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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/06/2025, 11/18/2025 and 12/17/2025 are considered. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's amendment filed on 12/08/2025 has been entered. Claims 1 and 17-18 have been amended. No claims have been added. Claim 9 has been cancelled. Claims 1-8 and 10-18 are still pending in this application, with claims 1 and 17-18, being independent.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-8 and 10-18 have been considered but are moot based on new grounds of rejections.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yanagi et al. (US 2016/0212787; hereinafter Yanagi) in view of Suzuki et al. (US 2014/0086219; hereinafter Suzuki).
Regarding claim 1, Yanagi shows a communication device (Figure 3C shows a device performing in part the method shown in Figures 6-7.) that communicates wirelessly, the communication device configured to:
receive, from a first another device, a predetermined signal to be transmitted before a connection with the first another device is established (Figures 6-7; Par. 0084, 0101-0102; receiving a search signal from D3.);
determine, upon receiving the predetermined signal, a transmission timing of a response to the predetermined signal, based on a condition of communication that is executable between the communication device and a second another device that is a communication partner of the first another device (Figure 6-7; Par. 0070, 0076, 0102-0106; the MCU 110 calculates its waiting time T by use of formula (1) (step S22). The waiting time T is calculated based on the stored parameter data. The MCU 110 transmits a response signal at the end of the calculated waiting time T. The waiting time T is obtained by considering at least an RSSI value of a given link. Such a waiting time T is then used to select a child apparatus as a relay point for another child apparatus that is newly incorporated in the communication system.); and
transmit, to the first another device, the response to the predetermined signal at the determined transmission timing (Figure 6-7; Par. 0070, 0076, 0102-0106; the MCU 110 transmits a response signal at the end of the calculated waiting time T.)
Yanagi shows all of the elements including the determination of the transmission timing, as discussed above. Yanagi does not specifically show a transmission timing based on a moving speed of the communication device; and wherein the transmission timing is determined to be made earlier, as a moving speed of the communication device is lower.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Suzuki. Specifically, Suzuki shows a transmission timing based on a moving speed of the communication device; and wherein the transmission timing is determined to be made earlier, as a moving speed of the communication device is lower (Figure 15; Par. 0027, 0139; The UE may provide the speed estimation to eNB (1510). Based on the identified UE speed (1520), the eNB may calculate the speed limit as (Te*Speed of light [m/s])/(Tresync*A) at step 1530. If the UE speed is found to be beyond the speed limit (1540), the eNB may not transmit TAC MAC CE (1550) and proceed to trigger a random access procedure and transmit TAC in a random access response (1560). If the estimated UE speed is determined to be lower than the speed limit (1540), the eNB can transmit TAC MAC CE (1570).).
In view of the above, having the system of Yanagi, then given the well-established teaching of Suzuki, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yanagi as taught by Suzuki, in order to provide motivation to counteract different propagation delays among multiple wireless devices (Par. 0004 of Suzuki).
Regarding claim 4, modified Yanagi shows wherein the communication device controls such that the transmission timing, in a case where a requested quality when the first another device communicates with the second another device is satisfiable with a communication quality obtainable by the communication device through communication with the second another device, is earlier than the transmission timing in a case where the requested quality is unsatisfiable with the communication quality (Yanagi: Par. 0076, 0088; a criteria for selecting a child apparatus having a fewer relay count is given the highest priority, and the next highest priority is given to the criteria that requires a satisfactory RSSI value of each communication link in the route toward the parent apparatus. Here, the fact that the RSSI value is satisfactory means the RSSI value has a small absolute value.).
Regarding claim 17, Yanagi shows a control method (Figure 3C shows a device performing in part the method shown in Figures 6-7.) performed by a communication device that communicates wirelessly, the control method comprising:
receiving, from a first another device, a predetermined signal to be transmitted before a connection with the first another device is established (Figures 6-7; Par. 0084, 0101-0102; receiving a search signal from D3.);
determining, upon receiving the predetermined signal, a transmission timing of a response to the predetermined signal, based on a condition of communication that is executable between the communication device and a second another device that is a communication partner of the first another device (Figure 6-7; Par. 0070, 0076, 0102-0106; the MCU 110 calculates its waiting time T by use of formula (1) (step S22). The waiting time T is calculated based on the stored parameter data. The MCU 110 transmits a response signal at the end of the calculated waiting time T. The waiting time T is obtained by considering at least an RSSI value of a given link. Such a waiting time T is then used to select a child apparatus as a relay point for another child apparatus that is newly incorporated in the communication system.); and
transmitting, to the first another device, the response to the predetermined signal at the determined transmission timing (Figure 6-7; Par. 0070, 0076, 0102-0106; the MCU 110 transmits a response signal at the end of the calculated waiting time T.)
