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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/31/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, applicant argues that “As acknowledged on page 4 of the Office Action, "Xue does not explicitly disclose receive, from the at least one network entity, a request for a location of the non-network connection entity," and the Office Action relies on TS 23.167 to cure this deficiency. Applicant respectfully disagrees and submits that TS 23.167 fails to remedy the defects in Xue with respect to independent claim 1 … However, nowhere in TS 23.167 is there any teaching or suggestion of "receive, from the at least one network entity, a request for a location of the non-network connection entity," as in independent claim 1. Accordingly, TS 23.167 does not remedy the deficiencies of Xue with respect to independent claim 1. Thus, Xue and TS 23.167, whether taken alone or in combination, fail to teach or suggest all the features of independent claim 1. The Office Action does not identify, and Applicant is unable to discern, how TR 23.771 or Davydov discloses or suggests the above recitations of claim 1. Thus, TR 23.771 or Davydov, whether taken individually or in combination with Xue and TS 23.167 discussed above, fails to disclose, teach, or suggest all the features of claim 1” in pages 9-10.
In response to the applicant’s argument, examiner respectfully disagrees with the argument above.
TS 23.167, pages 31-32, Figure 7.6.1, at step 10b2, discloses UE receives, from IMS Core, a request for a location of a non-network connection entity.
PNG
media_image1.png
648
593
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
261
733
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In view of the above response, the combined system of Xue and TS 23.167 discloses all the features of independent claims 1, 13, 14, and 30.
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 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:
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.
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, 5-7, 10-11, 13-20, 24-26, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xue et al. (US 8,718,596 B1, hereinafter “Xue”) in view of (3GPP TS 23.167: “3rd Generation Partnership Project, Technical Specification Group Services and System Aspects, IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) emergency sessions (Release 17), V17.0.0 (2021-03), hereinafter “TS 23.167”).
Regarding claims 1 and 13, Xue discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) [see Fig. 1, col. 2 line 48 to col. 4 line 44, Fig. 7, col. 9 lines 13-60; wireless device 130], comprising:
at least one memory [see Fig. 7, col. 9 lines 13-60; storage system 740];
a transceiver [see Fig. 7, col. 9 lines 13-60; communication interface 720]; and
at least one processor, communicatively connected to the at least one memory and the transceiver [see Fig. 7, col. 9 lines 13-60; processing system 730 communicatively connected to the storage system and the communication interface], the at least one processor configured to:
establish a connection with at least one network entity and a non-network connection entity [see Fig. 1, 4; see Fig. 2, col. 4 line 45 to col. 5 line 6; see Fig. 3, col. 5 lines 7-38; see Fig. 5, col. 8 lines 8-39; establish a connection with at least one network entity (wide area cellular network comprising call processing system 421, customer information system 460, emergency service system 450) and a non-network connection entity (local area wireless network comprising access point)];
transmit, to the at least one network entity, an identifier (ID) of the non-network connection entity when connected to the at least one network entity [see Fig. 4, col. 7 lines 57-62; see Fig. 5, col. 8 lines 17-25; transmit, to call processing system 421, access point identifier associated with the access point]; and
transmit, to the at least one network entity, an indication of location information for the non-network connection entity [see Fig. 2, col. 5 lines 1-3; see Fig. 3, col. 5 lines 28-34; transmit, to the wide area cellular network 120, location information associated with the access point identifier].
Xue does not explicitly disclose receive, from the at least one network entity, a request for a location of the non-network connection entity.
However, TS 23.167 teaches receive, from at least one network entity, a request for a location of a non-network connection entity [see pages 30-32, section 7.6.1, Figure 7.6.1, step 10b2; UE receives, from IMS Core, a request for a location of a non-network connection entity].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “receive, from at least one network entity, a request for a location of a non-network connection entity”, as taught by TS 23.167, into the system of Xue so that it would acquire location information from the UE [see TS 23.167, section 7.6.1].
