DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendments
The action is responsive to the Applicant’s Amendment filed on 12/01/2025.
Claims 1-2, 6-7, 11-12, 16, 18, 21, and 23 are pending in the application. Claims 1 and 11 have been amended. Claim 23 has been added. No claims have been cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections of claims 1-2, 6-7, 11-12, 16, 18, 21 have been fully considered. In view of the claim amendment filed, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made.
Further, regarding the new limitations recited in claims 1, 11, and 23, it is submitted that they are properly addressed by the new ground of rejection.
Furthermore, it is also submitted that all limitations in pending claims, including those not specifically argued, are properly addressed. The reason is set forth in the rejections. See claim analysis below for detail.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
5. 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.
6. Claims 1-2, 6-7, 11-12, 16, 18, 21, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chopra et al. (US 20210303413 A1) in view of Chan et al. (US 8713356 B1), Zhang et al. (US20210117287), Don et al. (US 20200042198 A1) and Anand et al (US 20070283017 A1).
7. Regarding Claim 1, Chopra discloses a method ([0049]: FIG. 2 is a flowchart that illustrates a method for tagging application resources) comprising:
identifying a data asset that is to be backed up (Fig. 1; [0011]: The application's host inputs a request from the backup server to create a snapshot of the application resource; [0018]-[0019]: the application data manager 122 can discover data for application resources on the application host 106 via the application host agent-service 132… In some embodiments, the discovery module 124 can use one component for discovering application resources… such as the databases 146, 154, and 164 [data for the application resource corresponds to a data asset which is to be backed up]);
evaluating a configuration ([0041]: The NetWorker® management console software provides a graphic user interface for functions such as client configuration; Fig. 1; [0026]: Before, during, and/or after discovery of existing and/or new application resources, an application host determines if each existing and/or new application resource satisfies at least one of a set of snapshot capability rules; [0031]: Examples of the application resources include the application host configurations 142, 150, and 160; [0041]: The NetWorker® management console software provides a graphic user interface for functions such as client configuration) of a logical volume group that comprises one or more physical volumes to which one or more logical volumes map, where the data asset is stored on the logical volume group (Fig. 1; [0024]: The backup/restore application 120 may be an Dell Corporation's NetWorker® backup/restore application, which is a suite of enterprise level data protection software that unifies and automates backup to tape, disk-based, and flash-based storage media across physical and virtual environments for granular and disaster recovery. Cross-platform support is provided for many environments;
[NetWorker supports the management and backup of data residing on logical volumes by integrating with third-party volume managers like Linux LVM. NetWorker can back up logical volumes on both physical and virtual machines, using policies within the NetWorker Management Web UI to manage the backups]);
evaluating a configuration of a storage array that comprises a volume group to which one or more of the physical volumes of the logical volume group map (Fig. 1; [0015] The server 110… includes a backup/restore application 120 that can … execute a restore based on the backup files stored on the storage array 112. The backup/restore application 120 can provide centralized administration, such as scheduling, monitoring, and managing backup operations and backup files; [0024]-[0025]: The backup/restore application 120 may be an Dell Corporation's NetWorker® backup/restore application… and automates backup to tape, disk-based, and flash-based storage media across physical and virtual environments… The storage array 112 may be a Dell Corporation's Powermax, a Dell Corporation XIO, or a Dell Corporation Unity storage array; [0048]: the storage array 112 has capacity for storing the long-term snapshots 182 and 184 on a long-term basis).
However, Chopra does not explicitly teach “comparing the configuration of the logical volume group with the configuration of the storage array wherein said comparing further includes a review of (i) a total size of all file systems in the logical volume group, (ii) a total size of physical volumes of the storage array, and (iii) a size of the volume group; selecting a data protection mechanism for the data asset wherein the selecting includes: (i) determining, based on the comparison, whether a host-based or storage-directed data protection mechanism will result in backing up a least amount of data and (ii) selecting whichever data protection mechanism will result in the least amount of data being backed up); tagging the data asset with a tag based on the selected data protection mechanism, wherein the tag specifies the selected data protection mechanism to be either the host-based data protection mechanism, which uses a guest/host-based agent through file or block based backups, or the storage-directed data protection mechanism, which is operable to create a snapshot of the storage volume; and backing up the tagged data asset by using the selected data protection mechanism as a backup mechanism.”
