DETAILED ACTION
This communication is responsive to applicant’s response filed under 37 C.F.R §1.111 in response to a non-final office action. Claim(s) 1, 3, 8-10, and 12-14 have been amended; Claims 7 and 18 have been canceled; No claim(s) have been added. Claim(s) 1-6 and 8-14 are subject to examination.
Acknowledgement is made to the applicant’s amendment to claims 3 and 9 to obviate the previous 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection to claims 3 and 9-12. The previous 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection to claims 3 and 9-12 is/are hereby withdrawn.
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 with respect to claim(s) 1-6 and 8-14 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 1-6 and 8-14 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.
Claims 1 and 14 recite the limitation “the first beam being aligned with a beam of the second device…is transmitted through a beam reciprocal to the first beam”. It is unclear whether “a beam of the second device” is the same as “a beam reciprocal to the first beam”. For the purpose of examination, the examiner will interpret this claim as: the first beam being aligned with a beam of the second device…is transmitted through the beam of the second device, wherein the beam of the second device is reciprocal to the first beam. Claims 2-6 and 8-13 are likewise rejected as being dependent on claim 1.
Claims 1 and 14 recite the limitation “wherein, based on the first beam being aligned with a beam of the second device in a PSFCH occasion, the SL CSI reporting including a result of the measurement, the first CRI and the second CRI is transmitted through a beam reciprocal to the first beam”. It is not clear what is done based on “the first beam being aligned with a beam of the second device in a PSFCH occasion”. For the purpose of examination, the examiner will interpret the claim as: “wherein, based on the first beam being aligned with a beam of the second device in a PSFCH occasion and the SL CSI reporting including a result of the measurement, the first CRI and the second CRI is transmitted through a beam reciprocal to the first beam”, wherein first CRI and second CRI is transmitted based on two conditions: 1) first beam being aligned and 2) SL CSI reporting. Claims 2-6 and 8-13 are likewise rejected as being dependent on claim 1.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ETSI TS 138.331 V16.1.0 (ETSI, ‘5G; NR; Radio Resource Control (RRC); Protocol Specification (3GPP TS 38.331 version 16.1.0 Release 16)’, 3GPP TS 38.331 V16.1.0 (2020-07)) (see 892 07/17/2025), hereby referred to as TS138.331, in view of LI et al. (US 20220286184 A1), hereby referred to as LI.
Claim 1:
TS138.331 teaches a method comprising: establishing, by a first device, a unicast link with a second device (TS138.331: pg 220 (“The purpose of this procedure is to modify a PC5-RRC connection…”) wherein reconfiguration procedure is for already established unicast links); receiving, by the first device, from the second device, a Sidelink (SL) Radio Resource Control (RRC) reconfiguration message (TS138.331: pg 219 FIG. 5.8.9.1.1-1 (“RRCReconfigurationSidelink”)), wherein the SL RRC reconfiguration message comprises a configuration for a Channel State Information Reference Signal (CSI-RS) (TS138.331: pg 220 (“The purpose of this procedure is to modify a PC5-RRC connection…to configure Sidelink CSI reference signal resources and CSI reporting latency bound…”); transmitting, by the first device, to the second device, an SL RRC reconfiguration complete message in response to the SL RRC Reconfiguration message (TS138.331 pg 220 FIG. 5.8.9.1.1-1 (“”RRCReconfiguration Complete Sidelink”));
While TS138.331 teaches receiving, by the first device, form the second device, SL control information (TS138.331: pg 227 section 5.8.9.4.1 (“The sidelink common control information is carried by MasterInforamtionBlockSidelink…”)), TS138.331 does not explicitly disclose first SL control information, wherein the first SL control information comprises a first CSI-RS Resource Index (CRI) indicating a CSI request for a first beam; second SL control information, wherein the second SL control information comprises a second CRI indicating a CSI request for a second beam; receiving, by the first device, from the second device, the CSI-RS via the first beam and the second beam; measuring, by the first device, the CSI-RS received via the first beam and the second beam; and transmitting, by the first device, to the second device, an SL CSI reporting, wherein, based on the first beam being aligned with a beam of the second device in a PSFCH occasion, the SL CSI reporting including a result of the measurement, the first CRI and the second CRI is transmitted through a beam reciprocal to the first beam.
