Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 31, 2026 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-8, 10-13, 15-17 and 19-20 and 31-32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koskela et al. (US 2021/0242922) (Hereafter, Koskela ‘922) in view of Deenoo et al. (US 2020/0274657 , and further in view of Moon et al. (US 2020/0221428).
Regarding claim 1, Koskela ‘922 discloses a user equipment (UE) (Koskela ‘922, Fig. 1, UE), comprising:
at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (Koskela ‘922, Fig. 1; paragraph [0061], processor, transceivers, transmitter, receiver) and configured to cause the UE to:
determine a beam failure detection resource combination for detecting beam failure of multiple transmissions of Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH), wherein the beam failure detection resource combination comprises a plurality of beam failure detection resources, and wherein each of the plurality of beam failure detection resources is associated with a respective one of the multiple transmissions of PDCCH (Koskela ‘922, paragraphs [0070], network configures the UE with a set of reference signals for monitoring the quality of the link for beam failure detection, these reference signals correspond to downlink beams used to transmit PDCCH; paragraph [0071], when the UE 110 is not explicitly configured with a BFD-RS list, the UE determines the BFD-RS resources implicitly based on the configured/indicated/activated PDCCH-TCI states per CORESET, i.e., the downlink reference signals (CSI-RS, SS/PBCH block) that are spatially quasi-co-located (QCL'd) with PDCCH beams used for transmitting PDCCH; UE may determine the RS for radio link monitoring implicitly based on the TCI states for PDCCH; paragraphs [0078], UE configured with a set of BFD-RS determined based on activated PDCCH-TCI states, each CORESET may be associated with one or more PDCCH TCI states);
receive signals from the plurality of beam failure detection resources (Koskela ‘922, paragraphs [0070]-[0071], network configures the UE with a set of reference signals for monitoring the quality of the link for beam failure detection, QCL’d with beams used for transmitting PDCCH);
determine a link quality for the beam failure detection resource combination based on measurements of the signals received from the plurality of beam failure detection resources, wherein the link quality is a value derived from a plurality of measurement results (Koskela ‘922, paragraphs [0070]-[0071], network configures the UE with a set of reference signals for monitoring the quality of the link for beam failure detection, QCL’d with beams used for transmitting PDCCH; paragraph [0105], beam failure detection based on measurements of reference signals), each measurement result of the plurality of measurement results associated with a respective one of the multiple transmissions of the PDCCH (Koskela ‘922, paragraphs [0070], network configures the UE with a set of reference signals for monitoring the quality of the link for beam failure detection, these reference signals correspond to downlink beams used to transmit PDCCH; paragraph [0071], when the UE 110 is not explicitly configured with a BFD-RS list, the UE determines the BFD-RS resources implicitly based on the configured/indicated/activated PDCCH-TCI states per CORESET, i.e., the downlink reference signals (CSI-RS, SS/PBCH block) that are spatially quasi-co-located (QCL'd) with PDCCH beams used for transmitting PDCCH; UE may determine the RS for radio link monitoring implicitly based on the TCI states for PDCCH; paragraphs [0078], UE configured with a set of BFD-RS determined based on activated PDCCH-TCI states, each CORESET may be associated with one or more PDCCH TCI states), and
a PDCCH with multiple transmissions using one or more Transmission Configuration Indication (TCI) states (Koskela ‘922, paragraphs [0078], UE configured with a set of BFD-RS determined based on activated PDCCH-TCI states, each CORESET may be associated with one or more PDCCH TCI states); and
generate a beam failure evaluation report based on the link quality (Koskela ‘922, paragraphs [0088], UE sends an indication of the beam failure toward the base station).
Koskela ‘922 does not explicitly disclose multiple transmissions of Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) for one Downlink Control Information (DCI), wherein each of the multiple transmissions of the PDCCH conveys the one DCI, and
determine a single link quality for the beam failure detection resource combination, wherein the single link quality is a single value derived from a plurality of measurement results; and
determine a threshold based on a hypothetical PDCCH with multiple transmissions; and
generate a beam failure evaluation report based on the single link quality and the threshold.
