DETAILED ACTION
This is a first Office action on the merits to the application filed 02/21/2023. Claims 1-54 are canceled. Claims 55-71 are pending.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/21/2023 and 09/19/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 56 - 61 and 69 are 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 56 recites:
“…QoS handling service comprises one or more of:
an identification of the first content provider (identified as identification #1);
an identification of the QoS handling service (identified as identification #2);
one or more application identifications of applications to which the first content provider can provide the QoS handling service (identified as identification #3);
an indication of one or more QoS handling actions that are supported by the first content provider (identified as identification #4); and
one or more user identifications to which the first content provider can provide the QoS handling service (identified a identification #5).”
The claim is not clear that it requires receiving at least one each of identification #1, and at least one of identification #2, and at least one of identification #3, and at least one of identification #4, and at least one of identification #5. The claim can also be interpreted as requiring to receive at least one of the five items, that is, at least one of identification #1, identification #2, identification #3, identification #4, or identification #5 such that one item at a minimum can be received.
For examination purposes, claim 56 is interpreted to mean:
“…QoS handling service comprises one or more of:
an identification of the first content provider (identified as identification #1);
an identification of the QoS handling service (identified as identification #2);
one or more application identifications of applications to which the first content provider can provide the QoS handling service (identified as identification #3);
an indication of one or more QoS handling actions that are supported by the first content provider (identified as identification #4); or
one or more user identifications to which the first content provider can provide the QoS handling service (identified as identification #5).”
Applicant should clarify and correct.
Claim 56’s dependent claims 58, 59, 60 and 61 are also rejected for dependency on claim 56:
Claim 57 recites:
“…first content provider comprises one or more of:
applying a particular bitrate to user traffic (identified as action #1);
applying a particular video resolution to video user traffic (identified as action #2);
reducing a video resolution of video user traffic to a lower level of resolution (identified as action #3).”
The claim is not clear that it requires performing at least one each of action #1, and at least one of action #2, and at least one of action #3. The claim can also be interpreted as requiring to perform at least one of the three actions, that is, at least one of action #1, or at least one of action #2, or at least one of action #3, such that one action at a minimum is to be performed.
For examination purposes, claim 57 is interpreted to mean:
“…first content provider comprises one or more of:
applying a particular bitrate to user traffic (identified as action #1);
applying a particular video resolution to video user traffic (identified as action #2); or
reducing a video resolution of video user traffic to a lower level of resolution (identified as action #3).”
Applicant should clarify and correct.
Claim 61 recites:
“…storing request comprises one or more of:
the identification of the QoS handling service (identified as identification #1;
the one or more application identifications of applications to which the first content provider can provide the QoS handling service (identified as identification #2);
the one or more user identifications to which the first content provider can provide the QoS handling service (identified as identification #3); and
the indication of one or more QoS handling actions that are supported by the first content provider (identified as identification #4).”
The claim is not clear that it requires receiving at least one each of identification #1, and at least one of identification #2, and at least one of identification #3, and at least one of identification #4. The claim can also be interpreted as requiring to receive at least one of the four items, that is, at least one of identification #1, identification #2, identification #3, or identification #4 such that one identification item at a minimum can be received.
For examination purposes, claim 61 is interpreted to mean:
“…storing request comprises one or more of:
the identification of the QoS handling service;
the one or more application identifications of applications to which the first content provider can provide the QoS handling service;
the one or more user identifications to which the first content provider can provide the QoS handling service; or
the indication of one or more QoS handling actions that are supported by the first content provider.”
Applicant should clarify and correct.
Claim 69, line 4 recites the limitation “the third network function.” There is a lack of antecedent basis for this limitation. The applicant may correct this by changing this limitation into “a third network function”.
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.
Claims 55-56, 58-62, 66-67, 70-71 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Kerpez (WO 2020/023179), hereinafter “Kerpez”, in view of Tan et al. (US Patent 8948007), hereinafter “Tan”.