LI, in the same field of endeavor, teaches first SL control information, wherein the first SL control information comprises a first CSI-RS Resource Index (CRI) indicating a CSI request for a first beam (LI: FIG. 5B item “Beam 1” and para 87 (“…beam index information may be indicated by the SCI scheduling the PSSCH…a SCI field may be used to carry the beam index…beam index information may be carried by the RS port…used in the PSSCH carrying the SCI…When SL-CSI-RS is used for beam measurement, such information may be carried by the SL-CSI-RS…”) wherein SCI/SL control information has a CRI/CSI-RS beam index); second SL control information, wherein the second SL control information comprises a second CRI indicating a CSI request for a second beam (LI: FIG. 5B item “beam 2” and para 87 (“…beam index information may be indicated by the SCI scheduling the PSSCH…a SCI field may be used to carry the beam index…beam index information may be carried by the RS port…used in the PSSCH carrying the SCI…When SL-CSI-RS is used for beam measurement, such information may be carried by the SL-CSI-RS…”) wherein SCI/SL control information has a CRI/CSI-RS beam index); receiving, by the first device, from the second device, the CSI-RS via the first beam and the second beam (LI: FIG. 5B item “Beam 1” and item “Beam 2”); measuring, by the first device, the CSI-RS received via the first beam and the second beam (LI: FIG. 2 item 2 (“Monitor and measure the received RS…”)); and transmitting, by the first device, to the second device, an SL CSI reporting (LI: FIG. 2 item 3 (“Indicate preferred beam(s) E.g., PSFCH…”) and para 119 (“…UE2 may indicate the absolute value of the measurement results for each beam in the reporting…”)), wherein, based on the first beam being aligned with a beam of the second device in a PSFCH occasion (YI: FIG. 15 item 2 (“Sweep the Rx beam and measure the received RS to determine the beam has best alignment”) and para 120-122 (“UE2 may indicate the preferred beam…implicitly by performing Sidelink transmission…using the selected beam…The UE2 may indicate the preferred beam to UE1 using…PSFCH…”) wherein the preferred/selected beams are the aligned beams…wherein the beams are aligned in PSFCH occasion), the SL CSI reporting including a result of the measurement (LI: para 119 (“…UE2 may indicate the absolute value of the measurement results for each beam in the reporting…”)), the first CRI and the second CRI is transmitted through a beam reciprocal to the first beam (LI: FIG. 2 item 3 (“Indicate preferred beam(s) E.g., PSFCH…”), para 119 (“…UE2 may indicate the beam index of…one or multiple preferred beam(s)…”), para 120-122 (“UE2 may indicate the preferred beam…implicitly by performing Sidelink transmission…using the selected beam…The UE2 may indicate the preferred beam to UE1 using…PSFCH…”) wherein multiple preferred beams include multiple beam index such as a first and second beam index/CRI and is sent on a preferred/selected beam which is a reciprocal beam).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified TS138.311 with LI, the combination hereby referred to as TS138.331-LI, for the benefit of improved beam condition and beam alignment (LI: para 58-59).
Claim 2:
TS138.331-LI teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the first CRI included in the first SL control information and/or the second CRI included in the second SL control information has a size greater than one bit (LI: para 87 (“…SCI field may be used to carry the beam index…32, a 5-bits field, e.g., a beam index indicator field…”) wherein CRI is greater than 1 bit).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified TS138.311 with LI for the benefit of improved beam condition and beam alignment (LI: para 58-59).
Claim 13:
TS138.331-LI teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the first device is in communication with at least one of a mobile device, a network, and/or autonomous vehicles other than the first device (LI: FIG 20A wherein first device is communicating in a large system).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified TS138.311 with LI for the benefit of improved beam condition and beam alignment (LI: para 58-59).
Claim 14:
TS138.331 teaches a first device comprising: at least one transceiver; at least one processor; and at least one memory connected to the at least one processor and storing instructions that, based on being executed, cause the first device to perform operations (TS138.331 FIG. 5.8.9.1.1-1 wherein first device requires at least a transceiver, processor, and memory to perform the described operation).
For further limitations, see rejection for claim 1 above.
