DETAILED ACTION
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.
This Office Action is in response to the amendment filed on 12/23/2025.
Claim 4 has been amended.
Claims 1-56 are pending for consideration.
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
The objection to claim 4 has been amended. Therefore, the objection has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 12/23/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on pages of the Remarks that Tsiatsis does not disclose or suggest at least the following elements/features of claim 1: "receiving one or more predicted values for one or more measurements of downlink reference signals based on measurements of previous downlink reference signals received from the base station; ... and determining whether an attacking device transmitted the received downlink reference signals based on the one or more predicted values for one or more measurements of downlink reference signals and the one or more measurements of the current downlink reference signals".
In response to the above argument, Examiner respectfully disagrees. Examiner notes that according to Applicant’s claims and specification, the one or more predicted values are not clearly defined or recited how these values are calculated. Expanding to the previous citations, Tsiatsis discloses generated indication from previous measurements of downlink reference signals that are known to be received from a base station (e.g., an imposter base station) are broadly interpreted as the one or more predicted values recited in the claims (Tsiatsis: paragraphs (36-40), (63) and (69), “to provide the network with a hint or indication that an imposter node may be present and to trigger a false base station detection campaign among a set of UEs”… “use unfiltered versions of certain measured quantities to generate an indication of a false base station in the vicinity of the UE”… “determines whether there is an indication that a first node is an imposter node based on the radio signal strength measurements. In some embodiments, determining whether there is an indication includes comparing different radio signal strength measurements that are associated with a common identifier. FIG. 13 further describes an example process for determining whether there is an indication that the first node is an imposter node based on the radio signal measurement”).
Tsiatsis further teaches detecting a presence of an imposter node (e.g., a false base station) based on past indication for one or more measurement reports of downlink reference signals which is mapped to the disputed limitation “determining whether an attacking device transmitted the received downlink reference signals based on the one or more predicted values for one or more measurements of downlink reference signals and the one or more measurements of the current downlink reference signals” (Tsiatsis: paragraphs (36-40), (63) and (69-71), “determines whether there is an indication that a node associated with the common identifier is an imposter node based on whether the standard deviation exceeds a threshold value”…“it would be beneficial to provide the network with a hint or indication that an imposter node may be present and to trigger a false base station detection campaign among a set of UEs”… “determines whether there is an indication that a first node is an imposter node based on the radio signal strength measurements. In some embodiments, determining whether there is an indication includes comparing different radio signal strength measurements that are associated with a common identifier. FIG. 13 further describes an example process for determining whether there is an indication that the first node is an imposter node based on the radio signal measurement”). For the above reasons, Tsiatsis does teach the disputed limitations. Therefore, the rejection has been maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6, 11-18, 23-34, 39-50 and 55-56 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tsiatsis et al. (US 12348967) (hereinafter Tsiatsis).
Regarding claim 1, Tsiatsis discloses a method performed by a user equipment (UE) for authenticating a connection with a base station, the method comprising:
receiving one or more predicted values for one or more measurements of downlink reference signals based on measurements of previous downlink reference signals received from the base station (Tsiatsis: paragraphs (27), (36-40), (63) and 69, “a transceiver, e.g., corresponding to portions of interface 4190 of FIG. 22 and/or portions of radio interface 4527 of FIG. 26) including a transmitter and a receiver configured to provide uplink and downlink radio communications with mobile terminals” and paragraphs (36-39), “a network can attempt to detect an imposter node using measurement reports from UEs connected to it. A network may be able to detect an imposter node since the network has the knowledge of the network topology (e.g., where each legitimate base station resides) and the network inventory”… “The radio channel can be monitored for different base station signals and their relative strength. This can allow the UE to monitor the radio environment and decide the best base station for the UE to connect to with respect to radio characteristics. When at least one false base station re-using an existing PCI is in the vicinity of the reporting UE, the false base station may not be detected since measurements are typically filtered”… “to provide the network with a hint or indication that an imposter node may be present and to trigger a false base station detection campaign among a set of UEs”… “use unfiltered versions of certain measured quantities to generate an indication of a false base station in the vicinity of the UE”… “determines whether there is an indication that a first node is an imposter node based on the radio signal strength measurements. In some embodiments, determining whether there is an indication includes comparing different radio signal strength measurements that are associated with a common identifier. FIG. 13 further describes an example process for determining whether there is an indication that the first node is an imposter node based on the radio signal measurement”);
