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 Claims
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on January 07, 2026. Claims 1-7 and 10-11 have been amended, claims 8-9 are canceled, claim 12 is added new. Claims 1-7 and 10-12 are presently pending and are presented for examination.
Response to Amendments
In response to the Amendments dated January 07, 2026, the Examiner withdraws the prior art rejections.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 07, 2026 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to ATA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-7 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0273065 (hereinafter, "Sellhusen"; previously of record), in view of U.S. Pub. No. 2010/0171628 (hereinafter, "Stansfield"; newly of record), and in further view of U.S. Pub. No. 2017/0050599 (hereinafter, "Gilbert"; newly of record).
Regarding claim 1, Sellhusen discloses a driving assistance device for a moving body, comprising:
a memory (“A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium that stores a computer program for detecting an unsecured load in a vehicle” (claim 8)); and
a processor connected to the memory (“a computer program is provided which comprises commands which, when the computer program is executed by a computer or a controller” (para 0016)) and that:
acquires travel information including acceleration of the moving body (“measurement data in the form of lateral accelerations and/or longitudinal accelerations acquired by at least one acceleration sensor are received. Here, acceleration data of the vehicle are acquired” (para 0007)); and
presents, to the moving body, information regarding cargo collapse on the moving body … (“generate a response to a determined unsecured load 14. A response can be realized, for example, in the form of a warning message” (para 0043) and “a teleoperator of the vehicle or of a vehicle fleet can be notified by the controller if an unsecured or loose load has been registered in at least one vehicle” (para 0026));
However, Sellhusen does not explicitly teach
… that is specified on a basis of a distribution of an acceleration of the moving body in multiple axes
in a predetermined unit time on a basis of the travel information.
Stansfield, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
that is specified on a basis of a distribution of an acceleration of the moving body in multiple axes (“A sensor system 141 is provided at the input of the motion classification device 14 to monitor movements of the cargo container 12. As shown in FIG. 3, the sensor system 141 takes the form of a three-axis motion sensor 160, a vibration unit (not shown) is also implemented to provide a direct measure of acceleration along three orthogonal axes” (para 0054)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Sellhusen with the teachings of Stansfield in order to monitor movements based on acceleration along three orthogonal axes; see Stansfield at least at [0054].
Gilbert, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
distribution of an acceleration of the moving body in multiple axes in a predetermined unit time on a basis of the travel information (“provide a quantitative measure of the one-, two, or three-dimensional acceleration profile of a vehicle over a predetermined period of time” (para 0085) and “the motion sensor data may be associated with a plurality of different events that occur while the vehicle is being driven” (para 0088)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Sellhusen with the teachings of Gilbert in order to provide a quantitative measure of the one-, two, or three-dimensional acceleration profile of a vehicle over a predetermined period of time; see Gilbert at least at [0085].
Regarding claim 2, Sellhusen discloses and Engelhard teaches the driving assistance device according to claim 1. Additionally, Sellhusen discloses wherein the processor further extracts information regarding a lateral direction component of the acceleration of the moving body (“measurement data in the form of lateral accelerations and/or longitudinal accelerations acquired by at least one acceleration sensor are received” (para 0007)) … and
specifies the information regarding the cargo collapse on the moving body on a basis of the extracted information regarding the lateral direction component of the acceleration of the moving body (“The detection of events during the time interval is no longer limited to the measurement data of the acceleration sensor. Here, different sensors such as microphones, travel sensors of the chassis, sensors of an air suspension and the like can be used to determine events during the time interval. During the activated time interval, the derivatives with respect to time of the received measurement data are used in order to trigger and count events. Here, the derivatives with respect to time of the measurement data provide the differences between the measurement data of two successive points in time and correspond to a tangent gradient of the measurement data plotted in a diagram against time at the respective point in time” (para 0013));
However, Sellhusen does not explicitly teach
from the distribution of the acceleration of the moving body in multiple axes in the predetermined unit time on the basis of the travel information.
