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 .
Response to Amendment
In the amendment filed on September 8, 2025, the following has occurred: claim(s) 1, 9, 17 have been amended. Now, claim(s) 1-20 are pending.
Notice to Applicant
The Examiner has withdrawn the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection(s) in light of the newly amended claims. The addition to independent claims 1, 9, and 17 of “based on the exercise plan, controlling, while the user performs the exercise plan on the electromechanical device, a physical portion of the electromechanical device via a control instruction specifying an operating parameter of the physical portion of the electromechanical device associated with the exercise plan, wherein the control instruction specifying the operating parameter is transmitted to the electromechanical device to adjust the operating parameter of the electromechanical device” combined with the previously presented steps and specifically the step of “transmitting the exercise plan to a computing device associated with the electromechanical device” recites a combination to improve an improvement to the technological field of controlling operation of electromechanical exercise devices and integrates the abstract idea into a practical application. The 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection(s) are withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities: “wherein the sum of each of the priority percentages” in p. 2, ll. 14-15. This appears to be a typographical error. Appropriate correction is required. For examination purposes, the Examiner will interpret the claimed portion as “wherein a sum of each of the priority percentages”
Claim 9 objected to because of the following informalities: “wherein the sum of each of the priority percentages” in p. 4, ll. 15-16. This appears to be a typographical error. Appropriate correction is required. For examination purposes, the Examiner will interpret the claimed portion as “wherein a sum of each of the priority percentages”
Claim 17 objected to because of the following informalities: “wherein the sum of each of the priority percentages” in p. 6, ll. 18-19. This appears to be a typographical error. Appropriate correction is required. For examination purposes, the Examiner will interpret the claimed portion as “wherein a sum of each of the priority percentages”
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rose et al. (U.S. Patent Pre-Grant Publication No. 2021/0050086) in view of Jang et al. (U.S. Patent Pre-Grant Publication No. 2017/0291067) in further view of Hacking et al. (U.S. Patent Pre-Grant Publication No. 2020/0289881).
As per independent claim 1, Rose discloses a computer-implemented method for generating, an exercise plan for a user to perform, wherein the method comprises, using one or more processing devices:
receiving data pertaining to the user, wherein the data comprises the user fitness test results (See Fig. 2 and Paragraphs [0084], [0168]-[0183]: User specific genetic and environmental data are collected from genetic and environmental collection sources, environmental data can be health and fitness applications, which the Examiner is interpreting the health and fitness applications as environmental data to encompass the user fitness test results);
generating, the exercise plan, wherein the generating is based at least on the user energy consumption metrics and a user energy score, wherein the exercise plan includes at least a subset of the plurality of exercises to be performed by the user to attempt to achieve the user energy score, wherein each of the plurality of exercises is assigned a priority percentage, wherein a sum of each of the priority percentages represent a weight associated with including each one of the plurality of exercises in the exercise plan for the purpose of enabling the user to achieve the user energy score (See Paragraphs [0167], [0464]: The relevant trait scores within the relevant biological systems to appropriate schedules, exercises and exercise parameters, and these scores are used to query databases comprising exercise and exercise parameters and fit the identified exercises into a customised schedule, which the Examiner is interpreting “priority exercises” and “accessory exercises” ([0464]) to encompass each of the plurality of exercises is assigned a priority percentage as the “priority exercises” represent a necessity to achieve the user’s goals ([0221]), and the Examiner is interpreting these scores are used to query databases comprising exercise and exercise parameters and fit the identified exercises into a customised schedule to encompass a sum of each of the priority percentages represent a weight associated with including each one of the plurality of exercises in the exercise plan for the purpose of enabling the user to achieve the user energy score as the trait scores are matched to the exercises that are most appropriate for the traits of the user), and wherein the user energy score corresponds to an amount of energy for the user to exert while performing the exercise plan (See Fig. 4a-4c and Paragraphs [0147], [0158]-[0168], [0422]-[0424]: The user data, and the trait scores are analysed to generate trait profiles which leverage understandings of the relationships, the interactions with the compound effects between the genetic and environmental data in order to generate a user profile, a trait profile can be generated for the user and the workout plan and/or recommendations provided by the system, the trait scores and biological system characterization are analysed within the trait and biological system model using customised algorithms or AI systems which leverage understandings of the relationships, interactions and compound effects between the traits and biological systems specific to the goal, which the Examiner is interpreting the workout plan to encompass the exercise plan, trait score and exercise parameters to encompass the user energy consumption metrics and a goal to encompass a user energy score, and the matching of relevant trait scores within the biological systems to appropriate schedules, exercises and exercise parameters to encompass the exercise plan includes at least a subset of the plurality of exercises to be performed by the user to attempt to achieve the user energy score, and interpreting the user's trait recommendations for recovery and lactate clearance are used to identify the exercise parameters for the identified exercises, i.e. the rest between exercises/sets, tempo to be used with the movement, and the effort level or rate of perceived exertion (RPE) required when performing the exercise or movement to encompass the user energy score corresponds to an amount of energy for the user to exert while performing the exercise plan ([0422]-[0424])); and transmitting the exercise plan to a computing device associated with the electromechanical device (See Paragraph [0032]: The optimised workout plan may be transmitted to one or more of: a mobile phone app, desktop app, tablet app, email address, web browser, wearable electronic device, and an exercise machine, which the Examiner is interpreting the optimised workout plan to encompass the exercise plan and a mobile phone app, desktop app, tablet app, email address, web browser, wearable electronic device, and an exercise machine to encompass a computing device associated with the electromechanical device.)