Regarding claims 14 and 30, Xue discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a network entity [see Fig. 1, col. 2 line 48 to col. 4 line 44, Fig. 7, col. 9 lines 13-60; call processing system], comprising:
at least one memory [see Fig. 7, col. 9 lines 13-60; storage system 740];
a transceiver [see Fig. 7, col. 9 lines 13-60; communication interface 720]; and
at least one processor, communicatively connected to the at least one memory and the transceiver [see Fig. 7, col. 9 lines 13-60; processing system 730 communicatively connected to the storage system and the communication interface], the at least one processor configured to:
establish a connection with at least one UE [see Fig. 1, 4; see Fig. 2, col. 4 line 45 to col. 5 line 6; see Fig. 3, col. 5 lines 7-38; see Fig. 5, col. 8 lines 8-39; establish a connection with a wireless device];
receive, from the at least one UE, an identifier (ID) of a non-network connection entity connected to the at least one UE [see Fig. 4, col. 7 lines 57-62; see Fig. 5, col. 8 lines 17-25; receive, from the wireless device, access point identifier associated with the access point];
receive, from the at least one UE, an indication of location information for the non-network connection entity [see Fig. 2, col. 5 lines 1-3; see Fig. 3, col. 5 lines 28-34; receive, from the wireless device, location information associated with the access point identifier]; and
update, based on the received indication, a mapping table between the ID of the non-network connection entity and the location information for the non-network connection entity [see col. 6 lines 12-26, col. 6 line 59 to col. 7 line 13, col. 7 lines 38-46; update, based on the location information, a file, document, or records between the access point identifier and the location information of the access point].
Xue does not explicitly disclose transmit, to the at least one UE, a request for a location of the non-network connection entity.
However, TS 23.167 teaches transmit, to a UE, a request for a location of a non-network connection entity [see pages 30-32, section 7.6.1, Figure 7.6.1, step 10b2; IMS Core transmits, to a UE, a request for a location of a non-network connection entity].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “transmit, to a UE, a request for a location of a non-network connection entity”, as taught by TS 23.167, into the system of Xue so that it would acquire location information from the UE [see TS 23.167, section 7.6.1].
Regarding claims 5 and 24, Xue discloses wherein the non-network connection entity is a wireless local area network (WLAN) access point (AP) [see Fig. 1, col. 2 line 48 col. 3 line 11; see Fig. 4, col. 5 lines 39-67; WLAN AP].
Regarding claims 6 and 25, Xue discloses wherein the ID is an access point name (APN) or an APN ID that is associated with the WLAN AP [see Fig. 4, col. 7 lines 57-62; see Fig. 5, col. 8 lines 17-25; the ID is an access point identifier that is associated with the WLAN AP].
Regarding claims 7 and 26, Xue discloses wherein the APN ID includes at least one of a service set identifier (SSID), a basic service set identifier (BSSID), or a line identifier (LID) [see col. 2 lines 27-38; SSID].
Regarding claim 10, Xue discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: transmit, to the at least one network entity, a request for an emergency service [see Fig. 2, col. 4 line 45 to col. 5 line 6; see Fig. 3, col. 5 lines 7-38; see Fig. 4, col. 5 line 47 to col. 8 line 7, see Fig. 5, col. 8 lines 8-39; transmit, to the wide area cellular network, 911 call signaling].
Regarding claim 11, Xue discloses wherein the request for the emergency service includes a location information of the UE [see Fig. 2, col. 4 line 45 to col. 5 line 6; see Fig. 3, col. 5 lines 7-38; see Fig. 4, col. 5 line 47 to col. 8 line 7, see Fig. 5, col. 8 lines 8-39; the 911 call signaling includes a location information of the wireless device].
Regarding claim 15, Xue discloses wherein the at least one processor [see Fig. 7, col. 9 lines 13-60; processing system 730] is further configured to: maintain the mapping table between the ID of the non-network connection entity and location information for the non-network connection entity [see col. 6 lines 12-26, col. 6 line 59 to col. 7 line 13, col. 7 lines 38-46; maintain the file, document, or records between the access point identifier and the location information of the access point].
Regarding claim 16, Xue discloses wherein the location associated with the non-network connection entity is determined based at least in part on the ID of the non-network connection entity [see Fig. 2, col. 4 line 45 to col. 5 line 6; see Fig. 3, col. 5 lines 7-38; see Fig. 5, col. 8 lines 8-39; the location associated with the access point is determined based on the access point identifier].