Regarding claim 55 and 70, Kerpez teaches:
A method, in a first network function, for providing quality of service handling of user traffic transmitted by a first content provider (Fig. 1: Chaining control-plane VNFs for end-to-end Internet QoS;Fig. 4: Setting up QoS chaining an internet service (video streaming/download)), the method comprising:
receiving an onboarding request from the first content provider ([Abstract, [0022-0045]: Kerpez teaches a method for virtual network functions (VNFs) in a control plane and components in a data plane (See Fig. 8), setting up QoS chaining (end-to-end) for servicing video servers and providing video service. [0046]:Flow chart 400 (See Fig. 4) illustrates method for an Internet service, including setting up (instantiating – equates to multi-step registering process including on-boarding, registering, etc.) and tearing down QoS chaining of an Internet service (e.g. video delivery). First step 402: Request for some type of Internet Service to be delivered over the Internet. This equates to on-boarding request or similar, as initial step(s) in the registering process. The request can come from user/consumer 822 (See Fig. 8), NG RAN 824 or AF 819, going to a ‘first VNF’ such as RAN VNF 806 Radio Access Network Function. The request gets forwarded/relayed to second function, e.g. AMF VNF 810 Access and Mobility Management Function, where the AMF serves as a “gateway” between the RAN VNF and the other control plane functions such as the SMF, PCF, UDM, etc.),
Kerpez teaches checking the request for compliance with policy (allowed, subscribed, bill service levels, etc. ) but does not teach the details of the received information:
wherein the onboarding request comprises
information relating to a Quality of Service, QoS, handling service that the first content provider supports.
However, Tan in a similar endeavor discloses QoS policy received in the notification to include QoS classifications that correspond to one or more types of traffic or service, teaches:
wherein the onboarding request comprises
information relating to a Quality of Service, QoS, handling service that the first content provider supports ([0010-0014, 0026-0030]: Tan teaches method that enables a PRCF server (see Fig. 1) to receive request and then obtain information associated with an interoperable QoS policies used by the network and its devices. The QoS policy may include classifications indicating types of traffic and/or services (e.g. steaming video, streaming audio, Internet traffic, etc.) being transported in the network. (See Step 606, then Steps 625 or 615, Fig. 6). The PRCF server would use the QoS policy to obtain QoS policy information (Step 615) or retrieve QCI values (Step 625, 630) based on such information associated with the QoS policy. The QCI value equates to information relating to a Quality of Service QoS. [0026-0027]: The PCRF server receives the notification (equates to ‘on-boarding request’ ) that includes information associated with the traffic received from the user device, such as type of traffic and/or service (e.g. streaming video [0011, 0019, 0027, 0037, 0056-0058]), a network address, information associated with gateway/remote network, user device information (e.g. MAC address) , etc.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Tan into the method of Kerpez in order to adapt analogous method of receiving traffic and/or service information that can be used to check compliance for Quality of Service issues, and to further end (or relay) such information, implemented through control plane functions, to respond with authentication and permission for establishing such traffic and/or service. The motivation is that applying a well know standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Particularly for claim 70, Kerpez teaches:
the first network function comprising processing circuitry configured to ([0060-0061]: Kerpez teaches that the QoS chaining process can encompass data-plane Physical Network Function (PNFs) virtual functions and functions running on bare metal infrastructure. This means assigning, scheduling resources including computing resources, memory etc. )
Regarding claim 56, Kerpez does not teach:
the information relating to the QoS handling service comprises one or more of:
an identification of the first content provider;
an identification of the QoS handling service;
one or more application identifications of applications to which the first content provider can provide the QoS handling service;
an indication of one or more QoS handling actions that are supported by the first content provider; and
one or more user identifications to which the first content provider can provide the QoS handling service.
However, Tan teaches:
one or more application identifications of applications to which the first content provider can provide the QoS handling service (0011]: The QoS policy includes forwarding classifications indicating the type of traffic and/or service (e.g. streaming video, Internet traffic, etc.) being transported via the network.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Tan into the method of Kerpez in order to adapt analogous method of receiving traffic and/or service information that can be used to check compliance for Quality of Service issues, and to further end (or relay) such information, implemented through control plane functions, to respond with authentication and permission for establishing such traffic and/or service. The motivation is that applying a well know standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Regarding claim 58, Kerpez teaches:
transmitting a registration request to register the QoS handling service with a second network function, wherein the registration request comprises at least part of the information relating to the QoS handling service ([Abstract, [0045]:In the 5G control-plane structure, the original on-boarding request gets forwarded/relayed to second function, e.g. AMF VNF 810 Access and Mobility Management Function (see Fig. 8), where the AMF serves as a “gateway” between the RAN VNF and the other control plane functions such as the SMF, PCF, UDM, etc. This AMF would gate-keep the request information to further authenticate and authorize the request.).
