rejections
Applicant’s amendments and associated arguments, see Remarks, filed 12/29/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) under 35 USC § 101 have been considered and are addressed below.
Applicant remarks, “The amended claims do not recite a mental process because they fundamentally involve physical laser irradiation, detection of reflected signals, and generation of three-dimensional point cloud data-processes that cannot be performed by human thought as a practical matter. Amended claim 1 now explicitly recites "wherein the laser radar is configured to generate three-dimensional point cloud data based on the reflected signal." Converting laser reflection signals to three- dimensional coordinate data is beyond human cognitive capability.”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The amended claims recite multiple abstract concepts including the detection of a moving bodies within multiple regions, the calculation of traffic flow, etc. Examiner notes that the limitations directed to the laser radar are identified as additional elements (utilization of laser irradiation, and detection of signals for generation of three-dimensional points clouds) and that such functions are forms of extra-solution data gathering that well-understood in the prior art (see rejection of amended claim language under 35 USC 101 below). Examiner notes that the claims do not currently recite the detection of positional changes at millimeter resolution.
Applicant further argues that sequential cycle-by-cycle tracking across adjacent divided regions clearly fall outside human mental capability. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Depending on the size and shape of the region, humans are capable of identifying vehicle, pedestrians, etc. at multiple areas within an intersection, which has multiple entry and exit areas, turning spaces, crosswalks, etc., all of which can be identified and monitored in real time by a human. Regarding arguments directed to the collection of sensor information, see response to argument above. Examiner notes that “claiming the improved speed or efficiency inherent with applying the abstract idea on a computer” does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 1367, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1639 (Fed. Cir. 2015).
Applicant further appears to argue that the claims represent a technical improvement to laser radar. Examiner respectfully disagrees. As claimed, the invention recites the application of generic laser radar for gathering data to be applied in the identified abstract limitations. See response to arguments above regarding the limitations directed to data gathering via laser radar.
Therefore, Examiner maintains the 35 USC § 101 rejection.
Applicant further argues that the applied prior art does not teach the amended limitations. Examiner respectfully agrees. Regarding claims 1-8 under 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered and persuasive. The claim(s) 1-8 under 35 USC § 103 has been withdrawn.
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.
Claim(s) 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1 of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test entails considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101: Process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.
Claim(s) 1-6 are directed to system. Therefore, claim(s) 1 are within at least one of the four statutory categories.
Claim(s) 7 is directed to control server. Therefore, claim(s) 7 is with at least one of the four stator categories.
Claim(s) 8 is directed to a method. Therefore, claim(s) 8 are within at least one of the four statutory categories.
If the claim recites a statutory category of invention, the claim requires further analysis in Step 2A. Step 2A of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test is a two-prong inquiry. In Prong One, examiners evaluate whether the claim recites a judicial exception.
Regarding Prong I of the Step 2A analysis in the 2019 PEG, the claims are to be analyzed to determine whether the recite subject matter that falls within one the follow groups of abstract ideas: a) mathematical concepts, b) certain methods of organizing human activity, and/or c) mental processes.
Independent claim 1 includes abstract limitations, shown in bold, that will be used as representative claim for the remainder of the 101 rejection. Claim 1 recites:
A moving body monitoring system for improving a monitoring accuracy of a moving body traveling on a traveling path, comprising:
a laser radar configured to irradiate a predetermined region set on the traveling path with a laser, and to detect a reflected signal of the laser by an object in the predetermined region at a predetermined cycle, wherein the laser radar is configured to generate three-dimensional point cloud data based on the reflected signal;
a moving body detecting unit configured to detect a moving body existing in the predetermined region based on the reflected signal detected by the laser radar;
a moving direction detecting unit configured to set a plurality of divided regions in the predetermined region and to detect a moving direction of the moving body based on a presence or absence of the moving body in each of the divided regions detected by the moving body detecting unit at each predetermined cycle;
wherein the moving direction detecting unit is configured to determine the moving direction of the moving body from a first divided region toward a second divided region, where:
the first divided region and the second divided region are adjacent divided regions arranged sequentially along a movement path of the moving body, and
the moving direction detecting unit is configured to determine the moving direction based on detecting the moving body in the first divided region at a first predetermined cycle and subsequently detecting the moving body in the second divided region at a second predetermined cycle immediately following the first predetermined cycle, thereby tracking chronological progression of the moving body across the plurality of divided regions; and
a traffic flow calculating unit configured to calculate a traffic flow data including a number of the moving body in each of the divided regions detected by the moving body detecting unit and the moving direction of each moving body detected by the moving direction detecting unit, wherein the traffic flow data includes, for each moving body, a movement route, a movement speed, and a residence time in each of the divided regions,
wherein based upon the calculated traffic flow data the monitoring accuracy is improved and an amount of time of a measurement period of the moving body traveling on the traveling path is reduced.
