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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 33-42 in the reply filed on October 7, 2025 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on July 21, 2023 and May 14, 2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 35 and 42 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claim 35 last limitation, "wherein if before the timer expires the times is re-set due to the returning to the network slice, the report is inhibited." It seems “the times” here is typo, that should be “the timer”.
In Claim 42, “wherein the re-ap is based on mapping information”. It seems “re-ap” here is typo, that should be “re-map”, as it was in earlier (03/30/2023) submitted claims.
Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 39 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 39 cited with three subsequent limitations after “wherein the apparatus is further caused to at least”. It seems that these are alternatives since some cannot occur at the same time. For instance, if reporting consent, then there shouldn’t be not receiving consent of the UE. Therefore, the claim has an indefinite scope.
For the examination purposes, Examiner interpret the claim to read, “at least one”.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 33, 37, and 42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SUN et al. (US 20230086410 A1), hereinafter Sun, and further in view of Watfa et al. (US 20190223093 A1, as provided by the IDS submitted on July 21, 2023), hereinafter Watfa.
Regarding Claim 33, Sun discloses An apparatus (Fig. 2, ¶0223 Access Device/radio access network) comprising:
at least one processor; (Fig. 6, ¶0452 processing unit 410 performed by the network device (¶0203 RAN device)) and
at least one memory including computer program code, the at least one memory and the computer program code configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to at least: (Fig. 6, ¶0452 the processing unit 410 is configured to execute the instructions stored in the storage unit 420, to enable the apparatus 400 to implement the operations performed by the network device)
receive an indication regarding a user equipment support of a network re-mapping from a network slice to a fallback network slice; (Sun in Fig. 2, ¶0223 teaches NAS/AS signaling layers between the UE, radio access network/access device and core network (CN; i.e. AMF, ¶234). ¶0395 FIG. 4, in S210, the terminal device #1 sends the session establishment request of the service #1 to the core network device #1 (via radio access network ¶0223, Figs. 2/3A-3C). ¶¶0399, 0401, 0409 in S221, the information #1A indicates whether the service #1 supports network slice remapping. the information #1B indicates whether the service #1 supports network slice fallback. ¶0409, Terminal device sends the information#1 to the core network carrier in the session establishment request of the service#1. ¶0034, the AS of terminal sends the session establishment request of the first service to the core network device via an access network device)
Though Sun discloses receiving the UE remapping support indication from the terminal, Sun does not explicitly disclose:
store the received indication in a context associated with the user equipment;
identify a need to perform the re-mapping of the network slice for the user equipment.
Watfa, however, discloses:
store the received indication in a context associated with the user equipment; (Watfa [0080] A network may determine which network slice(s) a WTRU may be allowed to access and/or the assistance information corresponding to those slice(s) on a per-slice basis. The network may store information regarding the allowed slice(s) and their corresponding assistance information, e.g., as part of the WTRU's context.) and
identify a need to perform the re-mapping of the network slice for the user equipment. (Watfa Fig. 4, 6 [0106] Network slice reselection (re-mapping) for an WTRU may be initiated by a network such as by a RAN, an AMF and/or a CNS. The determination (for the reselection/re-mapping) may be based on the network receiving a request from another network component (e.g., a SM function) to reselect a slice for the WTRU, for example due to changing load conditions, indicates a need)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the apparatus of Sun with the ability to store the re-mapping support indication for the UE to facilitate network slice selection as taught by Watfa. Doing so allows supporting one or more of network slices to provide differentiated services, e.g., phone service, critical service, IoT services etc., through network slices. (Watfa [0002])
Regarding Claim 37, Sun, and Watfa disclose the apparatus of claim 33. Watfa further discloses:
wherein the identification of the need is in response to identifying a congestion condition associated with the network slice or the network slice being temporarily not available. (Watfa [0106] Network slice reselection for an WTRU may be initiated by a network such as by a RAN, an AMF and/or a CNS. The network may take one or more actions related to the slice reselection individually or in combination. The reselection (remapping) is based on the network determination that a (current) slice associated with the WTRU may be changed or replaced (i.e. current slice became unavailable) or changing load conditions. ¶0125 FIG. 6 shows example for network slice selection and/or reselection due to a congestion situation at the slice.)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the apparatus of Sun with the ability to store the re-mapping support indication for the UE to facilitate network slice selection as taught by Watfa. Doing so allows supporting one or more of network slices to provide differentiated services, e.g., phone service, critical service, IoT services etc., through network slices. (Watfa [0002])
Regarding Claim 42, Sun, and Watfa disclose the apparatus of claim 33. Watfa further discloses:
wherein the re-ap is based on mapping information derived from configuration information received from an operation and maintenance node, (Watfa Fig. 3, [0086] A WTRU may register with a network and may access one or more network slices. Once associated with the one or more network slices, the WTRU may experience changes with its configuration, operational parameters, subscription, service requirements, service/application providers, and/or the like, indicates both WTRU and network have the mapping information through the registration process. The AMF may become cognizant of the congestion situation based on interaction with other network functions including a network slice selection function (NSSF), a network repository function (NRF), a session management function (SMF), and/or other operation and maintenance (O&M) network functions, indicates configurations from OAM nodes)
wherein the configuration information maps, for the user equipment, the network slice to one or more fallback network slices having an upgraded level of service or a downgraded level of service, (Watfa teaches [0090] A WTRU's behavior with respect to network slice selection and/or reselection may be controlled by one or more configurations of the WTRU. The configurations may control respective priorities assigned (e.g., mapped) to one or more sets of assistance information. For example, higher priorities may be assigned to URLLC slices, lower priorities may be assigned to eMBB slices, etc. [0106, 0125] Figs. 4,6, RAN can select the (upgraded or downgraded) slice based on changing load conditions. ) and/or
wherein the apparatus is comprised in or comprised a radio access network node. (Watfa Fig. 1D, [0064] The AMF 182a, 182b may be connected to one or more of the gNBs 180a, 180b, 180c in the RAN 113 via an N2 interface and may serve as a control node. For example, the AMF 182a, 182b may be responsible for authenticating users of the WTRUs 102a, 102b, 102c, support for network slicing (e.g., handling of different PDU sessions with different requirements), selecting a particular SMF 183a, 183b, management of the registration area, termination of NAS signaling, mobility management, and the like. [0073] The RAN may be configured to direct a registration message transmitted by a WTRU to an AMF. The network node (e.g., a RAN, an AMF, an NSSF, etc.) may use the assistance information provided by the WTRU to select a network slice for the WTRU. These indicates information sharing between AMF and RAN for slice remapping)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the apparatus of Sun with the ability to store the re-mapping support indication for the UE to facilitate network slice selection as taught by Watfa. Doing so allows supporting one or more of network slices to provide differentiated services, e.g., phone service, critical service, IoT services etc., through network slices. (Watfa [0002])
Claims 34 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SUN et al. (US 20230086410 A1), hereinafter Sun, in view of Watfa et al. (US 20190223093 A1, as provided by the IDS submitted on July 21, 2023), hereinafter Watfa and further in view of Myhre et al. (WO 2018135992 A1), hereinafter Myhre.
Regarding Claim 34, Sun and Watfa disclose the apparatus of claim 33. Sun further discloses:
wherein the indication indicates that the user equipment supports the network applying the re-mapping automatically, (Sun Fig. 2, 4 ¶¶0395-0403 the core network device #1 obtains indication information #1 from the terminal device including whether the service #1 supports or do not support network slice remapping (information #1A), network slice fallback (information #1B) and cell redirection (information #1C). ¶0415-0418 In S240, the core network device #1 may control (i.e. remap) the terminal device #1 based on the information #1)
wherein the apparatus is further caused to re-map, based on the received indication and the identified need, the network slice to the fallback network slice. (Sun Fig. 2, 4 ¶¶0395-0403 the core network device #1 obtains indication information #1 from the terminal device indicating the slice remapping/fallback/redirection support. ¶0417 the core network device #1 may perform network slice remapping on the service #A based on the information #1A. To be specific, the core network device #1 may remap the service #1 to a network slice #C.)