On the other hand, in the same field of endeavor, Chan teaches
comparing the configuration of the logical volume group with the configuration of the storage array (Fig. 8; [Col. 10, lines 25-60]: In step 124… The scan of the physical volumes to capture the LVM configuration information and the comparison with the LVM configuration information in the configuration database ensure that the logical volumes have the correct size and are mounted, activated, and operating correctly),
wherein said comparing further includes a review of
(i) a total size of all file systems in the logical volume group ([Col. 5, lines 55-57]: FIG. 3 shows… the size 66 of the logical volume),
(ii) a total size of physical volumes of the storage array ([Col. 7, lines 43-45]: The entry specifies… the size of the physical volume), and
(iii) a size of the volume group ([Col. 7, lines 49-51]: The entry specifies… the volume group size; Fig. 8; [Col. 10, lines 25-60]: In step 124… The scan of the physical volumes to capture the LVM configuration information and the comparison with the LVM configuration information in the configuration database ensure that the logical volumes have the correct size… The administrator (35 in FIG. 1) may review a summary report of the configuration check performed in step 124);
Also, Zang teaches selecting a data protection mechanism for the data asset wherein the selecting includes: (i) determining, based on the comparison, whether a host-based or storage-directed data protection mechanism will result in backing up a least amount of data and (ii) selecting whichever data protection mechanism will result in the least amount of data being backed up (Figs. 1-2; [0030]-[0035]: At 220, computing device 120 obtains backup information associated with data 126… At 230, computing device 120 generates, based on the desired backup period and the backup information, backup policy 104 for data 126; Fig. 3; [0056]: At 340, computing device 120 generates backup policy 104 indicating… a recommended backup period including an optimal backup quality policy and/or a most backup space-saving policy… In some embodiments, the backup policy may also indicate… a location of a storage device for backing up, and the like).
Additionally, Don teaches tagging the data asset with a tag (Fig. 1; [0030]: Such devices 402a, 402b, 402c, 402d, and 402e may comprise any type, number, and combination of devices that store data that is desired to be protected in some way… [0061]: The storage array may save up to X tags per device… The tags may be stored in a table located at the array, one example of which is disclosed in FIG. 2) indicating the selected data protection mechanism ([0014]: More particularly, the table maps the tags to a set of behaviors associated with the corresponding devices… an example table entry may indicate to a remote replication system or application… Thus, when a protection process is initiated… the storage array then performs the indicated process).
Furthermore, Anand teaches wherein the tag specifies the selected data protection mechanism to be either the host-based data protection mechanism, which uses a guest/host-based agent through file or block based backups, or the storage-directed data protection mechanism, which is operable to create a snapshot of the storage volume ([Abstract]: associate data with one or more protection intents at the data/data source level. A backup server can then associate the data with a specific protection mechanism regardless of where the data/data source(s) are located, or regardless of how other like-data are being backed up; [0017]: FIG. 1B illustrates a schematic overview in accordance with an implementation of the present invention in which differentially tagged data sources are organized into one or more protection groups based on associated one or more protection intents; [0048]: The various storage volumes/servers, in turn, can be designated for certain replication frequencies, times of replication, amounts of replication, types of data, and so forth; See also paras [0022]-[0027]); and
backing up the tagged data asset using the selected data protection mechanism as a backup mechanism (Fig. 2; [0063]-[0069]: FIG. 2 also shows that the method from the perspective of a client can comprise an act 220 of selecting one or more protection intents… Furthermore, FIG. 2 shows that the method from the perspective of a client can comprise an act 230 of revealing the selected one or more protection intents to a backup server. Act 230 includes revealing the selected one or more protection intents to the one or more backup servers, such that the one or more backup servers can backup the data to be protected in accordance with the selected one or more protection intents).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of Chopra to incorporate the teachings of Don and Anand to include tagging the data asset with a tag based on the selected data protection mechanism, and backing up the tagged data asset by using the selected data protection mechanism as a backup mechanism, wherein the selected data protection mechanism is either a host-based data protection mechanism or a storage-directed data protection mechanism.
The motivation for doing so would be to compare configurations as recognized by Chan ([Abatract] of Chan: The method involves comparing (124) the captured configuration information to the configuration information about the physical volumes, volume groups and logical volumes in configuration database), select a protection mechanism as recognized by Zhang ([Abstract] of Zhang: generating, based on the desired backup period and the backup information, a backup policy for the data), correlate the tag with a data protection mechanism, as recognized by Don ([Abstract] of Don: The method further includes saving the tag on a device that is an element of a storage group (SG) that is specific to the application, and correlating the tag with a data protection process that is associated with the application) and to associate data with one or more protection intents that the backup server can then use to associate the data with a specific protection mechanism, as recognized by Anand ([Abstract]: Implementations of the present invention allow clients (e.g., end-users, administrators, etc.) to associate data with one or more protection intents at the data/data source level. A backup server can then associate the data with a specific protection mechanism regardless of where the data/data source(s) are located, or regardless of how other like-data are being backed up).