Independent claim 7 includes abstract limitations, shown in bold, that will be used as representative claim for the remainder of the 101 rejection. Claim 7 recites:
A control server of a moving body monitoring system for improving a monitoring accuracy of a moving body traveling on a traveling path, comprising:
a moving body detecting unit configured to detect a moving body existing in a predetermined region based on a reflected signal detected by a laser radar which irradiates the predetermined region set on the traveling path with a laser and detects the reflected signal of the laser by an object in the predetermined region at a predetermined cycle, wherein the laser radar is configured to generate three-dimensional point cloud data based on the reflected signal;
a moving direction detecting unit configured to set a plurality of divided regions in the predetermined region and to detect a moving direction of the moving body based on a presence or absence of the moving body in each of the divided regions detected by the moving body detecting unit at each predetermined cycle;
wherein the moving direction detecting unit is configured to determine the moving direction of the moving body from a first divided region toward a second divided region, where:
the first divided region and the second divided region are adjacent divided regions arranged sequentially along a movement path of the moving body, and
the moving direction detecting unit is configured to determine the moving direction based on detecting the moving body in the first divided region at a first predetermined cycle and subsequently detecting the moving body in the second divided region at a second predetermined cycle immediately following the first predetermined cycle, thereby tracking chronological progression of the moving body across the plurality of divided regions; and
a traffic flow calculating unit configured to calculate a traffic flow data including a number of the moving body in each of the divided regions detected by the moving body detecting unit and the moving direction of each moving body detected by the moving direction detecting unit, wherein the traffic flow data includes, for each moving body, a movement route, a movement speed, and a residence time in each of the divided regions,
wherein based upon the calculated traffic flow data the monitoring accuracy is improved and an amount of time of a measurement period of the moving body traveling on the traveling path is reduced.
Independent claim 8 includes abstract limitations, shown in bold, that will be used as representative claim for the remainder of the 101 rejection. Claim 8 recites:
A moving body monitoring method for improving a monitoring accuracy of a moving body traveling on a traveling path, comprising:
a step of irradiating a predetermined region set on the traveling path with a laser, and detecting a reflected signal of the laser by an object in the predetermined region at a predetermined cycle, wherein three-dimensional point cloud data is generated based on the reflected signal;
a step of detecting a moving body existing in the predetermined region based on the reflected signal;
a step of setting a plurality of divided regions in the predetermined region and detecting a moving direction of the moving body based on a presence or absence of the moving body in each of the divided regions at each predetermined cycle; wherein:
the moving direction of the moving body is determined from a first divided region toward a second divided region, where the first divided region and the second divided region are adjacent divided regions arranged sequentially along a movement path of the moving body and the moving direction is determined based on detecting the moving body in the first divided region at a first predetermined cycle and subsequently detecting the moving body in the second divided region at a second predetermined cycle immediately following the first predetermined cycle, thereby tracking chronological progression of the moving body across the plurality of divided regions; and
a step of calculating a traffic flow data including a number of the moving body in each of the divided regions and the moving direction of each moving body, wherein the traffic flow data includes, for each moving body, a movement route, a movement speed, and a residence time in each of the divided regions, wherein based upon the calculated traffic flow data the monitoring accuracy is improved and an amount of time of a measurement period of the moving body traveling on the traveling path is reduced.
