DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 9 January 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s response, filed 9 January 2026, to the last office action has been entered and made of record.
In response to the amendments to the claims, they are acknowledged, supported by the original disclosure, and no new matter is added.
Amendments to the independent claims 1 and 12 have necessitated an updated ground of rejection over the applied prior art. Please see below for the updated interpretations and rejections.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9 January 2026 have been fully considered but they are not fully persuasive.
In regards to Applicant’s arguments on p. 8-11 of Applicant’s reply, that the combined teachings of Yoon and Cotte fail to teach the amended independent claim 1 and 12 limitations, the Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Examiner notes the claims are treated with their broadest reasonable interpretations consistent with the specification. See MPEP 2111. 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). Furthermore, the test for obviousness is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ871 (CCPA 1981).
Cotte is noted to teach using a holographic microscope for measuring complex refractive index values of light scattered by a microscopic object under observation is used to obtain refractive index data representing at least a spatial distribution of measured values of refractive index (RI) or values correlated to refractive index of said microscopic object, and applying transformations to generate a distribution of two or more parameters used to characterize features of the microscopic object (see Cotte [0120]-[0124]), where segmented 3D images of the specimens is produced and rendered according to the values of the acquired refractive index and gradient in 3D space (see Cotte [0316]-[0332]). Cotte further provides examples that multiple different cells can be segmented in generated 3D visualization images that are digitally stained based on their refractive index, in which multiple different cells are depicted in the single 3D reconstruction (see Cotte Fig. 29, [0091], and [0373]-[0374]). Cotte further teaches that holographic tomography for RI measurements and epifluorescence measurements are carried out to deliver 3D RI maps (see Cotte [0483]-[0484]).
Here, Cotte’s teachings for measuring complex refractive index values of light scattered by a microscopic object is used to obtain refractive index data representing at least a spatial distribution of measured values of refractive index or values correlated to refractive index of said microscopic object, and that the refractive index measurements are used to generate and deliver 3D refractive index maps, and further provides example in which multiple different cells can be segmented in a generated 3D reconstruction image that are digitally stained based on their refractive index, provides suggested teachings for the broadest reasonable interpretation for the amended claim subject matter of “processing the plurality of cell complex wavefronts as collective tomographic data formed by different tomographic projections coming from various cells in the population to collectively reconstruct a single collective 3D refractive index map representing the cell population, wherein the different tomographic projections coming from different cells in the population are combined together in a collective tomographic reconstruction process”
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are: “processing unit” in claims 12-16 and 18-20.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoon et al. (“Label-free characterization of white blood cells by measuring 3D refractive index maps”), herein Yoon, in view of Cotte et al. (US 2019/0251330), herein Cotte.
Regarding claim 1, Yoon discloses a tomographic method for analyzing a sample containing a population of biological cells, comprising:
receiving tomographic data indicative of a plurality of cell complex wavefronts (see Yoon sect. 2.1 Experimental setup and sect. 2.2 Tomogram reconstruction, where holograms of a sample are recorded using a interferometric microscope for various illumination angles, and complex optical fields are extracted from the measured holograms containing both amplitude and phase images; see Yoon sect. 3.2 Quantitative characterizations of WBCs using 3D RI tomograms and sect. 3.3 Heterogeneous populations even in isolated lymphocytes, where measurements of individual white blood cells (WBCs) are used to calculate mean values for quantitative characteristics of the measured population of WBCs); and
generating a 3D refractive index model of the cell being indicative of morphological and structural characteristics representative of the entire population of cells by using a plurality of projections (see Yoon Fig. 4 and sect. 3.3 Heterogeneous populations even in isolated lymphocytes, where quantitative analyses of representative lymphocytes in heterogenous populations is presented and render 3D RI surfaces of small, large, and lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-treated lymphocytes based on the measured 3D RI tomograms of WBCs).
At the time of filing, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious from Yoon’s combined teachings for performing quantitative analyses of morphological and biochemical information and rendering 3D RI surfaces of representative WBCs based on the 3D RI tomograms of individual WBCs in a measured sample population to suggest that a plurality of measured 2D complex amplitude and phase images of various different WBC in the sampled population are processed to generate the 3D RI tomograms of the individual WBCs in the sampled population, and that the rendered 3D RI surfaces of representative WBCs would be based on the plurality of measured 2D complex amplitude and phase images used to reconstruct the 3D RI tomograms of the individual WBCs of the sampled population.
This modification is rationalized as some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the prior art reference teachings to arrive at the claimed invention.
