DETAILED ACTION
Introduction
Claims 42-57 and 59-60 have been examined in this application. Claims 42, 46, 47, 52, 53, and 56 are amended. Claims 43-45, 48-51, 54, 55, 57, and 59 are as previously presented. Claim 60 is new. Claims 1-41 and 58 are cancelled.
This is a final office action in response to the arguments and amendments filed 2/25/2026. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Office Action Formatting
The following is an explanation of the formatting used in the instant Office Action:
• [0001] – Indicates a paragraph number in the most recent, previously cited source;
• [0001, 0010] – Indicates multiple paragraphs (in example: paragraphs 1 and 10) in the most recent, previously cited source;
• [0001-0010] – Indicates a range of paragraphs (in example: paragraphs 1 through 10) in the most recent, previously cited source;
• 1:1 – Indicates a column number and a line number (in example: column 1, line 1) in the most recent, previously cited source;
• 1:1, 2:1 – Indicates multiple column and line numbers (in example, column 1, line 1 and column 2, line 2) in the most recent, previously cited source;
• 1:1-10 – Indicates a range of lines within one column (in example: all lines spanning, and including, lines 1 and 10 in column 1) in the most recent, previously cited source;
• 1:1-2:1 – Indicates a range of lines spanning several columns (in example: column 1, line 1 to column 2, line 1 and including all intervening lines) in the most recent, previously cited source;
• p. 1, ln. 1 – Indicates a page and line number in the most recent, previously cited source;
• ¶1 – The paragraph symbol is used solely to refer to Applicant's own specification (further example: p. 1, ¶1 indicates first paragraph of page 1); and
• BRI – the broadest reasonable interpretation.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on application IL269715 filed in Israel on 09/26/2019. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on 9/3/2025 and 5/14/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, filed 2/25/2026, have been fully considered.
Regarding the remarks pertaining to the claim objections (presented on p. 11), the amendments are acceptable. Therefore, the objections have been withdrawn.
Regarding the arguments pertaining to the claim rejections under 112 (presented on p. 12), the arguments and amendments are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn.
Regarding the arguments pertaining to the claim rejections under 103 (presented on p. 12-16), the arguments and amendments are not persuasive. It is noted that in general, the features upon which applicant relies in the arguments are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). The claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI).
The arguments (p. 12-14) state that U.S. 10,518,879 B1 (Zhang et al.) corrects a trajectory to reflect reality, but states that this is not destination-based route planning, such as navigation “to turn right or left at the next intersection, as in the claimed subject matter.” The office respectfully disagrees. Particularly, the claims recite “repeatedly and selectively modifying the data indicative of the navigation route.” This includes any repeated and selective modification of such data, and is not provided with any further limitation of what the modification accomplishes, such as further route planning or intersection navigation tasks. The office maintains that any navigation of one or more sections of a trajectory is from a first to a second location (as a trajectory is a line made up of plural points) and that correction of such data representing a route is a modification of the route, as modification is generally defined as to change, alter, vary, modify mean to make or become different.
The arguments (p. 14-16) further state that Zhang et al. does not teach the use of visual data as claimed, particularly as visual cues are defined in specification ¶0185 such that street signs in the direction only may be retrieved. However, the office submits that the claims do not specify street signs and only specify limitations related to direction. While Zhang et al. does not explicitly recite features related to direction of segments, US2014/0244159A1 (Musabji et al.) is relied upon for such features related to direction of segments as well as use of GPS coordinates (see the rejection below for complete detail). The arguments (p. 16) further state that the use of feature points and descriptors in Zhang et al. is fundamentally different from the “visual cues” as claimed and describe in ¶0185. However, it is noted that applicant’s specification at ¶0185 recites that visual cues are any distinctive element in a surrounding environment, e.g. in an urban environment, which can be visually identified, such as… unique geometrical shapes. The office submits that a set of features points extracted by an image meets this definition of a visual cue as it represents a particular shape, and therefore the prior art reads on the claim. The arguments recite features such as semantic association, however this is not required by the claims. The features related to segment direction are rendered obvious by the combination with Musabji et al. as recited above. Therefore, the rejection is maintained.
Claim Objections
Claim 60 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 60 should end with a period.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 42-46, 49, 52, 53, 56, 57, and 60 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patent U.S. 10,518,879 B1 (Zhang et al.), in view of Publication US2014/0244159A1 (Musabji et al.).