Stansfield, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
from the distribution of the acceleration of the moving body in multiple axes (“A sensor system 141 is provided at the input of the motion classification device 14 to monitor movements of the cargo container 12. As shown in FIG. 3, the sensor system 141 takes the form of a three-axis motion sensor 160, a vibration unit (not shown) is also implemented to provide a direct measure of acceleration along three orthogonal axes” (para 0054)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Sellhusen with the teachings of Stansfield in order to monitor movements based on acceleration along three orthogonal axes; see Stansfield at least at [0054].
Gilbert, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
distribution of the acceleration of the moving body in multiple axes in the predetermined unit time on the basis of the travel information (“provide a quantitative measure of the one-, two, or three-dimensional acceleration profile of a vehicle over a predetermined period of time” (para 0085) and “the motion sensor data may be associated with a plurality of different events that occur while the vehicle is being driven” (para 0088)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Sellhusen with the teachings of Gilbert in order to provide a quantitative measure of the one-, two, or three-dimensional acceleration profile of a vehicle over a predetermined period of time; see Gilbert at least at [0085].
Regarding claim 3, Sellhusen discloses and Engelhard teaches the driving assistance device according to claim 1. Additionally, Sellhusen discloses wherein:
the processor further extracts information regarding a lateral direction component of the acceleration of the moving body in which weighting is performed in a front-back direction component of the acceleration of the moving body (“measurement data in the form of lateral accelerations and/or longitudinal accelerations acquired by at least one acceleration sensor are received. Here, acceleration data of the vehicle are acquired” (para 0007) and “In the context of a subsequent evaluation of the measurement data of the acceleration sensor, it is checked whether the measured lateral accelerations or longitudinal accelerations exceed a threshold value. If it is determined that the threshold value has been exceeded, a time interval for detecting the unsecured load is started” (para 0008)) ...; and specifies the information regarding the cargo collapse on the moving body on the basis of the extracted information regarding the lateral direction component of the acceleration of the moving body in which weighting is performed in the front-back direction component of the acceleration of the moving body (“The detection of events during the time interval is no longer limited to the measurement data of the acceleration sensor. Here, different sensors such as microphones, travel sensors of the chassis, sensors of an air suspension and the like can be used to determine events during the time interval. During the activated time interval, the derivatives with respect to time of the received measurement data are used in order to trigger and count events. Here, the derivatives with respect to time of the measurement data provide the differences between the measurement data of two successive points in time and correspond to a tangent gradient of the measurement data plotted in a diagram against time at the respective point in time” (para 0013));
However, Sellhusen does not explicitly teach
from the distribution of the acceleration of the moving body in the multiple axes in the predetermined unit time on the basis of the travel information.
Stansfield, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
from the distribution of the acceleration of the moving body in the multiple axes (“A sensor system 141 is provided at the input of the motion classification device 14 to monitor movements of the cargo container 12. As shown in FIG. 3, the sensor system 141 takes the form of a three-axis motion sensor 160, a vibration unit (not shown) is also implemented to provide a direct measure of acceleration along three orthogonal axes” (para 0054)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Sellhusen with the teachings of Stansfield in order to monitor movements based on acceleration along three orthogonal axes; see Stansfield at least at [0054].
Gilbert, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
distribution of the acceleration of the moving body in the multiple axes in the predetermined unit time on the basis of the travel information (“provide a quantitative measure of the one-, two, or three-dimensional acceleration profile of a vehicle over a predetermined period of time” (para 0085) and “the motion sensor data may be associated with a plurality of different events that occur while the vehicle is being driven” (para 0088)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Sellhusen with the teachings of Gilbert in order to provide a quantitative measure of the one-, two, or three-dimensional acceleration profile of a vehicle over a predetermined period of time; see Gilbert at least at [0085].