The examiner submits that the foregoing bolded limitation(s) constitute a “mental process” because under its broadest reasonable interpretation, the claim covers performance of the limitation in the human mind. For example, “determin(ing) the moving direction of the moving body from a first divided region toward a second divided region …”; “…detect a moving body existing in the predetermined region…”; “…detect a moving direction of the moving body based on a presence or absence of the moving body in each of the divided regions…” and “determine the moving direction of the moving body from a first divided region toward a second divided region, where: the first divided region and the second divided region are included in the plurality of divided regions in which the moving object is detected, and the second divided region is a region in which the moving body is detected after the detection of the moving body in the first divided region” in the context of this claim containing a person (driver) thinking or looking to execute driving actions within the environment looking at data collected and forming a simple judgement to navigate the environment. Accordingly, the claim recites at least one abstract idea.
If the claim recites a judicial exception in step 2A Prong One , the claim requires further analysis in step 2A Prong Two. In step 2A Prong Two, examiners evaluate whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception.
Claim 1 recites the additional elements of (see underlined portions below):
A moving body monitoring system for improving a monitoring accuracy of a moving body traveling on a traveling path, comprising:
a laser radar configured to irradiate a predetermined region set on the traveling path with a laser, and to detect a reflected signal of the laser by an object in the predetermined region at a predetermined cycle, wherein the laser radar is configured to generate three-dimensional point cloud data based on the reflected signal;
a moving body detecting unit configured to detect a moving body existing in the predetermined region based on the reflected signal detected by the laser radar;
a moving direction detecting unit configured to set a plurality of divided regions in the predetermined region and to detect a moving direction of the moving body based on a presence or absence of the moving body in each of the divided regions detected by the moving body detecting unit at each predetermined cycle;
wherein the moving direction detecting unit is configured to determine the moving direction of the moving body from a first divided region toward a second divided region, where:
the first divided region and the second divided region are adjacent divided regions arranged sequentially along a movement path of the moving body, and
the moving direction detecting unit is configured to determine the moving direction based on detecting the moving body in the first divided region at a first predetermined cycle and subsequently detecting the moving body in the second divided region at a second predetermined cycle immediately following the first predetermined cycle, thereby tracking chronological progression of the moving body across the plurality of divided regions; and
a traffic flow calculating unit configured to calculate a traffic flow data including a number of the moving body in each of the divided regions detected by the moving body detecting unit and the moving direction of each moving body detected by the moving direction detecting unit, wherein the traffic flow data includes, for each moving body, a movement route, a movement speed, and a residence time in each of the divided regions,
wherein based upon the calculated traffic flow data the monitoring accuracy is improved and an amount of time of a measurement period of the moving body traveling on the traveling path is reduced.
Claim 7 recites the additional elements of (see underlined portions below):
A control server of a moving body monitoring system for improving a monitoring accuracy of a moving body traveling on a traveling path, comprising:
a moving body detecting unit configured to detect a moving body existing in a predetermined region based on a reflected signal detected by a laser radar which irradiates the predetermined region set on the traveling path with a laser and detects the reflected signal of the laser by an object in the predetermined region at a predetermined cycle, wherein the laser radar is configured to generate three-dimensional point cloud data based on the reflected signal;
a moving direction detecting unit configured to set a plurality of divided regions in the predetermined region and to detect a moving direction of the moving body based on a presence or absence of the moving body in each of the divided regions detected by the moving body detecting unit at each predetermined cycle;
wherein the moving direction detecting unit is configured to determine the moving direction of the moving body from a first divided region toward a second divided region, where:
the first divided region and the second divided region are adjacent divided regions arranged sequentially along a movement path of the moving body, and
the moving direction detecting unit is configured to determine the moving direction based on detecting the moving body in the first divided region at a first predetermined cycle and subsequently detecting the moving body in the second divided region at a second predetermined cycle immediately following the first predetermined cycle, thereby tracking chronological progression of the moving body across the plurality of divided regions; and
a traffic flow calculating unit configured to calculate a traffic flow data including a number of the moving body in each of the divided regions detected by the moving body detecting unit and the moving direction of each moving body detected by the moving direction detecting unit, wherein the traffic flow data includes, for each moving body, a movement route, a movement speed, and a residence time in each of the divided regions,
wherein based upon the calculated traffic flow data the monitoring accuracy is improved and an amount of time of a measurement period of the moving body traveling on the traveling path is reduced.