Regarding Claim 42, Zhang et al. discloses a method for navigating a vehicle (see Figure 3, 9:5-15, output of corrected/drift-free trajectory from 326 can be used for causing travel/navigation) from a first location to a second location (see 9:5-15, output of corrected trajectory from 326, and see 10:34-48, correction including output of “following trajectory segment” from current position (i.e. first location), and end point or any other point of the trajectory being a “second location”), the method comprising, by a processor and memory circuitry associated with the vehicle (see Figures 1, 3, and 2:15-30, 8:23-30):
(a) obtaining data indicative of geographic-location related information associated with the first and second locations (see 10:34-48, obtain following trajectory segment, from current position (first location), to end point or any other point of the trajectory (a “second location”));
(b) determining data indicative of a navigation route from the first location to the second location based on the obtained data indicative of geographic-location related information (see Figure 5, and 10:34-48, trajectory R2 connects first and second location, i.e. all intermediate points of the line defining the data indicative of the navigation route), wherein the data indicative of the navigation route includes data indicative of a succession of at least two intermediate points (see Figure 5, and 10:34-48, trajectory R2 being a line (succession of points)), wherein each of the at least two intermediate points is associated with corresponding geographic-location related information (see Figure 5, line of points, 9:8 for global navigation),
(e) obtaining data indicative of a first local information, by retrieving, from a visual cues database comprising a plurality of records (see 10:16 features/points stored in image database), wherein each of the records comprises one or more visual cues associated with coordinates (see 10:22 image represents location),
(f) obtaining data indicative of a second local information of a surrounding area (see 9:65-67, and Figure 3, SLAM, using camera data), wherein one or more images of the surrounding area of the vehicle are captured by at least one camera mounted on the vehicle (see 8:35-55), and wherein the second local information comprises extracting at least one visual cue from the one or more captured images (see 10:5-15, features points/descriptors extracted from each image);
(f1) identifying a match to a retrieved visual cue by comparing the at least one visual cues extracted from the one or more captured images with the one or more visual cues retrieved from the visual cues database (see 10:15-20 finding match of image by matching features points in image database), and obtaining information associated with the matched visual cue, the obtained information being indicative of an accurate geographic location of the vehicle (see 10:20-32, location label of revisited location);
(g) repeatedly and selectively modifying the data indicative of the navigation route (see Figure 3, trajectory correction (selectively modifying route), and see 12:34-37, continues trajectory estimation based on estimated orientation and following estimation updates (i.e. repeated)) based on the obtained information associated with the matched retrieved visual cue (see 9:65-10:17, trajectory correction based on SLAM, which is based on match between camera data and image database)and
(h) navigating the vehicle based on the modified navigation route (see 9:9-16, navigating, steering and/or other control based on output 328).
Zhang et al. does not explicitly recite:
wherein each two successive intermediate points are associated with a corresponding segment of the navigation route;
(c) determining data indicative of a segment associated with a first and second intermediate points of the at least two intermediate points;
(d) determining data indicative of a direction of the segment from the first intermediate point to the second intermediate point, based on their corresponding geographic- location related information;
(e) obtaining data indicative of a first local information, based on the determined direction, wherein each of the records comprises one or more visual cues associated with GPS coordinates, one or more visual cues having corresponding GPS coordinates residing in a surrounding area of the determined segment; and
the modifying of the route based on: the direction of the segment.
However, Musabji et al. teaches a technique in navigation (see e.g. [0091])
wherein each two successive intermediate points are associated with a corresponding segment of the navigation route (see [0040, 0091], solution route is series of connected segments i.e. connection points);
(c) determining data indicative of a segment associated with a first and second intermediate points of the at least two intermediate points (see [0091, 0094] for any particular segment of the solution route as the user travels);
(d) determining data indicative of a direction of the segment from the first intermediate point to the second intermediate point (see [0099] guidance function including determination of direction of the navigation system 100 as it travels along the routes (i.e. each segment)), based on their corresponding geographic- location related information (see [0094] route guidance based on the determined route (i.e. based on the segment data and therefore the corresponding nodes));
(e) obtaining data indicative of a first local information, based on the determined direction (see [0099] step 1100, determine an image data record (indicative of local information) that corresponds to the direction), wherein each of the records comprises one or more images associated with GPS coordinates (see [0086] image data record indicates location such as longitude and latitude), one or more images having corresponding GPS coordinates residing in a surrounding area of the determined segment (see [0099] reference road segment data record to determine whether image data record exists and [0096] using longitude and latitude coordinates).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the use of the image features and locations of Zhang et al. to determine image data records based on segments and direction and use GPS coordinates, as taught by Musabji et al. with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of improving accuracy of navigation and better filtering data by providing images with the appropriate direction (see Musabji et al., [0006, 0099]).
