DETAILED ACTION
In view of the Appeal Brief filed on 05/14/2026, PROSECUTION IS HEREBY REOPENED. A new ground of rejection is set forth below.
To avoid abandonment of the application, appellant must exercise one of the following two options:
(1) file a reply under 37 CFR 1.111 (if this Office action is non-final) or a reply under 37 CFR 1.113 (if this Office action is final); or,
(2) initiate a new appeal by filing a notice of appeal under 37 CFR 41.31 followed by an appeal brief under 37 CFR 41.37. The previously paid notice of appeal fee and appeal brief fee can be applied to the new appeal. If, however, the appeal fees set forth in 37 CFR 41.20 have been increased since they were previously paid, then appellant must pay the difference between the increased fees and the amount previously paid.
A Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) has approved of reopening prosecution by signing below:
/CHARLES N APPIAH/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2641
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 4-11 of the remark, filed on 05/14/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 5, 8, 11-13, 17 and 25-27 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the finality of the previous Office Action has been withdrawn and the prosecution of the present application is reopened. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement submitted on 06/24/2026 has been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 25-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 25-27, which were added on November 15, 2024 by amendment, all depend on claim 13 and each recites the phrase “receiving a DCI transmission”. Claim 13 is directed to a “processor of a base station”; therefore, the operation “receiving a DCI transmission” is performed by the claimed “processor of a base station”, not a UE. However, the specification, as originally filed, describes the base station transmitting the DCI repetition configuration to the UE. Paragraph [0047] describes the UE receiving a PUCCH repetition configuration from the gNB and explains that the configuration would be indicated/provided by a DCI (also see par [0099]-[0101]), and paragraph [0097] describes the base station transmitting the enhanced PUCCH repetition configuration and receiving the resulting PUCCH transmission. Accordingly, the specification, as originally filed, supports the base station transmitting the DCI indicating the repetition and the UE receiving it, but not the base station processor “receiving a DCI transmission” as recited in claims 25-27.
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 5, 13 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Gao (US 20230262608 A1).
Consider claim 1, Gao discloses a processor of a user equipment (UE) configured to perform operations (read as wireless communication device 2600 as User Equipment (UE) having processor 2602 (processing circuitry) configured to perform multiple transmission and reception points (TRPs) power control operations, figures 13 and 26, par [0116], [0132], [0181]-[0182]) comprising:
receiving a 5G New Radio (NR)downlink control information (DCI) format 0_2 transmission including a transmission power control (TPC) configuration, wherein the TPC configuration includes multiple TPC commands and multiple closed loop indexes (read as wireless device (i.e. UE) receiving, in fifth generation (5G) New Radio (NR) system, DCI format 0_2 containing TPC#1, TPC#2, a first SRI and a second SRI (figure 19, par [0113], [0132], [0153] and [0158]); each of the first and second SRIs carried by the DCI selects an SRI-PUSCH-PowerControl information element containing a closed-loop index (i.e. SRI-PUSCH-ClosedLoopIndex); accordingly, the DCI format 0_2 power control signaling (corresponds to TPC configuration) contains multiple TPC commands and identifies multiple configured closed-loop indexes through its SRI selections, figures 6 and 15, par [0032], [0137]-[0138] and [0158]); (Note: See par [0040]-[0045] of instant application specification (See US PGPub 20240056980 A1), which describe similar mapping relationship between the claimed TPC configuration and claimed the multiple closed loop indexes);
determining that each TPC command corresponds to one of the multiple closed loop indexes, wherein the multiple closed loop indexes correspond to multiple transmission and reception points (TRPs) (read as TPC#1 associated with the first SRI and TPC#2 associated with the second SRI, and each SRI selects the respective SRI-PUSCH-PowerControl information element containing a SRI-PUSCH-ClosedLoopIndex; thus, processing DCI identifies one indexed closed loop for each TPC command (par [0032], [0138], [0153] and [0158]); the SRIs indicated/associated with the respective TRPs, and the closed loops associated with the TRPs are indexed together based on the respective SRIs, figure 19, par [0135]-[0138] and [0158]);
applying each TPC command to one or more physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) or physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) transmissions corresponding to the multiple closed loop indexes (read as the wireless device (UE) derives first and second transmit powers from the first and second TPC commands (TPC#1 and TPC#2) and applies the derived powers to the respective first and second uplink transmission occasions (par [0132]); figure 19 identifies those transmissions occasions as first and second PUSCH transmissions while each of the first and second SRIs selects the corresponding SRI-PUSCH-ClosedLoopIndex; thus, each of the TPC commands controls the power of the PUSCH associated with its indexed closed loop of the indexed closed loops, figures 15 and 19, par [0138] and [0158]).
