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 .
Status of the Claims
Based on the current set of claims (Claims, 01 February 2026), Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7, 9, 12, 14, 17, 19-20, 22-23, 25, 28, 31, 33, 35-36, and 42 are pending.
Based on the current set of claims (Claims, 01 February 2026), Claims 1 and 22 are amended and said amendments are narrowing.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the objection of Claims 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 12, 14, 17, 19, and 20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of Claims 2, 4, 5, 7, 9, 12, 14, 17, 19, and 20 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the rejection of Claim 20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of Claim 20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments regarding the rejection of Claims 1-2, 4, 22, 23, and 42 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
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 1-2, 4, 22, 23, and 42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murray et al. (US 20170367120 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Murray”) in view of Jung et al. (US 20240267955 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Jung”).
Regarding Claim 1, Murray discloses a random access method, applied to a user equipment (UE), comprising:
receiving resource configuration information (¶363-364 & Fig. 20 (0), Murray discloses receiving, by a user equipment (UE) from an evolved node B (eNB), configuration parameters via signaling), wherein the resource configuration information is configured to configure resources in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to at least one network slice (¶370, Murray discloses that the configuration parameters are configured to configure resources corresponding to a service-specific slice. Examiner correlates resources to "a specified random access resource pool");
determining a first random access resource based on slice information of target network slices and the resource configuration information (¶363-364 & Fig. 20 (0), Murray discloses determining, by the UE, a common PRACH resource based upon selecting, by the UE, a preamble corresponding to a service-specific slice where the service-specific slice is one of a plurality of slices indicated by the configuration parameters), wherein the target network slices are network slices for the UE to initiate a random access (¶370, Murray discloses that the service-specific slices are slices for the UE to initiate random access, such as by transmitting a preamble where each preamble corresponds to a particular service-specific slice); and
initiating the random access based on the first random access resource (¶373-374 & Fig. 20 (1), Murray discloses initiating, by the UE, a PRACH procedure by transmitting, by the UE to the eNB, a random access preamble based upon the common PRACH resource).
However, Murray does not disclose a number of target network slices is multiple, and determining the first random access resource based on the slice information of the target network slices and the resource configuration information comprises: taking resources in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to one target network slice of multiple target network slices as the first random access resource based on a priority order of the multiple target network slices and the resource configuration information.
Jung, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches a number of target network slices is multiple (¶206-207, Jung discloses one or more slice groups), and
determining the first random access resource based on the slice information of the target network slices and the resource configuration information comprises:
taking resources in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to one target network slice of multiple target network slices as the first random access resource (¶211-213, Jung discloses performing random access corresponding to a random access channel (RACH) configuration. ¶200, Jung discloses each RACH configuration configures RACH resources for use in the random access procedure. Here, the resources corresponding to each RACH configuration are “taken” to perform random access steps such as transmission of a preamble on a resource configured by the RACH configuration and reception of a random access response on another resource configured by the RACH configuration) based on a priority order of the multiple target network slices and the resource configuration information (¶210, Jung discloses that the RACH configuration is selected based upon a slice priority information and the corresponding RACH configuration).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Murray by requiring a number of target network slices is multiple and taking resources in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to one target network slice of multiple target network slices as the first random access resource based on a priority order of the multiple target network slices and the resource configuration information as taught by Jung because resource selection for random access is improved by enabling the UE to perform random access for a slice group preferred by a user equipment (UE) based on one of a slice identifier or slice priority information (Jung, Abstract & ¶1-2).
Regarding Claim 2, Murray in view of Jung discloses the random access method of claim 1.
Murray further discloses determining the first random access resource based on the slice information of the target network slices and the resource configuration information comprises:
taking resources in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to the target network slices as the first random access resource, in case of the resources in the specified random access resource pool corresponding to the target network slices being configured in the resource configuration information (¶370, Murray discloses optionally using resources corresponding to at least one service-specific slice in response to the configuration parameters indicating both a common PRACH resources and other optional resources correspond to at least one service-specific slice).
Regarding Claim 4, Murray in view of Jung discloses the random access method of claim 1.
Murray further discloses receiving the resource configuration information comprises one of:
receiving a system message carrying the resource configuration information (¶360-361, Murray discloses receiving, by the UE from the eNB, system information message comprising the configuration parameters for the PRACH procedure);
receiving a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) instruction carrying the resource configuration information (Examiner notes that the use of “or” and “and/or” has a broadest reasonable interpretation of any element in the list that follows or any of those elements taken together. See Ex Parte Gross, Appeal 2011-004811, Application No. 11/565,411. Thus, Examiner has not treated all limitations separated by “and/or” and “or”); or
receiving a radio resource control (RRC) message carrying the resource configuration information (Examiner notes that the use of “or” and “and/or” has a broadest reasonable interpretation of any element in the list that follows or any of those elements taken together. See Ex Parte Gross, Appeal 2011-004811, Application No. 11/565,411. Thus, Examiner has not treated all limitations separated by “and/or” and “or”).