Deenoo discloses determine a single link quality for the beam failure detection resource combination, wherein the single link quality is a single value derived from a plurality of measurement results (Deenoo, paragraph [0084], assess radio link quality based on Qout threshold corresponds to a 10% BLER of a hypothetical PDCCH transmission, Qin threshold corresponds to a 2% BLER of a hypothetical PDCCH transmission; paragraph [0110], if estimated link quality corresponding to a hypothetical PDCCH BLER based on all configured X RLM-RS resources is below Qout threshold; paragraph [0111], beam failure recovery procedure; paragraph [0120], for the comparison procedure 300, the PDCCH quality derived from each of the RLM-RS resources at block 302 may be compared with one of the configured BLER thresholds at block 304 (1 <xs3). In this example, all the RLM-RS resources may be compared with one BLER threshold at block 306. For example, BLER measurements associated with RLM-RS resources 1, 2, 3, … x may be compared with a configured BLER threshold at block 306; paragraph [0134], association between a RLM-RS resource and on or more corresponding BLER thresholds, evaluate hypothetical PDCCH quality derived from RLM-RS resource group and corresponding BLER thresholds); and
determine a threshold based on a hypothetical PDCCH with multiple transmissions (Deenoo, paragraph [0084], assess radio link quality based on Qout threshold corresponds to a 10% BLER of a hypothetical PDCCH transmission, Qin threshold corresponds to a 2% BLER of a hypothetical PDCCH transmission; paragraph [0110], if estimated link quality corresponding to a hypothetical PDCCH BLER based on all configured X RLM-RS resources is below Qout threshold; paragraph [0111], beam failure recovery procedure; paragraph [0120], for the comparison procedure 300, the PDCCH quality derived from each of the RLM-RS resources at block 302 may be compared with one of the configured BLER thresholds at block 304 (1 <xs3). In this example, all the RLM-RS resources may be compared with one BLER threshold at block 306. For example, BLER measurements associated with RLM-RS resources 1, 2, 3, … x may be compared with a configured BLER threshold at block 306; paragraph [0134], association between a RLM-RS resource and on or more corresponding BLER thresholds, evaluate hypothetical PDCCH quality derived from RLM-RS resource group and corresponding BLER thresholds); and
generate a beam failure evaluation report based on the single link quality and the threshold (Deenoo, paragraph [0084], assess radio link quality based on Qout threshold corresponds to a 10% BLER of a hypothetical PDCCH transmission, Qin threshold corresponds to a 2% BLER of a hypothetical PDCCH transmission; paragraph [0110], if estimated link quality corresponding to a hypothetical PDCCH BLER based on all configured X RLM-RS resources is below Qout threshold; paragraph [0101], WTRU configured to transmit a report when the quality of the control channel goes below the BLER threshold, the report may indicate the RS or RS group associated with the control channel on which failure was observed; paragraph [0111], beam failure recovery procedure; paragraph [0120], for the comparison procedure 300, the PDCCH quality derived from each of the RLM-RS resources at block 302 may be compared with one of the configured BLER thresholds at block 304 (1 <xs3). In this example, all the RLM-RS resources may be compared with one BLER threshold at block 306. For example, BLER measurements associated with RLM-RS resources 1, 2, 3, … x may be compared with a configured BLER threshold at block 306; paragraph [0134], association between a RLM-RS resource and on or more corresponding BLER thresholds, evaluate hypothetical PDCCH quality derived from RLM-RS resource group and corresponding BLER thresholds).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features taught by Deenoo into the system of Koskela ‘922 in order to provide support for diverse sets of services with different reliability requirements (Deenoo; [0091]).
The combination of Koskela ‘922 and Deenoo does not explicitly disclose multiple transmissions of Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) for one Downlink Control Information (DCI), wherein each of the multiple transmissions of the PDCCH conveys the one DCI.