8. Regarding Claim 2, the combined teaching of Chopra, Chan, Zhang, Don, and Anand disclose the method as recited in claim 1.
Chopra further teaches wherein the data asset comprises one or more file systems ([0024]: The core NetWorker® software backs up client file systems and operating system environments; [0031]: Examples of the application resources include… all backups in the clients 106 and 108, and any corresponding file systems).
Regarding Claim 6, the combined teaching of Chopra, Chan, Zhang, Don, and Anand disclose the method as recited in claim 1.
Chopra further teaches wherein the selected data protection mechanism is a most efficient data protection mechanism of a group of data protection mechanisms from which the data protection mechanism was selected ([0010]: Even if creating a snapshot of an application resource is possible, the creation of a single snapshot may be less efficient than creating multiple copies of multiple data objects in the application resource; [0025]: The backup/restore application 120 may be Dell Corporation's Avamar® backup/restore application, which provides fast, efficient backup and recovery through a complete software and hardware solution).
Regarding Claim 7, the combined teaching of Chopra, Chan, Zhang, Don, and Anand disclose the method as recited in claim 1.
Chopra further teaches the selected data protection mechanism is faster to perform than would be any other data protection mechanisms which were available for selection ([0010]: Therefore, requiring data protection administrators to intervene manually and determine whether to create a snapshot of an application resource may result in a delay in the protection of the application resource; [0025]: The backup/restore application 120 may be Dell Corporation's Avamar® backup/restore application, which provides fast, efficient backup and recovery through a complete software and hardware solution. Equipped with integrated variable-length deduplication technology, Dell Corporation's Avamar® backup/restore application facilitates fast, periodic full backups for virtual environments, remote offices, enterprise applications, network access servers, and desktops/laptops).
Regarding Claim 11, Chopra discloses a non-transitory storage medium having stored therein instructions that are executable by one or more hardware processors to perform operations comprising ([0078]: It is noted that the methods described herein may be embodied in executable instructions stored in a computer readable medium):
identifying a data asset that is to be backed up (Fig. 1; [0011]: The application's host inputs a request from the backup server to create a snapshot of the application resource; [0018]-[0019]: the application data manager 122 can discover data for application resources on the application host 106 via the application host agent-service 132… In some embodiments, the discovery module 124 can use one component for discovering application resources… such as the databases 146, 154, and 164 [data for the application resource corresponds to a data asset which is to be backed up]);
evaluating a configuration ([0041]: The NetWorker® management console software provides a graphic user interface for functions such as client configuration; Fig. 1; [0026]: Before, during, and/or after discovery of existing and/or new application resources, an application host determines if each existing and/or new application resource satisfies at least one of a set of snapshot capability rules; [0031]: Examples of the application resources include the application host configurations 142, 150, and 160; [0041]: The NetWorker® management console software provides a graphic user interface for functions such as client configuration) of a logical volume group that comprises one or more physical volumes to which one or more logical volumes map, where the data asset is stored on the logical volume group (Fig. 1; [0024]: The backup/restore application 120 may be an Dell Corporation's NetWorker® backup/restore application, which is a suite of enterprise level data protection software that unifies and automates backup to tape, disk-based, and flash-based storage media across physical and virtual environments for granular and disaster recovery. Cross-platform support is provided for many environments;
[NetWorker supports the management and backup of data residing on logical volumes by integrating with third-party volume managers like Linux LVM. NetWorker can back up logical volumes on both physical and virtual machines, using policies within the NetWorker Management Web UI to manage the backups]);
evaluating a configuration of a storage array that comprises a volume group to which one or more of the physical volumes of the logical volume group map (Fig. 1; [0015] The server 110… includes a backup/restore application 120 that can … execute a restore based on the backup files stored on the storage array 112. The backup/restore application 120 can provide centralized administration, such as scheduling, monitoring, and managing backup operations and backup files; [0024]-[0025]: The backup/restore application 120 may be an Dell Corporation's NetWorker® backup/restore application… and automates backup to tape, disk-based, and flash-based storage media across physical and virtual environments… The storage array 112 may be a Dell Corporation's Powermax, a Dell Corporation XIO, or a Dell Corporation Unity storage array; [0048]: the storage array 112 has capacity for storing the long-term snapshots 182 and 184 on a long-term basis).