Regarding Claim 22, Murray discloses a random access method, applied to a base station, comprising:
determining resource configuration information (¶363-364 & Fig. 20 (0), Murray discloses determining, by an evolved node B (eNB), configuration parameters), wherein the resource configuration information is configured to configure resources in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to at least one network slice (¶370, Murray discloses that the configuration parameters are configured to configure resources corresponding to a service-specific slice. Examiner correlates resources to "a specified random access resource pool"); and
sending the resource configuration information (¶363-364 & Fig. 20 (0), Murray discloses transmitting, by an evolved node B (eNB) to a user equipment (UE), configuration parameters via signaling).
However, Murray does not disclose wherein sending the resource configuration information comprises: sending a first indication message, wherein the first indication message is configured to configure a priority order of multiple target network slices, and the target network slices are network slices for a user equipment (UE) to initiate a random access, wherein the priority order of the multiple target network slices and the resource configuration information are configured for the UE to determine a first random access resource for initiating the random access, and the first random access resource is a resource in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to a target network slice among the multiple target network slices.
Jung, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein sending the resource configuration information comprises:
sending a first indication message (¶232 & Fig. 14 (S1401), Jung discloses sending, by a network node to a user equipment (UE), a configuration), wherein the first indication message is configured to configure a priority order of multiple target network slices (¶232 & Fig. 14 (S1401), Jung discloses that the configuration), and the target network slices are network slices for a user equipment (UE) to initiate a random access (¶237, Jung discloses that the slice groups have corresponding RACH configurations for performing a random access), wherein the priority order of the multiple target network slices and the resource configuration information are configured for the UE to determine a first random access resource for initiating the random access (¶232 & ¶237 & Fig. 14 (S1401->S1405), Jung discloses that the slice priority information of the one or more cell groups and the corresponding RACH configuration are configured such that the UE can determine a preferred cell of one or more slice groups have corresponding RACH configurations for performing a random access), and the first random access resource is a resource in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to a target network slice among the multiple target network slices (¶200, Jung discloses each RACH configuration configures RACH resources for use in the random access procedure).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Murray by sending a first indication message, wherein the first indication message is configured to configure a priority order of multiple target network slices, and the target network slices are network slices for a user equipment (UE) to initiate a random access, wherein the priority order of the multiple target network slices and the resource configuration information are configured for the UE to determine a first random access resource for initiating the random access, and the first random access resource is a resource in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to a target network slice among the multiple target network slices as taught by Jung because resource selection for random access is improved by enabling the UE to perform random access for a slice group preferred by a user equipment (UE) based on one of a slice identifier or slice priority information (Jung, Abstract & ¶1-2).
Regarding Claim 23, Murray in view of Jung discloses the random access method of claim 22.
Murray further discloses wherein sending the resource configuration information comprises one of:
broadcasting a system message carrying the resource configuration information (¶360-361, Murray discloses transmitting, by the eNB to the UE via broadcast, system information message comprising the configuration parameters for the PRACH procedure);
sending a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) instruction carrying the resource configuration information (Examiner notes that the use of “or” and “and/or” has a broadest reasonable interpretation of any element in the list that follows or any of those elements taken together. See Ex Parte Gross, Appeal 2011-004811, Application No. 11/565,411. Thus, Examiner has not treated all limitations separated by “and/or” and “or”); or
sending a radio resource control (RRC) message carrying the resource configuration information (Examiner notes that the use of “or” and “and/or” has a broadest reasonable interpretation of any element in the list that follows or any of those elements taken together. See Ex Parte Gross, Appeal 2011-004811, Application No. 11/565,411. Thus, Examiner has not treated all limitations separated by “and/or” and “or”).
Regarding Claim 42, Murray discloses a random access device, comprising:
a processor (¶146-148 & Fig. 1B & ¶393, Murray discloses a processor); and
a memory for storing instructions executable by the processor (¶146-148 & Fig. 1B & ¶393, Murray discloses instructions stored on a memory for execution by the processor);
wherein the processor is configured to perform the method of claim 1 (¶363-364 & ¶370 & ¶373-374 & Fig. 20, Murray discloses the method of claim 1).
Claims 5, 7, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murray in view of Jung in further view of Cheng et al. (US 20240015784 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Cheng”).
Regarding Claim 5, Murray in view of Jung discloses the method of claim 1.
However, Murray in view of Jung does not disclose determining the first random access resource based on the slice information of the target network slices and the resource configuration information comprises: determining, by the UE, the priority order of the multiple target network slices based on service priorities; or determining the priority order of the multiple target network slices based on a received first indication message.
Cheng, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches determining the first random access resource based on the slice information of the target network slices and the resource configuration information comprises at least one of:
determining, by the UE, the priority order of the multiple target network slices based on service priorities (¶154-156 & Fig. 9 (920), Cheng discloses determining, by the UE, a priority for each network slice based upon priorities indicated in random access configuration and/or a received indication); or
determining the priority order of the multiple target network slices based on a received first indication message (¶154-156 & Fig. 9 (910->920), Cheng discloses determining, by the UE, a priority for each network slice based upon a received indication).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Murray in view of Jung by requiring a number of the target network slices is multiple and either determining, by the UE, the priority order of the multiple target network slices based on service priorities or determining the priority order of the multiple target network slices based on a received first indication message as taught by Cheng because obtaining access to a network slice is improved by assigning priorities of network slices and assigning resources for a random access procedure (Cheng, ¶1-5).
