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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the OPA IC" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
For the purposes of examination, the limitation of claim 7 will be examined as the same OPA IC mentioned in claim 6.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claims 1-5, 10, and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stochino (United States Patent Application Publication 20200041616 A1), hereinafter Stochino.
Regarding claim 1, Stochino teaches a light detection and ranging (LiDAR) system ([Abstract] A lidar sensor comprising a laser, an optical sensor, and a processor.) comprising:
an emitter configured to emit light in the form of multiplexed beams of randomized, multiple wavelengths across a field of view (FoV) (Fig. 12; [0122] The code provided by the phase modulator 150B can be unique, such as with a pseudo-random code; [0123] In the illustrated embodiment, the code-embedded light beams having different wavelengths can be split into individual wavelengths λ1, λ2, . . . λ.sub.n by the wavelength combiner-splitter 198 or a multiplexer (MUX)-demultiplexer (DMUX) (serving as a splitter or DMUX). After being split into light beams having single wavelengths, the individual ones of the code-embedded light beams are fed into corresponding ones of the transceivers 120B-1/130B-1, 120B-2/130B-2, . . . 120B-n/130B-n, which in turn direct the code-embedded light beams into an environment.); and
a detector having one or more detection channels configured to simultaneously detect the multiplexed beams reflected from a target within the FoV to decode range information associated with the target ([0123] At least some of the code-embedded light beams directed to the environment can be reflected by object(s), and the transceivers 120B-1/130B-1, 120B-2/130B-2, . . . 120B-n/130B-n are configured to receive at least one of reflected light beams from the object(s) reflecting the at least one of the code-embedded light beams.).
Regarding claim 2, Stochino teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the emitter comprises a random number source which outputs a random bit sequence which is applied to the multiplexed beams to randomize the wavelengths emitted by the emitter ([0122] The code provided by the phase modulator 150B can be unique, such as with a pseudo-random code as described above (although different types of codes from spread spectrum theory can be used). This code can be sufficiently random such that a delay provided by the delay line 200B can shift the codes applied to the first and second portions of the beam of light sufficiently for the two codes to be substantially orthogonal to each other...Nevertheless, f.sub.1 can optionally be adjusted in a similar manner to achieve the desired ambiguity range for the measured distance as discussed above with respect to FIG. 5A.).
Regarding claim 3, Stochino teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the emitter comprises a plurality of light sources each simultaneously outputting a portion of the beams at a different one of the multiple wavelengths (Fig. 13; [0127] The lidar sensors 100L, 100M include a light source 110K configured to generate a source light having different wavelengths λ.sub.1, λ.sub.2, . . . λ.sub.n Similar to that described above with respect to FIG. 12. Unlike the lidar sensor described above with respect to FIG. 12 in which the same optical synthesizer circuit is used to embed a unique code into multiple light beams having different wavelengths).
Regarding claim 4, Stochino teaches the system of claim 3, further comprising a multiplexer which receives and combines each of the beams from the plurality of light sources to generate the multiplexed beams ([0123] In the illustrated embodiment, the code-embedded light beams having different wavelengths can be split into individual wavelengths λ1, λ2, . . . λ.sub.n by the wavelength combiner-splitter 198 or a multiplexer (MUX)-demultiplexer (DMUX) (serving as a splitter or DMUX).).
Regarding claim 5, Stochino teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the emitter comprises a frequency comb configured to simultaneously output each of the different multiple wavelengths ([0117] FIG. 12 illustrates a lidar sensor 100K configured to sense object distances using a source light having multiple wavelengths, according to some embodiments. The lidar sensor 100K includes a light source 110K configured to generate a source light having multiple different wavelengths λ.sub.1, λ.sub.2, . . . λ.sub.n.; [0118] In some implementations, the light source 110K can be a light source, e.g., a laser, configured to emit a source light comprising light beams having multiple wavelengths in any one or more of the visible, infrared or ultraviolet spectra.).