Moon discloses multiple transmissions of Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) for one Downlink Control Information (DCI), wherein each of the multiple transmissions of the PDCCH conveys the one DCI (Moon, paragraph [0120], multi-beam PDCCH transmission; paragraph [0155], repeated transmissions of the DCI for multi-beam transmission).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features taught by Moon into the system of the combination of Koskela ‘922 and Deenoo in order to enhance reliability of PDCCH transmission (Moon; [0083]).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Koskela ‘922, Deenoo and Moon, particularly Koskela ‘922 discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to receive a configuration signaling, and determine the beam failure detection resource combination based on the configuration signaling (Koskela ‘922, paragraphs [0070]-[0071], network configures the UE with a set of reference signals for monitoring the quality of the link for beam failure detection, QCL’d with beams used for transmitting PDCCH).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Koskela ‘922, Deenoo and Moon, particularly Koskela ‘922 discloses wherein the plurality of beam failure detection resources comprise Channel State Information Reference Signal (CSI-RS) resources, and/or Synchronization Signal Block (SSB) resources (Koskela ‘922, paragraphs [0070]-[0071], downlink reference signals are CSI-RS or SS/PBCH Block).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Koskela ‘922, Deenoo and Moon, particularly Koskela ‘922 discloses wherein each one of the beam failure detection resources corresponds to a newest TCI state for each CORESET that is used for the multiple transmissions of PDCCH (Koskela ‘922, paragraphs [0133], UE determines the set of q0 based on last TCI states for PDCCH monitoring that UE has decoded).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Koskela ‘922, Deenoo and Moon, particularly Koskela ‘922 discloses wherein the beam failure detection resources correspond to last used TCI states for the multiple transmissions of PDCCH (Koskela ‘922, paragraphs [0133], UE determines the set of q0 based on last TCI states for PDCCH monitoring that UE has decoded).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Koskela ‘922, Deenoo and Moon, particularly Koskela ‘922 discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to determine a hypothetical PDCCH transmission parameter list comprising a number of PDCCH transmissions for a DCI and/or a TCI state switching pattern of the PDCCH transmissions (Koskela ‘922, paragraphs [0074], monitoring pattern for monitoring a CORESET).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Koskela ‘922, Deenoo and Moon, particularly Koskela ‘922 discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to receive further receives a signaling indicating a hypothetical PDCCH transmission scheme for the multiple transmissions of PDCCH (Koskela ‘922, paragraphs [0074], monitoring pattern for monitoring a CORESET).
Regarding claim 10, Koskela ‘922 discloses a base station (Koskela ‘922, Fig. 1, gNB), comprising:
at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (Koskela ‘922, Fig. 1; paragraph [0061], processor, transceivers, transmitter, receiver) and configured to cause the base station to:
transmit signals over a beam failure detection resource combination for detecting beam failure of multiple transmissions of Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH), wherein the beam failure detection resource combination comprises a plurality of beam failure detection resources and wherein each of the plurality of beam failure detection resources is associated with a respective one of the multiple transmissions of PDCCH (Koskela ‘922, paragraphs [0070], network configures the UE with a set of reference signals for monitoring the quality of the link for beam failure detection, these reference signals correspond to downlink beams used to transmit PDCCH; paragraph [0071], when the UE 110 is not explicitly configured with a BFD-RS list, the UE determines the BFD-RS resources implicitly based on the configured/indicated/activated PDCCH-TCI states per CORESET, i.e., the downlink reference signals (CSI-RS, SS/PBCH block) that are spatially quasi-co-located (QCL'd) with PDCCH beams used for transmitting PDCCH; UE may determine the RS for radio link monitoring implicitly based on the TCI states for PDCCH; paragraphs [0078], UE configured with a set of BFD-RS determined based on activated PDCCH-TCI states, each CORESET may be associated with one or more PDCCH TCI states);
receive a beam failure report that is generated based on a link quality, wherein the link quality is determined based on measurements of signals received from the plurality of beam failure detection resources (Koskela ‘922, paragraphs [0070]-[0071], network configures the UE with a set of reference signals for monitoring the quality of the link for beam failure detection, QCL’d with beams used for transmitting PDCCH; paragraphs [0088], UE sends an indication of the beam failure toward the base station; paragraph [0105], beam failure detection based on measurements of reference signals) and is a value derived from a plurality of measurement results (Koskela ‘922, paragraphs [0070]-[0071], network configures the UE with a set of reference signals for monitoring the quality of the link for beam failure detection, QCL’d with beams used for transmitting PDCCH; paragraph [0105], beam failure detection based on measurements of reference signals), each measurement result of the plurality of measurement results associated with a respective one of the multiple transmissions of the PDCCH (Koskela ‘922, paragraphs [0070], network configures the UE with a set of reference signals for monitoring the quality of the link for beam failure detection, these reference signals correspond to downlink beams used to transmit PDCCH; paragraph [0071], when the UE 110 is not explicitly configured with a BFD-RS list, the UE determines the BFD-RS resources implicitly based on the configured/indicated/activated PDCCH-TCI states per CORESET, i.e., the downlink reference signals (CSI-RS, SS/PBCH block) that are spatially quasi-co-located (QCL'd) with PDCCH beams used for transmitting PDCCH; UE may determine the RS for radio link monitoring implicitly based on the TCI states for PDCCH; paragraphs [0078], UE configured with a set of BFD-RS determined based on activated PDCCH-TCI states, each CORESET may be associated with one or more PDCCH TCI states), and
a PDCCH with multiple transmissions using one or more Transmission Configuration Indication (TCI) states (Koskela ‘922, paragraphs [0078], UE configured with a set of BFD-RS determined based on activated PDCCH-TCI states, each CORESET may be associated with one or more PDCCH TCI states).
