ETAILED 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 . Claims 1-24 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-14, 17-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by NPL “Physical Layer Control Procedure in NR-NTN” (hereinafter referred to as MediaTek).
RE Claim 1, MediaTek discloses A method performed by a User Equipment (UE) (See MediaTek Section 2) comprising:
receiving, from a network node, both a cell-specific offset for a scheduling timing (See MediaTek Section 2 – K1 (slots) indicating PDSCH-to-HARQ timing delay) and a UE-specific offset for the scheduling timing (See MediaTek Section 2 – K1_ntnOffset (slots) can be construed as UE-specific offset (i.e. offset should take into account the elevation angle for a given beam spot)), wherein the cell-specific offset and the UE-specific offset are slot offsets (See MediaTek Section 2 – K1 and K1_ntnOffset are in slots), wherein the UE-specific offset is selected from an extended range of values that for downlink control information (DCI) format 1_0 has an upper bound value that is greater than 8 or for DCI format 1_1 has an upper bound value that is greater than 15 (See MediaTek Section 2 – timing offset information in DCI formats 1_0 & 1_1; in case the scheduling delay needs to be longer to accommodate NR-NTNRTT, gNB adjusts scheduling delay by n+N1’ slots (i.e. extended range of offset values); K1’ = K1 + K1_ntnOffset; K1 can already be 8. K1_ntnOffset can be any number, so for every value for K1_ntnOffset > 8, K1’ would be > 15. For example, if K1_ntnOffset is 8, K1’ would equal 8 + 8 = 16 which is greater than 15); and
determining the scheduling timing based on the cell-specific offset for the scheduling timing and the UE-specific offset for the scheduling timing (See MediaTek Section 2 – adjusting scheduling delay for HARQ A/N by K1 + K1_ntnOffset).
RE Claim 2, MediaTek discloses a method, as set forth in claim 1 above, wherein the scheduling timing comprises a Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (HARQ) feedback timing (See MediaTek Section 2 – adjusting scheduling delay for HARQ A/N (UL transmission timing for UL HARQ ACK on PUCCH)), a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH) timing (See MediaTek Section 2 – adjusting scheduling delay for PUSCH (UL transmission timing for UL data on PUSCH)), or a Msg3 timing.
RE Claim 3, MedaTek discloses a method, as set forth in claim 2 above, further comprising transmitting a HARQ feedback, a PUSCH, or a Msg3 in accordance with the determined scheduling timing (See MediaTek Section 2 – HARQ A/N/PUSCH is transmitted based on the scheduling delay adjustment).
RE Claim 5, MediaTek discloses a method, as set forth in claim 1 above, wherein: receiving the cell-specific offset for the scheduling timing and/or the UE-specific offset for the scheduling timing comprises receiving both the cell-specific offset for the scheduling timing and the UE-specific offset for the scheduling timing (See MediaTek Section 2 – receiving both UE specific offset and cell specific offset information (i.e. K1, K1_ntnOffset)); and
determining the scheduling timing comprises determining the scheduling timing based on a sum of the cell-specific offset and the UE-specific offset (See MediaTek Section 2 – adjusting scheduling delay for HARQ A/N by K1 + K1_ntnOffset).
RE Claim 6, MediaTek, discloses a method, as set forth in claim 1 above, wherein: the scheduling timing is a HARQ feedback timing for a particular Downlink Control Information (DCI) format (See MediaTek Section 2 – UL transmission timing for HARQ ACK on DCI format 1_0, 1_1);
receiving the cell-specific offset for the scheduling timing and/or the UE-specific offset for the scheduling timing comprises receiving the cell-specific offset for the scheduling timing (See MediaTek Section 2 – K1_ntnOffset (slots) indicating cell-specific timing delay), the cell-specific offset being a cell-specific offset for the HARQ feedback timing for the particular DCI format (See MediaTek Section 2 – adjusting scheduling delay for HARQ A/N using K1_ntnOffset; feedback timing for DCI format 1_0, 1_1); and
determining the scheduling timing comprises determining the HARQ feedback timing based on a sum of a Physical Downlink Shared Channel (PDSCH)-to-HARQ feedback timing offset and the cell specific offset (See MediaTek Section 2 – sum of PDSCH-to-HARQ (n) to delay offset (K1’ = K1 + K1_ntnOffset)).