Yanagi shows all of the elements including the determination of the transmission timing, as discussed above. Yanagi does not specifically show a transmission timing based on a moving speed of the communication device; and wherein the transmission timing is determined to be made earlier, as a moving speed of the communication device is lower.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Suzuki. Specifically, Suzuki shows a transmission timing based on a moving speed of the communication device; and wherein the transmission timing is determined to be made earlier, as a moving speed of the communication device is lower (Figure 15; Par. 0027, 0139; The UE may provide the speed estimation to eNB (1510). Based on the identified UE speed (1520), the eNB may calculate the speed limit as (Te*Speed of light [m/s])/(Tresync*A) at step 1530. If the UE speed is found to be beyond the speed limit (1540), the eNB may not transmit TAC MAC CE (1550) and proceed to trigger a random access procedure and transmit TAC in a random access response (1560). If the estimated UE speed is determined to be lower than the speed limit (1540), the eNB can transmit TAC MAC CE (1570).).
In view of the above, having the system of Yanagi, then given the well-established teaching of Suzuki, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yanagi as taught by Suzuki, in order to provide motivation to counteract different propagation delays among multiple wireless devices (Par. 0004 of Suzuki).
Regarding claim 18, Yanagi shows a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium that stores a program for causing a computer included in a communication device (Figure 3C shows a device performing in part the method shown in Figures 6-7. Device includes instructions stored in memory and executed by a processor to perform the disclosed method.)that communicates wirelessly to:
receive, from a first another device, a predetermined signal to be transmitted before a connection with the first another device is established (Figures 6-7; Par. 0084, 0101-0102; receiving a search signal from D3.);
determine, upon receiving the predetermined signal, a transmission timing of a response to the predetermined signal, based on a condition of communication that is executable between the communication device and a second another device that is a communication partner of the first another device (Figure 6-7; Par. 0070, 0076, 0102-0106; the MCU 110 calculates its waiting time T by use of formula (1) (step S22). The waiting time T is calculated based on the stored parameter data. The MCU 110 transmits a response signal at the end of the calculated waiting time T. The waiting time T is obtained by considering at least an RSSI value of a given link. Such a waiting time T is then used to select a child apparatus as a relay point for another child apparatus that is newly incorporated in the communication system.); and
transmit, to the first another device, the response to the predetermined signal at the determined transmission timing (Figure 6-7; Par. 0070, 0076, 0102-0106; the MCU 110 transmits a response signal at the end of the calculated waiting time T.)
Yanagi shows all of the elements including the determination of the transmission timing, as discussed above. Yanagi does not specifically show a transmission timing based on a moving speed of the communication device; and wherein the transmission timing is determined to be made earlier, as a moving speed of the communication device is lower.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Suzuki. Specifically, Suzuki shows a transmission timing based on a moving speed of the communication device; and wherein the transmission timing is determined to be made earlier, as a moving speed of the communication device is lower (Figure 15; Par. 0027, 0139; The UE may provide the speed estimation to eNB (1510). Based on the identified UE speed (1520), the eNB may calculate the speed limit as (Te*Speed of light [m/s])/(Tresync*A) at step 1530. If the UE speed is found to be beyond the speed limit (1540), the eNB may not transmit TAC MAC CE (1550) and proceed to trigger a random access procedure and transmit TAC in a random access response (1560). If the estimated UE speed is determined to be lower than the speed limit (1540), the eNB can transmit TAC MAC CE (1570).).
In view of the above, having the system of Yanagi, then given the well-established teaching of Suzuki, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yanagi as taught by Suzuki, in order to provide motivation to counteract different propagation delays among multiple wireless devices (Par. 0004 of Suzuki).
