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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The 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.
4. Claim(s) 1, 4, 14 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Regueira Caumel et al. (US Pub. 2017/0257787) in view of Periyasamy et al. (US 2018/0184344), newly recited reference.
Regarding claim 1, Regueira Caumel et al. discloses a method (fig. 9, P:0082 and P:0115), comprising: determining a first transmit power level for a cell (P:0029-P:0030); monitor, by a network device (centralized node), one or more key performance indicators (KPIs) associated with a coverage of the cell (P:0030); determining, by the network device, that at least one KPI, of the one or more KPIs (P:0030), satisfies a threshold (i.e. a high value of the cell-level interference)(P:0030); determining, by the network device and based on the at least one KPI satisfying the threshold (i.e. For example, a high value of the cell-level interference KPI may indicate that a lower maximum transmit power limit should be utilized for the considered cell) (P:0030), that the first transmit power level (a transmit power of the considered cell) should be adjusted (P:0030); and adjusting, by the network device, the first transmit power level, resulting in a second transmit power level (a lower maximum transmit power) associated with the cell (P:0030). Regueira Caumel et al. differs from claim 1 of the present invention in that it does not explicit disclose determining, by the network device, whether at least one KPI, of the one or more KPIs, exceeds a threshold; a pattern of failure occurrence associated with the one or more KPIs; and adjusting the power based on the at least one KPI exceeding the threshold. Periyasamy et al. teaches the controller 200 may be used to implement the functions of the central controller 110 of FIG. 1 (fig. 1 , fig. 2 and P:0018) disclose determining, whether at least one KPI, of the one or more KPIs, exceeds a threshold (i.e. At block 412, the optimization module may apply one or more correction modules 440 to 460 to optimize (e.g., adjust) various aspects of each cell site individually (or by way of cluster). The modules 440 to 460 that are applied depend on the one or more KPI's, that have exceeded predetermined threshold values based on determined baselines, as discussed previously)(P:0038 and P:0042), a pattern of drop call and/or failed handovers (failure occurrence) associated with the one or more KPIs (P:0042, P:0044-P:0045) and increasing the power based on the at least one KPI exceeding the threshold (P:0042). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Regueira Caumel et al. with determining, by the network device, whether at least one KPI, of the one or more KPIs, exceeds a threshold; a pattern of failure occurrence associated with the one or more KPIs; and adjusting the power based on the at least one KPI exceeding the threshold in order for the centralize node to provide power control parameters to the cells based upon network performance and cell level interference to prevent drop calls and/or handover failures, as taught by Periyasamy et al..
Regarding claim 4, Regueira Caumel et al. discloses measuring, by the network device, interference associated with one or more other cells, wherein determining the first transmit power level associated with the cell is based on the interference associated with the one or more other cells (i.e. The cell-level interference KPI may be determined in a centralized manner, by collecting and evaluating the measurements in a centralized node, such as a management node or an access node serving the considered cell. Further, the cell-level interference KPI may be determined in a distributed manner by cooperation of access nodes serving the considered cell and its surrounding cells (P:0029), (i.e. The cell-level interference KPI may also be utilized as a basis for adjusting a transmit power of the considered cell. For example, a high value of the cell-level interference KPI may indicate that a lower maximum transmit power limit should be utilized for the considered cel) (P:0030).