Though Sun and Watfa discloses the network (RAN/Core) receive information regarding UE support of re-mapping (Sun FIG. 2/3A-3C/4 ¶¶00395, 399, 0401, 0409) and the RAN initiating the remapping based on load condition (Watfa Fig. 4, 6 [0106]), Sun and Watfa do not explicitly disclose doing the remapping automatically:
wherein the indication indicates that the user equipment supports the network applying the re-mapping automatically,
Myhre, however, discloses:
wherein the indication indicates that the user equipment supports the network applying the re-mapping automatically, (Figs. 6, 8, pg. 12, ll. 20-35 the receiving module or unit 811b of the RAN include receiving an indication of a second network slice to which the wireless device is allowed to connect. the mapping module or unit 815b may include autonomously mapping a wireless device connection to a default network slice)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the apparatus of Sun and Watfa with the ability to autonomously remap as taught by Myhre. Doing so allows RAN to perform a re-mapping in certain mobility or connection setup scenarios without first notifying the core network, which would add additional delay affecting the UE and system performance. (Myhre [pg. 8, ll. 1-10])
Regarding Claim 36, Sun and Watfa disclose the apparatus of claim 33. Watfa further discloses:
wherein the indication is received from an access and mobility management function, (Watfa Fig. 1D, [0064] The AMF 182a, 182b may be connected to one or more of the gNBs 180a, 180b, 180c in the RAN 113 via an N2 interface and may serve as a control node. For example, the AMF 182a, 182b may be responsible for authenticating users of the WTRUs 102a, 102b, 102c, support for network slicing (e.g., handling of different PDU sessions with different requirements), selecting a particular SMF 183a, 183b, management of the registration area, termination of NAS signaling, mobility management, and the like. [0073] The RAN may be configured to direct a registration message transmitted by a WTRU to an AMF. The network node (e.g., a RAN, an AMF, an NSSF, etc.) may use the assistance information provided by the WTRU to select a network slice for the WTRU. These indicates information sharing between AMF and RAN for slice remapping) and/or
Though Sun, and Watfa discloses the network (RAN/Core) receive information regarding UE support of re-mapping (Sun FIG. 2/3A-3C/4 ¶¶00395, 399, 0401, 0409) and the RAN initiating the remapping based on load condition (Watfa Fig. 4, 6 [0106]), Sun and Watfa do not explicitly disclose doing the remapping automatically with notification:
wherein the indication further indicates the automatic re-mapping is allowed to proceed with a subsequent notice provided to the user equipment.
Myhre, however, discloses:
wherein the indication further indicates the automatic re-mapping is allowed to proceed with a subsequent notice provided to the user equipment. (Myhre [Fig. 6, pg. 11, ll. 1-11] the network node 611 remaps the wireless device connection to the allowed slice 643, as represented by block 619. In addition, the network node 611 may transmit, to the wireless device 601, an indication that the wireless device connection is mapped to the replacement network slice, indicates a subsequent notice to the user equipment)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the apparatus of Sun and Watfa with the ability to autonomously remap as taught by Myhre. Doing so allows RAN to perform a re-mapping in certain mobility or connection setup scenarios without first notifying the core network, which would add additional delay affecting the UE and system performance. (Myhre [pg. 8, ll. 1-10])
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SUN et al. (US 20230086410 A1), hereinafter Sun, in view of Watfa et al. (US 20190223093 A1, as provided by the IDS submitted on July 21, 2023), hereinafter Watfa, in view of Myhre et al. (WO 2018135992 A1), hereinafter Myhre, and further in view of Comsa et al. (US 20120207040 A1), hereinafter Comsa.
Regarding Claim 35, Sun, Watfa, and Myhre disclose the apparatus of claim 34. Myhre further discloses:
wherein the apparatus is further caused to report, based on a timer, a list to a core network node, (Myhre [Fig. 6, pg. 11, ll. 1-11] the network node 611 remaps the wireless device connection to the allowed slice 643, as represented by block 619. In addition, the network node 611 may transmit, to the core network node 621 , an indication that the wireless device connection is mapped to the replacement network slice.)
the list identifying the user equipment re-mapped to the fallback network slice, (Myhre Fig. 10, pg. 13, ll. 24-28 At block 1013, the method 1000 includes mapping the wireless device connection to the second network slice associated with the identifier. At block 1015, the method 1000 may include transmitting, to the wireless device or the core network node, an indication that the wireless device connection is mapped to the second network slice, indicates identifying the user terminal with the fallback network slice in the indication)
Though Myhre teaches transmitting the new network slice info associated with the UE to the core network, Sun, Watfa, and Myhre do not explicitly teach the timer before reporting:
wherein the apparatus is further caused to report, based on a timer, a list to a core network node,
wherein if the timer expires, the report is performed, and
wherein if before the timer expires the times is re-set due to the returning to the network slice, the report is inhibited.