Regarding claim 4, Sellhusen discloses and Engelhard teaches the driving assistance device according to claim 1. Additionally, Sellhusen discloses wherein:
the processor specifies the information regarding the cargo collapse on the moving body on the basis of the extracted information regarding the deviation of the acceleration of the moving body in which the time sequence information is taken into account (“The detection of events during the time interval is no longer limited to the measurement data of the acceleration sensor. Here, different sensors such as microphones, travel sensors of the chassis, sensors of an air suspension and the like can be used to determine events during the time interval. During the activated time interval, the derivatives with respect to time of the received measurement data are used in order to trigger and count events. Here, the derivatives with respect to time of the measurement data provide the differences between the measurement data of two successive points in time and correspond to a tangent gradient of the measurement data plotted in a diagram against time at the respective point in time” (para 0013));
However, Sellhusen does not explicitly teach
the processor further extracts information regarding a deviation of the acceleration of the moving body in which time sequence information is taken into account from the distribution of the acceleration of the moving body in the multiple axes in the predetermined unit time on the basis of the travel information.
Stansfield, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
the processor further extracts information regarding a deviation of the acceleration of the moving body (“a set of 3 statistical coefficients (.sigma., .mu..sub.3* and .mu..sub.4*) will be associated with each "spectral modulation gram" for each of the three axes, along with the overall standard deviation” (para 0075)) in which time sequence information is taken into account (“determine statistics of said output motion signals over a period of time” (para 0028)) from the distribution of the acceleration of the moving body in the multiple axes … (“A sensor system 141 is provided at the input of the motion classification device 14 to monitor movements of the cargo container 12. As shown in FIG. 3, the sensor system 141 takes the form of a three-axis motion sensor 160, a vibration unit (not shown) is also implemented to provide a direct measure of acceleration along three orthogonal axes” (para 0054)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Sellhusen with the teachings of Stansfield in order to monitor movements based on acceleration along three orthogonal axes; see Stansfield at least at [0054];
Gilbert, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
… distribution of the acceleration of the moving body in the multiple axes in the predetermined unit time on the basis of the travel information (“provide a quantitative measure of the one-, two, or three-dimensional acceleration profile of a vehicle over a predetermined period of time” (para 0085) and “the motion sensor data may be associated with a plurality of different events that occur while the vehicle is being driven” (para 0088)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Sellhusen with the teachings of Gilbert in order to provide a quantitative measure of the one-, two, or three-dimensional acceleration profile of a vehicle over a predetermined period of time; see Gilbert at least at [0085].
Regarding claim 5, Sellhusen discloses and Engelhard teaches the driving assistance device according to claim 1. Additionally, Sellhusen discloses wherein:
the processor further extracts information regarding a degree of distortion of the acceleration of the moving body at a most recent predetermined time… (“The measurement of kinetic pulses of a load during a defined period of time or during the time interval thus prevents false positive results” (para 0011) and “when the threshold value is exceeded by the lateral acceleration, the time interval is initiated with a start time with a time offset” (para 0020)); and
specifies the information regarding the cargo collapse on the moving body on the basis of the extracted information regarding the degree of the distortion of the acceleration of the moving body at the most recent predetermined time (“evaluation of the measurement data of the acceleration sensor, it is checked whether the measured lateral accelerations or longitudinal accelerations exceed a threshold value. If it is determined that the threshold value has been exceeded, a time interval for detecting the unsecured load is started” (para 0008));
However, Sellhusen does not explicitly teach
… from the distribution of the acceleration of the moving body in the multiple axes in the predetermined unit time on the basis of the travel information.
Stansfield, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
from the distribution of the acceleration of the moving body in the multiple axes (“A sensor system 141 is provided at the input of the motion classification device 14 to monitor movements of the cargo container 12. As shown in FIG. 3, the sensor system 141 takes the form of a three-axis motion sensor 160, a vibration unit (not shown) is also implemented to provide a direct measure of acceleration along three orthogonal axes” (para 0054)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Sellhusen with the teachings of Stansfield in order to monitor movements based on acceleration along three orthogonal axes; see Stansfield at least at [0054].