Regarding claim 14, Regueira Caumel et al. discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium (memory)(fig. 12 number 1260 and P:0115) storing a set of instructions, the set of instructions comprising: one or more instructions that, when executed by one or more processors (fig. 12 number 1250 and P:0115) of a network device (centralize node and/or management node)(fig. 12), cause the network device to: measure an interference level associated with one or more cells (P:0029-P:0030); determine, based on the interference level, a first transmit power level associated with a cell associated with the network device; monitor one or more key performance indicators (KPIs) associated with a coverage associated with the cell (P:0029-P:0030); determine that at least one KPI, of the one or more KPIs, satisfies a threshold i.e. For example, a high value of the cell-level interference KPI may indicate that a lower maximum transmit power limit should be utilized for the considered cell) (P:0030), that the first transmit power level (a transmit power of the considered cell) should be adjusted (P:0030); and adjusting, by the network device, the first transmit power level, resulting in a second transmit power level (a lower maximum transmit power) associated with the cell (P:0030). Regueira Caumel et al. differs from claim 14 of the present invention in that it does not explicit disclose determining, by the network device, whether at least one KPI, of the one or more KPIs, exceeds a threshold; a pattern of failure occurrence associated with the one or more KPIs; and adjusting the power based on the at least one KPI exceeding the threshold. Periyasamy et al. teaches the controller 200 may be used to implement the functions of the central controller 110 of FIG. 1 (fig. 1 , fig. 2 and P:0018) disclose determining, whether at least one KPI, of the one or more KPIs, exceeds a threshold (i.e. At block 412, the optimization module may apply one or more correction modules 440 to 460 to optimize (e.g., adjust) various aspects of each cell site individually (or by way of cluster). The modules 440 to 460 that are applied depend on the one or more KPI's, that have exceeded predetermined threshold values based on determined baselines, as discussed previously)(P:0038 and P:0042), a pattern of drop call and/or failed handovers (failure occurrence) associated with the one or more KPIs (P:0042, P:0044-P:0045) and increasing the power based on the at least one KPI exceeding the threshold (P:0042). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Regueira Caumel et al. with determining, by the network device, whether at least one KPI, of the one or more KPIs, exceeds a threshold; a pattern of failure occurrence associated with the one or more KPIs; and adjusting the power based on the at least one KPI exceeding the threshold in order for the centralize node to provide power control parameters to the cells based upon network performance and cell level interference to prevent drop calls and/or handover failures, as taught by Periyasamy et al..
Regarding claim 17, Regueira Caumel et al. discloses the network device to determine the second transmit power level based on the interference level associated with the one or more cells (P:0029-P:0030).
5. Claim(s) 2 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Regueira Caumel et al. (US Pub. 2017/0257787) in view of Periyasamy et al. (US 2018/0184344), newly recited reference as applied to claims 1 and 14 above and in further view of Kim et al. (EP 3606189 A1).
Regarding claims 2 and 15, the combination of Regueira Caumel et al. and Periyasamy et al. differs from claims 2 and 15 of the present invention in that they do not explicit disclose the one or more KPIs includes at least one of an incomplete handover procedures KPI or an active connection drop KPI. Kim et al. teaches the base station transfers handover statistics of a cell and call drop statistics to the optimization server in every transmission power control period (i.e. active period)(page 11 lines 4-17), Thereafter, the optimization server determines that the network quality deteriorates if performance of the handover success rate or the call drop rate deteriorates in step 810. The determination follows a reference of Equation (55) below. Call drop rate > KPI _CALL_DROP_RATE (col. 8 lines 9-14). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Regueira Caumel et al. and Periyasamy et al. with the one or more KPIs includes at least one of an incomplete handover procedures KPI or an active connection drop KPI in order for the central node to control the transmission power of the cell when the cell quality deteriorates based upon the number of drop calls from user equipment within the network, as taught by Kim et al..
6. Claim(s) 3 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Regueira Caumel et al. (US Pub. 2017/0257787) in view of Periyasamy et al. (US 2018/0184344), newly recited reference as applied to claims 1 and 14 above and in further view of Chande et al. (US 2013/0102309).
Regarding claims 3 and 16, the combination of Regueira Caumel et al. and Periyasamy et al. differs from claims 3 and 16 of the present invention in that they do not explicit disclose determining whether a transmit power level associated with the cell is to be adjusted on a periodic or scheduled basis. Chande et al. teaches the transmit power is periodically increased over a short period of time (a burst) for a duration of time sufficient to capture registration requests from UEs in the vicinity. For example, this can be on the order of minutes and/or can correlate to a time at a UE for evaluating cells for reselection (P:0079). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Regueira Caumel et al. and Periyasamy et al. with determining whether a transmit power level associated with the cell is to be adjusted on a periodic or scheduled basis in order for the centralized node to periodically adjust the transmit to allow the user equipment to evaluate the cells for reselection to a cell that may have better quality and communication services, as taught by Chande et al..
7. Claim(s) 6 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Regueira Caumel et al. (US Pub. 2017/0257787) in view of Periyasamy et al. (US 2018/0184344), newly recited reference as applied to claims 1 and 14 above and in further view of Carter (US 2013/0171985).