Regarding Claim 7, Murray in view of Jung discloses the random access method of claim 1.
However, Murray in view of Jung does not disclose that [the random access method], further comprising: reinitiating the random access based on a second random access resource fallen back to, in response to satisfying a preset fallback condition; wherein the second random access resource is one of alternative random access resource pools, and the alternative random access resource pools comprise at least one of: resources in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to other network slices, other random access resources corresponding to the target network slices, or common random access resources; or the second random access resource is a random access resource which is determined based on a received second indication message.
Cheng, a prior art reference in the same of endeavor, teaches [the random access method], further comprising:
reinitiating the random access based on a second random access resource fallen back to, in response to satisfying a preset fallback condition (¶47, Cheng discloses performing a fallback procedure in response to the UE being unable to complete a slice-based random access procedure after exceeding a random access channel (RACH) threshold);
wherein the second random access resource is one of alternative random access resource pools (¶47, Cheng discloses performing a fallback procedure in response to the UE being unable to complete a slice-based random access procedure. Here, the resource used for the fallback procedure is correlated to “the second random access resource”), and the alternative random access resource pools comprise at least one of:
resources in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to other network slices (¶47, Cheng discloses that the fallback procedure is performed in a dedicated resource corresponding to a different slice-based RACH procedure),
other random access resources corresponding to the target network slices (¶47, Cheng discloses that the fallback procedure is performed in a dedicated resource corresponding to a different slice-based RACH procedure), or
common random access resources (¶85 & ¶47, Cheng discloses that the fallback procedure is performed in a common resource in response to satisfying the RACH threshold); or
the second random access resource is a random access resource which is determined based on a received second indication message (Examiner notes that the use of “or” and “and/or” has a broadest reasonable interpretation of any element in the list that follows or any of those elements taken together. See Ex Parte Gross, Appeal 2011-004811, Application No. 11/565,411. Thus, Examiner has not treated all limitations separated by “and/or” and “or”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Murray in view of Jung by reinitiating the random access based on a second random access resource fallen back to, in response to satisfying a preset fallback condition; wherein the second random access resource is one of alternative random access resource pools, and the alternative random access resource pools comprise at least one of: resources in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to other network slices, other random access resources corresponding to the target network slices, or common random access resource as taught by Cheng because obtaining access to a network slice is improved by assigning priorities of network slices and assigning resources for a random access procedure (Cheng, ¶1-5).
Regarding Claim 14, Murray in view of Jung in further view of Cheng discloses the random access method of claim 7.
Cheng, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, further teaches the preset fallback condition comprises one of:
a number of failures of initiating the random access based on the first random access resource reaching a first fallback number threshold (¶84 & ¶47, Cheng discloses that the fallback procedure is performed in response to the UE being unable to complete a slice-based random access procedure where the inability to complete a slice-based random access procedure is based on a number of attempts of slice-based RACH procedures exceeding a RACH threshold corresponding to a number of attempts);
a first fallback timer expiring (¶84 & ¶47, Cheng discloses that the fallback procedure is performed in response to the UE being unable to complete a slice-based random access procedure where the inability to complete a slice-based random access procedure is based on a number of attempts of slice-based RACH procedures exceeding a RACH threshold corresponding to an amount of time in which the slice-based random access procedure is performed);
receiving a random access resource fallback indication message corresponding to the target network slices (Examiner notes that the use of “or” and “and/or” has a broadest reasonable interpretation of any element in the list that follows or any of those elements taken together. See Ex Parte Gross, Appeal 2011-004811, Application No. 11/565,411. Thus, Examiner has not treated all limitations separated by “and/or” and “or”);
receiving a random access response message carrying the random access resource fallback indication message (Examiner notes that the use of “or” and “and/or” has a broadest reasonable interpretation of any element in the list that follows or any of those elements taken together. See Ex Parte Gross, Appeal 2011-004811, Application No. 11/565,411. Thus, Examiner has not treated all limitations separated by “and/or” and “or”); or
receiving an RRC message carrying the random access resource fallback indication message, wherein the resource configuration information is further configured to configure at least one of the first fallback number threshold or the first fallback timer (Examiner notes that the use of “or” and “and/or” has a broadest reasonable interpretation of any element in the list that follows or any of those elements taken together. See Ex Parte Gross, Appeal 2011-004811, Application No. 11/565,411. Thus, Examiner has not treated all limitations separated by “and/or” and “or”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Murray in view of Jung in further view of Cheng by requiring that the preset fallback condition comprises one of: a number of failures of initiating the random access based on the first random access resource reaching a first fallback number threshold and a first fallback timer expiring as taught by Cheng because obtaining access to a network slice is improved by assigning priorities of network slices and assigning resources for a random access procedure (Cheng, ¶1-5).