Regarding claim 59, Kerpez does not teach:
wherein the registration request comprises:
the identification of the QoS handling service;
the one or more application identifications of applications to which the first content provider can provide the QoS handling service; and
the indication of one or more QoS handling actions that are supported by the first content provider.
However, Tan in a similar endeavor discloses QoS policy received in the notification to include QoS classifications that correspond to one or more types of traffic or service, teaches:
wherein the registration request comprises:
information relating to a Quality of Service, QoS, handling service that the first content provider supports ([0010-0014, 0026-0030]: Tan teaches method that enables a PRCF server (see Fig. 1) to receive request and then obtain information associated with an interoperable QoS policies used by the network and its devices. The QoS policy may include classifications indicating types of traffic and/or services (e.g. steaming video, streaming audio, Internet traffic, etc.) being transported in the network. (See Step 606, then Steps 625 or 615, Fig. 6). The PRCF server would use the QoS policy to obtain QoS policy information (Step 615) or retrieve QCI values (Step 625, 630) based on such information associated with the QoS policy. The QCI value equates to information relating to a Quality of Service QoS. [0026-0027]: The PCRF server receives the notification (equates to ‘on-boarding request’ ) that includes information associated with the traffic received from the user device, such as type of traffic and/or service (e.g. streaming video [0011, 0019, 0027, 0037, 0056-0058]), a network address, information associated with gateway/remote network, user device information (e.g. MAC address) , etc.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Tan into the method of Kerpez in order to adapt analogous method of receiving traffic and/or service information that can be used to check compliance for Quality of Service issues, and to further end (or relay) such information, implemented through control plane functions, to respond with authentication and permission for establishing such traffic and/or service. The motivation is that applying a well know standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Regarding claim 60, Kerpez teaches:
comprising transmitting a storing request to a third network function, ([Abstract, [0045]:In this embodiment, the third function equates to the Unified Data Management UDM function (see Fig. 8), that would manage the disposal of the information, such as storing the information related to the QoS handling of the video service.)…
Kerpez does not teach:
wherein the storing request comprises at least part of the information relating to the QoS handling service
However, Tan teaches:
wherein the storing request comprises at least part of the information relating to the QoS handling service ([0026]: PCRF server 155, continuing its role with managing the request information, may gather, process, search, store, and/or provide information, in its efforts to perform operations to establish and identify policies associated with the communication session.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Tan into the method of Kerpez in order to adapt analogous method of receiving traffic and/or service information that can be used to check compliance for Quality of Service issues, and to further end (or relay) such information, implemented through control plane functions, to respond with authentication and permission for establishing such traffic and/or service. The motivation is that applying a well know standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Regarding claim 61, Kerpez does not teach:
wherein the storing request comprises one or more of:
the identification of the QoS handling service;
the one or more application identifications of applications to which the first content provider can provide the QoS handling service;
the one or more user identifications to which the first content provider can provide the QoS handling service; and
the indication of one or more QoS handling actions that are supported by the first content provider.
However, Tan teaches:
the one or more application identifications of applications to which the first content provider can provide the QoS handling service (0011]: The QoS policy includes forwarding classifications indicating the type of traffic and/or service (e.g. streaming video, Internet traffic, etc.) being transported via the network.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Tan into the method of Kerpez in order to adapt analogous method of receiving traffic and/or service information that can be used to check compliance for Quality of Service issues, and to further end (or relay) such information, implemented through control plane functions, to respond with authentication and permission for establishing such traffic and/or service. The motivation is that applying a well know standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Regarding claim 62, Kerpez teaches:
receiving a service request from a fourth network function to initiate performance of a desired QoS handling service ([Abstract, [0045]:In this embodiment, the fourth function equates to the Policy Control Function PCF (see Fig. 8), that would manage the performance of the desired QoS service, such as requesting to change services transmitted through the network.).
Regarding claim 66 and 71, Kerpez teaches:
A method, in a second network function, for providing quality of service handling of user traffic transmitted by a content provider, the method comprising:
receiving a registration request from a first network function, the registration request comprising first information relating to a Quality of Service, QoS, handling service that the content provider supports ([Abstract, [0045]:In the 5G control-plane structure, the original on-boarding request gets forwarded/relayed to second function, e.g. AMF VNF 810 Access and Mobility Management Function (see Fig. 8), where the AMF serves as a “gateway” between the RAN VNF and the other control plane functions such as the SMF, PCF, UDM, etc. This AMF would gate-keep the request information to further authenticate and authorize the request. The first function is the RAN VNF, or may be the AF (see Fig. 8.).; and
Kerpez does not teach:
storing the first information.