Gilbert, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
distribution of the acceleration of the moving body in the multiple axes in the predetermined unit time on the basis of the travel information (“provide a quantitative measure of the one-, two, or three-dimensional acceleration profile of a vehicle over a predetermined period of time” (para 0085) and “the motion sensor data may be associated with a plurality of different events that occur while the vehicle is being driven” (para 0088)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Sellhusen with the teachings of Gilbert in order to provide a quantitative measure of the one-, two, or three-dimensional acceleration profile of a vehicle over a predetermined period of time; see Gilbert at least at [0085].
Regarding claim 6, Sellhusen discloses and Engelhard teaches the driving assistance device according to claim 1. Additionally, Sellhusen discloses further comprising wherein:
the processor further extracts information regarding a moment to be added to a cargo loaded on the moving body from the travel information (“when the minimum number of counted events that are counted during the started time interval is reached, the vehicle is brought to a safe state and/or vehicle dynamics are reduced. Depending on the design of the vehicle and the load, a reduction in the vehicle dynamics can already be sufficient to ensure safe transport” (para 0028)); and specifies the information regarding the cargo collapse on the moving body on a basis of the extracted information regarding the moment to be added to the cargo loaded on the moving body (“evaluation of the measurement data of the acceleration sensor, it is checked whether the measured lateral accelerations or longitudinal accelerations exceed a threshold value. If it is determined that the threshold value has been exceeded, a time interval for detecting the unsecured load is started” (para 0008)).
Regarding claim 7, Sellhusen discloses and Engelhard teaches the driving assistance device according to claim 1. However, Sellhusen does not explicitly teach wherein the processor acquires the travel information from a three axes acceleration sensor located inside the moving body.
Stansfield, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
wherein the processor acquires the travel information from a three axes acceleration sensor (“A sensor system 141 is provided at the input of the motion classification device 14 to monitor movements of the cargo container 12. As shown in FIG. 3, the sensor system 141 takes the form of a three-axis motion sensor 160, a vibration unit (not shown) is also implemented to provide a direct measure of acceleration along three orthogonal axes” (para 0054)) located inside the moving body (“the three axes acceleration sensor 5 is not limited to a case of being mounted in the vehicle” (para 0069)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Sellhusen with the teachings of Stansfield in order to monitor movements based on acceleration along three orthogonal axes; see Stansfield at least at [0054].
Regarding claim 10, Sellhusen discloses a driving assistance method executed by a driving assistance device, comprising:
acquiring travel information including acceleration of a moving body (“measurement data in the form of lateral accelerations and/or longitudinal accelerations acquired by at least one acceleration sensor are received. Here, acceleration data of the vehicle are acquired” (para 0007)); and
presenting, to the moving body, information regarding a cargo collapse on the moving body … (“generate a response to a determined unsecured load 14. A response can be realized, for example, in the form of a warning message” (para 0043) and “a teleoperator of the vehicle or of a vehicle fleet can be notified by the controller if an unsecured or loose load has been registered in at least one vehicle” (para 0026)) …
However, Sellhusen does not explicitly teach
… to be specified on a basis of a distribution of an acceleration of the moving body in multiple axes in a predetermined unit time on a basis of the acquired travel information.
Stansfield, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
to be specified on a basis of a distribution of an acceleration of the moving body in multiple axes (“A sensor system 141 is provided at the input of the motion classification device 14 to monitor movements of the cargo container 12. As shown in FIG. 3, the sensor system 141 takes the form of a three-axis motion sensor 160, a vibration unit (not shown) is also implemented to provide a direct measure of acceleration along three orthogonal axes” (para 0054)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Sellhusen with the teachings of Stansfield in order to monitor movements based on acceleration along three orthogonal axes; see Stansfield at least at [0054].
Gilbert, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
a distribution of an acceleration of the moving body in multiple axes in a predetermined unit time on a basis of the acquired travel information (“provide a quantitative measure of the one-, two, or three-dimensional acceleration profile of a vehicle over a predetermined period of time” (para 0085) and “the motion sensor data may be associated with a plurality of different events that occur while the vehicle is being driven” (para 0088)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Sellhusen with the teachings of Gilbert in order to provide a quantitative measure of the one-, two, or three-dimensional acceleration profile of a vehicle over a predetermined period of time; see Gilbert at least at [0085].