Claims 25 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murray in view of Jung in further view of Wu et al. (US 20220070938 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Wu”).
Regarding Claim 25, Murray in view of Jung discloses the random access method of claim 22.
However, Murray in view of Jung does not disclose [the random access method] further comprising: sending a second indication message, wherein the second indication message is configured for a user equipment (UE) to determine a second random access resource which is used when resource fallback is performed, wherein the second indication message is configured to indicate a resource selection index or to configure the second random access resource, wherein sending the second indication message comprises one of: sending a random access response message carrying the second indication message; or sending a radio resource control (RRC) message carrying the second indication message.
Wu, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches [the random access method] further comprising:
sending a second indication message (¶138 & Fig. 2 (Step 2) & ¶139-144, Wu discloses transmitting, by the BS to the UE, a fallback indicator (FI). Examiner correlates the FI of the MSGB/RAR to "a random access resource fallback indication message"), wherein the second indication message is configured for a user equipment (UE) to determine a second random access resource which is used when resource fallback is performed (¶138 & Fig. 2 (Step 2) & ¶139-144, Wu discloses that the RAR, comprising the FI, configures the UE to determine another resource corresponding to another RACH procedure), wherein the second indication message is configured to indicate a resource selection index or to configure the second random access resource (¶138 & Fig. 2 (Step 2) & ¶190, Wu discloses that the RAR, comprising the FI, configures the UE to determine another resource for retransmission of MSGA/MSG1/preamble on a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH)), wherein sending the second indication message comprises one of:
sending a random access response message carrying the second indication message (¶138 & Fig. 2 (Step 2) & ¶139-144, Wu discloses transmitting, by the BS to the UE, a random access response (RAR) or MSGB comprising a fallback indicator (FI) where the fallback indicator is an indication of the fallback probability of the UE successfully transmitting MSGA); or
sending a radio resource control (RRC) message carrying the second indication message (Examiner notes that the use of “or” and “and/or” has a broadest reasonable interpretation of any element in the list that follows or any of those elements taken together. See Ex Parte Gross, Appeal 2011-004811, Application No. 11/565,411. Thus, Examiner has not treated all limitations separated by “and/or” and “or”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Murray in view of Jung by requiring that [the random access method] further comprising: sending a second indication message, wherein the second indication message is configured for a user equipment (UE) to determine a second random access resource which is used when resource fallback is performed, wherein the second indication message is configured to indicate a resource selection index or to configure the second random access resource, wherein sending the second indication message comprises sending a random access response message carrying the second indication message as taught by Wu because power consumption of the UE may be reduced, and the waste of system resources may be reduced by directly transmitting uplink data via the RACH procedure without an RRC connection (Wu, Abstract).
Regarding Claim 31, Murray in view of Jung discloses the random access method of claim 22.
However, Murray in view of Jung does not disclose [the random access method] further comprising: sending a random access resource fallback indication message, wherein sending the random access resource fallback indication message comprises one of: sending a random access response message carrying the random access resource fallback indication message; or sending a radio resource control (RRC) message carrying the random access resource fallback indication message.
Wu, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches [the random access method] further comprising:
sending a random access resource fallback indication message (¶138 & Fig. 2 (Step 2) & ¶139-144, Wu discloses transmitting, by the BS to the UE, a fallback indicator (FI). Examiner correlates the FI of the MSGB/RAR to "a random access resource fallback indication message"), wherein sending the random access resource fallback indication message comprises one of:
sending a random access response message carrying the random access resource fallback indication message (¶138 & Fig. 2 (Step 2) & ¶139-144, Wu discloses transmitting, by the BS to the UE, a random access response (RAR) or MSGB comprising a fallback indicator (FI) where the fallback indicator is an indication of the fallback probability of the UE successfully transmitting MSGA); or
sending a radio resource control (RRC) message carrying the random access resource fallback indication message (Examiner notes that the use of “or” and “and/or” has a broadest reasonable interpretation of any element in the list that follows or any of those elements taken together. See Ex Parte Gross, Appeal 2011-004811, Application No. 11/565,411. Thus, Examiner has not treated all limitations separated by “and/or” and “or”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Murray in view of Jung by sending a random access response message carrying the random access resource fallback indication message as taught by Wu because power consumption of the UE may be reduced, and the waste of system resources may be reduced by directly transmitting uplink data via the RACH procedure without an RRC connection (Wu, Abstract).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-2, 4, 22, 23, and 42 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2, 35, and 49 of copending Application No. 18/576013 (hereinafter referred to as “the ‘013 Application”) in view of Murray in further view of Jung.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Regarding Claim 1, Murray discloses a random access method, applied to a user equipment (UE), comprising:
receiving resource configuration information (Claim 1 of the '013 Application discloses receiving resource configuration information sent by a base station), wherein the resource configuration information is configured to configure resources in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to at least one network slice (Claim 1 of the '013 Application discloses the resource configuration information is used to configure at least one of: a common random access resource; a specified random access resource corresponding to at least one network slice; a two-step random access resource; a four-step random access resource; a two-step common random access resource; a four-step common random access resource; a two-step specified random access resource; or a four-step specified random access resource);
determining a first random access resource based on slice information of target network slices and the resource configuration information (Claim 1 of the '013 Application discloses determining a first random access resource according to at least one of the resource configuration information or the slice information), wherein the target network slices are network slices for the UE to initiate a random access (Claim 1 of the '013 Application discloses determining slice information of a target network slice that triggers a random access).