In this instance, Yoon teaches that a plurality of measured 2D complex amplitude and phase images of individual WBC in a sampled population are used to reconstruct and generate the 3D RI tomograms of the individual WBCs in the sampled population, and that 3D RI surfaces of representative WBCs are rendered according to calculated quantitative values for morphological and biochemical characteristics of the individual cells of the sampled population measured from the plurality of 3D RI tomograms of individual cells of the sample population.
One of ordinary skill in the art would reasonably expect from Yoon’s combined teachings to successfully render a 3D RI surfaces of representative WBCs based on calculated mean values for the cellular population determined from measured 3D RI tomograms of the individual WBCs, which are reconstructed from the plurality of measured 2D complex amplitude and phase images of the individual WBCs of the sampled population, and provide for the broadest reasonable interpretation of a plurality of complex wavefronts for a plurality of various different individual cells of the population are received and processed as different projections and used to generate a representative 3D refractive index model.
While Yoon teaches holograms of a sample are recorded for various illumination angles, and measured multiple 2D complex amplitude and phase images of a sample are used to reconstruct a 3D refractive index (RI) tomogram (see Yoon sect. 2.1 Experimental setup and sect. 2.2 Tomogram reconstruction), and plurality of 3D RI tomograms of individual cells of a sample population are measured to provide quantitative values for morphological and biochemical characteristics of the individual cells of the sampled population (see Yoon sect. 3.2 Quantitative characterizations of WBCs using 3D RI tomograms and sect. 3.3 Heterogeneous populations even in isolated lymphocytes);
Yoon does not explicitly disclose that the cell complex wavefronts corresponding to different cells of the population;
processing the plurality of cell complex wavefronts as collective tomographic data formed by different tomographic projections coming from various cells in the population to collectively reconstruct a single collective 3D refractive index map representing the cell population, wherein the different tomographic projections coming from different cells in the population are combined together in a collective tomographic reconstruction process; and
generating a single collective 3D refractive index model by using a plurality of the different tomographic projections from multiple different individual cells.
Cotte teaches in a pertinent and related microscopic object characterization system and method (see Cotte Abstract)¸ where a holographic microscope for measuring complex refractive index values of light scattered by a microscopic object under observation is used to obtain refractive index data representing at least a spatial distribution of measured values of refractive index (RI) or values correlated to refractive index of said microscopic object, and applying transformations to generate a distribution of two or more parameters used to characterize features of the microscopic object (see Cotte [0120]-[0124]), where segmented 3D image of the specimen is produced and rendered according to different values of acquired refractive index and gradient in 3D space (see Cotte [0316]-[0332]), and that multiple different cells can be segmented in generated 3D images and digitally stained based on their RI, which multiple different cells are depicted in the single 3D reconstruction (see Cotte Fig. 29, [0091], and [0373]-[0374]), where holographic tomography for RI measurements and epifluorescence measurements are carried out to deliver 3D RI maps (see Cotte [0483]-[0484])
At the time of filing, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to apply the teachings of Cotte to the teachings of Yoon, such that a plurality of different specimens can be imaged in the holographic tomography microscope to measure 2D complex amplitude and phase images of the plurality of different measured specimens and used to reconstruct a 3D RI maps depicting the plurality of different measured specimen which each individual specimen can be segmented, where the measurement the complex amplitude and phase images and reconstruction of a single collective 3D RI model comprising of the plurality of different measured specimens provides for the broadest reasonable interpretations of measuring cell complex wavefronts corresponding to different cells of the population, and collectively reconstructing a single 3D refractive index map representing the cell population by combining together different projections from different cells in the population.
This modification is rationalized as an application of a known technique to a known method ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
In this instance, Yoon teaches a base method for measuring 3D refractive index maps where a plurality of measured 2D complex amplitude and phase images of individual WBC in a sampled population are used to reconstruct and generate the 3D RI tomograms of the individual WBCs in the sampled population, and that 3D RI surfaces of representative WBCs are rendered according to calculated quantitative values for morphological and biochemical characteristics of the individual cells of the sampled population measured from the plurality of 3D RI tomograms of individual cells of the sample population.
Cotte teaches a known technique for microscopic object characterization, in which
a holographic microscope measures complex refractive index values of light scattered by a microscopic object under observation to obtain refractive index data representing a spatial distribution of measured values of refractive index of said microscopic object, applying transformations to generate a distribution of two or more parameters used to characterize features of the microscopic object, and producing a segmented 3D image of the specimen according to the different values of acquired refractive index and gradient in 3D space, where multiple different cells can be segmented in generated 3D images digitally stained based on their RI, where multiple different cells are depicted in the single 3D reconstruction, and that holographic tomography for RI measurements and epifluorescence measurements are carried out to deliver 3D RI maps.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that by applying Cotte’s technique would allow for the method of Yoon to image a plurality of different specimens to measure 2D complex amplitude and phase images of the plurality of different measured specimens, reconstruct a 3D RI maps depicting the plurality of different measured specimen which each individual specimen can be segmented, where the suggested teaching for measuring the complex amplitude and phase images and reconstruction of a single collective 3D RI map comprising of the plurality of different measured specimens provides for the broadest reasonable interpretations of measuring cell complex wavefronts corresponding to different cells of the population, and collectively reconstructing a single 3D refractive index model by combining together different projections from different cells in the population, predictably leading to an improved method for measuring and characterizing microscopic specimens where multiple different specimens can be measured and used to reconstruct 3D RI tomograms where specimens can be segmented.