receiving downlink reference signals (Tsiatsis: paragraphs (38-40), (63) and (69), “an imposter node may be detected based on the imposter node transmitting with a PCI of a non-existent base station in the vicinity of UEs that perform measurement reports. The imposter node can be detected by the network because the network may be aware that a base station with the specific PCI is not in the specific area”… “determines whether there is an indication that a first node is an imposter node based on the radio signal strength measurements. In some embodiments, determining whether there is an indication includes comparing different radio signal strength measurements that are associated with a common identifier. FIG. 13 further describes an example process for determining whether there is an indication that the first node is an imposter node based on the radio signal measurement”);
performing one or more measurements of the received downlink reference signals (Tsiatsis: paragraphs (38-40), (63) and (69), “The radio channel can be monitored for different base station signals and their relative strength. This can allow the UE to monitor the radio environment and decide the best base station for the UE to connect to with respect to radio characteristics. When at least one false base station re-using an existing PCI is in the vicinity of the reporting UE, the false base station may not be detected since measurements are typically filtered. In additional or alternative examples, a UE can be configured by the network to take any measurements with a specified period. The network may task the UE to periodically measure the radio characteristics and the UE can report back the measured quantities typically filtered in which case a false base station may not be detected.”… ““determines whether there is an indication that a first node is an imposter node based on the radio signal strength measurements. In some embodiments, determining whether there is an indication includes comparing different radio signal strength measurements that are associated with a common identifier. FIG. 13 further describes an example process for determining whether there is an indication that the first node is an imposter node based on the radio signal measurement”); and
determining whether an attacking device transmitted the received downlink reference signals based on the one or more predicted values for one or more measurements of downlink reference signals and the one or more measurements of the current downlink reference signals (Tsiatsis: paragraphs (39-44), “to provide the network with a hint or indication that an imposter node may be present and to trigger a false base station detection campaign among a set of UEs” …“In response to the notification of the anomaly, a CN node can initiate an additional false base station investigation that requests additional UEs to investigate the potential imposter node and provide additional measurement reports.”… ““determines whether there is an indication that a first node is an imposter node based on the radio signal strength measurements. In some embodiments, determining whether there is an indication includes comparing different radio signal strength measurements that are associated with a common identifier. FIG. 13 further describes an example process for determining whether there is an indication that the first node is an imposter node based on the radio signal measurement””).
Regarding claim 13, the claim 13 discloses a user equipment claim that is substantially equivalent to the method of claim 1. Therefore, the arguments set forth above with respect to claim 1 are equally applicable to claim 13 and rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 25, the claim 25 discloses a method claim that is substantially equivalent to the method of claim 1. Therefore, the arguments set forth above with respect to claim 1 are equally applicable to claim 25 and rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 41, the claim 41 discloses a network entity claim that is substantially equivalent to the method of claim 1. Therefore, the arguments set forth above with respect to claim 1 are equally applicable to claim 41 and rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claims 2, 14, 26 and 42, Tsiatsis discloses wherein the downlink reference signals are downlink positioning reference signals (Tsiatsis: paragraphs (27-28), “As shown, the RAN node may include transceiver circuitry 901 (also referred to as a transceiver, e.g., corresponding to portions of interface 4190 of FIG. 22 and/or portions of radio interface 4527 of FIG. 26) including a transmitter and a receiver configured to provide uplink and downlink radio communications with mobile terminals.”).
Regarding claims 3 and 15, Tsiatsis discloses further comprising sending a report to a network entity indicating a presence of the attacking device in the connection between the UE and the base station in response to a determination that the received downlink reference signals are transmitted by the attacking device (Tsiatsis: paragraphs (37-40), “The network may task the UE to periodically measure the radio characteristics and the UE can report back the measured quantities typically filtered in which case a false base station may not be detected. The network may not be able to activate these measurements for all the UEs due to the load on the UE side and due to the load on the network for the UEs to transmit the measurement reports. Therefore, it would be beneficial to provide the network with a hint or indication that an imposter node may be present and to trigger a false base station detection campaign among a set of UEs.”).