However, Claim 1 of the ‘013 Application does not disclose initiating the random access based on the first random access resource.
Murray, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches initiating the random access based on the first random access resource (¶373-374 & Fig. 20 (1), Murray discloses initiating, by the UE, a PRACH procedure by transmitting, by the UE to the eNB, a random access preamble based upon the common PRACH resource).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify Claim 1 of the ‘013 Application by initiating the random access based on the first random access resource as taught by Murray because random access is improved by enabling a new random access procedure optimized for NextGen networks configured for network/RAN slicing (Murray, ¶3).
However, Claim 1 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray does not disclose a number of target network slices is multiple, and determining the first random access resource based on the slice information of the target network slices and the resource configuration information comprises: taking resources in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to one target network slice of multiple target network slices as the first random access resource based on a priority order of the multiple target network slices and the resource configuration information.
Jung, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches a number of target network slices is multiple (¶206-207, Jung discloses one or more slice groups), and
determining the first random access resource based on the slice information of the target network slices and the resource configuration information comprises:
taking resources in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to one target network slice of multiple target network slices as the first random access resource (¶211-213, Jung discloses performing random access corresponding to a random access channel (RACH) configuration. ¶200, Jung discloses each RACH configuration configures RACH resources for use in the random access procedure) based on a priority order of the multiple target network slices and the resource configuration information (¶210, Jung discloses that the RACH configuration is selected based upon a slice priority information and the corresponding RACH configuration).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Claim 1 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray by requiring a number of target network slices is multiple and taking resources in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to one target network slice of multiple target network slices as the first random access resource based on a priority order of the multiple target network slices and the resource configuration information as taught by Jung because resource selection for random access is improved by enabling the UE to perform random access for a slice group preferred by a user equipment (UE) based on one of a slice identifier or slice priority information (Jung, Abstract & ¶1-2).
Regarding Claim 2, Claim 1 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray in further view of Jung discloses the random access method of claim 1.
Claim 3 of the ‘013 Application discloses wherein determining the first random access resource based on the slice information of the target network slices and the resource configuration information comprises:
taking resources in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to the target network slices as the first random access resource, in case of the resources in the specified random access resource pool corresponding to the target network slices being configured in the resource configuration information (Claim 2 of the ‘013 Application discloses determining that the base station where the base station has configured at least a specified random access resource corresponding to the target network slice according to the resource configuration information and the slice information. Here, the resources corresponding to each RACH configuration are “taken” to perform random access steps such as transmission of a preamble on a resource configured by the RACH configuration and reception of a random access response on another resource configured by the RACH configuration).
Regarding Claim 4, Claim 1 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray in further view of Jung discloses the random access method of claim 1.
Murray, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, further teaches wherein receiving the resource configuration information comprises one of:
receiving a system message carrying the resource configuration information (¶360-361, Murray discloses receiving, by the UE from the eNB, system information message comprising the configuration parameters for the PRACH procedure);
receiving a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) instruction carrying the resource configuration information (Examiner notes that the use of “or” and “and/or” has a broadest reasonable interpretation of any element in the list that follows or any of those elements taken together. See Ex Parte Gross, Appeal 2011-004811, Application No. 11/565,411. Thus, Examiner has not treated all limitations separated by “and/or” and “or”); or
receiving a radio resource control (RRC) message carrying the resource configuration information (Examiner notes that the use of “or” and “and/or” has a broadest reasonable interpretation of any element in the list that follows or any of those elements taken together. See Ex Parte Gross, Appeal 2011-004811, Application No. 11/565,411. Thus, Examiner has not treated all limitations separated by “and/or” and “or”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify Claim 1 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray in further view of Jung by receiving a system message carrying the resource configuration information as taught by Murray because random access is improved by enabling a new random access procedure optimized for NextGen networks configured for network/RAN slicing (Murray, ¶3).
Regarding Claim 22, Claim 35 of the ‘013 Application discloses a random access method, applied to a base station, comprising:
determining resource configuration information (Claim 35 of the ‘013 Application discloses sending resource configuration information to a user equipment (UE)), wherein the resource configuration information is configured to configure resources in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to at least one network slice (Claim 35 of the ‘013 Application discloses he resource configuration information is used to configure at least one of: a common random access resource; a specified random access resource corresponding to at least one network slice; a two-step random access resource; a four-step random access resource; a two-step common random access resource; a four-step common random access resource; a two-step specified random access resource; or a four-step specified random access resource).
However, Claim 35 of the ‘013 Application does not disclose sending the resource configuration information.