Claim(s) 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TS138.331 in view of LI, the combination hereby referred to as TS138.331-LI, and in further view of SHIN et al. (US 20220399917 A1) (See 892 07/17/2025), hereby referred to as SHIN.
Claim 3:
TS138.331-LI teaches the method of claim 2, disclose wherein, after the first SL control is received, the CSI-RS is received via the first beam after X slot (LI: FIG. 7B wherein the RS is received/transmitted some slot time after the SCI), wherein, after the first SL control information is received, the SL CSI reporting is transmitted after Y slot (LI: FIG. 2 item 3 wherein reporting is done sometime after 1st SL control information and CSI-RS reception, therefore Y is greater than X), but does not explicitly wherein the X and the Y are a positive integer.
SHIN, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the X and the Y are a positive integer (SHIN: para 164 (“…periodicity for transmission of the SL CSI-RS. CSI-ResourcePeriodicity…slots4, slots5…”) wherein CSI-RS is received after X slots and para 165 (“…periodicity for transmission of the SL CSI report…slots4, slots6…”) wherein CSI reporting is after Y slot).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified TS138.331-LI with SHIN for the benefit of reducing pathloss and improving coverage (SHIN: para 55).
Claim 4:
TS138.331-LI teaches the method of claim 2, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the CSI-RS received via the first beam and the CSI-RS received via the second beam are received at regular periods.
SHIN, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the CSI-RS received via the first beam and the CSI-RS received via the second beam are received at regular periods (SHIN: FIG. 9A item 901 (“OFFsetIndicator1”) and (“Periodicity”); para 164 (“…periodicity for transmission of the SL CSI-RS. CSI-ResourcePeriodicity…slots4, slots5…”) wherein CSI-RS is received in regular periods).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified TS138.331-LI with SHIN for the benefit of reducing pathloss and improving coverage (SHIN: para 55).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TS138.331 in view of LI, the combination hereby referred to as TS138.331-LI, and in further view of SON et al. (US 20230217287 A1) (see 892 07/17/2025), hereby referred to as SON.
Claim 5:
TS138.331-LI teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the SL CSI reporting is transmitted within an SL CSI latency boundary configured in the SL RRC reconfiguration message (TS138.331: pg 220 (“The purpose of this procedure is to modify a PC5-RRC connection…to configure Sidelink CSI reference signal resources and CSI reporting latency bound…”) wherein SL CSI latency boundary is configured for SL CSI reporting), but does not explicitly disclose from after the first SL control information is received.
SON, in the same field of endeavor, teaches from after the first SL control information is received (SON: FIG. 8 item K and para 94 (“…feedback indication information and K may be included in SCI…K may be ‘sl-LatencyBound-CSI-Report’.”) wherein SL CSI latency boundary is started after SL control information is received).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified TS138.331-LI with SON for the benefit of improving sidelink communication performance (SON: para 13).
Claim(s) 6 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TS138.331 in view of LI, the combination hereby referred to as TS138.331-LI, and in further view of GROSSMAN et al. (US 20230246785 A1) (see 892 07/17/2025), hereby referred to GROSSMAN.
Claim 6:
TS138.331-LI teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the CSI-RS received via the first beam and the CSI-RS received via the second beam are received via different dynamically allocated time resources (LI: FIG. 4 wherein each beam is dynamically allocated a different time slot),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified TS138.311 with LI for the benefit of improved beam condition and beam alignment (LI: para 58-59).
However, TS138.331-LI does not explicitly disclose wherein the first CRI in the first SL control information and/or the second CRI included in the second SL control information has a size of 1 bit.
GROSSMAN, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the first CRI in the first SL control information and/or the second CRI included in the second SL control information has a size of 1 bit (GROSSMAN: para 209 (“…then the CRI field has a size of log2X bits…”) wherein CRI can be 1 bit).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified TS138.133-LI with GROSSMANN for the benefit of interference management (GROSSMANN: para 205).
Claim 10:
TS138.331-LI teaches the method of claim 9, wherein the at least one of the first CRI or the second CRI included in the SL CSI reporting has a size of at least 7 bits.