RE Claim 7, MediaTek, discloses a method, as set forth in claim 6 above, further comprising:
receiving, from the network node, system information that comprises a set of PDSCH-to- HARQ feedback offset values that map to a set of PDSCH-to-HARQ-timing indicator values (See MediaTek Section 2 – receiving PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing values); and
receiving a DCI that schedules a PDSCH (See MediaTek Section 2 – DCI schedules PDSCH; DCI indicates DL assignment and UL grant), the DCI comprising a PDSCH-to-HARQ- timing-indicator field (See MediaTek Section 2 – PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing indicator field in DCI) having one of the set of PDSCH-to-HARQ-timing indicator values to thereby indicate the PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing offset (See MediaTek Section 2 – DCI scheduling PDSCH comprising PDSCH-to-HARQ and indicating PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing offset (n+K1’ where K1’ = K1 + K1_ntnOffset)).
RE Claim 8, MediaTek discloses a method, as set forth in claim 7 above, wherein determining the HARQ feedback timing based on the sum of the PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing offset and the cell-specific offset comprises determining the HARQ feedback timing as slot n + Kloffset + K1, where n is a slot in which the PDSCH is received, Kl,offset is the cell-specific offset, and K1 is the PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing offset (See MediaTek Section 2 – (n+K1’ where K1’ = K1 + K1_ntnOffset)).
RE Claim 9, MediaTek discloses a method, as set forth in claim 1 above,
wherein: receiving the cell-specific offset for the scheduling timing and/or the UE-specific offset for the scheduling timing comprises receiving system information including the cell- specific offset and/or receiving UE specific Radio Resource Control, RRC, signaling including the UE-specific offset (See MediaTek Section 2; proposal 4 – receiving scheduling timing in SIB).
RE Claim 10, MediaTek discloses a method, as set forth in claim 1 above,
wherein the scheduling timing is a HARQ feedback timing for a particular DCI format (See MediaTek Section 2 – UL transmission timing for HARQ ACK on DCI format 1_0, 1_1);
receiving the cell-specific offset for the scheduling timing and/or the UE-specific offset for the scheduling timing comprises receiving the cell-specific offset for the scheduling timing and receiving the UE-specific offset for the scheduling timing (See MediaTek Section 2 – receiving both UE specific offset and cell specific offset information (i.e. K1, K1_ntnOffset)), the cell-specific offset being a cell-specific offset for the HARQ feedback timing for the particular DCI format and the UE- specific offset being a UE-specific offset for the HARQ feedback timing for the particular DCI format (See MediaTek Section 2 – cell-specific and UE-specific offset timing for HARQ ACK on DCI format 1_0, 1_1); and
determining the scheduling timing comprises determining the HARQ feedback timing based on a sum of a PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing offset and the cell-specific offset and/or the UE-specific offset (See MediaTek Section 2 – adjusting scheduling delay for HARQ A/N by K1 + K1_ntnOffset).
RE Claim 11, MediaTek discloses a method, as set forth in claim 10 above,
wherein determining the HARQ feedback timing based on the sum of the PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing offset and the cell-specific offset comprises determining the HARQ feedback timing as slot n + Kloffset + K1, where n is a slot in which the PDSCH is received, Kl,offset is the cell-specific offset, and K1 is the PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing offset (See MediaTek Section 2 – (n+K1’ where K1’ = K1 + K1_ntnOffset)).
RE Claim 12, MediaTek, discloses a method, as set forth in claim 1 above, wherein:
the scheduling timing is the PUSCH timing for a PUSCH transmission (See MediaTek Section 2 – UL transmission timing for UL data on PUSCH);
receiving the cell-specific offset for the scheduling timing and/or the UE-specific offset for the scheduling timing comprises receiving a cell-specific offset for scheduling the PUSCH timing for a particular DCI format and/or receiving a UE-specific offset for scheduling the PUSCH timing for the particular DCI format (See MediaTek Section 2 – receiving UL transmission timing for UL data on PUSCH on a particular DCI format (i.e. 0_0 or 0_1)), the cell-specific offset being a cell-specific offset for the PUSCH timing and the UE-specific offset being a UE-specific offset for the PUSCH timing (See MediaTek Section 2 – receiving UL transmission timing via broadcast (i.e. cell-specific)); and
determining the scheduling timing comprises determining the PUSCH timing based on a sum of a Physical Downlink Control Channel-, PDCCH-, to-PUSCH timing offset and the cell-specific offset and/or the UE-specific offset (See MediaTek Section 2 ; proposal 2 – slot offset between DCI at slot n (PDCCH) & PUSCH at slot n+k).