However, Chopra does not explicitly teach “comparing the configuration of the logical volume group with the configuration of the storage array wherein said comparing further includes a review of (i) a total size of all file systems in the logical volume group, (ii) a total size of physical volumes of the storage array, and (iii) a size of the volume group; selecting a data protection mechanism for the data asset wherein the selecting includes: (i) determining, based on the comparison, whether a host-based or storage-directed data protection mechanism will result in backing up a least amount of data and (ii) selecting whichever data protection mechanism will result in the least amount of data being backed up); tagging the data asset with a tag based on the selected data protection mechanism, wherein the tag specifies the selected data protection mechanism to be either the host-based data protection mechanism, which uses a guest/host-based agent through file or block based backups, or the storage-directed data protection mechanism, which is operable to create a snapshot of the storage volume; and backing up the tagged data asset by using the selected data protection mechanism as a backup mechanism.”
On the other hand, in the same field of endeavor, Chan teaches
comparing the configuration of the logical volume group with the configuration of the storage array (Fig. 8; [Col. 10, lines 25-60]: In step 124… The scan of the physical volumes to capture the LVM configuration information and the comparison with the LVM configuration information in the configuration database ensure that the logical volumes have the correct size and are mounted, activated, and operating correctly),
wherein said comparing further includes a review of
(i) a total size of all file systems in the logical volume group ([Col. 5, lines 55-57]: FIG. 3 shows… the size 66 of the logical volume),
(ii) a total size of physical volumes of the storage array ([Col. 7, lines 43-45]: The entry specifies… the size of the physical volume), and
(iii) a size of the volume group ([Col. 7, lines 49-51]: The entry specifies… the volume group size; Fig. 8; [Col. 10, lines 25-60]: In step 124… The scan of the physical volumes to capture the LVM configuration information and the comparison with the LVM configuration information in the configuration database ensure that the logical volumes have the correct size… The administrator (35 in FIG. 1) may review a summary report of the configuration check performed in step 124);
Also, Zang teaches selecting a data protection mechanism for the data asset wherein the selecting includes: (i) determining, based on the comparison, whether a host-based or storage-directed data protection mechanism will result in backing up a least amount of data and (ii) selecting whichever data protection mechanism will result in the least amount of data being backed up (Figs. 1-2; [0030]-[0035]: At 220, computing device 120 obtains backup information associated with data 126… At 230, computing device 120 generates, based on the desired backup period and the backup information, backup policy 104 for data 126; Fig. 3; [0056]: At 340, computing device 120 generates backup policy 104 indicating… a recommended backup period including an optimal backup quality policy and/or a most backup space-saving policy… In some embodiments, the backup policy may also indicate… a location of a storage device for backing up, and the like).
Additionally, Don teaches tagging the data asset with a tag (Fig. 1; [0030]: Such devices 402a, 402b, 402c, 402d, and 402e may comprise any type, number, and combination of devices that store data that is desired to be protected in some way… [0061]: The storage array may save up to X tags per device… The tags may be stored in a table located at the array, one example of which is disclosed in FIG. 2) indicating the selected data protection mechanism ([0014]: More particularly, the table maps the tags to a set of behaviors associated with the corresponding devices… an example table entry may indicate to a remote replication system or application… Thus, when a protection process is initiated… the storage array then performs the indicated process).
Furthermore, Anand teaches wherein the tag specifies the selected data protection mechanism to be either the host-based data protection mechanism, which uses a guest/host-based agent through file or block based backups, or the storage-directed data protection mechanism, which is operable to create a snapshot of the storage volume ([Abstract]: associate data with one or more protection intents at the data/data source level. A backup server can then associate the data with a specific protection mechanism regardless of where the data/data source(s) are located, or regardless of how other like-data are being backed up; [0017]: FIG. 1B illustrates a schematic overview in accordance with an implementation of the present invention in which differentially tagged data sources are organized into one or more protection groups based on associated one or more protection intents; [0048]: The various storage volumes/servers, in turn, can be designated for certain replication frequencies, times of replication, amounts of replication, types of data, and so forth; See also paras [0022]-[0027]); and
backing up the tagged data asset using the selected data protection mechanism as a backup mechanism (Fig. 2; [0063]-[0069]: FIG. 2 also shows that the method from the perspective of a client can comprise an act 220 of selecting one or more protection intents… Furthermore, FIG. 2 shows that the method from the perspective of a client can comprise an act 230 of revealing the selected one or more protection intents to a backup server. Act 230 includes revealing the selected one or more protection intents to the one or more backup servers, such that the one or more backup servers can backup the data to be protected in accordance with the selected one or more protection intents).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teaching of Chopra to incorporate the teachings of Don and Anand to include tagging the data asset with a tag based on the selected data protection mechanism, and backing up the tagged data asset by using the selected data protection mechanism as a backup mechanism, wherein the selected data protection mechanism is either a host-based data protection mechanism or a storage-directed data protection mechanism.