While Rose teaches the method as described above, Rose may not explicitly teach generating, based on the user fitness test results, user energy consumption metrics for a plurality of exercises, wherein each of the user energy consumption metrics is generated for a respective one of the plurality of exercises based at least on a metabolic equivalent of task (MET) value for the respective one of the plurality of exercises and the user fitness test results.
Jang teaches a method for generating, based on the user fitness test results, user energy consumption metrics for a plurality of exercises, wherein each of the user energy consumption metrics is generated for a respective one of the plurality of exercises based at least on a metabolic equivalent of task (MET) value for the respective one of the plurality of exercises and the user fitness test results (See Fig. 1A and Paragraphs [0040]-[0050]: Embodiments may be applied to generate and provide the personalized exercise program using personalized metabolic equivalent of task (MET) information and a target exercise amount by generating the personalized MET information based on user information received or input through a device, the processor generates a personalized exercise program based on the target exercise amount and the personalized MET information, which the Examiner is interpreting generate and provide the personalized exercise program using personalized metabolic equivalent of task (MET) information and a target exercise amount to encompass generating, user energy consumption metrics for a plurality of exercises, wherein each of the user energy consumption metrics is generated for a respective one of the plurality of exercises based at least on a metabolic equivalent of task (MET) value for the respective one of the plurality of exercises and the user fitness test results.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed to modify the method of Rose to include generating, based on the user fitness test results, user energy consumption metrics for a plurality of exercises, wherein each of the user energy consumption metrics is generated for a respective one of the plurality of exercises based at least on a metabolic equivalent of task (MET) value for the respective one of the plurality of exercises and the user fitness test results as taught by Jang to be added to Rose's disclosure of customised algorithms that are utilized to analyze trait profiles that are used to identify an optimised workout plan for a user. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Rose with Jang with the motivation of generating a personalized exercise program (See Summary of Jang in Paragraph [0005]).
While Rose/Jang teaches the method as described above, Rose/Jang may not explicitly teach generating fitness test results while the user operates an electromechanical device;
based on the exercise plan, controlling, while the user performs the exercise plan on the electromechanical device, a physical portion of the electromechanical device via a control instruction specifying an operating parameter of the physical portion of the electromechanical device associated with the exercise plan, wherein the control instruction specifying the operating parameter is transmitted to the electromechanical device to adjust the operating parameter of the electromechanical device.