Consider claim 13, Gao discloses a processor of a base station configured to perform operations (read as processor 2304 (processing circuitry) within control system 2302 of a 5G New Radio base station configured to perform multiple transmission and reception points (TRPs) power control operations, figures 14 and 23, par [0116], [0132], [0181]-[0182]) comprising:
generating, for transmission, to a user equipment (UE), a 5G New Radio (NR) downlink control information (DCI) format 0 2 transmission including a transmission power control (TPC) configuration, wherein the TPC configuration includes multiple TPC commands and multiple closed loop indexes (read as the base station in a 5G New Radio (NR) system generating the DCI for transmission to the wireless device (i.e. UE) (figures 14 and 23, par [0116], [0133] and [0175], [0179]); and the wireless device (i.e. UE) receiving, in fifth generation (5G) New Radio (NR) system, DCI format 0_2 containing TPC#1, TPC#2, a first SRI and a second SRI (figure 19, par [0113], [0132], [0153] and [0158]); each of the first and second SRIs carried by the DCI selects an SRI-PUSCH-PowerControl information element containing a closed-loop index (i.e. SRI-PUSCH-ClosedLoopIndex); accordingly, the DCI format 0_2 power control signaling (corresponds to TPC configuration) contains multiple TPC commands and identifies multiple configured closed-loop indexes through its SRI selections, figures 6 and 15, par [0032], [0137]-[0138] and [0158]); (Note: See par [0040]-[0045] of instant application specification (See US PGPub 20240056980 A1), which describe similar mapping relationship between the claimed TPC configuration and claimed the multiple closed loop indexes);
wherein the UE is configured to determine that each TPC command corresponds to one of the multiple closed loop indexes, wherein the multiple closed loop indexes correspond to multiple transmission and reception points (TRPs) (read as TPC#1 associated with the first SRI and TPC#2 associated with the second SRI, and the UE uses each of the first and second SRIs to select its corresponding SRI-PUSCH-PowerControl information element containing a corresponding SRI-PUSCH-ClosedLoopIndex; thus, processing DCI identifies one indexed closed loop for each TPC command (par [0032], [0138], [0153] and [0158]); the SRIs indicated/associated with the respective TRPs, and the closed loops associated with the TRPs are indexed together based on the respective SRIs, figure 19, par [0135]-[0138] and [0158]);
wherein the UE is configured to apply each TPC command to one or more physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) or physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH) transmissions corresponding to the multiple closed loop indexes (read as the wireless device (UE) derives first and second transmit powers from the first and second TPC commands (TPC#1 and TPC#2) and applies the derived powers to the respective first and second uplink transmission occasions (par [0132]); figure 19 identifies those transmissions occasions as first and second PUSCH transmissions while each of the first and second SRIs selects the corresponding SRI-PUSCH-ClosedLoopIndex; thus, each of the TPC commands controls the power of the PUSCH associated with its indexed closed loop of the indexed closed loops, figures 15 and 19, par [0138] and [0158]).