GROSSMANN, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the first CRI and/or the second CRI included in the SL CSI reporting has a size of at least 7 bits (GROSSMANN: para 209 (“…then the CRI field has a size of LOG2X bits…”) and para 217 (“…the CSI report comprises two parts…there exists a first CRI and a second CRI…”) wherein a CRI field for each of the first and second CRI can be any number of bits including 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified TS138.133-LI with GROSSMANN for the benefit of interference management (GROSSMANN: para 205).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TS138.331 in view of LI, the combination hereby referred to as TS138.331-LI, and in further view of SON et al. (US 20230217287 A1) (see 892 07/17/2025), hereby referred to as SON.
Claim 8:
TS138.331-LI teaches the method of claim 1, the SL CSI reporting including the result of the measurement (LI: para 119 (“…UE2 may indicate the absolute value of the measurement results for each beam in the reporting…”)), the first CRI and the second CRI is transmitted through the beam reciprocal to the first beam (LI: FIG. 2 item 3 (“Indicate preferred beam(s) E.g., PSFCH…”), para 119 (“…UE2 may indicate the beam index of…one or multiple preferred beam(s)…”), para 120-122 (“UE2 may indicate the preferred beam…implicitly by performing Sidelink transmission…using the selected beam…The UE2 may indicate the preferred beam to UE1 using…PSFCH…”) wherein multiple preferred beams include multiple beam index such as a first and second beam index/CRI and is sent on a preferred/selected beam which is a reciprocal beam), within an SL CSI latency boundary configured in the SL RRC reconfiguration message (TS138.331: pg 220 (“The purpose of this procedure is to modify a PC5-RRC connection…to configure Sidelink CSI reference signal resources and CSI reporting latency bound…”)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified TS138.311 with LI for the benefit of improved beam condition and beam alignment (LI: para 58-59).
However, TS138.331-LI does not explicitly disclose from after the first SL control information is received.
SON, in the same field of endeavor, teaches from after the first SL control information is received (SON: FIG. 8 item K and para 94 (“…feedback indication information and K may be included in SCI…K may be ‘sl-LatencyBound-CSI-Report’.”) wherein SL CSI latency boundary is started after SL control information is received).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified TS138.331-LI with SON for the benefit of improving sidelink communication performance (SON: para 13).
However, TS138.331-LI in view of SON does not explicitly disclose wherein, based on the first beam being aligned with the beam of the second device in a slot corresponding to a multiple of a beam alignment cycle check parameter received by an upper layer, and from after the first SL control information is received.
SHIN, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein, based on the first beam being aligned with the beam of the second device in a slot corresponding to a multiple of a beam alignment cycle check parameter (SHIN: FIG. 10D and para 195 (“…transmitting UE…may transmit a signal to the receiving UE…by forming a beam for PSCCH/PSSCH based on the beam information received….”) wherein first beam is the beam that aligns with the transmitting UE beam in a slot/forms PSCCH/PSSCH based on multiple parameters/beam alignment cycle check parameters) received by an upper layer (SHIN: FIG. 5 item 510 and para 108 (“SL-SIB information may include…parameter configuration operation..”) wherein parameters are received via upper layer) and (MANOLAKOS: para 59 (“CSI Report configuration…indicating…what parameters to report…”) wherein parameters are received via upper layer),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified TS138.331-LI in view of SON with SHIN for the benefit of reducing pathloss and improving coverage (SHIN: para 55).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TS138.331 in view of LI, the combination hereby referred to as TS138.331-LI, and in further view of MANOKALOS et al. (US 20210050888 A1) (see 892 07/17/2025), hereby referred to as MANOKALOS.
Claim 9:
TS138.331-LI teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the SL RRC reconfiguration message comprises a configuration (TS138.331V16.1.0: pg 219 Figure 5.8.9.1.1-1 the RRCReconfigurationSidelink), but does not explicitly disclose to enable the SL CSI reporting to include at least one of the first CRI or the second CRI and a Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP).
MANOLAKOS teaches to enable the SL CSI reporting to include at least one of the first CRI or the second CRI and a Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP) (MANOLAKOS: para 63 (“The CSI report configuration received…may indicates to the UE…which parameters associated with a sidelink channel quality to measure and report…a RSRP…a CRI…”) wherein SL CSI reporting is configured to include CRI and RSRP).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified TS138.331-LI with the configuration of MANOLAKOS, the combination hereby referred to as TS138.331-LI-MANOLAKOS, for the benefit of enabling specified estimates of channel conditions between wireless communication devices (MANOLAKOS: para 6 and 63).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TS138.331 in view of LI and MANOLAKOS, the combination hereby referred to as TS138.331-LI-MANOLAKOS, and in further view of WU et al. (US 20220183017 A1) (see 892 07/17/2025), hereby referred to as WU.