Hacking teaches a method for generating fitness test results while the user operates an electromechanical device (See Paragraphs [0018]-[0019]: The therapy device may include one or more sensors for measuring metric data associated with a patient's physical activities, and the metric data may be compared to acquired metric data and/or a set of a target values and feedback may be provided based on the comparison, which the Examiner is interpreting measuring metric data associated with a patient's physical activities to encompass fitness test results, and the therapy device to encompass an electromechanical device);
based on the exercise plan, controlling, while the user performs the exercise plan on the electromechanical device, a physical portion of the electromechanical device via a control instruction specifying an operating parameter of the physical portion of the electromechanical device associated with the exercise plan (See Fig. 3 and Paragraphs [0045]-[0048], [0052]-[0057], [0067]-[0070]: The control system may use information received from the monitoring devices to adjust parameters of components of the electromechanical device in real-time during a pedaling session, and enable a computing device operated by a physician to monitor the progress of a user participating in a treatment plan in real-time and/or to control operation of the electromechanical device during a pedaling session, the computing device may also use the steps taken and/or the heart rate to control a parameter of operating the electromechanical device, which the Examiner is interpreting control a parameter of operating the electromechanical device, and the movement of pedals ([0045]) to encompass a control instruction specifying an operating parameter of the physical portion of the electromechanical device associated with the exercise plan, and interpreting the control system to encompass an artificial intelligence engine as the control system can adjust parameters (e.g., reduce resistance provided by electric motor, increase resistance provided by the electric motor, increase/decrease speed of the electric motor, adjust position of pedals on radially-adjustable couplings, etc.) while operating the electromechanical device in the various modes), wherein the control instruction specifying the operating parameter is transmitted to the electromechanical device to adjust the operating parameter of the electromechanical device (See Fig. 4 and Paragraphs [0047]-[0058], [0064]-[0065], [0067]-[0076]: The control system may enable operating the electromechanical device in a variety of modes, such as a passive mode, an active-assisted mode, a resistive mode, and/or an active mode, the control system may use the information received from the measuring devices to adjust parameters (e.g., reduce resistance provided by electric motor, increase resistance provided by the electric motor, increase/decrease speed of the electric motor, adjust position of pedals on radially-adjustable couplings, etc.) while operating the electromechanical device in the various modes, which the Examiner is interpreting the control system may enable operating the electromechanical device and operating the electromechanical device in the various modes to encompass the control instruction specifying the operating parameter is transmitted to the electromechanical device to adjust the operating parameter of the electromechanical device.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed to modify the method of Rose/Jang to include generating fitness test results while the user operates an electromechanical device; based on the exercise plan, controlling, while the user performs the exercise plan on the electromechanical device, a physical portion of the electromechanical device via a control instruction specifying an operating parameter of the physical portion of the electromechanical device associated with the exercise plan, wherein the control instruction specifying the operating parameter is transmitted to the electromechanical device to adjust the operating parameter of the electromechanical device as taught by Hacking to generate data to be used by the method of Rose/Jang. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify Rose/Jang with Hacking with the motivation of enhancing patient rehabilitation (See Detailed Description of Hacking in Paragraph [0044]).
Claim(s) 9 and 17 mirror claim 1 only within different statutory categories, and are rejected for the same reason as claim 1. The addition of "a memory device for storing instructions; and a processing device communicatively coupled to the memory device, the processing device configured to execute the instructions to" in claim 9 and "a tangible, non- transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed, cause a processing device to" in claim 17 are disclosed by Rose in Paragraphs [0508]-[0509] that discloses that the methods can be implemented as a computer program and the computer may include a read only memory (ROM) and a physical computer readable medium, such as a disc or a memory device may provide the computer program.
As per claim 2, Rose/Jang/Hacking discloses the method of claim 1 as described above. Rose further teaches wherein the data pertaining to the user further comprises one or more user- reported pain levels, and wherein the user energy consumption metrics are further generated based on the one or more user-reported pain levels (See Paragraphs [0443]-[0445], [0452]-[0453], [0468]-[0469]: A new optimised workout plan can be generated based on the updated trait profile, feedback can be utilized by the system, the feedback may be emotional data input and exercise progression and regression, which the Examiner is interpreting the feedback may be emotional data input and exercise progression and regression to encompass pain levels as a user can identify if they are experiencing pain.)
Claim(s) 10 and 18 mirror claim 2 only within different statutory categories, and are rejected for the same reason as claim 2.
As per claim 3, Rose/Jang/Hacking discloses the method of claims 1-2 as described above. Rose further teaches wherein the user energy consumption metrics are further generated based on at least one selected from a group consisting of heart rate, step count, blood pressure, perspiration, blood oxygen levels, and body temperature (See Paragraphs [0128]-[0150], [0439]-[0469]: The feedback data itself may comprise data describing a physiological condition of the individual before, during, and/or after performing an exercise, for example a user's heart rate after an exercise has been completed, and environmental data can be digital information regarding the health, lifestyle and wellbeing of the individual which may include, but is not limited to, height, weight, age, blood pressure, body fat percentage, and fitness activity.)
Claim(s) 11 and 19 mirror claim 3 only within different statutory categories, and are rejected for the same reason as claim 3.
As per claim 4, Rose/Jang/Hacking discloses the method of claim 1 as described above. Rose further teaches wherein the user fitness test results indicate at least one selected from a group consisting of strength, mobility, endurance, pliability, a range of motion, flexibility, and balance (See Paragraphs [0112]: The system uses the genetic and environmental data to define a number of "traits", or propensities towards particular phenotypic expressions, and then uses these traits to model a smaller number of higher-level biological systems, a trait may be a physiological, behavioral or biological metric based on genetic and/or environmental factors, for example, endurance capability, workout recovery, etc.)