Claim(s) 2-3, 5-8, 10-11 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yanagi in view of Suzuki and Tsuchie et al. (US 2018/0368048; hereinafter Tsuchie).
Regarding claim 2, modified Yanagi shows all of the elements except wherein the predetermined signal is a signal for requesting, by the first another device, a connection for relaying the communication with the second another device.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Tsuchie. Specifically, Tsuchie shows wherein the predetermined signal is a signal for requesting, by the first another device, a connection for relaying the communication with the second another device (Figure 4; Par. 0041; processing unit 12 periodically generates a packet (hereinafter, also referred to as an “adjacence discovery packet”) for discovering an adjacent radio communication device 10 serving as a parent node candidate, and requests the communication unit 11 to transmit the adjacence discovery packet.).
In view of the above, having the system of Yanagi, then given the well-established teaching of Tsuchie, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yanagi as taught by Tsuchie, in order to provide motivation to effectively decide a radio relay device serving as a connection destination and promptly participate in a radio network (Par. 0015 of Tsuchie).
Regarding claim 3, modified Yanagi shows wherein the signal for requesting the connection is a signal simultaneously transmitted from the first another device to a plurality of devices (Tsuchie: Par. 0052; the participation node (processing unit 12) broadcasts a generated adjacence discovery packet via the communication unit 11 (S101-1 and S101-2) to discover an adjacent node (parent candidate node).).
Regarding claim 5, modified Yanagi shows all of the elements except wherein the communication device controls to make the transmission timing earlier, as there is a higher probability that the first another device is capable of communicating with the second another device through relay of the communication device.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Tsuchie. Specifically, Tsuchie shows wherein the communication device controls to make the transmission timing earlier, as there is a higher probability that the first another device is capable of communicating with the second another device through relay of the communication device (Par. 0075; In the mathematical expression (1), “slot” represents the number of slots, and “N” represents the number of adjacent nodes with satisfactory the path qualities (including own node) as described above. In the mathematical expression (1), “P” represents probability of transmission of a response packet from a certain node with a satisfactory path quality without collision with response packets from the (N−1) number of other adjacent nodes with satisfactory the path qualities (referred to as response packet transmission success rate) in the case where each of the certain node and the (N−1) number of other adjacent nodes randomly selects one slot from among the slots and transmits a response packet. If a response packet transmission success rate that the network system should have is determined in advance, the boundary between slots is calculated such that the response packet transmission success rate P is satisfied.).
In view of the above, having the system of Yanagi, then given the well-established teaching of Tsuchie, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yanagi as taught by Tsuchie, in order to provide motivation to effectively decide a radio relay device serving as a connection destination and promptly participate in a radio network (Par. 0015 of Tsuchie).
Regarding claim 6, modified Yanagi shows all of the elements except wherein the communication device controls to make the transmission timing earlier, as there is a larger communication capacity available to the communication for the first another device in the communication between the communication device and the second another device.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Tsuchie. Specifically, Tsuchie shows wherein the communication device controls to make the transmission timing earlier, as there is a larger communication capacity available to the communication for the first another device in the communication between the communication device and the second another device (Par. 0033-0034; an adjacent node (parent candidate node) around a participation node decides a transmission waiting time of a response packet (a response packet to an adjacence discovery packet transmitted by the participation node) by using a path quality and adjacent node information. In the case of a good path quality, a short transmission waiting time is set with regard to a response packet.).
In view of the above, having the system of Yanagi, then given the well-established teaching of Tsuchie, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yanagi as taught by Tsuchie, in order to provide motivation to effectively decide a radio relay device serving as a connection destination and promptly participate in a radio network (Par. 0015 of Tsuchie).
Regarding claim 7, modified Yanagi shows all of the elements except wherein the communication device controls to make the transmission timing earlier, as wireless quality in the communication with the second another device is better.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Tsuchie. Specifically, Tsuchie shows wherein the communication device controls to make the transmission timing earlier, as wireless quality in the communication with the second another device is better (Par. 0033-0034; an adjacent node (parent candidate node) around a participation node decides a transmission waiting time of a response packet (a response packet to an adjacence discovery packet transmitted by the participation node) by using a path quality and adjacent node information. In the case of a good path quality, a short transmission waiting time is set with regard to a response packet.).