RE Claim 13, MediaTek discloses a method, as set forth in claim 12 above, wherein: determining the PUSCH timing based on the sum of the PDCCH-to-PUSCH timing offset and the cell-specific offset and/or the UE-specific offset comprises determining a slot allocated for the PUSCH transmission as
PNG
media_image1.png
49
242
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(See MediaTek Section 2 – UL transmission timing for UL data on PUSCH; page 2, 1st paragraph) where n is the slot with the scheduling DCI, and K2 is based on the numerology of PUSCH, and pPUSCHandPDCCH are the subcarrier spacing configurations for PUSCH and PDCCH, respectively, and K2,offset is the cell- specific offset for PUSCH timing and/or the UE-specific offset for PUSCH timing (See MediaTek Section 2 – UL transmission timing for UL data on PUSCH).
RE Claim 14, MediaTek discloses a method, as set forth in claim 1 above, wherein: the scheduling timing is the PUSCH timing for a PUSCH transmission (See MediaTek Section 2 – UL transmission timing for UL data on PUSCH);
receiving the cell-specific offset for the scheduling timing and/or the UE-specific offset for the scheduling timing comprises receiving the cell-specific offset for the scheduling timing, the cell-specific offset being a cell-specific offset for the PUSCH timing (See MediaTek Section 2 – receiving UL transmission timing via broadcast (i.e. cell-specific)).
RE Claim 17, MediaTek discloses a method, as set forth in claim 14 above, wherein: receiving the cell-specific offset for the scheduling timing comprises receiving system information comprising the cell-specific offset (See MediaTek Section 2 – SIB).
RE Claim 18, MediaTek discloses a user equipment (UE) (See MediaTek Section 2 - UE) comprising:
processing circuitry and transceiver circuitry, the processing circuitry configured to execute stored instructions that cause the processing circuitry to perform operations (See MediaTek Section 2 – UE comprising processing and transceiver circuitry as well as storing instructions that can be executed by a processor) comprising:
receiving, from a network node, both a cell-specific offset for a scheduling timing (See MediaTek Section 2 – K1 (slots) indicating PDSCH-to-HARQ timing delay) and a UE-specific offset for the scheduling timing (See MediaTek Section 2 – K1_ntnOffset (slots) can be construed as UE-specific offset (i.e. offset should take into account the elevation angle for a given beam spot)), wherein the cell-specific offset and the UE-specific offset are slot offsets (See MediaTek Section 2 – K1 and K1_ntnOffset are in slots), wherein the UE-specific offset is selected from an extended range of values that for downlink control information (DCI) format 1_0 has an upper bound value that is greater than 8 or for DCI format 1_1 has an upper bound value that is greater than 15 (See MediaTek Section 2 – timing offset information in DCI formats 1_0 & 1_1; in case the scheduling delay needs to be longer to accommodate NR-NTNRTT, gNB adjusts scheduling delay by n+N1’ slots (i.e. extended range of offset values); K1’ = K1 + K1_ntnOffset; K1 can already be 8. K1_ntnOffset can be any number, so for every value for K1_ntnOffset > 8, K1’ would be > 15. For example, if K1_ntnOffset is 8, K1’ would equal 8 + 8 = 16 which is greater than 15); and
determining the scheduling timing based on the cell-specific offset for the scheduling timing and the UE-specific offset for the scheduling timing (See MediaTek Section 2 – adjusting scheduling delay for HARQ A/N by K1 + K1_ntnOffset).
RE Claim 19, MediaTek, discloses a wireless device, as set forth in claim 18 above, wherein the scheduling timing comprises a Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (HARQ) feedback timing (See MediaTek Section 2 – adjusting scheduling delay for HARQ A/N), a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH) timing, or a Msg3 timing.