Regarding claim 10, Stochino teaches the system of claim 1, further comprising at least one splitter configured to send a first portion of the multiplexed beams to an output device for emission toward the target and a second portion of the multiplexed beams to the detector to provide single or multi-channel I/Q decoding ([0119] The first fiber coupler 170B can split direct an internal portion of the source light toward an optical sensor 160B, and direct a remaining portion of the source light to an optical synthesizer circuit 115B.; [0123] The fourth fiber coupler 193B combines the reflected light beam(s) and the internal portion of the source light split from the second fiber coupler 170B, and directs them to the optical sensor 160B, in a similar manner as described above, for identifying the reflected light beams and for detecting the distances of the object(s) in the environment.).
Regarding claim 13, Stochino teaches a method of performing light detection and ranging (LiDAR) ([Abstract] A lidar sensor comprising a laser, an optical sensor, and a processor.), comprising steps of:
generating a plurality of beams of light each at a different wavelength; combining, using a randomization function, the plurality of beams to generate a multiplexed beam; emitting the combined multiplexed beam toward a target within a field of view (FoV) (Fig. 12; [0122] The code provided by the phase modulator 150B can be unique, such as with a pseudo-random code; [0123] In the illustrated embodiment, the code-embedded light beams having different wavelengths can be split into individual wavelengths λ1, λ2, . . . λ.sub.n by the wavelength combiner-splitter 198 or a multiplexer (MUX)-demultiplexer (DMUX) (serving as a splitter or DMUX). After being split into light beams having single wavelengths, the individual ones of the code-embedded light beams are fed into corresponding ones of the transceivers 120B-1/130B-1, 120B-2/130B-2, . . . 120B-n/130B-n, which in turn direct the code-embedded light beams into an environment.); and
simultaneously detecting the respective wavelengths from the multiplexed beam reflected from the target to decode range information associated with the target ([0123] At least some of the code-embedded light beams directed to the environment can be reflected by object(s), and the transceivers 120B-1/130B-1, 120B-2/130B-2, . . . 120B-n/130B-n are configured to receive at least one of reflected light beams from the object(s) reflecting the at least one of the code-embedded light beams.).
Regarding claim 14, Stochino teaches the method of claim 13, wherein the randomization function is a pseudorandom bit sequence (PRBS) which is applied to the multiplexed beam ([0122] The code provided by the phase modulator 150B can be unique, such as with a pseudo-random code as described above (although different types of codes from spread spectrum theory can be used). This code can be sufficiently random such that a delay provided by the delay line 200B can shift the codes applied to the first and second portions of the beam of light sufficiently for the two codes to be substantially orthogonal to each other...Nevertheless, f.sub.1 can optionally be adjusted in a similar manner to achieve the desired ambiguity range for the measured distance as discussed above with respect to FIG. 5A.).
Regarding claim 15, Stochino teaches the method of claim 13, wherein each of the plurality of beams of light are generated by a different one of a corresponding plurality of laser based devices configured to output light over a different wavelength range (Fig. 13; [0127] The lidar sensors 100L, 100M include a light source 110K configured to generate a source light having different wavelengths λ.sub.1, λ.sub.2, . . . λ.sub.n Similar to that described above with respect to FIG. 12. Unlike the lidar sensor described above with respect to FIG. 12 in which the same optical synthesizer circuit is used to embed a unique code into multiple light beams having different wavelengths).
Regarding claim 16, Stochino teaches the method of claim 13, wherein each of the plurality of beams of light are generated by a frequency comb source ([0117] FIG. 12 illustrates a lidar sensor 100K configured to sense object distances using a source light having multiple wavelengths, according to some embodiments. The lidar sensor 100K includes a light source 110K configured to generate a source light having multiple different wavelengths λ.sub.1, λ.sub.2, . . . λ.sub.n.; [0118] In some implementations, the light source 110K can be a light source, e.g., a laser, configured to emit a source light comprising light beams having multiple wavelengths in any one or more of the visible, infrared or ultraviolet spectra.).
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.
Claims 6-7, 12 and 18-19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stochino in view of Yeruhami et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 20200249354 A1), hereinafter Yeruhami.