Regarding claim 17, Xue discloses wherein the mapping table includes at least the ID, the location information for the non-network connection entity, and an age of the location information [see Fig. 2, col. 4 line 45 to col. 5 line 6; see Fig. 3, col. 5 lines 7-38; see Fig. 4, col. 5 line 47 to col. 8 line 7, see Fig. 5, col. 8 lines 8-39; the file, document, or records includes the ID, the location information for the access point, and an age of the location information].
Regarding claim 18, Xue discloses wherein the at least one processor [see Fig. 7, col. 9 lines 13-60; processing system 730] is further configured to: receive, from the at least one UE, a request for an emergency service; and determine the location of the at least one UE based on the mapping table [see Fig. 2, col. 4 line 45 to col. 5 line 6; see Fig. 3, col. 5 lines 7-38; see Fig. 4, col. 5 line 47 to col. 8 line 7, see Fig. 5, col. 8 lines 8-39; receive, from the wireless device, 911 call signaling; and determine the location of the wireless device based on the file, document, or records].
Regarding claim 19, Xue discloses wherein the at least one processor [see Fig. 7, col. 9 lines 13-60; processing system 730] is further configured to: output the location of the at least one UE that connected to the non-network connection entity, when the emergency service is triggered, and no other method of location of the at least one UE is available [see Fig. 2, col. 4 line 45 to col. 5 line 6; see Fig. 3, col. 5 lines 7-38; see Fig. 4, col. 5 line 47 to col. 8 line 7, see Fig. 5, col. 8 lines 8-39; output the location information of the wireless device that connected to the access point when the 911 call signaling is triggered].
Regarding claim 20, Xue discloses wherein the at least one processor [see Fig. 7, col. 9 lines 13-60; processing system 730] is further configured to: determine a public-safety answering point (PSAP) for the at least one UE based on the mapping table [see col. 1, lines 6-32, col. 2 lines 27-39; see Fig. 2, col. 4 line 45 to col. 5 line 6; see Fig. 3, col. 5 lines 7-38; see Fig. 5, col. 8 lines 8-39; determining a public safety answering points (PSAP) for the wireless device based on the file, document, or records].
Claims 2-4, 8-9, 21-23, and 27-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xue in view of TS 23.167 and (3GPP TR 23.771: "3rd Generation Partnership Project, Technical Specification Group Services and System Aspects, Study on System Impacts of IMS Emergency Sessions Over WLAN (Release 13)", V2.0.0, 23771-200, 3rd Generation Partnership Project, Mobile Competence Centre, 650, Route Des Lucioles, F-06921 Sophia-Antipolis Cedex, France, pp. 1-64, 8 June 2016, XP051115876, page 17 – page 20, figures 6.8-1 - 6.8-2, page 50, hereinafter “TR 23.771”).
Regarding claims 2 and 21, Xue does not explicitly disclose wherein the at least one network entity includes at least one of a 5G Core (5GC) network or an IP multimedia subsystem (IMS).
However, TR 23.771 teaches a network entity includes at least one of a 5G Core (5GC) network or an IP multimedia subsystem (IMS) [see pages 17-20, Fig. 6.8-1, 6.8-2; a network entity includes IMS Core].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “a network entity includes at least one of a 5G Core (5GC) network or an IP multimedia subsystem (IMS)”, as taught by TR 23.771, into the combined system of Xue and TS 23.167 so that it would provide IMS emergency calls with WLAN access [see TR 23.771, page 17].
Regarding claims 3 and 22, Xue does not explicitly disclose wherein the 5GC network or the IMS is associated with at least one of a proxy-call session control function (P-CSCF), a gateway mobile location center (GMLC), a location retrieval function (LRF), or an application server (AS).
However, TR 23.771 teaches the 5GC network or the IMS is associated with at least one of a proxy-call session control function (P-CSCF), a gateway mobile location center (GMLC), a location retrieval function (LRF), or an application server (AS) [see pages 17-20, Fig. 6.8-1, 6.8-2; the IMS Core is associated with P-CSCF, GMLC, LRF, PCRF].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “the 5GC network or the IMS is associated with at least one of a proxy-call session control function (P-CSCF), a gateway mobile location center (GMLC), a location retrieval function (LRF), or an application server (AS)”, as taught by TR 23.771, into the combined system of Xue and TS 23.167 so that it would provide IMS emergency calls with WLAN access [see TR 23.771, page 17].