Murray, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches sending the resource configuration information (¶373-374 & Fig. 20 (1), Murray discloses initiating, by the UE, a PRACH procedure by transmitting, by the UE to the eNB, a random access preamble based upon the common PRACH resource).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify Claim 35 of the ‘013 Application by sending the resource configuration information as taught by Murray because random access is improved by enabling a new random access procedure optimized for NextGen networks configured for network/RAN slicing (Murray, ¶3).
However, Claim 35 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray does not disclose wherein sending the resource configuration information comprises: sending a first indication message, wherein the first indication message is configured to configure a priority order of multiple target network slices, and the target network slices are network slices for a user equipment (UE) to initiate a random access, wherein the priority order of the multiple target network slices and the resource configuration information are configured for the UE to determine a first random access resource for initiating the random access, and the first random access resource is a resource in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to a target network slice among the multiple target network slices.
Jung, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein sending the resource configuration information comprises:
sending a first indication message (¶232 & Fig. 14 (S1401), Jung discloses sending, by a network node to a user equipment (UE), a configuration), wherein the first indication message is configured to configure a priority order of multiple target network slices (¶232 & Fig. 14 (S1401), Jung discloses that the configuration), and the target network slices are network slices for a user equipment (UE) to initiate a random access (¶237, Jung discloses that the slice groups have corresponding RACH configurations for performing a random access), wherein the priority order of the multiple target network slices and the resource configuration information are configured for the UE to determine a first random access resource for initiating the random access (¶232 & ¶237 & Fig. 14 (S1401->S1405), Jung discloses that the slice priority information of the one or more cell groups and the corresponding RACH configuration are configured such that the UE can determine a preferred cell of one or more slice groups have corresponding RACH configurations for performing a random access), and the first random access resource is a resource in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to a target network slice among the multiple target network slices (¶200, Jung discloses each RACH configuration configures RACH resources for use in the random access procedure).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Claim 35 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray by sending a first indication message, wherein the first indication message is configured to configure a priority order of multiple target network slices, and the target network slices are network slices for a user equipment (UE) to initiate a random access, wherein the priority order of the multiple target network slices and the resource configuration information are configured for the UE to determine a first random access resource for initiating the random access, and the first random access resource is a resource in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to a target network slice among the multiple target network slices as taught by Jung because resource selection for random access is improved by enabling the UE to perform random access for a slice group preferred by a user equipment (UE) based on one of a slice identifier or slice priority information (Jung, Abstract & ¶1-2).
Regarding Claim 23, Claim 35 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray in further view of Jung discloses the random access method of claim 22.
Murray, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, further teaches wherein sending the resource configuration information comprises one of:
broadcasting a system message carrying the resource configuration information (¶360-361, Murray discloses transmitting, by the eNB to the UE via broadcast, system information message comprising the configuration parameters for the PRACH procedure);
sending a physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) instruction carrying the resource configuration information (Examiner notes that the use of “or” and “and/or” has a broadest reasonable interpretation of any element in the list that follows or any of those elements taken together. See Ex Parte Gross, Appeal 2011-004811, Application No. 11/565,411. Thus, Examiner has not treated all limitations separated by “and/or” and “or”);
sending a radio resource control (RRC) message carrying the resource configuration information (Examiner notes that the use of “or” and “and/or” has a broadest reasonable interpretation of any element in the list that follows or any of those elements taken together. See Ex Parte Gross, Appeal 2011-004811, Application No. 11/565,411. Thus, Examiner has not treated all limitations separated by “and/or” and “or”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify Claim 35 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray in further view of Jung by broadcasting a system message carrying the resource configuration information as taught by Murray because random access is improved by enabling a new random access procedure optimized for NextGen networks configured for network/RAN slicing (Murray, ¶3).
Regarding Claim 42, Claim 49 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray in further view of Jung discloses a random access device, comprising:
a processor (Claim 49 of the ‘013 Application discloses a processor); and
a memory for storing instructions executable by the processor (Claim 49 of the ‘013 Application discloses a memory for storing instructions executable by the processor);
wherein the processor is configured to perform the method of claim 1 (See double patenting rejection of Claim 1).
Claims 5, 7, and 14 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2, 35, and 49 of copending Application No. 18/576013 (hereinafter referred to as “the ‘013 Application”) in view of Murray in view of Jung in further view of Cheng.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Regarding Claim 5, Claim 1 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray in further view of Jung discloses the random access method of claim 1.
However, Claim 1 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray in further view of Jung does not disclose determining the first random access resource based on the slice information of the target network slices and the resource configuration information comprises: determining, by the UE, the priority order of the multiple target network slices based on service priorities; or determining the priority order of the multiple target network slices based on a received first indication message.
Cheng, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches determining the first random access resource based on the slice information of the target network slices and the resource configuration information comprises:
determining, by the UE, the priority order of the multiple target network slices based on service priorities (¶154-156 & Fig. 9 (920), Cheng discloses determining, by the UE, a priority for each network slice based upon priorities indicated in random access configuration and/or a received indication); or
determining the priority order of the multiple target network slices based on a received first indication message (¶154-156 & Fig. 9 (910->920), Cheng discloses determining, by the UE, a priority for each network slice based upon a received indication).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Claim 1 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray in further view of Jung by determining, by the UE, the priority order of the multiple target network slices based on service priorities or determining the priority order of the multiple target network slices based on a received first indication message as taught by Cheng because obtaining access to a network slice is improved by assigning priorities of network slices and assigning resources for a random access procedure (Cheng, ¶1-5).