Claim(s) 12 and 20 mirror claim 4 only within different statutory categories, and are rejected for the same reason as claim 4.
As per claim 5, Rose/Jang/Hacking discloses the method of claim 1 as described above. Rose further teaches further comprising: receiving a physical activity goal the user desires to achieve, wherein the physical activity goal requires one or more physical levels of attainment to achieve (See Paragraphs [0128]-[0150]: Goal-specific Trait and Biological System Model, an algorithm used to modify scores based on weightings of traits associated with particular goal-linked questions and their effects on the biological systems to produce a readout, which the Examiner is interpreting the goal-linked questions when answered to encompass receiving a physical activity goal the user desires to achieve, wherein the physical activity goal requires one or more physical levels of attainment to achieve); and
determining the user energy score, wherein the user energy score is correlated with an amount of energy it takes to achieve the physical activity goal (See Paragraphs [0245]-[0250], [0474]: The question database provides a non-user specific overview of which traits are relevant to which category for a specific goal-related question and the categories can be assessed can be the "daily caloric intake" and "amount of carbohydrate" categories, which the Examiner is interpreting "daily caloric intake" to encompass an amount of energy as further discussed in Paragraph [0474].)
Claim(s) 13 mirrors claim 5 only within a different statutory category, and is rejected for the same reason as claim 5.
As per claim 6, Rose/Jang/Hacking discloses the method of claim 1 as described above. Rose further teaches further comprising: receiving updated user fitness test results (See Paragraphs [0485]-[0499]: Harvested data from a collection of users' data, or external/open source data, can be used to update the trait weightings that are used to generate trait profiles for all users, which the Examiner is interpreting updated trait weightings to encompass updated user fitness test results);
generating updated user energy consumption metrics for the plurality of exercises, wherein the generating is based at least on the updated user fitness test results (See Paragraphs [0485]-[0499]: Harvested data from a collection of users' data, or external/open source data, can be used to update the trait weightings that are used to generate trait profiles for all users, which the Examiner is interpreting updated trait weightings to encompass updated user fitness test results);
generating an updated exercise plan, wherein the generating is based at least on the updated user energy consumption metrics (See Paragraphs [0168], [0485]-[0499]: The user progresses through their health regime and experiences changes in their overall fitness and health, their diet, fitness and plans may then be updated by re-running the traits and biological system model in a sandbox environment, harvested data from a collection of users' data, or external/open source data, can be used to update the trait weightings that are used to generate trait profiles for all users, which the Examiner is interpreting updated trait weightings to encompass updated user fitness test results); and
transmitting the updated exercise plan to the computing device (See Paragraphs [0327]-[0438]: The optimised workout plan can be transmitted to an individual or healthcare practitioner.)
Claim(s) 14 mirrors claim 6 only within a different statutory category, and is rejected for the same reason as claim 6.
As per claim 7, Rose/Jang/Hacking discloses the method of claim 1 as described above. Rose further teaches further comprising generating one or more machine learning models trained to perform the generating of the user energy consumption metrics (See Paragraphs [0165]-[0168]: Trait scores and biological system characterization are analysed within the trait and biological system model using customised algorithms or AI system, which the Examiner is the trait and biological system model using customised algorithms or AI system to encompass generating one or more machine learning models.)
Claim(s) 15 mirrors claim 7 only within a different statutory category, and is rejected for the same reason as claim 7.
As per claim 8, Rose/Jang/Hacking discloses the method of claim 1 as described above. Rose further teaches further comprising: transmitting a signal to an exercise apparatus, wherein the user performs at least one of the subset of the plurality of exercises included in the exercise plan on the exercise apparatus (See Paragraphs [0333]-[0336]: As the user progresses through their workout plan, intra-workout feedback may be provided in many ways including telemetric through wearable devices, connect gym equipment, manual response to questionnaires or smart items, synced with the dynamic planner system, which the Examiner is interpreting the connected gym equipment or smart items to encompass the exercise apparatus as the workout plan may be uploaded directly to exercise machines in gyms); and
in response to the exercise apparatus receiving the signal, adjusting at least one portion of the exercise apparatus based on at least one operating parameter specified in the exercise plan (See Paragraphs [0331]-[0342]: As the user progresses through their workout plan, intra-workout feedback may be provided in many ways including telemetric through wearable devices, connect gym equipment, manual response to questionnaires or smart items, synced with the dynamic planner system, and the AI interpreter may ingest other personal data to guide plan adjustments and feedback data inputs can be utilized to adjust the plan, which the Examiner is interpreting adjusting the AI interpreter may ingest other personal data to guide plan adjustments and feedback data inputs can be utilized to adjust the plan to encompass adjusting at least one portion of the exercise apparatus based on at least one operating parameter specified in the exercise plan.)