Regarding claim 4, Xue does not explicitly disclose wherein to transmit the ID of the non-network connection entity, the at least one processor is configured to transmit the ID of the non-network connection entity to the P-CSCF in IMS signaling at IMS registration, IMS emergency registration, IMS session initiation, or short message service (SMS) over IP procedures.
However, TR 23.771 teaches the ID of the non-network connection entity is transmitted to the P-CSCF in IMS signaling at IMS registration, IMS emergency registration, IMS session initiation, or short message service (SMS) over IP procedures [see pages 16-20, Fig. 6.8-1, 6.8-2; the ID of the access point is transmitted to the P-CSCF in IMS signaling at IMS registration, IMS emergency registration, IMS session initiation, or short message service (SMS) over IP procedures].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “the ID of the non-network connection entity is transmitted to the P-CSCF in IMS signaling at IMS registration, IMS emergency registration, IMS session initiation, or short message service (SMS) over IP procedures”, as taught by TR 23.771, into the combined system of Xue and TS 23.167 so that it would provide IMS emergency calls with WLAN access [see TR 23.771, page 17].
Regarding claim 23, Xue does not explicitly disclose wherein to receive the ID of the non-network connection entity, the at least one processor is configured to receive the ID of the non-network connection entity via the P-CSCF in IMS signaling at IMS registration, IMS emergency registration, IMS session initiation, or short message service (SMS) over IP procedures.
However, TR 23.771 teaches the ID of the non-network connection entity is received via the P-CSCF in IMS signaling at IMS registration, IMS emergency registration, IMS session initiation, or short message service (SMS) over IP procedures [see pages 16-20, Fig. 6.8-1, 6.8-2; the ID of the access point is transmitted to the P-CSCF in IMS signaling at IMS registration, IMS emergency registration, IMS session initiation, or short message service (SMS) over IP procedures].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “the ID of the non-network connection entity is received via the P-CSCF in IMS signaling at IMS registration, IMS emergency registration, IMS session initiation, or short message service (SMS) over IP procedures”, as taught by TR 23.771, into the combined system of Xue and TS 23.167 so that it would provide IMS emergency calls with WLAN access [see TR 23.771, page 17].
Regarding claim 8, Xue does not explicitly disclose wherein the non-network connection entity provides the UE with a non-3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) access, and wherein to transmit the ID of the non-network connection entity, the at least one processor is configured to transmit the ID of the non-network connection entity to a non-3GPP interworking function (N3IWF) when the at least one UE establishes a protocol data unit (PDU) session via the N3IWF.
However, TR 23.771 teaches a non-network connection entity provides a UE with a non-3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) access, and wherein the ID of the non-network connection entity is transmitted to a non-3GPP interworking function when the UE establishes a protocol data unit (PDU) session via the non-3GPP interworking function [see pages 16-20, Fig. 6.8-1, 6.8-2; a non-network connection entity provides a UE with a non-3GPP access, and wherein the TWAN ID is received via a non-3GPP interworking function when the UE establishes a PDU session via the non-3GPP interworking function].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “a non-network connection entity provides a UE with a non-3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) access, and wherein the ID of the non-network connection entity is transmitted to a non-3GPP interworking function when the UE establishes a protocol data unit (PDU) session via the non-3GPP interworking function”, as taught by TR 23.771, into the combined system of Xue and TS 23.167 so that it would provide IMS emergency calls with WLAN access [see TR 23.771, page 17].
Regarding claim 27, Xue does not explicitly disclose wherein the non-network connection entity provides the UE with a non-3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) access, and wherein to receive the ID of the non-network connection entity, the at least one processor is configured to receive the ID of the non-network connection entity via a non-3GPP interworking function (N3IWF) when the at least one UE establishes a protocol data unit (PDU) session via the N3IWF.