RE Claim 20¸ MediaTek discloses a method performed by a User Equipment (UE) (See MediaTek Section 2) comprising:
obtaining, from a network node, indication configuration of a set of Physical Downlink Shared Channel (PDSCH-to-Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (HARQ) timing offset values (See MediaTek Section 2 – receiving PDSCH-to-HARQ offset), the set of PDSCH-to-HARQ timing offset values being from an extended range of values that, for downlink control information, DCI, format 1_0 has an upper bound that is greater than 8 and, for DCI format 1_1 has an upper bound that is greater than 15 (See MediaTek Section 2 – timing offset information in DCI formats 1_0 & 1_1; in case the scheduling delay needs to be longer to accommodate NR-NTNRTT, gNB adjusts scheduling delay by n+N1’ slots (i.e. extended range of offset values); K1’ = K1 + K1_ntnOffset; K1 can already be 8. K1_ntnOffset can be any number, so for every value for K1_ntnOffset > 8, K1’ would be > 15. For example, if K1_ntnOffset is 8, K1’ would equal 8 + 8 = 16 which is greater than 15); receiving, from the network node, a DCI message comprising a PDSCH-to-HARQ timing offset indicator that indicates one of the set of PDSCH-to-HARQ timing offset values (See MediaTek Section 2 – timing offset information (PDSCH-to-HARQ offset) in DCI); and determining a scheduling timing for HARQ feedback for a PDSCH scheduled by the DCI message based on the one of the set of PDSCH-to-HARQ timing offset values indicated by the PDSCH-to-HARQ timing offset indicator (See MediaTek Section 2 – determining timing using PDSCH-to-HARQ timing offset information).
RE Claim 21¸ MediaTek discloses a method, as set forth in claim 20 above, further comprising transmitting the HARQ feedback for the PDSCH in accordance with the determined scheduling timing (See MediaTek Section 2 – transmitting HARQ feedback in accordance with determined scheduling timing).
RE Claim 22¸ MediaTek discloses a method, as set forth in claim 20 above, wherein: the DCI message uses the DCI format 1_0, and the extended range of values has an upper bound that is greater than 8 (See MediaTek Section 2 – DCI format 1_0; offset values can be extended greater than 8 (i.e. n+N1’)).
RE Claim 23¸ MediaTek discloses a method, as set forth in claim 20 above, wherein: the DCI message uses the DCI format 1_1, and the extended range of values has an upper bound that is greater than 15 (See MediaTek Section 2 – DCI format 1_1; offset values can be extended greater than 15 (i.e. n+N1’)).
RE Claim 24¸ MediaTek discloses a wireless device (See MediaTek Section 2) comprising:
processing circuitry and transceiver circuitry, the processing circuitry configured to execute stored instructions that cause the processing circuitry to perform operations comprising:
obtaining, from a network node, indication configuration of a set of Physical Downlink Shared Channel (PDSCH-to-Hybrid Automatic Repeat Request (HARQ) timing offset values (See MediaTek Section 2 – receiving PDSCH-to-HARQ offset), the set of PDSCH-to-HARQ timing offset values being from an extended range of values that, for downlink control information, DCI, format 1_0 has an upper bound that is greater than 8 and, for DCI format 1_1 has an upper bound that is greater than 15 (See MediaTek Section 2 – timing offset information in DCI formats 1_0 & 1_1; in case the scheduling delay needs to be longer to accommodate NR-NTNRTT, gNB adjusts scheduling delay by n+N1’ slots (i.e. extended range of offset values); K1’ = K1 + K1_ntnOffset; K1 can already be 8. K1_ntnOffset can be any number, so for every value for K1_ntnOffset > 8, K1’ would be > 15. For example, if K1_ntnOffset is 8, K1’ would equal 8 + 8 = 16 which is greater than 15); receiving, from the network node, a DCI message comprising a PDSCH-to-HARQ timing offset indicator that indicates one of the set of PDSCH-to-HARQ timing offset values (See MediaTek Section 2 – timing offset information (PDSCH-to-HARQ offset) in DCI); and determining a scheduling timing for HARQ feedback for a PDSCH scheduled by the DCI message based on the one of the set of PDSCH-to-HARQ timing offset values indicated by the PDSCH-to-HARQ timing offset indicator (See MediaTek Section 2 – determining timing using PDSCH-to-HARQ timing offset information).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NPL “Physical Layer Control Procedure in NR-NTN” (hereinafter referred to as MediaTek) in view of Jung et al. (US# 2021/0168807 hereinafter referred to as Jung).