Claim 8 recites the additional elements of (see underlined portions below):
A moving body monitoring method for improving a monitoring accuracy of a moving body traveling on a traveling path, comprising:
a step of irradiating a predetermined region set on the traveling path with a laser, and detecting a reflected signal of the laser by an object in the predetermined region at a predetermined cycle, wherein three-dimensional point cloud data is generated based on the reflected signal;
a step of detecting a moving body existing in the predetermined region based on the reflected signal;
a step of setting a plurality of divided regions in the predetermined region and detecting a moving direction of the moving body based on a presence or absence of the moving body in each of the divided regions at each predetermined cycle; wherein:
the moving direction of the moving body is determined from a first divided region toward a second divided region, where the first divided region and the second divided region are adjacent divided regions arranged sequentially along a movement path of the moving body and the moving direction is determined based on detecting the moving body in the first divided region at a first predetermined cycle and subsequently detecting the moving body in the second divided region at a second predetermined cycle immediately following the first predetermined cycle, thereby tracking chronological progression of the moving body across the plurality of divided regions; and
a step of calculating a traffic flow data including a number of the moving body in each of the divided regions and the moving direction of each moving body, wherein the traffic flow data includes, for each moving body, a movement route, a movement speed, and a residence time in each of the divided regions, wherein based upon the calculated traffic flow data the monitoring accuracy is improved and an amount of time of a measurement period of the moving body traveling on the traveling path is reduced.
For the following reason(s), the examiner submits that the above identified additional limitations do not integrate the above-noted abstract idea into a practical application.
Regarding the additional limitations of “A moving body monitoring system”; “a laser radar”; “a moving body detecting unit”; “a moving direction detecting unit” and “a traffic flow calculating unit”, “a control server,” the claimed components are recited at a high level of generality and are merely invoked as tools to perform the abstract idea. In addition, each of these additional limitations indicate a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception and cannot integrate the judicial exception into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
Additionally, the functions of the “a laser radar”; “a moving body detecting unit”; “a moving direction detecting unit” and “a traffic flow calculating unit” (collecting, sending and receiving information) amount to extra-solution activity because they are merely generating data. [see MPEP, 2106.04(g) Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity [R-10.2019], (3) Whether the limitation amounts to necessary data gathering, for use in the abstract idea (i.e., all uses of the recited judicial exception require such data gathering or data output). See Mayo, 566 U.S. at 79, 101 USPQ2d at 1968; OIP Techs., Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1092-93 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (presenting offers and gathering statistics amounted to mere data gathering)].
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Further, looking at the additional limitation(s) as an ordered combination or as a whole, the limitation(s) add nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. For instance, there is no indication that the additional elements, when considered as a whole, reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer or an improvement to another technology or technical field, apply or use the above-noted judicial exception to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition, implement/use the above-noted judicial exception with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim, effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or apply or use the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is not more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP § 2106.05).
Accordingly, the additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
If the additional elements do not integrate the exception into a practical application in step 2A Prong Two, then the claim is directed to the recited judicial exception, and requires further analysis under Step 2B to determine whether they provide an inventive concept (i.e., whether the additional elements amount to significantly more than the exception itself).
As discussed above, “a moving body monitoring system,” “a laser radar”; “a moving body detecting unit”; “a moving direction detecting unit” and “a traffic flow calculating unit,” and a “control server” amount to mere instructions to apply the exception. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, update, or generate) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea does not provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit). Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept.
Further, a conclusion that an additional element is insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A should be re-evaluated in Step 2B to determine if they are more than what is well understood, routine, conventional activity in the field. The additional limitations of “a laser radar”; “a moving body detecting unit”; “a moving direction detecting unit” and “a traffic flow calculating unit” are well-understood, routine, and conventional activities because the background recites that the processors and/or sensors are all conventional sensors mounted on the roadside unit/ traffic infrastructure, and the specification does not provide any indication that the monitoring system is anything other than a conventional computer within a roadside unit/ traffic infrastructure. MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), and the cases cited therein, including Intellectual Ventures I, LLC v. Symantec Corp., 838 F.3d 1307, 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2016), TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 610 (Fed. Cir. 2016), and OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2015), indicate that mere collection or receipt of data over a network is a well‐understood, routine, and conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner.