Consider claim 5, as applied to claim 1 above, Gao discloses wherein the operations further comprise: maintaining one closed loop power control (CLPC) for each of the multiple closed loop indexes (read as the UE maintaining four power control states, which identified as four closed loops, with corresponding SRI-PUSCH-ClosedLoopIndex values i0 through i3, each index identifies one maintained PUSCH closed-loop power control state, figure 15, par [0137]-[0138]).
Consider claim 17, as applied to claim 13 above, Gao discloses wherein the UE is configured to maintain one closed loop power control (CLPC) for each of the multiple closed loop indexes (read as the UE is configured to maintain four power control states, which identified as four closed loops, with corresponding SRI-PUSCH-ClosedLoopIndex values i0 through i3, each index identifies one maintained PUSCH closed-loop power control state, figure 15, par [0137]-[0138]).
Claims 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Fukui (US 20240137935 A1).
Consider claim 8, Fukui discloses a processor of a user equipment (UE) configured to perform operations (read as terminal apparatus 1, identified as User Equipment #1 (UE #1), performing repetition control and transmission operations, figure 6, par [0027], [0084] and [0293]-[0295]) comprising:
receiving a first repetition configuration, wherein the first repetition configuration is received in a downlink control information (DCI) and comprises an enhanced physical uplink control channel (PUCCH) repetition configuration, wherein the enhanced PUCCH repetition configuration is UE-specific (read as terminal apparatus 1 receiving physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) 910 carrying a downlink control information (DCI) which includes PUCCH-ReceptionFactor field that specifies the repetition number for PUCCH 920, which corresponds to enhanced PUCCH repetition (figure 9, par [0260], [0268] and [0281]-[0282]); and receiving the DCI format through a UE-specific PDCCH search space set using a Cell Radio Network Temporary Identifier (C-RNTI), thus the DCI repetition configuration is directed to the terminal apparatus 1 (i.e. UE-specific), par [0235]);
receiving a second repetition configuration, wherein the second repetition configuration is received in a radio resource control (RRC) message and comprises a PUCCH repetition parameter nrofslots, wherein the PUCCH repetition parameter nrofslots is UE-specific (read as radio resource control (RRC) layer processing circuitry 16 setting the terminal apparatus 1’s RRC parameters from a RRC message received from base station apparatus 3 (figure 6, par [0090]); and identifies NrofSlots (number of repetitions) as a higher layer parameter that determines N.sup.repeat.sub.PUCCH (repetition count) for the corresponding PUCCH format and describes the higher layer parameter being included in the RRC message (par [0194], [0198] par [0255]); the RRC message would be a dedicated RRC message directed to the terminal apparatus 1, which makes the NrofSlots being US-specific, par [0194]-[0195]);
determining whether to use the first repetition configuration or the second repetition configuration when there is a conflict between the first repetition configuration and the second repetition configuration (read as the NrofSlots (RRC) and the PUCCH-RepetitionFactor field (DCI) may be simultaneously applicable but with different repetition values for the PUCCH 920; the terminal apparatus 1 resolves the competing (i.e. conflict) settings by determining one repetition number: assigning the PUCCH-RepetitionFactor with higher priority than the NrofSlots, and ignoring NrofSlots configuration, par [0282]-[0285]); and
generating, for transmission, a PUCCH transmission with a configured number of repetitions based on the first repetition configuration or the second repetition configuration (read as radio transmission circuitry 10a generating a PUCCH baseband signal for transmission; and after the competing repetition settings condition is resolved, N.sup.repeat.sub.PUCCH value is supplied with the value of the selected PUCCH-RepetitionFactor field having higher priority above; and terminal apparatus 1 transmits PUCCH 920 and repeats the PUCCH 921 using the N.sup.repeat.sub.PUCCH having the value of PUCCH-RepetitionFactor field, figures 6 and 9, par [0086], [0260]-[0261] and [0285]-[0287]).