Regarding Claim 7, Claim 1 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray in further view of Jung discloses the random access method of claim 1.
However, Claim 1 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray in further view of Jung does not disclose that [the random access method], further comprising: reinitiating the random access based on a second random access resource fallen back to, in response to satisfying a preset fallback condition; wherein the second random access resource is one of alternative random access resource pools, and the alternative random access resource pools comprise at least one of: resources in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to other network slices, other random access resources corresponding to the target network slices, or common random access resources; or the second random access resource is a random access resource which is determined based on a received second indication message.
Cheng, a prior art reference in the same of endeavor, teaches [the random access method], further comprising:
reinitiating the random access based on a second random access resource fallen back to, in response to satisfying a preset fallback condition (¶47, Cheng discloses performing a fallback procedure in response to the UE being unable to complete a slice-based random access procedure after exceeding a random access channel (RACH) threshold);
wherein the second random access resource is one of alternative random access resource pools (¶47, Cheng discloses performing a fallback procedure in response to the UE being unable to complete a slice-based random access procedure. Here, the resource used for the fallback procedure is correlated to “the second random access resource”), and the alternative random access resource pools comprise at least one of:
resources in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to other network slices (¶47, Cheng discloses that the fallback procedure is performed in a dedicated resource corresponding to a different slice-based RACH procedure),
other random access resources corresponding to the target network slices (¶47, Cheng discloses that the fallback procedure is performed in a dedicated resource corresponding to a different slice-based RACH procedure), or
common random access resources (¶85 & ¶47, Cheng discloses that the fallback procedure is performed in a common resource in response to satisfying the RACH threshold); or
the second random access resource is a random access resource which is determined based on a received second indication message (Examiner notes that the use of “or” and “and/or” has a broadest reasonable interpretation of any element in the list that follows or any of those elements taken together. See Ex Parte Gross, Appeal 2011-004811, Application No. 11/565,411. Thus, Examiner has not treated all limitations separated by “and/or” and “or”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Claim 1 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray in further view of Jung by reinitiating the random access based on a second random access resource fallen back to, in response to satisfying a preset fallback condition; wherein the second random access resource is one of alternative random access resource pools, and the alternative random access resource pools comprise at least one of: resources in a specified random access resource pool corresponding to other network slices, other random access resources corresponding to the target network slices, or common random access resource as taught by Cheng because obtaining access to a network slice is improved by assigning priorities of network slices and assigning resources for a random access procedure (Cheng, ¶1-5).
Regarding Claim 14, Claim 1 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray in view of Jung in further view of Cheng discloses the random access method of claim 7.
Cheng, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, further teaches the preset fallback condition comprises one of:
a number of failures of initiating the random access based on the first random access resource reaching a first fallback number threshold (¶84 & ¶47, Cheng discloses that the fallback procedure is performed in response to the UE being unable to complete a slice-based random access procedure where the inability to complete a slice-based random access procedure is based on a number of attempts of slice-based RACH procedures exceeding a RACH threshold corresponding to a number of attempts);
a first fallback timer expiring (¶84 & ¶47, Cheng discloses that the fallback procedure is performed in response to the UE being unable to complete a slice-based random access procedure where the inability to complete a slice-based random access procedure is based on a number of attempts of slice-based RACH procedures exceeding a RACH threshold corresponding to an amount of time in which the slice-based random access procedure is performed);
receiving a random access resource fallback indication message corresponding to the target network slices (Examiner notes that the use of “or” and “and/or” has a broadest reasonable interpretation of any element in the list that follows or any of those elements taken together. See Ex Parte Gross, Appeal 2011-004811, Application No. 11/565,411. Thus, Examiner has not treated all limitations separated by “and/or” and “or”);
receiving a random access response message carrying the random access resource fallback indication message (Examiner notes that the use of “or” and “and/or” has a broadest reasonable interpretation of any element in the list that follows or any of those elements taken together. See Ex Parte Gross, Appeal 2011-004811, Application No. 11/565,411. Thus, Examiner has not treated all limitations separated by “and/or” and “or”); or
receiving an RRC message carrying the random access resource fallback indication message, wherein the resource configuration information is further configured to configure at least one of the first fallback number threshold or the first fallback timer (Examiner notes that the use of “or” and “and/or” has a broadest reasonable interpretation of any element in the list that follows or any of those elements taken together. See Ex Parte Gross, Appeal 2011-004811, Application No. 11/565,411. Thus, Examiner has not treated all limitations separated by “and/or” and “or”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Claim 1 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray in view of Jung in further view of Cheng by requiring that the preset fallback condition comprises one of: a number of failures of initiating the random access based on the first random access resource reaching a first fallback number threshold and a first fallback timer expiring as taught by Cheng because obtaining access to a network slice is improved by assigning priorities of network slices and assigning resources for a random access procedure (Cheng, ¶1-5).