Comsa, however, discloses:
wherein the apparatus is further caused to report, based on a timer, a list to a core network node, (Comsa ¶0095 a report may be transmitted if a predefined period, x, has elapsed. Once the notification prohibit timer expires, if the triggering condition may still exist, the notification is transmitted to the network)
wherein if the timer expires, the report is performed, (Comsa ¶0095 Once the notification prohibit timer expires, if the triggering condition may still exist, the notification is transmitted to the network) and
wherein if before the timer expires the times is re-set due to the returning to the network slice, the report is inhibited. (Comsa ¶0095 Once the notification prohibit timer expires, if the triggering condition may still exist, the notification is transmitted to the network. This indicates if the condition no longer exist (e.g. returning to slice instead of fallback), reporting is inhibited)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the apparatus of Sun, Watfa, and Myhre with the ability to control transmitting notification if condition exist for a timer duration as taught by Comsa. Doing so allows avoiding frequent request ensuring the conditions for the trigger still hold. (Comsa [0148])
Claim 38 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SUN et al. (US 20230086410 A1), hereinafter Sun, in view of Watfa et al. (US 20190223093 A1, as provided by the IDS submitted on July 21, 2023), hereinafter Watfa, in view of Myhre et al. (WO 2018135992 A1), hereinafter Myhre, in view of Comsa et al. (US 20120207040 A1), hereinafter Comsa and further in view of SUN et al. (US 20230098982 A1), hereinafter Sun’982.
Regarding Claim 38, Sun, Watfa, Myhre, and Comsa disclose the apparatus of claim 35. Though Myhre teaches transmitting the new network slice info associated with the UE to the core network, Sun, Watfa, and Myhre do not explicitly disclose target RAN:
wherein a target radio access network reports the list to the core network node.
Sun’982, however, discloses:
wherein a target radio access network reports the list to the core network node. (Sun’982 Fig. 3A/3B, [0156] S106. The target RAN node sends a path handover request to the core network node. [0157] The path handover request includes an identifier of a network slice to which each of one or more PDU sessions is re-mapped. ¶0007 discloses PDU session belongs to the terminal, “when the terminal device is handed over, a PDU session/QoS flow/DRB of the terminal device on any network slice of the source RAN node is transferred (or falls back) to the specific network slice. This indicates the list reported from the target RAN to core network identifying the slice associated with the UE.)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the apparatus of Sun, Watfa, Myhre, and Comsa with the ability for the target RAN reporting to the core network for slice remapping as taught by Sun’982. Doing so allows reducing signaling overheads caused during handover interaction. (Sun’982 [Abstract])
Claims 39, 40, 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SUN et al. (US 20230086410 A1), hereinafter Sun, in view of Watfa et al. (US 20190223093 A1, as provided by the IDS submitted on July 21, 2023), hereinafter Watfa and further in view of Cho et al. (US 20250184880 A1), hereinafter Cho.
Regarding Claim 39, Sun and Watfa disclose the apparatus of claim 33. Sun further discloses:
wherein the indication indicates the user equipment requires consent before allowing the re-mapping of the network slice to the fallback network slice, (Sun ¶0395 FIG. 4, in S210, the terminal device #1 sends the session establishment request of the service #1 to the core network device #1 (via radio access network ¶0223, Figs. 2/3A-3C) with the slice remapping and fallback support related indication. (¶¶0399, 0401, 0409 in S221). ¶0409, Terminal device sends the information#1 to the core network carrier in the session establishment request of the service#1. ¶0067 when the indication information indicates whether the first service does not support the network slice remapping (i.e. not automatic remapping), the network device (for example, the core network device) may determine, based on the third indication information, whether to perform processing in a manner of remapping the first service to another network slice. The indicates network can determine to identify recommended slice with UE interaction (consent)).
wherein the apparatus is further caused to at least:
report the list to the core network node, (Watfa discloses ¶0003 determination that the current network slice cannot be used and core network use updated network slice information in response to a subscription change or a mobility change associated with the WTRU. Indicates a list to consider by the core network associated with the terminal.)
in response to receiving, from the core network node, the consent of the user equipment, modify a context to allow the re-mapping of the network slice to the fallback network slice; (Watfa discloses ¶0118 the network may update the WTRU's context, e.g., so that the default CNS and/or AMF may be marked as the WTRU's selected network slice (via) ¶0064 the AMF 162 may provide a control plane function for switching between the RAN 113 and other RANs (indicates signaling between core<->RAN<->UE for context modification based on re-mapping/fallback decision) and
Though, Sun, and Watfa discloses receiving whether the terminal support slice remapping and network receive list of allowed slices for the terminal, Sun, and Watfa do not explicitly disclose getting consent from the terminal before remapping:
the list identifying at least the user equipment allowing the re-mapping when consent is requested and provided by the user equipment;
in response to receiving, from the core network node, the consent of the user equipment, modify a context to allow the re-mapping of the network slice to the fallback network slice;
in response to not receiving the consent of the user equipment, inhibit application of the re-mapping to the fallback network slice.