However, TR 23.771 teaches a non-network connection entity provides a UE with a non-3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) access, and wherein the ID of the non-network connection entity is received via a non-3GPP interworking function when the UE establishes a protocol data unit (PDU) session via the non-3GPP interworking function [see pages 16-20, Fig. 6.8-1, 6.8-2; a non-network connection entity provides a UE with a non-3GPP access, and wherein the TWAN ID is received via a non-3GPP interworking function when the UE establishes a PDU session via the non-3GPP interworking function].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “a non-network connection entity provides a UE with a non-3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) access, and wherein the ID of the non-network connection entity is received via a non-3GPP interworking function when the UE establishes a protocol data unit (PDU) session via the non-3GPP interworking function”, as taught by TR 23.771, into the combined system of Xue and TS 23.167 so that it would provide IMS emergency calls with WLAN access [see TR 23.771, page 17].
Regarding claim 9, Xue does not explicitly disclose wherein to transmit the ID, the at least one processor is configured to transmit the ID in an Internet key exchange (IKE) authorization request message associated with the PDU session establishment.
However, TR 23.771 teaches wherein the ID is transmitted in an Internet key exchange (IKE) authorization request message associated with the PDU session establishment [see pages 16-20, 25, 42, 44, 46, 50-51, Fig. 6.8-1, 6.8-2; Network Initiated IKE-based WiFi Query for on-demand UE Location mid-emergency session].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “wherein the ID is transmitted in an Internet key exchange (IKE) authorization request message associated with the PDU session establishment”, as taught by TR 23.771, into the combined system of Xue and TS 23.167 so that it would provide IMS emergency calls with WLAN access [see TR 23.771, page 17].
Regarding claim 28, Xue does not explicitly disclose wherein to receive the ID, the at least one processor is configured to receive the ID in an Internet key exchange (IKE) authorization request message associated with the PDU session establishment.
However, TR 23.771 teaches wherein the ID is received in an Internet key exchange (IKE) authorization request message associated with the PDU session establishment [see pages 16-20, 25, 42, 44, 46, 50-51, Fig. 6.8-1, 6.8-2; Network Initiated IKE-based WiFi Query for on-demand UE Location mid-emergency session].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “wherein the ID is received in an Internet key exchange (IKE) authorization request message associated with the PDU session establishment”, as taught by TR 23.771, into the combined system of Xue and TS 23.167 so that it would provide IMS emergency calls with WLAN access [see TR 23.771, page 17].
Regarding claim 29, Xue does not explicitly disclose wherein to receive the ID of the non-network connection entity, the at least one processor is configured to receive the ID of the non-network connection entity from a trusted wireless local area network (WLAN) access network (TWAN) in a TWAN identifier.
However, TR 23.771 teaches the ID of the non-network connection entity is received from a trusted wireless local area network (WLAN) access network (TWAN) in a TWAN identifier [see pages 16-20, Fig. 6.8-1, 6.8-2; the ID of the access point is received from a TWAN in a TWAN ID].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “the ID of the non-network connection entity is received from a trusted wireless local area network (WLAN) access network (TWAN) in a TWAN identifier”, as taught by TR 23.771, into the combined system of Xue and TS 23.167 so that it would provide IMS emergency calls with WLAN access [see TR 23.771, page 17].
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xue in view of TS 23.167 and Davydov et al. (US 2016/0037301 A1, hereinafter “Davydov”).
Regarding claim 12, Xue does not explicitly disclose a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) receiver, wherein the location information is determined, at least in part, using the GNSS receiver.
However, Davydov teaches a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) receiver, wherein the location information is determined, at least in part, using the GNSS receiver [see para. 40-41; location capabilities 208 includes information regarding the UE’s 102 capability to measure signals from and/or attach to APs 160 and eNBs 104. The UE 102 and location server 170 may be configured to determine a location of the UE 102. LTE based location services may include Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS); UE 102 and location server 170 may be configured for two types of GNSS; assisted-GNSS (A-GNSS), the UE 102 is a basic satellite receiver and sends the measurements 206 of the satellite signals 154 to the location server 170, which determines an estimate location 210 of the UE 102].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide “a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) receiver, wherein the location information is determined, at least in part, using the GNSS receiver”, as taught by Davydov, into the combined system of Xue and TS 23.167 so that it would determine a location of the UE [see Davydov, para. 41].
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 BRIAN T LE whose telephone number is (571)270-5615. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9AM-6PM.
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, JAE LEE can be reached on 571-270-3936. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BRIAN T LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2469
Prosecution Insights