Regarding Claim 43, Zhang et al. does not explicitly recite the method of claim 42, wherein obtaining the data indicative of the geographic-location related information includes obtaining GPS coordinates associated with the first location and/or the second location.
However, Musabji et al. teaches the technique as above,
wherein obtaining the data indicative of the geographic-location related information includes obtaining GPS coordinates associated with the first location and/or the second location (see [0091] starting and destination location using “geographic coordinates” which [0044] refer to latitude and longitude (see also supporting reference “Global Positioning System - Wikipedia“ e.g. p. 1, 3, as evidence of latitude and longitude being “GPS coordinates”)).
Examiner's note: since the claim uses the conjunction "and/or," only one of the recited alternatives is necessary in the prior art to read on this claim.
The motivation to combine Zhang et al. and Musabji et al. was provided above in the rejection of Claim 42.
Regarding Claim 44, Zhang et al. discloses the method of claim 42, wherein obtaining the data indicative of the geographic-location related information further comprises obtaining one or more visual cues associated with the first location and/or the second location (see 9:65-10:17 obtaining current position by SLAM localization (the first location) performed by obtaining camera or database feature descriptors associated with images of the first location. Additionally, see 12:34-37, following estimation updates with SLAM, i.e. second location data will be obtained in the same way).
Examiner's note: since the claim uses the conjunction "and/or," only one of the recited alternatives is necessary in the prior art to read on this claim.
Regarding Claim 45, Zhang et al. does not explicitly recite the method of claim 42, wherein at least one of the first or the second intermediate points are identical to the first or the second locations, respectively.
However, Musabji et al. teaches the technique as above,
wherein at least one of the first or the second intermediate points are identical to the first or the second locations, respectively (see [0091] connected segments (which have first/second intermediate points) connect the starting location (first location) to destination (second location). In other words, for the first segment, the first intermediate point is identical to first location, and for the last segment, second intermediate point is identical to second location).
The motivation to combine Zhang et al. and Musabji et al. was provided above in the rejection of Claim 42.
Regarding Claim 46, Zhang et al. further discloses the method comprising:
(i) repeating stages (f) through (g) with respect to at least one different segment until reaching the second location (see 12:34-37, following estimation updates with SLAM, i.e. repeated localization and trajectory correction, to reach any next point or ultimate destination).
Zhang et al. does not explicitly recite the method of claim 42, the method further comprising:
(i) repeating stages (c) to (h) with respect to at least one different segment, the at least one different segment being between at least one different intermediate point than the first and second intermediate points, until reaching the second location.
However, Musabji et al. teaches the technique as above, wherein obtaining database images requires:
stages (c) through (e) with respect to at least one different segment (see the mapping of Claim 42 above with respect to Musabji et al. teaching (c) through (e)),, the at least one different segment being between at least one different intermediate point than the first and second intermediate points (see [0093] ordered list of plural segments, i.e. a subsequent segment will have a different, third intermediate point, in continuous route to destination).
The motivation to combine Zhang et al. and Musabji et al. was provided above in the rejection of Claim 42.
Regarding Claim 49, Zhang et al. discloses the method of claim 42, wherein the method further comprises:
configuring the vehicle (see 9:10-15, controlling steering, motors, wheels, rotors, etc.).
Regarding Claims 52, 53, and 56: all limitations as recited have been analyzed with respect to Claims 42 and 49. Claims 52 and 53 pertain to an apparatus corresponding to the method of Claims 42 and 49, respectively. Claim 56 pertains to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having instructions corresponding to the method of Claim 42. Claims 52, 53, and 56 do not teach or define any new limitations beyond Claims 42 and 49, and therefore are rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 57, Zhang et al. discloses the method of claim 42, wherein navigating the vehicle comprising generating a signal to operate the vehicle along the modified navigation route (see 9:10-15, control for steering/motors, output 328).