Claims 25 and 31 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2, 35, and 49 of copending Application No. 18/576013 (hereinafter referred to as “the ‘013 Application”) in view of Murray in view of Jung in further view of Wu.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Regarding Claim 25, Claim 35 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray in further view of Jung discloses the random access method of claim 22.
However, Claim 35 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray does not disclose [the random access method] further comprising: sending a second indication message, wherein the second indication message is configured for a user equipment (UE) to determine a second random access resource which is used when resource fallback is performed, wherein the second indication message is configured to indicate a resource selection index or to configure the second random access resource, wherein sending the second indication message comprises one of: sending a random access response message carrying the second indication message; or sending a radio resource control (RRC) message carrying the second indication message.
Wu, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches [the random access method] further comprising:
sending a second indication message (¶138 & Fig. 2 (Step 2) & ¶139-144, Wu discloses transmitting, by the BS to the UE, a fallback indicator (FI). Examiner correlates the FI of the MSGB/RAR to "a random access resource fallback indication message"), wherein the second indication message is configured for a user equipment (UE) to determine a second random access resource which is used when resource fallback is performed (¶138 & Fig. 2 (Step 2) & ¶139-144, Wu discloses that the RAR, comprising the FI, configures the UE to determine another resource corresponding to another RACH procedure), wherein the second indication message is configured to indicate a resource selection index or to configure the second random access resource (¶138 & Fig. 2 (Step 2) & ¶190, Wu discloses that the RAR, comprising the FI, configures the UE to determine another resource for retransmission of MSGA/MSG1/preamble on a Physical Uplink Shared Channel (PUSCH)), wherein sending the second indication message comprises one of:
sending a random access response message carrying the second indication message (¶138 & Fig. 2 (Step 2) & ¶139-144, Wu discloses transmitting, by the BS to the UE, a random access response (RAR) or MSGB comprising a fallback indicator (FI) where the fallback indicator is an indication of the fallback probability of the UE successfully transmitting MSGA); or
sending a radio resource control (RRC) message carrying the second indication message (Examiner notes that the use of “or” and “and/or” has a broadest reasonable interpretation of any element in the list that follows or any of those elements taken together. See Ex Parte Gross, Appeal 2011-004811, Application No. 11/565,411. Thus, Examiner has not treated all limitations separated by “and/or” and “or”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Claim 35 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray in further view of Jung by requiring that [the random access method] further comprising: sending a second indication message, wherein the second indication message is configured for a user equipment (UE) to determine a second random access resource which is used when resource fallback is performed, wherein the second indication message is configured to indicate a resource selection index or to configure the second random access resource, wherein sending the second indication message comprises sending a random access response message carrying the second indication message as taught by Wu because power consumption of the UE may be reduced, and the waste of system resources may be reduced by directly transmitting uplink data via the RACH procedure without an RRC connection (Wu, Abstract).
Regarding Claim 31, Claim 35 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray in further view of Jung discloses the random access method of claim 22.
However, Claim 35 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray in further view of Jung does not disclose [the random access method] further comprising: sending a random access resource fallback indication message, wherein sending the random access resource fallback indication message comprises one of: sending a random access response message carrying the random access resource fallback indication message; or sending a radio resource control (RRC) message carrying the random access resource fallback indication message.
Wu, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches [the random access method] further comprising:
sending a random access resource fallback indication message (¶138 & Fig. 2 (Step 2) & ¶139-144, Wu discloses transmitting, by the BS to the UE, a fallback indicator (FI). Examiner correlates the FI of the MSGB/RAR to "a random access resource fallback indication message"), wherein sending the random access resource fallback indication message comprises one of:
sending a random access response message carrying the random access resource fallback indication message (¶138 & Fig. 2 (Step 2) & ¶139-144, Wu discloses transmitting, by the BS to the UE, a random access response (RAR) or MSGB comprising a fallback indicator (FI) where the fallback indicator is an indication of the fallback probability of the UE successfully transmitting MSGA); or
sending a radio resource control (RRC) message carrying the random access resource fallback indication message (Examiner notes that the use of “or” and “and/or” has a broadest reasonable interpretation of any element in the list that follows or any of those elements taken together. See Ex Parte Gross, Appeal 2011-004811, Application No. 11/565,411. Thus, Examiner has not treated all limitations separated by “and/or” and “or”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Claim 35 of the ‘013 Application in view of Murray in further view of Jung by sending a random access response message carrying the random access resource fallback indication message as taught by Wu because power consumption of the UE may be reduced, and the waste of system resources may be reduced by directly transmitting uplink data via the RACH procedure without an RRC connection (Wu, Abstract).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 12, 17, 19, 20, 28, 33, 35, and 36 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC NOWLIN whose telephone number is (313)446-6544. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12:00PM-10:00PM.
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, Michael Thier can be reached at (571) 272-2832. 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.
/ERIC NOWLIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2474