In view of the above, having the system of Yanagi, then given the well-established teaching of Tsuchie, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yanagi as taught by Tsuchie, in order to provide motivation to effectively decide a radio relay device serving as a connection destination and promptly participate in a radio network (Par. 0015 of Tsuchie).
Regarding claim 8, modified Yanagi shows wherein the wireless quality includes at least one of received signal strength (Tsuchie: Par. 0033; link quality pertains to RSSI values.), a signal-to-noise ratio, and a signal-to-interference and noise ratio of a signal that have been received in the communication device regarding the communication with the second another device.
Regarding claim 10, modified Yanagi shows all of the elements except wherein the communication device controls to make the transmission timing earlier, as there is a higher probability that the communication device is capable of communicating with the second another device.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Tsuchie. Specifically, Tsuchie shows wherein the communication device controls to make the transmission timing earlier, as there is a higher probability that the communication device is capable of communicating with the second another device (Par. 0075; In the mathematical expression (1), “slot” represents the number of slots, and “N” represents the number of adjacent nodes with satisfactory the path qualities (including own node) as described above. In the mathematical expression (1), “P” represents probability of transmission of a response packet from a certain node with a satisfactory path quality without collision with response packets from the (N−1) number of other adjacent nodes with satisfactory the path qualities (referred to as response packet transmission success rate) in the case where each of the certain node and the (N−1) number of other adjacent nodes randomly selects one slot from among the slots and transmits a response packet. If a response packet transmission success rate that the network system should have is determined in advance, the boundary between slots is calculated such that the response packet transmission success rate P is satisfied.).
In view of the above, having the system of Yanagi, then given the well-established teaching of Tsuchie, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yanagi as taught by Tsuchie, in order to provide motivation to effectively decide a radio relay device serving as a connection destination and promptly participate in a radio network (Par. 0015 of Tsuchie).
Regarding claim 11, modified Yanagi shows wherein the communication device controls such that the transmission timing in a case where the communication device is in connection with the second another device is earlier than the transmission timing in a case where the communication device is not in connection with the second another device (Yanagi: Figure 6; Par. 0084; the child apparatus D3 completes the transmission of the search signal at time t0. The child apparatus D1 then starts transmitting its response signal at time t1 that corresponds to the end of the waiting time T1 starting from time t0. The child apparatus D4 starts transmitting its response signal at time t2 that corresponds to the end of the waiting time T4 starting from time t0. The child apparatus D2 starts transmitting its response signal at time t3 that corresponds to the end of the waiting time T2 starting from time t0. The child apparatus D5 starts transmitting its response signal at time t4 that corresponds to the end of the waiting time T5 starting from time t0.).
Regarding claim 16, modified Yanagi shows all of the elements except wherein the communication with the second another device is performed through a wireless LAN.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Tsuchie. Specifically, Tsuchie shows wherein the communication with the second another device is performed through a wireless LAN (Par. 0031; various wireless LAN interface communication methods can be applied to the communication methods (communication media) between devices (nodes) in the radio communication system 1.).
In view of the above, having the system of Yanagi, then given the well-established teaching of Tsuchie, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yanagi as taught by Tsuchie, in order to provide motivation to effectively decide a radio relay device serving as a connection destination and promptly participate in a radio network (Par. 0015 of Tsuchie).
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yanagi in view of Suzuki, Tsuchie and Yamamoto (US 2011/0012756; hereinafter Yamamoto).
Regarding claim 12, modified Yanagi shows all of the elements except wherein the communication device determines that there is a higher probability of being capable of communicating with the second another device, as there is a higher probability of moving to a location where the communication with the second another device is possible on a movement route of the communication device.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Yamamoto. Specifically, Yamamoto shows wherein the communication device determines that there is a higher probability of being capable of communicating with the second another device, as there is a higher probability of moving to a location where the communication with the second another device is possible on a movement route of the communication device (Par. 0100-0103; the moving direction and speed of in-vehicle communication devices 3 and 4 are further respectively compared with the moving direction and speed of communication source in-vehicle communication device 1, to thereby determine which from among in-vehicle communication devices 3 and 4 is more likely to continue to maintain, even at present, the state that enables direct communication with communication source in-vehicle communication device 1, and such that the relay in-vehicle communication device is comprehensively determined also in consideration of the comparison result.).