Examiner notes that, with respect to the irradiating function of the laser radar, the specification demonstrates the well-understood, routine, conventional nature of additional elements as it describes the additional elements as well-understood or routine or conventional (or an equivalent term), as a commercially available product, or in a manner that indicates that the additional elements are sufficiently well-known that the specification does not need to describe the particulars of such additional elements to satisfy 35 U.S.C. §112(a).
Examiner notes that, though not positively recited, a sensor for collecting and
transmitting a signal comprising information would amount to extra-solution activity. The specification demonstrates the well-understood, routine, conventional nature of additional elements as it describes the additional elements as well-understood or routine or conventional (or an equivalent term), as a commercially available product, or in a manner that indicates that the additional elements are sufficiently well-known that the specification does not need to describe the particulars of such additional elements to satisfy 35 U.S.C. §112(a). See, for example, [0009], [0013], etc. In addition, the Symantec, TLI, OIP Techs. and buySAFE court decisions cited in MPEP 2106.05(d)(II) indicate that mere collection or receipt of data over a network is a well‐understood, routine, conventional function when it is claimed in a merely generic manner (as it is here). Hence, the claim is not patent eligible.
Furthermore, the function of laser scanners (i.e., generation of a point cloud), are well-established in the industry. See Pettersson et al. 20090046895 A1 ([0008] 3D scanning systems, in particular in the form of 3D laser scanners, which carry out deep scanning within a sector and produce a point cloud are furthermore known.), and Rieger et al. 20120257186 ([0039] In the second case, a discrete surface model of the environment U (a "point cloud") can be created from the large number of distance measurement values D.sub.k and the direction of transmission of the transmitted pulses S.sub.m known in the scanner 1, as is familiar to the person skilled in the art, e.g. in the field of laser scanning.)
The various metrics/limitations of claims 2-6 merely narrow the previously recited abstract idea limitations and introduce additional abstract limitations that are directed to mental processes and mathematical concepts, without reciting any further additional elements not recited above with respect to the independent claims (generic computing devices for processing and transmitting data). For the reasons described above with respect to claim 1, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application, or significantly more than the abstract idea.
Possible Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 1-8 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the
rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101, however, would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Prior Art, Achour et al (Patent No.: US 11,105,918), teaches intelligent antennas using metamaterial structures and providing dynamic control of metamaterial unit cells in the metamaterial structures for radar systems.
Prior Art. Toru Mabuchi (JP2006259833A; previously recorded; the NPL citations are based on the provided English Translation) hereinafter, referred to as “Mabuchi”, teaches determine the appropriate signal control parameters in consideration of the traffic volume for each branching direction, such as right turn, left turn, straight ahead, etc. of the vehicle at the intersection, thereby sufficiently suppressing the occurrence of traffic jams. Is to provide a signal control system and a signal control method capable of smoothly running the vehicle
Prior art, Yasunori Kuramochi (JP2009146337A; previously recorded; the NPL citations are based on the provided English Translation) hereinafter, referred to as “Kuramochi”, teaches a time series change of a captured image by a camera is compared and analyzed to determine whether or not there is a moving vehicle in the sensing area, and the captured image and a predetermined template image are determined in advance. In the pattern matching process, it is determined whether or not there is a stopped vehicle in the sensing area, and the presence or absence of the vehicle in the sensing area is determined based on the determination result of the moving vehicle and the stopped vehicle. The determination of the presence or absence of a stopped vehicle is performed by calculating a matching rate for each of a plurality of partial areas into which the sensing area is divided, and comparing the calculated matching rate with a given threshold value for the partial area.
Prior art, Jang (Pub. No.: US 2011/0098.916; previously recorded), teaches navigation apparatus of a mobile terminal, including: a display unit configured to display a route from a current location to a destination on data map; a communication unit configured to receive signal information of a traffic light and traffic volume information regarding an intersection on the route; and a controller configured to inform a vehicle driver about whether or not the vehicle driver is supposed to enter the intersection based on the signal information of the traffic light and the traffic volume information.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BAKARI UNDERWOOD whose telephone number is (571)272-8462. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 8:00 TO 4:30.
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, Abby Flynn can be reached on (571) 272-9855. 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.
/B.U./Examiner, Art Unit 3663
/ABBY J FLYNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3663
Prosecution Insights