Regarding claim 6, Stochino teaches the system of claim 1,
Stochino fails to teach the system wherein the emitter further comprises an optical phase array (OPA) integrated circuit (IC) device configured to sweep the multiplexed beams across the FoV along at least one direction.
However, Yeruhami teaches the system wherein the emitter further comprises an optical phase array (OPA) integrated circuit (IC) device configured to sweep the multiplexed beams across the FoV along at least one direction (Fig. 2B; [0120] The projected light is projected towards an outbound deflector 114A that functions as a steering element for directing the projected light in field of view 120; [0106] The term “light deflector” broadly includes any mechanism or module which is configured to make light deviate from its original path; for example, a mirror, a prism, controllable lens, a mechanical mirror, mechanical scanning polygons, active diffraction (e.g. controllable LCD), Risley prisms, non-mechanical-electro-optical beam steering (such as made by Vscent), polarization grating (such as offered by Boulder Non-Linear Systems), optical phased array (OPA), and more.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Stochino to comprise the OPA similar to Yeruhami, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using a known optical deflecting device to scan a field of view from the lidar device.
Regarding claim 7, Stochino teaches the system of claim 5,
Stochino fails to teach the system wherein the OPA IC device sweeps the multiplexed beams across the FoV along two orthogonal directions.
However, Yeruhami teaches the system wherein the OPA IC device sweeps the multiplexed beams across the FoV along two orthogonal directions (Fig. 2B; [0120] The projected light is projected towards an outbound deflector 114A that functions as a steering element for directing the projected light in field of view 120.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Stochino to comprise the OPA derived field of view similar to Yeruhami, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of utilizing the OPA’s deflective properties to define a wide, rectangular field of view.
Regarding claim 12, Stochino teaches the system of claim 1,
Stochino fails to teach the system wherein a first configuration of multiplexed beams is emitted in a direction toward the target within the FoV, and wherein a different, second configuration of multiplexed beams is subsequently emitted in a direction toward the target within the FoV, the second configuration selected responsive to the range information decoded from the target using the first configuration.
However, Yeruhami teaches the system wherein a first configuration of multiplexed beams is emitted in a direction toward the target within the FoV, and wherein a different, second configuration of multiplexed beams is subsequently emitted in a direction toward the target within the FoV, the second configuration selected responsive to the range information decoded from the target using the first configuration ([0239] Various configurations of calibration sensors may be used in the presently disclosed LIDAR systems. As noted above, the calibration sensor may be included as part of a LIDAR sensor (such as sensor 806). In other cases, the calibration sensor may be separate from the LIDAR sensor, such as sensor 806, configured to receive reflections of LIDAR light from objects in a field of view. In such cases, the calibration sensor may be similar to the sensor that receives the LIDAR light reflections. Such similarity, for example, may facilitate correlation between the output of the LIDAR reflections sensor (e.g., sensor 806) and the calibration sensor and may facilitate correction of the output of the LIDAR reflections sensor.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Stochino to comprise the reconfiguring second scan based on the first scan similar to Yeruhami, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of minimizing non-useful scans in a variety of real-world environments with a variety of environmental factors.
Regarding claim 18, Stochino teaches the method of claim 13,
Stochino fails to teach the method further comprising using an optical phase array (OPA) integrated circuit (IC) device to sweep the combined multiplexed beam across the FoV along at least one direction.
However, Yeruhami teaches the method further comprising using an optical phase array (OPA) integrated circuit (IC) device to sweep the combined multiplexed beam across the FoV along at least one direction (Fig. 2B; [0120] The projected light is projected towards an outbound deflector 114A that functions as a steering element for directing the projected light in field of view 120; [0106] The term “light deflector” broadly includes any mechanism or module which is configured to make light deviate from its original path; for example, a mirror, a prism, controllable lens, a mechanical mirror, mechanical scanning polygons, active diffraction (e.g. controllable LCD), Risley prisms, non-mechanical-electro-optical beam steering (such as made by Vscent), polarization grating (such as offered by Boulder Non-Linear Systems), optical phased array (OPA), and more.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Stochino to comprise the OPA similar to Yeruhami, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using a known optical deflecting device to scan a field of view from the lidar device.