Regarding claim 2, please see the above rejection of claim 1. Yoon and Cotte disclose the method of claim 1, wherein said processing of the cell complex wavefronts comprises
processing an image frame of the tomographic data as a projection (see Yoon sect. 2.2 Tomogram reconstruction, the complex optical fields are extracted from measured holograms which are obtained with various illumination angles, and are 2D Fourier transformed),
positioning the projection in a 3D Fourier domain at a determined orientation (see Yoon sect. 2.2 Tomogram reconstruction, the spectral information are mapped onto a surface, so called Ewald sphere, in 3D Fourier space), and
collecting a plurality of the tomographic projections in inversed 3D Fourier transform to generate a collective 3D refractive index map of the sample (see Yoon sect. 2.2 Tomogram reconstruction, where the 3D RI tomogram is reconstructed by applying a 3D inverse Fourier transformation to the mapped 3D Fourier space).
Regarding claim 3, please see the above rejection of claim 1. Yoon and Cotte disclose the method of claim 1, wherein at least one projection comes from a different cell in the population, thereby providing that the tomographic data indicative of the plurality of cell complex wavefronts comprise the cell complex wavefronts corresponding to the different cells of the population (see Yoon sect. 3.2 Quantitative characterizations of WBCs using 3D RI tomograms and sect. 3.3 Heterogeneous populations even in isolated lymphocytes, where a plurality of 3D RI tomograms of individual cells of a sample population are measured to provide quantitative values for morphological and biochemical characteristics of the individual cells of the sampled population; see Cotte Fig. 29, [0091], and [0373]-[0374], where multiple different cells are depicted in the single 3D reconstruction, and the multiple different cells can be segmented in generated 3D images digitally stained based on their RI; where the combined teachings suggest that multiple projections images corresponding to different measured specimens are used to reconstruct a single collective 3D RI tomogram comprising of different individual cells in the sample population).
Regarding claim 4, please see the above rejection of claim 1. Yoon and Cotte disclose the method of claim 1, further comprising quantifying a morphological and content contribution of a plurality of cells in a population of biological cells (see Yoon sect. 3.2 Quantitative characterizations of WBCs using 3D RI tomograms and sect. 3.3 Heterogeneous populations even in isolated lymphocytes, where a plurality of 3D RI tomograms of individual cells of a sample population are measured to provide quantitative values for morphological and biochemical characteristics of the individual cells of the sampled population).
Regarding claim 5, please see the above rejection of claim 4. Yoon and Cotte disclose the method of claim 4, wherein each cell contributes to a plurality of projections (see Yoon sect. 2.1 Experimental setup and sect. 2.2 Tomogram reconstruction, where a plurality of hologram images of each sample are recorded and corresponding plurality complex amplitude and phase images are extracted from the hologram images; see Yoon sect. 3.2 Quantitative characterizations of WBCs using 3D RI tomograms and sect. 3.3 Heterogeneous populations even in isolated lymphocytes, where a plurality of 3D RI tomograms of individual cells of a sample population are measured to provide quantitative values for morphological and biochemical characteristics of the individual cells of the sampled population; where the combined teachings suggests that a plurality of hologram images of individual WBCs are recorded and corresponding plurality of complex amplitude and phase images are extracted).
Regarding claim 6, please see the above rejection of claim 1. Yoon and Cotte disclose the method of claim 1, further comprising acquiring tomographic data being indicative of a cell complex wavefront of each cell of the population (see Yoon sect. 2.2 Tomogram reconstruction, where measured multiple 2D complex amplitude and phase images of each sampled WBC are used to reconstruct a 3D RI tomogram of individual WBCs).
Regarding claim 7, please see the above rejection of claim 6. Yoon and Cotte disclose the method of claim 6, wherein acquiring tomographic data comprises determining at least one collection projection angle by correlating the cells to a two- or three- dimensional predefined geometrical shape (see Yoon sect. 2.2 Tomogram reconstruction, where the reconstruction of a 3D RI tomogram of individual WBCs includes having the spectral information mapped onto a surface, so called Ewald sphere, in 3D Fourier space).