Consider claim 10, as applied to claim 8 above, Fukui discloses wherein the DCI includes a field which explicitly indicates the configured number of repetitions (read as PDCCH 910 carrying a PUCCH-RepetitionFactor field whose selected value directly establishes N.sup.repeat.sub.PUCCH, supplying the configured repetition count for PUCCH 920, figure 9, par [0281]-[0282]).
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukui (US 20240137935 A1) in view of Jiang et al. (US 20220385401 A1).
Consider claim 11, as applied to claim 8 above, Fukui discloses wherein the DCI includes a bitwidth field which explicitly indicates the configured number of repetitions (read as PDCCH 910 carrying a multi-bit PUCCH-RepetitionFactor field whose selected value directly establishes N.sup.repeat.sub.PUCCH,including two-bit and three-bit configurations for different numbers of repetition states, figure 9, par [0281]-[0282]) but does not specifically disclose an extended bitwidth field which explicitly indicates the configured number of repetitions in addition to an additional indication.
Nonetheless, Jiang discloses extended joint DCI signaling, in which the joint DCI field having more bits (corresponds to extended bitwidth) than the legacy field; each selected state identifies a PUCCH transmission repetition mode whose configured parameters include the number of transmissions T (explicitly), while the same field also supplies PUCCH resource and feedback-timing information, figure 6, par [0038] and [0050].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Jiang into the teachings of Fukui, to configure Fukui’s DCI repetition signaling using Jiang’s extended joint DCI field, in order to allow the terminal to obtain repetition, resource and feedback-timing controls from one field while supporting more signaling states (see par [0050] of Jiang).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukui (US 20240137935 A1) in view of Ling et al. (US 20230198684 A1).
Consider claim 12, as applied to claim 8 above, Fukui the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose discloses wherein the DCI includes a "PDSCH- to-HARQfeedback timing indicator" field that indicates one of multiple entries of a "DL- DataToUL-ACK" table, wherein each of the multiple entries indicates (i) a slot offset between a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission and a hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK), and (ii) the configured number of repetitions.
Nonetheless, in related art, Ling disclose a system for PUCCH repetition number indication, comprising HARQ-ACK corresponding to a scheduled DL transmission is transmitted on a PUCCH resource and that the DCI scheduling the DL transmission also schedules the PUCCH resource and indicates the repetition number (par [0060]-[0061]); also the repetition number of the PUCCH carrying HARQ-ACK corresponding to the scheduled DL transmission would be indicated in the PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing indicator filed of the DCI, and that the value m of the PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing indicator field indicates a row m+1 of a table configured by the DL-DataToUL-ACK (see par [0069]); furthermore, each row of the DL-DataToUL-ACK list includes parameters where k indicates the time offset between the PDSCH and the PUCCH carrying the HARQ-ACK, and an additional parameter (nrofSlots) indicates the repetition number of the PUCCH, such that each entry/row of the DL-DataToUL-ACK list/table indicates both the HARQ timing offset and the PUCCH repetition number (see par [0070]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Ling into the teachings of Fukui, to modify the transmission with Ling’s DL-DataToUL-ACK based HARQ timing and PUCCH repetition indication, in order to improve transmission reliability (see par [0073] of Ling).
Claims 25-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao (US 20230262608 A1) in view of Jiang et al. (US 20220385401 A1).
Consider claim 25, as applied to claim 13 above, Gao discloses receiving a DCI transmission having a field which indicates a configured number of PUCCH repetitions (read as processor 2304 providing the base station functions for the downlink DCI sent through transmitter 2312 and formation of such DCI before transmission is functionally implied by the signaling path (figure 23, par [0175]); the DCI’s PRI field selects a PUCCH resource and provide that resource indication while the selected resource’s activated spatial relations established the PUCCH repetition count, which corresponds to the field indicates the count in addition to its PUCCH resource indication, figure 17, par [0147]) but does not specifically disclose DCI transmission having the field which explicitly indicates a configured number of PUCCH repetitions.