In view of the above, having the system of Yanagi, then given the well-established teaching of Yamamoto, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yanagi as taught by Yamamoto, in order to provide motivation to adaptively and efficiently manage the position information on surrounding in-vehicle and roadside communication devices that are able to directly communicate with the each in-vehicle or with each roadside communication device (Par. 0011 of Yamamoto).
Claim(s) 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yanagi in view of Suzuki and Yamamoto.
Regarding claim 13, modified Yanagi shows all of the elements except wherein the communication device controls to make the transmission timing earlier, as a time while the communication device is capable of maintaining a connection with the second another device is longer.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Yamamoto. Specifically, Yamamoto shows wherein the communication device controls to make the transmission timing earlier, as a time while the communication device is capable of maintaining a connection with the second another device is longer (Par. 0100-0103; the moving direction and speed of in-vehicle communication devices 3 and 4 are further respectively compared with the moving direction and speed of communication source in-vehicle communication device 1, to thereby determine which from among in-vehicle communication devices 3 and 4 is more likely to continue to maintain, even at present, the state that enables direct communication with communication source in-vehicle communication device 1, and such that the relay in-vehicle communication device is comprehensively determined also in consideration of the comparison result.).
In view of the above, having the system of Yanagi, then given the well-established teaching of Yamamoto, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yanagi as taught by Yamamoto, in order to provide motivation to adaptively and efficiently manage the position information on surrounding in-vehicle and roadside communication devices that are able to directly communicate with the each in-vehicle or with each roadside communication device (Par. 0011 of Yamamoto).
Regarding claim 14, modified Yanagi shows all of the elements except wherein the communication device is a vehicle.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Yamamoto. Specifically, Yamamoto shows wherein the communication device is a vehicle (Par. 0042; exemplary embodiment shows a case where in-vehicle communication device 1 and in-vehicle communication device 2, which are respectively mounted on different vehicles existing in a reachable range of radio waves transmitted from the other of the vehicles, transmit information by performing direct communication using radio transmission and reception signals.).
In view of the above, having the system of Yanagi, then given the well-established teaching of Yamamoto, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yanagi as taught by Yamamoto, in order to provide motivation to adaptively and efficiently manage the position information on surrounding in-vehicle and roadside communication devices that are able to directly communicate with the each in-vehicle or with each roadside communication device (Par. 0011 of Yamamoto).
Regarding claim 15, modified Yanagi shows wherein the first another device is a vehicle.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Yamamoto. Specifically, Yamamoto shows wherein the first another device is a vehicle (Par. 0042; exemplary embodiment shows a case where in-vehicle communication device 1 and in-vehicle communication device 2, which are respectively mounted on different vehicles existing in a reachable range of radio waves transmitted from the other of the vehicles, transmit information by performing direct communication using radio transmission and reception signals.).
In view of the above, having the system of Yanagi, then given the well-established teaching of Yamamoto, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Yanagi as taught by Yamamoto, in order to provide motivation to adaptively and efficiently manage the position information on surrounding in-vehicle and roadside communication devices that are able to directly communicate with the each in-vehicle or with each roadside communication device (Par. 0011 of Yamamoto).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 12127145 B2 - A method for enhanced autonomous uplink timing adjustment includes determining that a user equipment (UE) is traveling above a predetermined velocity.
US 12074829 B2 - Various aspects of the present disclosure generally relate to wireless communication. In some aspects, a first user equipment (UE) may switch from a first sidelink (SL) full-duplex (FD) mode to a second SL FD mode based on at least one of a first SL discontinuous reception (DRX) pattern associated with the first UE or a second SL DRX pattern associated with the second UE.
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 REDENTOR M PASIA whose telephone number is (571)272-9745. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays-Thursdays - 5am-245pm and Fridays 5am-330pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Un Cho can be reached at (571)272-7919. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/REDENTOR PASIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2413