As per claim 16, Rose/Jang/Hacking discloses the system of claim 9 as described above. Rose further teaches further including an exercise apparatus for the user to perform at least one of the subset of the plurality of exercises included in the exercise plan, wherein the processing device is further configured to execute the instructions to transmit a signal to the exercise apparatus (See Paragraphs [0333]-[0336]: As the user progresses through their workout plan, intra-workout feedback may be provided in many ways including telemetric through wearable devices, connect gym equipment, manual response to questionnaires or smart items, synced with the dynamic planner system, which the Examiner is interpreting the connected gym equipment or smart items to encompass the exercise apparatus as the workout plan may be uploaded directly to exercise machines in gyms), wherein, in response to the exercise apparatus receiving the signal, the exercise apparatus is configured to adjust at least one portion of the exercise apparatus based on at least an operating parameter specified in the exercise plan (See Paragraphs [0331]-[0342]: As the user progresses through their workout plan, intra-workout feedback may be provided in many ways including telemetric through wearable devices, connect gym equipment, manual response to questionnaires or smart items, synced with the dynamic planner system, and the AI interpreter may ingest other personal data to guide plan adjustments and feedback data inputs can be utilized to adjust the plan, which the Examiner is interpreting adjusting the AI interpreter may ingest other personal data to guide plan adjustments and feedback data inputs can be utilized to adjust the plan to encompass adjusting at least one portion of the exercise apparatus based on at least one operating parameter specified in the exercise plan.)
Response to Arguments
In the Remarks filed on September 8, 2025, the Applicant argues that the newly amended and/or added claims overcome the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection(s) and 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection(s). The Examiner does acknowledge that the newly added and/or amended claims overcome the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection(s). The Examiner does not acknowledge that the newly added and/or amended claims overcome the newly added Claim Objection(s) and 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection(s).
The Applicant argues that:
(1) Applicant respectfully submits that this portion of Rose does not teach or suggest each of the plurality of exercises is assigned a priority percentage, wherein the sum of each of the priority percentages represents a weight associated with including each one of the plurality of exercises in the exercise plan for the purpose of enabling the user to achieve the user energy score, as recited by the amended independent claims. In fact, this portion of Rose and the rest of the portions of Rose appear to be silent regarding assigning a priority percentage, wherein the sum of each of the priority percentages represents a weight associated with including each one of the plurality of exercises in the exercise plan for the purpose of enabling the user to achieve the user energy score. The other cited references fail to cure this deficiency of Rose. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests that the Office withdraw this rejection of the claims and, further, allow the same.
In response to argument (1), the Examiner does not find the Applicant’s argument(s) persuasive. The Examiner maintains that Rose encompasses the newly amended independent claimed portions of each of the plurality of exercises is assigned a priority percentage, wherein a sum of each of the priority percentages represents a weight associated with including each one of the plurality of exercises in the exercise plan for the purpose of enabling the user to achieve the user energy score in Paragraphs [0167], [0464]: The relevant trait scores within the relevant biological systems to appropriate schedules, exercises and exercise parameters, and these scores are used to query databases comprising exercise and exercise parameters and fit the identified exercises into a customised schedule, which the Examiner is interpreting “priority exercises” and “accessory exercises” ([0464]) to encompass each of the plurality of exercises is assigned a priority percentage as the “priority exercises” represent a necessity to achieve the user’s goals ([0221]), and the Examiner is interpreting these scores are used to query databases comprising exercise and exercise parameters and fit the identified exercises into a customised schedule to encompass a sum of each of the priority percentages represent a weight associated with including each one of the plurality of exercises in the exercise plan for the purpose of enabling the user to achieve the user energy score as the trait scores are matched to the exercises that are most appropriate for the traits of the user. The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection(s) stand.
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 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 Bennett S Erickson whose telephone number is (571)270-3690. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Robert Morgan can be reached at (571) 272-6773. 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.
/Bennett Stephen Erickson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3683