Cho, however, discloses:
the list identifying at least the user equipment allowing the re-mapping when consent is requested and provided by the user equipment; (Cho Fig. 2, ¶0026 discloses a slice recommender at core network node. Fig. 4 discloses [0041] the slice recommender (in core network) receiving Network parameters 420 including network-side information related to a specific UE device 102 and application session from access station 214 (Fig. 2 RAN))
in response to receiving, from the core network node, the consent of the user equipment, modify a context to allow the re-mapping of the network slice to the fallback network slice; (Cho Figs. 4, ¶0042 Slice recommender 226 identify what slice is best-suited for the current application and provide the slice recommendation 432 to UE device 102. Fig. 10 ¶¶0060, 0065 discloses prompting the user to change to the recommended slice (block 1045), receiving user input to accept the recommended slice (block 1050), and remapping the slice configuration to the recommended slice (block 1055). Components of core network 206 and access network 204 may then use the selected network slice to service the application 310. Indicates modifying the UE context in response to UE consent)
in response to not receiving the consent of the user equipment, inhibit application of the re-mapping to the fallback network slice. (Cho Figs. 4, 10 ¶¶0060, 0065 discloses prompting the user to accept or reject (do not allow), the remapping step 1055 only happens if the user accepts. This indicates remapping is inhibited if user selects do not allow, it means no fallback or context modification is initiated.)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the apparatus of Sun and Watfa with the ability to receive user consent before remapping as taught by Cho. Doing so allows appropriate slice selections to upgrade to a different slice for improved performance, to downgrade to another slice for network efficiency, or to update a user's service subscription to allow access to a premium network slice. (Cho [0017])
Regarding Claim 40, Sun, Watfa, and Cho disclose the apparatus of claim 39. Cho further discloses:
wherein not receiving the consent comprises receiving a denial of the consent or receiving no response regarding the consent of the user equipment before an expiry of a timer. (Cho Figs. 4, 10 ¶¶0060, 0065 discloses prompting the user to accept or reject (do not allow), the remapping step 1055 only happens if the user accepts. This indicates remapping is denied if user selects do not allow)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the apparatus of Sun and Watfa with the ability to receive user consent before remapping as taught by Cho. Doing so allows appropriate slice selections to upgrade to a different slice for improved performance, to downgrade to another slice for network efficiency, or to update a user's service subscription to allow access to a premium network slice. (Cho [0017])
Regarding Claim 41, Sun, Watfa, and Cho disclose the apparatus of claim 39. Sun and Cho further disclose:
wherein the apparatus is further caused to at least received, from the core network node, the consent of the user equipment, (Cho Figs. 4, 10 ¶¶0060, 0065 discloses prompting the user to change to the recommended slice (block 1045), receiving user input to accept (consent) the recommended slice (block 1050), and remapping the slice configuration to the recommended slice (block 1055). Components of core network 206 and access network 204 may then use the selected network slice to service the application 310. Indicates modifying the UE context via AMF and RAN based on the UE consent.)
wherein the core network node comprises an access and mobility management function. (Sun ¶0233 discloses A “core network device” include any device, for example, the access management function entity or the session management function entity, that can communicate with the terminal device through transparent transmission performed by one or more intermediate devices (for example, access devices). ¶0234 AMF is used as the core network device.)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the apparatus of Sun, and Watfa with the ability to receive user consent before remapping as taught by Cho. Doing so allows appropriate slice selections to upgrade to a different slice for improved performance, to downgrade to another slice for network efficiency, or to update a user's service subscription to allow access to a premium network slice. (Cho [0017])
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMED NIAMUL HUDA KHAN whose telephone number is (703)756-1689. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8AM-5PM.
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, Rebecca Song can be reached at 571-270-3667. 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.
/M.N.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2417
/REBECCA E SONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2417