Regarding Claim 60, Zhang et al. discloses the method wherein:
obtaining the data indicative of the geographic-location related information associated with the first location comprises:
(i) retrieving, from the visual cues database, one or more stored visual cues having corresponding position coordinates (see 10:15-22 image database with location information),
(ii) wherein one or more images of the surrounding environment of the vehicle are captured by the at least one camera mounted on the vehicle (see 8:35-55) for extracting at least one visual cue appearing in the one or more captured images (see 10:5-15, features points/descriptors extracted from each image); and
(iii)identifying a match by comparing the at least one visual cue extracted from the one or more captured images with the one or more retrieved stored visual cues (see 10:15-20 finding match of image by matching features points in image database) to obtain information associated with a matched retrieved visual cue, the obtained information being indicative of the first location as an accurate geographic location of the vehicle (see 10:20-32, location label of revisited location).
Zhang et al. does not explicitly recite: the method of claim 42, wherein obtaining the data indicative of the geographic-location related information associated with the first location comprises:
(i) retrieving, from the visual cues database, one or more stored visual cues having corresponding GPS coordinates residing in a surrounding area of the vehicle.
However, Musabji et al. teaches the technique as above,
wherein obtaining the data indicative of the geographic-location related information associated with the first location comprises:
(i) retrieving, from the visual cues database, one or more stored visual cues (see [0099] retrieve image data record) having corresponding GPS coordinates (see [0086] latitude and longitude associated w/image) residing in a surrounding area of the vehicle (see [0099] use segment data record or other data corresponding to current location of the navigation system to determine whether image data record exists).
The motivation to combine Zhang et al. and Musabji et al. was provided above in the rejection of Claim 42.
Claims 47 and 48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patent U.S. 10,518,879 B1 (Zhang et al.), in view of Publication US2014/0244159A1 (Musabji et al.), further in view of Publication US2017/0307388A1 (McConathy et al.).
Regarding Claim 47, Zhang et al. further discloses the method further comprising:
(i) repeating stages (a) to (h) where the first location is a current location of the navigated vehicle (see 12:34-37, following updates, i.e. repeated process of SLAM as localization changes, and see the combination with Musabji et al. in the rejection of Claim 42 regarding all stages (a) through (h) as part of the localization and navigation), and
(k) performing the determining data indicative of a navigation route in the repeated execution of stage (b) (see 12:34-37, for repeated iteration).
Zhang et al. does not explicitly recite: the method of claim 42, the method further comprising:
(j) during or prior to the repeated execution of stage (b), selectively filtering out at least one forbidden intermediate point of the at least two intermediate points included in the repeated execution, upon determining that the at least one forbidden intermediate point falls in a forbidden area; and
(k) performing the determining data indicative of a navigation route in the repeated execution of stage (b), wherein the determined navigation route includes a succession of intermediate points that excludes the at least one filtered forbidden intermediate point.
However, McConathy et al. teaches a technique to navigate (see [0011] navigation system in vehicle), by:
(j) during or prior to navigation(see [0046-0047] prior to finalizing route), selectively filtering out at least one forbidden intermediate point of the at least two intermediate points included in the repeated execution, upon determining that the at least one forbidden intermediate point falls in a forbidden area (see [0046-0047] compare geo-coordinate of nodes corresponding to segment to geo-coordinate values corresponding to restriction to determine whether any portion of the segment of the route (i.e. including endpoints/nodes) intersects 94 the area that defines the retrieved restriction, and not using (i.e. filtering out) the corresponding route/nodes); and
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the consideration of intermediate points of Zhang et al. to use the restricted areas as taught by McConathy et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, resulting in the repeated execution of stage (b) using a succession of intermediate points that excludes the at least one filtered forbidden intermediate point, with the motivation of improving public safety and ensuring compliance with the law (see McConathy et al., [0002-0005]).
Regarding Claim 48, Zhang et al. does not explicitly recite the method of claim 47, wherein the geographic-location related information associated with the at least one intermediate point includes GPS coordinates, and wherein selectively filtering out comprises:
positioning the GPS coordinates on a map coordinate system; and
discarding at least some of the GPS coordinates upon determining that at least some of the GPS coordinates are positioned in a predefined forbidden part of the map coordinate system.