The motivation for doing so would be to compare configurations as recognized by Chan ([Abatract] of Chan: The method involves comparing (124) the captured configuration information to the configuration information about the physical volumes, volume groups and logical volumes in configuration database), select a protection mechanism as recognized by Zhang ([Abstract] of Zhang: generating, based on the desired backup period and the backup information, a backup policy for the data), correlate the tag with a data protection mechanism, as recognized by Don ([Abstract] of Don: The method further includes saving the tag on a device that is an element of a storage group (SG) that is specific to the application, and correlating the tag with a data protection process that is associated with the application) and to associate data with one or more protection intents that the backup server can then use to associate the data with a specific protection mechanism, as recognized by Anand ([Abstract]: Implementations of the present invention allow clients (e.g., end-users, administrators, etc.) to associate data with one or more protection intents at the data/data source level. A backup server can then associate the data with a specific protection mechanism regardless of where the data/data source(s) are located, or regardless of how other like-data are being backed up).
Regarding Claim 12, the combined teaching of Chopra, Chan, Zhang, Don, and Anand disclose the non-transitory storage medium as recited in claim 11.
Chopra further teaches wherein the data asset comprises one or more file systems ([0024]: The core NetWorker® software backs up client file systems and operating system environments; [0031]: Examples of the application resources include… all backups in the clients 106 and 108, and any corresponding file systems).
Regarding Claim 16, the combined teaching of Chopra, Chan, Zhang, Don, and Anand disclose the non-transitory storage medium as recited in claim 11.
Chopra further teaches wherein the selected data protection mechanism is a most efficient data protection mechanism of a group of data protection mechanisms from which the data protection mechanism was selected ([0010]: Even if creating a snapshot of an application resource is possible, the creation of a single snapshot may be less efficient than creating multiple copies of multiple data objects in the application resource; [0025]: The backup/restore application 120 may be Dell Corporation's Avamar® backup/restore application, which provides fast, efficient backup and recovery through a complete software and hardware solution).
Regarding Claim 18, the combined teaching of Chopra, Chan, Zhang, Don, and Anand disclose the non-transitory storage medium as recited in claim 11.
Chopra further teaches the selected data protection mechanism backs up less data than would be backed up by any other data protection mechanisms which were available for selection ([0002]: Since an incremental backup file does not store duplicate copies of unchanged data, a system can efficiently store more backup files created at more points in time by organizing the data into increments of change between points in time. [0025]: The backup/restore application 120 may be Dell Corporation's Avamar® backup/restore application, which provides fast, efficient backup and recovery… Data deduplication significantly reduces backup time by only storing unique periodic changes, while always maintaining periodic full backups for an immediate single step restore. The transmission of deduplicated backup sends only changed blocks, reducing network traffic).
Regarding Claim 21, the combined teaching of Chopra, Chan, Zhang, Don, and Anand disclose the method as recited in claim 1.
Chopra further teaches wherein each of the configuration of the logical volume group or the storage array includes a total size of all file systems in the logical volume group, a total size of the physical volumes of the storage array, a size of the storage array volume groups, a backup time taken by the host-based data protection mechanism, a backup time taken for the storage-directed data protection mechanism, or whether or not a user has added most of file systems in one logical volume group in a single data protection policy schedule ([0028]: The set of snapshot capability rules may specify a size of storage that stores the application resource, a type of storage that stores the application resource, a computing resource utilization associated with the application host, a communication rate associated with the application host, a changed part of the application resource relative to an unchanged part of the application resource; a name associated with the application host, an internet protocol range associated with the application host, and a vendor associated with the application).
Regarding Claim 23, the combined teaching of Chopra, Chan, Zhang, Don, and Anand disclose method of claim 1.
Anand further teaches wherein tagging the data asset enables grouping of file systems into a single PLC (data protection policy schedule) ([0017]-[0019]: FIG. 1B illustrates a schematic overview in accordance with an implementation of the present invention in which differentially tagged data sources are organized into one or more protection groups based on associated one or more protection intents... Fig. 1C; data are backed up according to their respective protection intent and/or protection group associations).
Conclusion
17. 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 extension fee 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 SHIRLEY D. HICKS whose telephone number is (571)272-3304. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 7:30 - 4:00.
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, Charles Rones can be reached on (571) 272-4085. 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.
/S D H/Examiner, Art Unit 2168
/CHARLES RONES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2168