Koskela ‘922 does not explicitly disclose multiple transmissions of Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) for one Downlink Control Information (DCI), wherein each of the multiple transmissions of the PDCCH conveys the one DCI, and
receive a beam failure report based on a single link quality and the threshold, wherein the single link quality is a single value derived from a plurality of measurement results; and
the threshold is determined based on a hypothetical PDCCH with multiple transmissions.
Deenoo discloses receive a beam failure report based on a single link quality and the threshold, wherein the single link quality is a single value derived from a plurality of measurement results (Deenoo, paragraph [0084], assess radio link quality based on Qout threshold corresponds to a 10% BLER of a hypothetical PDCCH transmission, Qin threshold corresponds to a 2% BLER of a hypothetical PDCCH transmission; paragraph [0101], WTRU configured to transmit a report when the quality of the control channel goes below the BLER threshold, the report may indicate the RS or RS group associated with the control channel on which failure was observed; paragraph [0110], if estimated link quality corresponding to a hypothetical PDCCH BLER based on all configured X RLM-RS resources is below Qout threshold; paragraph [0111], beam failure recovery procedure; paragraph [0120], for the comparison procedure 300, the PDCCH quality derived from each of the RLM-RS resources at block 302 may be compared with one of the configured BLER thresholds at block 304 (1 <xs3). In this example, all the RLM-RS resources may be compared with one BLER threshold at block 306. For example, BLER measurements associated with RLM-RS resources 1, 2, 3, … x may be compared with a configured BLER threshold at block 306; paragraph [0134], association between a RLM-RS resource and on or more corresponding BLER thresholds, evaluate hypothetical PDCCH quality derived from RLM-RS resource group and corresponding BLER thresholds); and
the threshold is determined based on a hypothetical PDCCH with multiple transmissions (Deenoo, paragraph [0084], assess radio link quality based on Qout threshold corresponds to a 10% BLER of a hypothetical PDCCH transmission, Qin threshold corresponds to a 2% BLER of a hypothetical PDCCH transmission; paragraph [0110], if estimated link quality corresponding to a hypothetical PDCCH BLER based on all configured X RLM-RS resources is below Qout threshold; paragraph [0111], beam failure recovery procedure; paragraph [0120], for the comparison procedure 300, the PDCCH quality derived from each of the RLM-RS resources at block 302 may be compared with one of the configured BLER thresholds at block 304 (1 <xs3). In this example, all the RLM-RS resources may be compared with one BLER threshold at block 306. For example, BLER measurements associated with RLM-RS resources 1, 2, 3, … x may be compared with a configured BLER threshold at block 306; paragraph [0134], association between a RLM-RS resource and on or more corresponding BLER thresholds, evaluate hypothetical PDCCH quality derived from RLM-RS resource group and corresponding BLER thresholds).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features taught by Deenoo into the system of Koskela ‘922 in order to provide support for diverse sets of services with different reliability requirements (Deenoo; [0091]).
The combination of Koskela ‘922 and Deenoo does not explicitly disclose multiple transmissions of Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) for one Downlink Control Information (DCI), wherein each of the multiple transmissions of the PDCCH conveys the one DCI.
Moon discloses multiple transmissions of Physical Downlink Control Channel (PDCCH) for one Downlink Control Information (DCI), wherein each of the multiple transmissions of the PDCCH conveys the one DCI (Moon, paragraph [0120], multi-beam PDCCH transmission; paragraph [0155], repeated transmissions of the DCI for multi-beam transmission).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features taught by Moon into the system of the combination of Koskela ‘922 and Deenoo in order to enhance reliability of PDCCH transmission (Moon; [0083]).
Claim 11 is rejected under substantially the same reasons as claim 2.
Claim 12 is rejected under substantially the same reasons as claim 3.
Claim 13 is rejected under substantially the same reasons as claim 8.
Claim 15 is rejected under substantially the same reasons as claim 1.