RE Claim 4, MediaTek, discloses a method, as set forth in claim 1 above. Shim does not specifically disclose wherein:
wherein the UE-specific offset overwrites the cell-specific offset such that determining the scheduling timing comprises determining the scheduling timing based on the UE- specific offset, but not the cell-specific offset.
However, Jung teaches of
wherein the UE-specific offset overwrites the cell-specific offset such that determining the scheduling timing comprises determining the scheduling timing based on the UE- specific offset, but not the cell-specific offset (See Jung [0107]-[0109], [0112], [0126] –UE-specific SFI/scheduling information (which can correspond to index/offset information) with higher priority is used instead of cell-specific SFI/scheduling information (which can correspond to index/offset information) with lower priority).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to implement the scheduling timing system, as disclosed in MediaTek, wherein the UE-specific offset overwrites the cell-specific offset such that determining the scheduling timing comprises determining the scheduling timing based on the UE- specific offset, but not the cell-specific offset, as taught in Jung. One is motivated as such in order to improve performance in a dynamic and flexible system (See Jung [0007]-[0027]).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NPL “Physical Layer Control Procedure in NR-NTN” (hereinafter referred to as MediaTek) and NPL “Discussion on the Physical Control Procedure for NTN” (hereinafter referred to as ZTE).
RE Claim 15, MediaTek discloses a method, as set forth in claim 1 above, wherein: the scheduling timing is the PUSCH timing for a PUSCH transmission (See MediaTek Section 2 – UL transmission timing for UL data on PUSCH); and
receiving the cell-specific offset for the scheduling timing and/or the UE-specific offset for the scheduling timing comprises receiving an offset value range of cell-specific offsets for the scheduling timing and receiving a cell-specific offset indicator indicating a cell-specific offset in the offset value range (See MediaTek Section 2 – K2 and K2_ntnOffset are offset value range (i.e. K2 can be 0, 1, …., 31)).
MediaTek does not specifically disclose determining the scheduling timing comprises determining the PUSCH timing based on a sum of a Random Access Response (RAR) uplink (UL) grant-to-PUSCH timing offset and the cell-specific offset.
However, ZTE teaches of receiving the cell-specific offset for the scheduling timing and/or the UE-specific offset for the scheduling timing comprises receiving an offset value range of cell-specific offsets for the scheduling timing and receiving a cell-specific offset indicator indicating a cell-specific offset in the offset value range (See ZTE Section 2.3 – slot n + k2 + ∆); and determining the scheduling timing comprises determining the PUSCH timing based on a sum of a Random Access Response (RAR) uplink (UL) grant-to-PUSCH timing offset and the cell-specific offset (See ZTE Section 2.3 – slot n + k2 + ∆; slot n = UE receives RAR PUSCH grant allocation in RAR).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the scheduling timing system, as disclosed in MediaTek, comprising determining the scheduling timing comprises determining the PUSCH timing based on a sum of a Random Access Response (RAR) uplink (UL) grant-to-PUSCH timing offset and the cell-specific offset, as taught in ZTE. One is motivated as such in order to extend the scheduling time interval for UL transmissions (See ZTE Section 2.3).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 16 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/27/2026 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Regarding Applicant's argument that MediaTek does not specifically disclose wherein the UE-specific offset is selected from an extended range of values that for downlink control information (DCI) format 1_0 has an upper bound value that is greater than 8 or for DCI format 1_1 has an upper bound value that is greater than 15, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claim language is broad and vague when it comes to defining what “cell-specific offset” and “UE-specific offset” are. Broadly construed, K1_ntnOffset can be interpreted to be the claimed UE-specific offset (See MediaTek Section 2 – K1_ntnOffset (slots) can be construed as UE-specific offset (i.e. offset should take into account the elevation angle for a given beam spot)) and K1 can be construed as the claimed cell-specific offset. With this interpretation, K1_ntnOffset “is selected from an extended range of values that for downlink control information (DCI) format 1_0 has an upper bound value that is greater than 8 or for DCI format 1_1 has an upper bound value that is greater than 15” (See MediaTek Section 2 – K1_ntnOffset can be any number (i.e. upper bound value greater than both 8 and 15)).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Charbit et al. (US# 2020/0295824 – which teaches of extending timing to account for delay).
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Steve R Young whose telephone number is (571)270-7518. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Chirag G Shah can be reached at (571) 272-3144. 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.
/STEVE R YOUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477
Prosecution Insights