However, McConathy et al. teaches the technique as above, wherein selectively filtering out comprises:
wherein the geographic-location related information associated with the at least one intermediate point includes GPS coordinates (see [0046] segments are bound by two GPS points), and wherein selectively filtering out comprises:
positioning the GPS coordinates on a map coordinate system (see [0046] segments are bound by two GPS points); and
discarding at least some of the GPS coordinates upon determining that at least some of the GPS coordinates are positioned in a predefined forbidden part of the map coordinate system (see [0046-0047] discarding and not using route when any portion of the segment of the route (i.e. including nodes) intersects 94 the area that defines the retrieved restriction).
The motivation to combine Zhang et al. and McConathy et al. was provided above in the rejection of Claim 47.
Claims 50 and 54 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patent U.S. 10,518,879 B1 (Zhang et al.), in view of Publication US2014/0244159A1 (Musabji et al.), further in view of Publication US2008/0147281A1 (Ishii et al.).
Regarding Claim 50, Zhang et al. does not explicitly recite the method of claim 49, wherein configuring the vehicle includes adjusting a handle connected to the vehicle.
However, Ishii et al. teaches a technique for a vehicle,
wherein configuring the vehicle includes adjusting a handle connected to the vehicle (see Figure 4B, [0075], a rotation command θref0 for maintain the handle 5 in the vertical position is generated in the central control device 91 and supplied to a motor control unit 92H that controls the driving of the driving motor 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the navigation system for a vehicle of Zhang et al. to be used in a vehicle as taught by Ishii et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of enhancing the robustness and flexibility of the navigation system to apply to additional vehicles while improving ease of use of the vehicle (see Ishii et al., [00012]).
Regarding Claim 54: all limitations as recited have been analyzed with respect to Claim 50. Claim 54 pertains to an apparatus corresponding to the method of Claim 50. Claim 54 does not teach or define any new limitations beyond Claim 50, and therefore is rejected under the same rationale.
Claims 51 and 55 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patent U.S. 10,518,879 B1 (Zhang et al.), in view of Publication US2014/0244159A1 (Musabji et al.), further in view of Published Application US2020/0349368A1 (Mayster et al.).
Regarding Claim 51, Zhang et al. does not explicitly recite the method of claim 49, wherein configuring the vehicle includes configuring the speed of the vehicle.
However, Mayster et al. teaches a technique for a vehicle,
wherein configuring the vehicle includes configuring the speed of the vehicle (see [0031] autonomous driving or adaptive cruise control operation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the vehicle of Zhang et al. to operate with a configurable speed as taught by Mayster et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of enhancing the robustness and flexibility of the navigation system to be used with autonomous vehicles or those with advanced driver assistance while increasing driver convenience (see Mayster et al., [0025, 0031]).
Regarding Claim 55: all limitations as recited have been analyzed with respect to Claim 51. Claim 55 pertains to an apparatus corresponding to the method of Claim 51. Claim 55 does not teach or define any new limitations beyond Claim 51, and therefore is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 59 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patent U.S. 10,518,879 B1 (Zhang et al.), in view of Publication US2014/0244159A1 (Musabji et al.), further in view of NPL Publication “Single-View Place Recognition under Seasonal Changes” (Olid et al.)
Regarding Claim 59, Zhang et al. does not explicitly recite the method of claim 42, wherein searching for the match to a stored visual cue comprises using a trained Siamese network deep learning network to find the match.
However, Olid et al. teaches a technique to match images in the field of vehicle (see e.g. Abstract),
wherein searching for the match to a stored visual cue comprises using a trained Siamese network deep learning network to find the match (see p. 3, Siamese neural network, pre-trained, for task of identifying similar feature vectors of places, and p. 4 deep models).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the searching for a match of Zhang et al. to use a network as taught by Olid et al., with a reasonable expectation of success, with the motivation of improving accuracy by allowing for the identification of matches even with seasonal changes (see Olid et al., Abstract).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 Paul Allen whose telephone number is (571)272-4383. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday from 9am to 5pm, Eastern.
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, Erin Piateski can be reached at 571-270-7429. 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./Erin M Piateski/
/P.A./ Examiner, Art Unit 3669
/Erin M Piateski/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Prosecution Insights