Regarding claim 19, Stochino, as modified above, teaches the method of claim 18, further comprising using a splitter to divert a first portion of the combined multiplexed beam and a remaining second portion of the combined multiplexed beam to at least one channel of a detector circuit configured to provide I/Q decoding ([0119] The first fiber coupler 170B can split direct an internal portion of the source light toward an optical sensor 160B, and direct a remaining portion of the source light to an optical synthesizer circuit 115B.; [0123] The fourth fiber coupler 193B combines the reflected light beam(s) and the internal portion of the source light split from the second fiber coupler 170B, and directs them to the optical sensor 160B, in a similar manner as described above, for identifying the reflected light beams and for detecting the distances of the object(s) in the environment.).
Stochino fails to teach the redirection of the first beam to the OPA IC device.
However, Yeruhami teaches redirecting a beam to a OPA IC device (Fig. 2B; [0120] The projected light is projected towards an outbound deflector 114A that functions as a steering element for directing the projected light in field of view 120; [0106] The term “light deflector” broadly includes any mechanism or module which is configured to make light deviate from its original path; for example, a mirror, a prism, controllable lens, a mechanical mirror, mechanical scanning polygons, active diffraction (e.g. controllable LCD), Risley prisms, non-mechanical-electro-optical beam steering (such as made by Vscent), polarization grating (such as offered by Boulder Non-Linear Systems), optical phased array (OPA), and more.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Stochino to comprise the OPA device similar to Yeruhami, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of using a known optical deflection device to redirect a portion of the beam to a desired target at a specified location.
Regarding claim 20, Stochino teaches the method of claim 13,
Stochino fails to teach the method wherein a first configuration of multiplexed beams is emitted in a direction toward the target within the FoV, and wherein a different, second configuration of multiplexed beams is subsequently emitted in a direction toward the target within the FoV, the second configuration selected responsive to the range information decoded from the target using the first configuration.
However, Yeruhami teaches the method wherein a first configuration of multiplexed beams is emitted in a direction toward the target within the FoV, and wherein a different, second configuration of multiplexed beams is subsequently emitted in a direction toward the target within the FoV, the second configuration selected responsive to the range information decoded from the target using the first configuration ([0239] Various configurations of calibration sensors may be used in the presently disclosed LIDAR systems. As noted above, the calibration sensor may be included as part of a LIDAR sensor (such as sensor 806). In other cases, the calibration sensor may be separate from the LIDAR sensor, such as sensor 806, configured to receive reflections of LIDAR light from objects in a field of view. In such cases, the calibration sensor may be similar to the sensor that receives the LIDAR light reflections. Such similarity, for example, may facilitate correlation between the output of the LIDAR reflections sensor (e.g., sensor 806) and the calibration sensor and may facilitate correction of the output of the LIDAR reflections sensor.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Stochino to comprise the reconfiguring second scan based on the first scan similar to Yeruhami, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of minimizing non-useful scans in a variety of real-world environments with a variety of environmental factors.
Claims 8-9, 11, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stochino in view of Vermeulen et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 20230186005 A1), hereinafter Vermeulen.
Regarding claim 8, Stochino teaches the system of claim 1,
Stochino fails to teach the system further comprising at least one multiplexer (mux) comprising a plurality of input waveguides coupled to a unitary output waveguide by an intervening corresponding number of micro-resonance rings (MRRs), each MRR configured to resonate at a different one of the multiple wavelengths.
However, Vermeulen teaches the system further comprising at least one multiplexer (mux) comprising a plurality of input waveguides coupled to a unitary output waveguide by an intervening corresponding number of micro-resonance rings (MRRs), each MRR configured to resonate at a different one of the multiple wavelengths ([0205] Referring to FIGS. 43A-43D, various virtual photonic integrated subcircuits as displayed on a menu of the user interface are presented... wavelength demultiplexer subcircuit 4330, 1×4 splitter tree subcircuit 4332, nitride double ring resonator subcircuit 4334 and micro-ring resonator subcircuit 4336; [0215] Referring to FIG. 52, a virtual template for a polarization multiplexed-quadrature phase shift keying (PM-QPSK) transceiver is presented, according to some embodiments. In some embodiments, the virtual template for a polarization multiplexed-quadrature phase shift keying (PM-QPSK) transceiver 5200 can include the various virtual photonic integrated subcircuits described for FIGS. 43A-44D.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Stochino to comprise the multiplexer coupled to a number of micro-resonance rings similar to Vermeulen, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of filtering the output to a desired wavelength from the plurality of wavelength sources.