Regarding claim 11, Sellhusen discloses a storage medium storing a program causing a processor to implement:
acquiring travel information including acceleration of a moving body (“measurement data in the form of lateral accelerations and/or longitudinal accelerations acquired by at least one acceleration sensor are received. Here, acceleration data of the vehicle are acquired” (para 0007)); and
presenting, to the moving body, information regarding cargo collapse on the moving body … (“generate a response to a determined unsecured load 14. A response can be realized, for example, in the form of a warning message” (para 0043) and “a teleoperator of the vehicle or of a vehicle fleet can be notified by the controller if an unsecured or loose load has been registered in at least one vehicle” (para 0026));
However, Sellhusen does not explicitly teach
… that is specified on the basis of a distribution of the acceleration of the moving body in multiple axes in a predetermined unit time on the basis of the acquired travel information.
Stansfield, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
… that is specified on the basis of a distribution of the acceleration of the moving body in multiple axes (“A sensor system 141 is provided at the input of the motion classification device 14 to monitor movements of the cargo container 12. As shown in FIG. 3, the sensor system 141 takes the form of a three-axis motion sensor 160, a vibration unit (not shown) is also implemented to provide a direct measure of acceleration along three orthogonal axes” (para 0054)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Sellhusen with the teachings of Stansfield in order to monitor movements based on acceleration along three orthogonal axes; see Stansfield at least at [0054].
Gilbert, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
a distribution of the acceleration of the moving body in multiple axes in a predetermined unit time on the basis of the acquired travel information (“provide a quantitative measure of the one-, two, or three-dimensional acceleration profile of a vehicle over a predetermined period of time” (para 0085) and “the motion sensor data may be associated with a plurality of different events that occur while the vehicle is being driven” (para 0088)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Sellhusen with the teachings of Gilbert in order to provide a quantitative measure of the one-, two, or three-dimensional acceleration profile of a vehicle over a predetermined period of time; see Gilbert at least at [0085].
Regarding claim 12, Sellhusen discloses and Engelhard teaches the driving assistance device according to claim 1. Additionally, Sellhusen discloses wherein the processor presents, to the moving body, information regarding cargo collapse on the moving body (“generate a response to a determined unsecured load 14. A response can be realized, for example, in the form of a warning message” (para 0043) and “a teleoperator of the vehicle or of a vehicle fleet can be notified by the controller if an unsecured or loose load has been registered in at least one vehicle” (para 0026)) …
However, Sellhusen does not explicitly teach
… that is specified only on the basis of the distribution of the acceleration of the moving body in the multiple axes in the predetermined unit time on the basis of the travel information.
Stansfield, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
… that is specified only on the basis of the distribution of the acceleration of the moving body in the multiple axes (“A sensor system 141 is provided at the input of the motion classification device 14 to monitor movements of the cargo container 12. As shown in FIG. 3, the sensor system 141 takes the form of a three-axis motion sensor 160, a vibration unit (not shown) is also implemented to provide a direct measure of acceleration along three orthogonal axes” (para 0054)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Sellhusen with the teachings of Stansfield in order to monitor movements based on acceleration along three orthogonal axes; see Stansfield at least at [0054].
Gilbert, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
the distribution of the acceleration of the moving body in the multiple axes in the predetermined unit time on the basis of the travel information (“provide a quantitative measure of the one-, two, or three-dimensional acceleration profile of a vehicle over a predetermined period of time” (para 0085) and “the motion sensor data may be associated with a plurality of different events that occur while the vehicle is being driven” (para 0088)).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the time of filing, would have been motivated to modify the disclosure of Sellhusen with the teachings of Gilbert in order to provide a quantitative measure of the one-, two, or three-dimensional acceleration profile of a vehicle over a predetermined period of time; see Gilbert at least at [0085].
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 extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM ALHARBI whose telephone number is (313)446-6621. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am-6:30pm.
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, Abby Flynn can be reached on (571) 272-9855. 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.
/ADAM M ALHARBI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3663