Nonetheless, Jiang discloses extended joint DCI signaling, in which the joint DCI field having more bits (corresponds to extended bitwidth) than the legacy field; each selected state identifies a PUCCH transmission repetition mode whose configured parameters include the number of transmissions T (explicitly), while the same field also supplies PUCCH resource and feedback-timing information, figure 6, par [0038] and [0050].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Jiang into the teachings of Gao, to configure Gao’s repetition signaling using Jiang’s extended joint DCI field, in order to allow the base station to directly signal the repetition mode together with the PUCCH resource and feedback-timing selected while supporting more DCI states (see par [0050] of Jiang).
Consider claim 26, as applied to claim 13 above, Gao discloses receiving a DCI transmission having a field which indicates a configured number of PUCCH repetitions in addition to an additional indication (read as processor 2304 providing the base station functions for the downlink DCI sent through transmitter 2312 and formation of such DCI before transmission is functionally implied by the signaling path (figure 23, par [0175]); the DCI’s PRI field selects a PUCCH resource and provide that resource indication while the selected resource’s activated spatial relations established the PUCCH repetition count, which corresponds to the field indicates the count in addition to its PUCCH resource indication, figure 17, par [0147]) but does not specifically disclose an extended bitwidth field that explicitly indicate the configured number of PUCCH repetition.
Nonetheless, Jiang discloses extended joint DCI signaling, in which the joint DCI field having more bits (corresponds to extended bitwidth) than the legacy field; each selected state identifies a PUCCH transmission repetition mode whose configured parameters include the number of transmissions T (explicitly), while the same field also supplies PUCCH resource and feedback-timing information, figure 6, par [0038] and [0050].
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Jiang into the teachings of Gao, to configure Gao’s repetition signaling using Jiang’s extended joint DCI field, in order to allow the base station to directly signal the repetition mode together with the PUCCH resource and feedback-timing selected while supporting more DCI states (see par [0050] of Jiang).
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gao (US 20230262608 A1) in view of Ling et al. (US 20230198684 A1).
Consider claim 27, as applied to claim 13 above, Gao discloses the claimed invention above but does not specifically disclose receiving a DCI transmission having a "PDSCH-to-HARQfeedback timing indicator" field that indicates one of multiple entries of a "DL-DataToUL-ACK" table, wherein each of the multiple entries indicates (i) a slot offset between a physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) transmission and a hybrid automatic repeat request acknowledgement (HARQ-ACK), and (ii) a configured number of PUCCH repetitions.
Nonetheless, in related art, Ling disclose a system for PUCCH repetition number indication, comprising HARQ-ACK corresponding to a scheduled DL transmission is transmitted on a PUCCH resource and that the DCI scheduling the DL transmission also schedules the PUCCH resource and indicates the repetition number (par [0060]-[0061]); also the repetition number of the PUCCH carrying HARQ-ACK corresponding to the scheduled DL transmission would be indicated in the PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing indicator filed of the DCI, and that the value m of the PDSCH-to-HARQ feedback timing indicator field indicates a row m+1 of a table configured by the DL-DataToUL-ACK (see par [0069]); furthermore, each row of the DL-DataToUL-ACK list includes parameters where k indicates the time offset between the PDSCH and the PUCCH carrying the HARQ-ACK, and an additional parameter (nrofSlots) indicates the repetition number of the PUCCH, such that each entry/row of the DL-DataToUL-ACK list/table indicates both the HARQ timing offset and the PUCCH repetition number (see par [0070]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Ling into the teachings of Gao, to modify the transmission with Ling’s DL-DataToUL-ACK based HARQ timing and PUCCH repetition indication, in order to improve transmission reliability (see par [0073] of Ling).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Junpeng Chen whose telephone number is (571) 270-1112. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday, 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, Applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anthony S Addy can be reached on 571-272-7795. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Junpeng Chen/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645
/CHARLES N APPIAH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2641
Prosecution Insights