Regarding claim 6 and 19, the combination of Regueira Caumel et al. and Periyasamy et al. differs from claims 6 and 19 of the present invention in that they do not explicit disclose adjusting, by the network device, the first or second transmit power level based on the pattern. Carter teaches determining a pattern (i.e. traffic profile of the femtocell, such as knowledge of the typical duration of calls made through the femtocell) associated with at least one of a time of day (P:0092) associated with reducing the transmit power level (P:0092). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of the combination of Regueira Caumel et al. and Periyasamy et al. with adjusting, by the network device, the first or second transmit power level based on the pattern in order for the centralized node to provide power control parameters to the cell based on cell interference and UEs traffic for telephone calls during particular times of the day during cell reselection or handover to another cell, as taught by Carter.
8. Claim(s) 7 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Regueira Caumel et al. (US Pub. 2017/0257787) in view of Periyasamy et al. (US 2018/0184344), newly recited reference as applied to claims 1 and 14 above and in further view of Bellamkonda et al. (US 2019/0261197).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Regueira Caumel et al. and Periyasamy et al. differs from claims 7 and 20 of the present invention in that they do not explicit disclose the one or more KPIs includes a first KPI and a second KPI, and wherein adjusting the first transmit power level includes adjusting the first transmit power level as a function of a first factor and a second factor, wherein the first factor is a first product of a first weight and the first KPI, and wherein the second factor is a second product of a second weight and the second KPI. Bellamkonda et al. teaches the one or more KPIs includes a quality (first KPI) and coverage (second KPI)(P:0031 and P:0094), and wherein adjusting the first transmit power level includes adjusting the first transmit power level as a function high density (first factor) and low density (second factor)(P:0117), wherein the first factor is a first product of a first weight and the first KPI, and wherein the second factor is a second product of a second weight and the second KPI (P:0031,P:0094 and P:0117). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Regueira Caumel et al. and Periyasamy et al. with the one or more KPIs includes a first KPI and a second KPI, and wherein adjusting the first transmit power level includes adjusting the first transmit power level as a function of a first factor and a second factor, wherein the first factor is a first product of a first weight and the first KPI, and wherein the second factor is a second product of a second weight and the second KPI in order for the centralize node to determine a level of interference based upon the quality and coverage generated by the given cell with respect to the surrounding cells when adjusting its power for with surrounding UEs for reliable communication, as taught by Bellamkonda et al..
9. Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Regueira Caumel et al. (US Pub. 2017/0257787) in view of Huang et al. (WO 2014173316 A1) and Periyasamy et al. (US 2018/0184344), newly recited reference.
Regarding claim 8, Regueira Caumel et al. discloses a network device (management node)(fig. 12 and P:0113), comprising: one or more processors (fig. 12 number 1250) configured to: determine a transmit power level associated with a cell associated with the network device (P:0029-P:0030), wherein the one or more processors are configured to determine the transmit power level based on: a measured interference level associated with one or more neighboring cells (P:0030), and a key performance indicator (KPI) monitoring algorithm (P:0030), wherein the KPI monitoring algorithm is associated with the network device monitoring one or more KPIs associated with a coverage of the cell (P:0030) and determining whether the one or more KPIs satisfy a threshold (i.e. a high value of the cell-level interference)(P:0030); determining, by the network device and based on the at least one KPI satisfying the threshold (i.e. For example, a high value of the cell-level interference KPI may indicate that a lower maximum transmit power limit should be utilized for the considered cell) (P:0030). Regueira Caumel et al. differs from claim 8 of the present invention in that it does not explicit disclose determining, by the network device, whether at least one KPI, of the one or more KPIs, exceeds a threshold; a pattern of failure occurrence associated with the one or more KPIs; and adjusting the power based on the at least one KPI exceeding the threshold and transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), a communication based on the transmit power level. Periyasamy et al. teaches the controller 200 may be used to implement the functions of the central controller 110 of FIG. 1 (fig. 1 , fig. 2 and P:0018) disclose determining, whether at least one KPI, of the one or more KPIs, exceeds a threshold (i.e. At block 412, the optimization module may apply one or more correction modules 440 to 460 to optimize (e.g., adjust) various aspects of each cell site individually (or by way of cluster). The modules 440 to 460 that are applied depend on the one or more KPI's, that have exceeded predetermined threshold values based on determined baselines, as discussed previously)(P:0038 and P:0042), a pattern of drop call and/or failed handovers (failure occurrence) associated with the one or more KPIs (P:0042, P:0044-P:0045) and increasing the power based on the at least one KPI exceeding the threshold (P:0042). Huang et al. teaches the key performance indicator parameters of the network include network performance indicators that reflect the running performance of the cell, such as throughput, call loss rate, and dropped call rate. The cell metric parameters include the number of user equipments, the cell load, and the interference status, and reflect the current cell service distribution and network status. The control parameter is a control parameter related to the base station broadcasted to all user equipments in the cell, for example, including a base station transmit power, a base station antenna downtilt, and the like (page 6, 10th paragraph). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Regueira Caumel et al. with determining, by the network device, whether at least one KPI, of the one or more KPIs, exceeds a threshold; a pattern of failure occurrence associated with the one or more KPIs; and adjusting the power based on the at least one KPI exceeding the threshold and transmitting, to a user equipment (UE), a communication based on the transmit power level in order for the management node to provide power control parameters to the cells based upon network performance and cell level interference to prevent drop calls and/or handover failures and to transmit a power adjustment to the user equipment to allow the user equipment to reselect a cell for better communication, as taught by Huang et al. and Periyasamy et al..
10. Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Regueira Caumel et al. (US Pub. 2017/0257787) in view of Huang et al. (WO 2014173316 A1) and Periyasamy et al. (US 2018/0184344), newly recited reference as applied to claim 8 above and in further view of Kim et al. (EP 3606189 A1).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Regueira Caumel et al., Huang et al. and Periyasamy et al. differs from claim 9 of the present invention in that they do not explicit disclose the one or more KPIs includes at least one of an incomplete handover procedures KPI or an active connection drop KPI. Kim et al. teaches the base station transfers handover statistics of a cell and call drop statistics to the optimization server in every transmission power control period (i.e. active period)(page 11 lines 4-17), Thereafter, the optimization server determines that the network quality deteriorates if performance of the handover success rate or the call drop rate deteriorates in step 810. The determination follows a reference of Equation (55) below. Call drop rate > KPI _CALL_DROP_RATE (col. 8 lines 9-14). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Regueira Caumel et al., Huang et al. and Periyasamy et al. with the one or more KPIs includes at least one of an incomplete handover procedures KPI or an active connection drop KPI in order for the management node to control the transmission power of the cell when the cell quality deteriorates based upon the number of drop calls from user equipment within the network, as taught by Kim et al..
11. Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Regueira Caumel et al. (US Pub. 2017/0257787) in view of Huang et al. (WO 2014173316 A1) and Periyasamy et al. (US 2018/0184344), newly recited reference as applied to claim 8 above and in further view of Chande et al. (US 2013/0102309).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Regueira Caumel et al., Huang et al. and Periyasamy et al. differs from claim 10 of the present invention in that they do not explicit disclose determining whether a transmit power level associated with the cell is to be adjusted on a periodic or scheduled basis. Chande et al. teaches the transmit power is periodically increased over a short period of time (a burst) for a duration of time sufficient to capture registration requests from UEs in the vicinity. For example, this can be on the order of minutes and/or can correlate to a time at a UE for evaluating cells for reselection (P:0079). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Regueira Caumel et al., Huang et al. and Periyasamy et al. with determining whether a transmit power level associated with the cell is to be adjusted on a periodic or scheduled basis in order for the management node to periodically adjust the transmit to allow the user equipment to evaluate the cells for reselection to a cell that may have better quality and communication services, as taught by Chande et al..
12. Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Regueira Caumel et al. (US Pub. 2017/0257787) in view of Huang et al. (WO 2014173316 A1) and Periyasamy et al. (US 2018/0184344), newly recited reference as applied to claim 8 above and in further view of Carter (US 2013/0171985).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Regueira Caumel et al., Huang et al. and Periyasamy et al. differs from claim 12 of the present invention in that they do not explicit disclose determining a pattern associated with at least one of a time of day associated with adjusting the transmit power level, or a day of a week associated with adjusting the transmit power level. Carter teaches determining a pattern (i.e. traffic profile of the femtocell, such as knowledge of the typical duration of calls made through the femtocell) associated with at least one of a time of day (P:0092) associated with reducing the transmit power level (P:0092). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Regueira Caumel et al., Huang et al. and Periyasamy et al. with determining, by the network device, a pattern associated with determining a pattern associated with at least one of a time of day associated with adjusting the transmit power level, or a day of a week associated with adjusting the transmit power level in order for the management node to provide power control parameters to the cell based on cell interference and UEs traffic for telephone calls during particular times of the day in case of UE cell reselection or handover to another cell, as taught by Carter.
13. Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Regueira Caumel et al. (US Pub. 2017/0257787) in view of Huang et al. (WO 2014173316 A1) and Periyasamy et al. (US 2018/0184344), newly recited reference as applied to claim 8 above and in further view of Bellamkonda et al. (US 2019/0261197).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Regueira Caumel et al., Huang et al. and Periyasamy et al. differs from claim 13 of the present invention in that they do not explicit disclose the one or more KPIs includes a first KPI and a second KPI, and wherein adjusting the first transmit power level includes adjusting the first transmit power level as a function of a first factor and a second factor, wherein the first factor is a first product of a first weight and the first KPI, and wherein the second factor is a second product of a second weight and the second KPI. Bellamkonda et al. teaches the one or more KPIs includes a quality (first KPI) and coverage (second KPI)(P:0031 and P:0094), and wherein adjusting the first transmit power level includes adjusting the first transmit power level as a function high density (first factor) and low density (second factor)(P:0117), wherein the first factor is a first product of a first weight and the first KPI, and wherein the second factor is a second product of a second weight and the second KPI (P:0031,P:0094 and P:0117). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Regueira Caumel et al., Huang et al. and Periyasamy et al. with the one or more KPIs includes a first KPI and a second KPI, and wherein adjusting the first transmit power level includes adjusting the first transmit power level as a function of a first factor and a second factor, wherein the first factor is a first product of a first weight and the first KPI, and wherein the second factor is a second product of a second weight and the second KPI in order for the management node to determine a level of interference based upon the quality and coverage generated by the given cell with respect to the surrounding cells when adjusting its power for with surrounding UEs for reliable communication, as taught by Bellamkonda et al..
14. Claim(s) 21 ad 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Regueira Caumel et al. (US Pub. 2017/0257787) in view of Periyasamy et al. (US 2018/0184344), newly recited reference as applied to claims 1 and 14 above and in further view of Goria et al. (US 2018/0310258).
Regarding claims 21 and 23, the combination of Regueira Caumel et al. and Periyasamy et al. differs from claims 21 and 23 of the present invention in that they do not explicit disclose adjusting the first transmit power level is based on a KPI impact percentage. Goria et al. teaches the possibility of implementing an incremental approach for applying boosting and de-boosting of the RS power in the cells 107, the possibility of applying the method only to a group of cells or to just to one of the cells of the radio mobile network, the finer granularity with which the algorithm may be configured to modify the RS power, the possibility of providing a plurality of boosting and/or de-boosting values by exploiting the plurality allowed values of at least one of the parameters P.sub.A and/or P.sub.B, the possibility of defining a plurality of boost KPI threshold values, the possibility of evaluating a percentage of decrease of a KPI below a boost KPI threshold value (P:0202). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Regueira Caumel et al. and Periyasamy et al. with adjusting the first transmit power level is based on a KPI impact percentage in order for the centralize node to provide power control parameters to the cell for managing cell reselection operation, as taught by Goria et al..
15. Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Regueira Caumel et al. (US Pub. 2017/0257787) in view of Huang et al. (WO 2014173316 A1) and Periyasamy et al. (US 2018/0184344), newly recited reference as applied to claim 8 above and in further view of Goria et al. (US 2018/0310258).
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Regueira Caumel et al., Huang et al. and Periyasamy et al. differs from claim 22 of the present invention in that they do not explicit disclose adjusting the first transmit power level is based on a KPI impact percentage. Goria et al. teaches the possibility of implementing an incremental approach for applying boosting and de-boosting of the RS power in the cells 107, the possibility of applying the method only to a group of cells or to just to one of the cells of the radio mobile network, the finer granularity with which the algorithm may be configured to modify the RS power, the possibility of providing a plurality of boosting and/or de-boosting values by exploiting the plurality allowed values of at least one of the parameters P.sub.A and/or P.sub.B, the possibility of defining a plurality of boost KPI threshold values, the possibility of evaluating a percentage of decrease of a KPI below a boost KPI threshold value (P:0202). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Regueira Caumel et al., Huang et al. and Periyasamy et al. with adjusting the first transmit power level is based on a KPI impact percentage in order for the centralize node to provide power control parameters to the cell for managing cell reselection operation, as taught by Goria et al..
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEITH FERGUSON whose telephone number is (571)272-7865. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7 am -3 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Wesley L Kim can be reached at (571) 272-7867. 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.
/KEITH FERGUSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648