Regarding claim 9, Stochino teaches the system of claim 1,
Stochino fails to teach the system further comprising at least one demultiplexer (demux) comprising a unitary input waveguide coupled to a plurality of output waveguides via an intervening corresponding number of MRRs, each MRR configured to resonate at a different one of the multiple wavelengths.
However, Vermeulen teaches the system further comprising at least one demultiplexer (demux) comprising a unitary input waveguide coupled to a plurality of output waveguides via an intervening corresponding number of MRRs, each MRR configured to resonate at a different one of the multiple wavelengths ([0144] The wavelength demultiplexer (WDM) may have any implementation including, e.g., ring resonators, echelle gratings, Bragg gratings, arrayed waveguide gratings, counter-directional coupling Bragg gratings, etc.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Stochino to comprise the demultiplexer coupled to a number of MRRs similar to Vermeulen, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of filtering unwanted wavelength signals from the signal.
Regarding claim 11, Stochino teaches the system of claim 1,
Stochino fails to teach the system wherein the detector comprises at least one balanced pair of photodetectors (PDs) to convert the beams to an electrical analog signal for processing by a signal processing circuit.
However, Vermeulen teaches the system wherein the detector comprises at least one balanced pair of photodetectors (PDs) to convert the beams to an electrical analog signal for processing by a signal processing circuit ([0205] FIG. 43D shows active optical photonics subcircuits 4360. In an example, the active optical photonic subcircuits 4360 can include...balanced photodetector subcircuit 4376).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Stochino to comprise the balanced photodetectors similar to Vermeulen, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of comparing reference signals for proper calibration and comparison purposes.
Regarding claim 17, Stochino teaches the method of claim 13,
Stochino fails to teach the method further comprising using a multiplexer to receive and combine each of the beams from the plurality of light sources to generate the multiplexed beams, the multiplexer comprising a plurality of input waveguides, a unitary output waveguide, and a plurality of micro-resonance rings (MRRs) each configured to resonate at the associated wavelength to transfer the beams to the unitary output waveguide.
However, Vermeulen teaches the method further comprising using a multiplexer to receive and combine each of the beams from the plurality of light sources to generate the multiplexed beams, the multiplexer comprising a plurality of input waveguides, a unitary output waveguide, and a plurality of micro-resonance rings (MRRs) each configured to resonate at the associated wavelength to transfer the beams to the unitary output waveguide ([0205] Referring to FIGS. 43A-43D, various virtual photonic integrated subcircuits as displayed on a menu of the user interface are presented... wavelength demultiplexer subcircuit 4330, 1×4 splitter tree subcircuit 4332, nitride double ring resonator subcircuit 4334 and micro-ring resonator subcircuit 4336; [0215] Referring to FIG. 52, a virtual template for a polarization multiplexed-quadrature phase shift keying (PM-QPSK) transceiver is presented, according to some embodiments. In some embodiments, the virtual template for a polarization multiplexed-quadrature phase shift keying (PM-QPSK) transceiver 5200 can include the various virtual photonic integrated subcircuits described for FIGS. 43A-44D.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of this invention to modify the invention of Stochino to comprise the multiplexer coupled to a number of micro-resonance rings similar to Vermeulen, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of filtering the output to a desired wavelength from the plurality of wavelength sources.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT WILLIAM VASQUEZ JR whose telephone number is (571)272-3745. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday, Flex Friday, 7:00-4:00 PST.
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 HODGE can be reached at (571)272-2097. 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.
/ROBERT W VASQUEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/ROBERT W HODGE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645