However, Tan teaches:
storing the first information ([0026]: PCRF server 155, continuing its role with managing the request information, may gather, process, search, store, and/or provide information, in its efforts to perform operations to establish and identify policies associated with the communication session.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Tan into the method of Kerpez in order to adapt analogous method of receiving traffic and/or service information that can be used to check compliance for Quality of Service issues, and to further end (or relay) such information, implemented through control plane functions, to respond with authentication and permission for establishing such traffic and/or service. The motivation is that applying a well know standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Particularly for claim 71, Kerpez teaches:
the first network function comprising processing circuitry configured to ([0060-0061]: Kerpez teaches that the QoS chaining process can encompass data-plane Physical Network Function (PNFs) virtual functions and functions running on bare metal infrastructure. This means assigning, scheduling resources including computing resources, memory etc. )
Regarding claim 67, Kerpez does not teach:
wherein the first information comprises:
an identification of a QoS handling service;
one or more application identifications of applications to which the content provider can provide the QoS handling service; and
an indication of one or more QoS handling actions that are supported by the content provider.
However, Tan teaches:
wherein the first information comprises
an identification of a QoS handling service ([0010-0014, 0026-0030]: Tan teaches method that enables a PRCF server (see Fig. 1) to receive request and then obtain information associated with an interoperable QoS policies used by the network and its devices. The QoS policy may include classifications indicating types of traffic and/or services (e.g. steaming video, streaming audio, Internet traffic, etc.) being transported in the network. (See Step 606, then Steps 625 or 615, Fig. 6). The PRCF server would use the QoS policy to obtain QoS policy information (Step 615) or retrieve QCI values (Step 625, 630) based on such information associated with the QoS policy. The QCI value equates to information relating to a Quality of Service QoS. [0026-0027]: The PCRF server receives the notification (equates to ‘on-boarding request’ ) that includes information associated with the traffic received from the user device, such as type of traffic and/or service (e.g. streaming video [0011, 0019, 0027, 0037, 0056-0058]), a network address, information associated with gateway/remote network, user device information (e.g. MAC address) , etc.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Tan into the method of Kerpez in order to adapt analogous method of receiving traffic and/or service information that can be used to check compliance for Quality of Service issues, and to further end (or relay) such information, implemented through control plane functions, to respond with authentication and permission for establishing such traffic and/or service. The motivation is that applying a well know standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Claims 57, 63, 64, and 65 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Kerpez (WO 2020/023179), hereinafter “Kerpez”, in view of Tan et al. (US Patent 8948007), hereinafter “Tan”, in further view of Inoue (US 2013030148), hereinafter “Inoue”.
Regarding claim 57, Kerpez and Tan do not teach:
wherein the one or more QoS handling actions that are supported by the first content provider comprises one or more of:
applying a particular bitrate to user traffic;
applying a particular video resolution to video user traffic;
reducing a video resolution of video user traffic to a lower level of resolution.
However, Inoue in a similar endeavor discloses the management device implementing the usage states of frequency bandwidths for each QoS state for upstream and downstream traffic, teaches
wherein the one or more QoS handling actions that are supported by the first content provider comprises one or more of:
applying a particular bitrate to user traffic ([0043-0044]: Management information is used by the frequency-band control unit 520 (equates to first network function) to determine whether or not the frequency bandwidth according to the QoS policy contained in the frequency band request can be secured/reserved for the identified IP interface. In other words, the unit 520 [0070] use the QoS class, of the QoS policy, to determine whether the upstream and downstream frequency bandwidth used for the QoS policy can be secured. If yes, then the bandwidth (associated with the bitrate) is applied.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Inoue into the method of Kerpez and Tan in order to adapt broadly used transmission parameters, such as bandwidth and bitrate), for selected adjustment of the dedicated service, for simplifying network operations.
Regarding claim 63, Kerpez and Tan do not teach:
forwarding the service request to a second content provider capable of providing the desired QoS handling service, wherein the second content provider comprises one of the first content provider and a different content provider to the first content provider.