Regarding claim 8, please see the above rejection of claim 6. Yoon and Cotte disclose the method of claim 6, wherein acquiring tomographic data comprises illuminating the sample (see Yoon Fig. 1 and sect. 2.1 Experimental setup, where a laser is used produce a laser beam which is split and impinged upon a sample to generate a hologram of the sample).
Regarding claim 9, please see the above rejection of claim 2. Yoon and Cotte disclose the method of claim 2, wherein said processing the cell complex wavefronts as the different tomographic projection of the 3D refractive index map comprises inducing multiple cells in the population to be acquired at different angles of projection (see Yoon sect. 2.1 Experimental setup, where the holograms of a sample is illuminated by plane waves with various illumination angles; and see Yoon sect. 2.2. Tomogram reconstruction, where the multiple complex amplitude images obtained with various illumination angles are extracted from the measured holograms).
Regarding claim 10, please see the above rejection of claim 1. Yoon and Cotte disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the tomographic data comprises holographic data (see Yoon sect. 2.1 Experimental setup, where holograms of the samples are recorded for reconstructing the 3D RI tomogram).
Regarding claim 11, please see the above rejection of claim 1. Yoon and Cotte disclose the method of claim 1, for use in blood or sperm tests (see Yoon Abstract and sect. 2. Methods, where the disclosed method for optical measurement and characterization of white blood cells (WBC) is crucial for blood analyses and disease diagnoses).
Regarding claim 12, it recites a system performing the method of claim 1. Yoon and Cotte disclose a system performing the method of claim 1. Please see above for detailed claim analysis, with the exception to the following further limitations:
a processing unit being configured and operable to carry out the method of claim 1 (see Yoon sect. 2.2 Tomogram reconstruction, where the tomogram reconstruction was performed using a graphics processor unit (GPU)).
Please see the above rejection for claim 1, as the rationale to combine the various teachings of Yoon and Cotte are similar, mutatis mutandis.
Regarding claim 13, see above rejection for claim 12. It is a system claim reciting similar subject matter as claim 2. Please see above claim 2 for detailed claim analysis as the limitations of claim 13 are similarly rejected.
Regarding claim 14, see above rejection for claim 12. It is a system claim reciting similar subject matter as claim 3. Please see above claim 3 for detailed claim analysis as the limitations of claim 14 are similarly rejected.
Regarding claim 15, see above rejection for claim 12. It is a system claim reciting similar subject matter as claim 5. Please see above claim 5 for detailed claim analysis as the limitations of claim 15 are similarly rejected.
Regarding claim 16, see above rejection for claim 12. It is a system claim reciting similar subject matter as claim 7. Please see above claim 7 for detailed claim analysis as the limitations of claim 16 are similarly rejected.
Regarding claim 18, please see the above rejection of claim 12. Yoon and Cotte disclose the system of claim 12, further configured and operable to acquire said tomographic data by illuminating the sample and detecting the radiation response of the sample and generating the tomographic data indicative thereof (see Yoon Fig. 1 and sect. 2.1 Experimental setup, where the holograms of the sample are recorded using a Mach-Zehnder interferometric microscope for various illumination angles with a high speed CMOS camera; see Yoon sect. 2.2. Tomogram reconstruction, where the holograms contain the multiple 2D complex amplitude and phase images of a sample used to reconstruct the 3D RI tomogram of a sampled WBC) to be received by said processing unit (see Yoon sect. 2.2. Tomogram reconstruction, where the tomogram reconstruction is performed by a GPU; where the combined teachings suggests that the GPU receives the measured holograms to be processed).
Regarding claim 19, please see the above rejection of claim 18. Yoon and Cotte disclose the system of claim 18, comprising a microscope for detecting the radiation response of the sample (see Yoon Fig. 1 and sect. 2.1 Experimental setup, where the holograms of the sample are recorded using a Mach-Zehnder interferometric microscope).
Regarding claim 20, please see the above rejection of claim 19. Yoon and Cotte disclose the system of claim 19, wherein said microscope comprises an off-axis holographic phase microscope (see Yoon Fig. 1 and sect. 2.1 Experimental setup, where the holograms of the sample are recorded using a Mach-Zehnder interferometric microscope, where the hologram is generated by interference of two beams split into two arms by a beam splitter, where one arm is a reference beam and the other is tilted by a dual-axis scanning galvanometer).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY WING HO CHOI whose telephone number is (571)270-3814. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM.
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, VINCENT RUDOLPH can be reached at (571) 272-8243. 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.
/TIMOTHY CHOI/Examiner, Art Unit 2671
/VINCENT RUDOLPH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2671