Claim 16 is rejected under substantially the same reasons as claim 2.
Claim 17 is rejected under substantially the same reasons as claim 3.
Claim 19 is rejected under substantially the same reasons as claim 5.
Claim 20 is rejected under substantially the same reasons as claim 6.
Regarding claim 30, the combination of Koskela ‘922, Deenoo and Moon, particularly Koskela ‘922 discloses wherein the beam failure detection resource combination is determined implicitly from resources with a same TCI state as one of multiple activated TCI states for PDCCH monitoring (Koskela ‘922, paragraph [0078], the UE 110 may be configured explicitly or implicitly with a set of beam failure detection RS (BFD-RS), also referred to as a q0 set. In case of implicit configuration, the UE determines the q0 set based on activated PDCCH-TCI states).
Regarding claim 31, the combination of Koskela ‘922 and Deenoo does not explicitly disclose wherein the multiple transmissions of PDCCH are repetitions of the one DCI respectively monitored on a plurality of PDCCH monitoring occasions.
Moon discloses wherein the multiple transmissions of PDCCH are repetitions of the one DCI respectively monitored on a plurality of PDCCH monitoring occasions (Moon, paragraph [0120], multi-beam PDCCH transmission; paragraph [0147], the time point at which the DCI is received may be a specific symbol of the PDCCH monitoring occasion including the PDCCH candidate in which the DCI is received; paragraph [0155], repeated transmissions of the DCI for multi-beam transmission).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features taught by Moon into the system of the combination of Koskela ‘922 and Deenoo in order to enhance reliability of PDCCH transmission (Moon; [0083]).
Claim(s) 9 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koskela et al. (US 2021/0242922) in view of Deenoo et al. (US 2020/0274657 , and further in view of Moon et al. (US 2020/0221428), and further in view of Zhou et al. (US 2019/0053314).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Koskela ‘922, Deenoo and Moon does not explicitly disclose to cause the UE to transmit a capability report indicating whether beam failure detection with hypothesis of multiple PDCCH transmissions is supported.
Zhou discloses to cause the UE to transmit a capability report indicating whether beam failure detection with hypothesis of multiple PDCCH transmissions is supported (Zhou, paragraph [0061], wireless device may send its capabilities information; paragraph [0141], wireless device indicates its capability regarding beam selection, determining that RSRP of multiple beams is lower than a threshold).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to add the features taught by Zhou into the system of the combination of Koskela ‘922 and Deenoo and Moon in order to reduce power consumption and reduce time spent for a BFR procedure (Zhou; [0139]).
Claim 14 is interpreted and rejected for substantially the same reasons as claim 9.
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yu et al. (US 20210399863) discloses that IS/OOS threshold values may be defined with respect to SINR values, where the SINR values are mapped with target IS/OOS PDCCH BLER thresholds. For example, a PDCCH BLER value for IS threshold may be 2% and mapped with a corresponding SINR value. Thus, the IS/OOS threshold adaption may be performed based on an LUT, in which a plurality of quantized channel parameters are to be correlated to respective delta SINR values that are correlated with the target IS/OOS PDCCH BLER thresholds. The delta SINR values may indicate respective offsets in determining the IS/OOS threshold values defined with respect to SINR values.
Deng et al. (US 20200389847) discloses that Beam link failure may be determined based on hypothetical PDCCH block error ratio (BLER). For example, a UE may establish a correlation between hypothetical PDCCH BLER and a reference signal measurement. Beam link failure may be determined using measurement of Radio Link Measurement (RLM) reference signal (RS). Configured with monitoring identical DCI transmissions, a UE may perform a conditional NR PDCCH decoding on one or more configured downlink beams. The UE may perform the conditional NR PDCCH decoding on the configured downlink beam(s), e.g., based on the NR PDCCH decoding result(s) of a preceding downlink beam. For instance, in some embodiments, in a full monitored slot, a UE may decode the NR PDCCH in the 1.sup.st monitored downlink beam and may buffer the signal received in (e.g., all) the other configured downlink beams for subsequent NR PDCCH decoding of the same DCI transmission, if deemed necessary.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALAN LOUIS LINDENBAUM whose telephone number is (571)270-3858. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 11:00 AM to 7:00 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Un Cho can be reached at (571) 272-7919. 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.
/A.L.L/Examiner, Art Unit 2413
/UN C CHO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2413
Prosecution Insights