However, Inoue teaches:
forwarding the service request to a second content provider capable of providing the desired QoS handling service ([0015, 0121-0125]: The control traffic processing device receives a service request (S310, Fig. 7), including terminal ID information, ID of a second control traffic processing device (equates to second content provider) belonging to a second communication network; relays request to Service providing device 60 in Step 330 (generates and send info) for a frequency band change).
wherein the second content provider comprises one of the first content provider and a different content provider to the first content provider ([0120-0125]: Second service providing device 60 in second network (Fig. 7) is separate network from the first network).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Inoue into the method of Kerpez and Tan in order to adapt broadly used transmission parameters, such as bandwidth and bitrate), for selected adjustment of the dedicated service, for simplifying network operations.
Regarding claim 64, Kerpez and Tan do not teach:
receiving a response from the second content provider indicating that the service request is accepted.
However, Inoue teaches:
receiving a response from the second content provider indicating that the service request is accepted. (Fig. 7. [0121-0125]: Messages exchanged finalize the frequency band change – Steps 340-S450)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Inoue into the method of Kerpez and Tan in order to adapt broadly used transmission parameters, such as bandwidth and bitrate), for selected adjustment of the dedicated service, for simplifying network operations.
Regarding claim 65, Kerpez and Tan do not teach:
the service request comprises a subscription request, and wherein the method further comprises receiving a notification from the second content provider when the desired QoS handling service has been effectively applied.
However, Inoue teaches:
the service request comprises a subscription request, and wherein the method further comprises receiving a notification from the second content provider when the desired QoS handling service has been effectively applied Fig. 7. [0121-0125]: Messages exchanged finalize the frequency band change – Steps 340-S450)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Inoue into the method of Kerpez and Tan in order to adapt broadly used transmission parameters, such as bandwidth and bitrate), for selected adjustment of the dedicated service, for simplifying network operations.
Claims 68 and 69 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Kerpez (WO 2020/023179), hereinafter “Kerpez”, in view of Tan et al. (US Patent 8948007), hereinafter “Tan”, in further view of Atarius et al. (US 2020/0153644), hereinafter “Atarius”.
Regarding claim 68, Kerpez, and Tan do not teach:
receiving a discovery request from a fourth network function wherein the discovery request comprises second information relating to a desired QoS handling service.
However, Atarius in a similar endeavor discloses PCRF function receiving from a mission critical video application function, video service identifying information and QoS parameters, teaches:
receiving a discovery request from a fourth network function wherein the discovery request comprises second information relating to a desired QoS handling service (Abstract. PCRF function receiving from a mission critical video (MCVideo) application function, an attribute value pair (AVP) comprising an MCVideo-identifier identifying an MCVideo service, and QoS parameters indicating a QoS of the MCVideo service. The PCRF determines one or more QoS policies based on the identifier and the QoS parameter. See Also Fig. 8, 9. [0098])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Atarius into the method of Kerpez and Tan in order to adapt a specific QoS policy for specific type of video service as implementable within the larger framework of Kerpez and Tan. The motivation is that applying a well know standard or protocol or machine to a system provides the system with significantly improved industrial applicability.
Regarding claim 69, Kerpez does not teach:
selecting a stored information entry that matches the second information, and
transmitting an indication of a fifth network function associated with the stored information entry to the third network function.
However, Tan teaches:
selecting a stored information entry that matches the second information ([0069 – 0074]: See Fig. 6. Process 600 may include PCRF server 155 retrieving (upon request 605), from memory, information associated with a local QoS policy information block 615. Information is associated with interoperable QoS policy, and may information to derive QCI value 625. PCRF server may retrieve, from memory, information that corresponds to environment 100 [0074]. ), and
transmitting an indication of a fifth network function associated with the stored information entry to the third network function ( [0069-0074]: Process 600 includes sending notification to signal bearers that includes the local policy information (block 620, 645). See Fig. 6.[0076]: PCRF server sends information to other HSS 150 associated with the environment 100, so that the HSS 150 may allow other HSS to communicate with the device. Communication with HSS 150 and other HSS is furtherance of utilizing a fifth network function to connect with a third network function.)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT MA whose telephone number is (408)918-7661. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday and alternate Fridays, 7:30-4:30 PT.
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, Huy Vu can be reached at 571-272-3155. 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.
/R.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2461
/HUY D VU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2461