Claim 11:
TS138.331-LI-MANOLAKOS teaches the method of claim 9, wherein the result of the measurement included in the SL CSI reporting comprises an RSRP of the CSI-RS received via the first beam and an RSRP of the CSI-RS received via the second beam (MANOLAKOS: para 63 (“The CSI report configuration received…may indicates to the UE…which parameters associated with a sidelink channel quality to measure and report…a RSRP…a CRI…”) and para 80 (“The CSI feedback from each of the UEs…may be an ordered sequence of parameters associated with…beams…may include RSRP for each of sidelink RS resource sets…”)wherein SL CSI reporting is configured to include CRI and RSRP).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified TS138.331-LI with the configuration of MANOLAKOS, the combination hereby referred to as TS138.331-LI-MANOLAKOS, for the benefit of enabling specified estimates of channel conditions between wireless communication devices (MANOLAKOS: para 6 and 63).
However, TS138.331-LI-MANOLAKOS does not explicitly disclose wherein the RSRP of the CSI-RS received via the first beam has a size of 7 bits, and wherein the RSRP of the CSI-RS received via the second beam has a size of 4 bits.
WU, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the RSRP of the CSI-RS received via the first beam has a size of 7 bits (WU: para 83 (“…the SL L1-RSRP…is quantized as 7 bits…”) and para 91 (“…7-bit L1-RSRP reference quantized value, and three 4-bit L1-RSRP differential quantized values…”) wherein the RSRP of a beam is 7 bits), and wherein the RSRP of the CSI-RS received via the second beam has a size of 4 bits (WU: para 83 (“The differences between the L1-RSRPs measured in the other slots and the reference L1-RSRP are quantized as 4 bits…”) and para 91 (“…7-bit L1-RSRP reference quantized value, and three 4-bit L1-RSRP differential quantized values…”) wherein the RSRP difference of the second beam has a size of 4 bits).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified TS138.133-LI-MANOLAKOS with WU for the benefit of reducing signaling overhead (WU: para 83).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TS138.331 in view of LI and MANOLAKOS, the combination hereby referred to as TS138.331-LI-MANOLAKOS, and in further view of GHANBARINEJAD et al. (US 20230155800 A1) (see 892 07/17/2025), hereby referred to as GHAN.
Claim 12:
TS138.331-LI-MANOLAKOS teaches the method of claim 9, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one of the first CRI or the second CRI included in the SL CSI reporting is expressed as an offset value of 4 bits relative to a representative CRI.
GHAN, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the first CRI and/or the second CRI included in the SL CSI reporting is expressed as an offset value of 4 bits relative to a representative CRI (GHAN: pg 12 Table 5 “If the UE is configured with a CSI-ReportConfig…set to ‘cri-RSRP’…For L1-RSRP reporting…if the higher layer parameter nrofReportedRS is configured to be larger than one, or if the higher layer parameter groupBasedBeamReporting is configured as ‘enabled’, the UE shall use differential L1- RSRP based reporting, where the largest measured value of L1-RSRP is quantized to a 7-bit value in the range [−140, −44] dBm with 1 dB step size, and the differential L1-RSRP is quantized to a 4-bit value. The differential L1-RSRP value is computed with 2 dB step size with a reference to the largest measured L1- RSRP value which is part of the same L1-RSRP reporting instance. The mapping between the reported L1-RSRP value and the measured quantity”) wherein CRI including RSRP is represented as a differential/offset 4-bit value).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to have modified TS138.133-LI-MANOLAKOS with GHAN for the benefit of improving beam management (GHAN: para 59).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELIE T NGO whose telephone number is (571)272-0180. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thur: 8am - 5pm; 2nd Fri: 8am - 3pm.
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, Noel Beharry can be reached at (571) 270-5630. 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.T.N./ Examiner, Art Unit 2416
/NOEL R BEHARRY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2416