Regarding claims 4, 16, 32 and 48, Tsiatsis discloses wherein the network entity is the base station or a location server (Tsiatsis: paragraphs (36-40) and (72), “The network may task the UE to periodically measure the radio characteristics and the UE can report back the measured quantities typically filtered in which case a false base station may not be detected. The network may not be able to activate these measurements for all the UEs due to the load on the UE side and due to the load on the network for the UEs to transmit the measurement reports. Therefore, it would be beneficial to provide the network with a hint or indication that an imposter node may be present and to trigger a false base station detection campaign among a set of UEs.”… “the network inventory (e.g., number of base stations, base station identities including PCI or Cell IDs, and base station locations).”… “the network node is a RAN node (e.g., RAN node 900). In additional or alternative embodiments, the network node is a CN node (e.g., CN node 1000).”).
Regarding claims 5, 17, 33 and 49, Tsiatsis discloses wherein the one or more predicted values for the one or more measurements comprise a security set of predicted values for the one or more measurements for determining if the attacking device transmitted the received downlink reference signals and an assistance data set of predicted values for the one or more measurements for performing the one or more measurements of the received downlink reference signals (Tsiatsis: paragraphs (27) and (39), “A UE can be configured to take measurements. In some examples, a UE can take specific measurements all the time for the purpose of handover decisions. The radio channel can be monitored for different base station signals and their relative strength. This can allow the UE to monitor the radio environment and decide the best base station for the UE to connect to with respect to radio characteristics. When at least one false base station re-using an existing PCI is in the vicinity of the reporting UE, the false base station may not be detected since measurements are typically filtered”).
Regarding claims 6, 18, 34 and 50, Tsiatsis discloses wherein the one or more predicted values for one or more measurements of downlink reference signals comprises one or more expected Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP) values for the downlink reference signals (Tsiatsis: paragraphs (33-34) and (44-47), “Measurement quantities can include a Reference Signal Received Power (“RSRP”) and a Reference Signal Received Quality (“RSRQ”).”).
Regarding claims 11, 23, 39 and 55, Tsiatsis discloses further comprising: receiving at least one of velocity, direction, or a combination thereof based on measurements of previous downlink reference signals received from the base station; and determining at least one of current velocity, current direction, or a combination thereof from the received downlink reference signals (Tsiatsis: paragraph (150), “one or more omni-directional, sector or panel antennas operable to transmit/receive radio signals between, for example, 2 GHz and 66 GHz. An omni-directional antenna may be used to transmit/receive radio signals in any direction, a sector antenna may be used to transmit/receive radio signals from devices within a particular area, and a panel antenna may be a line of sight antenna used to transmit/receive radio signals in a relatively straight line. In some instances, the use of more than one antenna may be referred to as MIMO. In certain embodiments, antenna 4162 may be separate from network node 4160 and may be connectable to network node 4160 through an interface or port.”); wherein determining if the attacking device transmitted the received downlink reference signals is further based on the predicted at least one of velocity, direction, or a combination thereof and the at least one of a current velocity, a current direction, or a combination thereof (Tsiatsis).
Regarding claims 12, 24, 40 and 56, Tsiatsis discloses further comprising receiving one or more time stamps associated with the predicted values for the one or more measurements of downlink reference signals (Tsiatsis: paragraphs (40-47), “UE110 takes a subset of the measurements from operations 510a-c with respect to time (e.g., a time window or period of time) and with respect to features (e.g., RSRP and RSRQ) as described earlier and processes them unfiltered.”).
Regarding claims 27 and 43, Tsiatsis discloses wherein obtaining the one or more predicted values for the one or more measurements of downlink reference signals to be performed by the UE comprises: receiving a plurality of one or more measurements performed by the UE of downlink reference signals transmitted by the base station (Tsiatsis: paragraph (27), “a transceiver, e.g., corresponding to portions of interface 4190 of FIG. 22 and/or portions of radio interface 4527 of FIG. 26) including a transmitter and a receiver configured to provide uplink and downlink radio communications with mobile terminals” and paragraphs (36-39), “a network can attempt to detect an imposter node using measurement reports from UEs connected to it. A network may be able to detect an imposter node since the network has the knowledge of the network topology (e.g., where each legitimate base station resides) and the network inventory”… “The radio channel can be monitored for different base station signals and their relative strength. This can allow the UE to monitor the radio environment and decide the best base station for the UE to connect to with respect to radio characteristics. When at least one false base station re-using an existing PCI is in the vicinity of the reporting UE, the false base station may not be detected since measurements are typically filtered”); and generating the one or more predicted values for the one or more measurements of the downlink reference signals based on received plurality of the one or more measurements performed by the UE (Tsiatsis: paragraph (27), “a transceiver, e.g., corresponding to portions of interface 4190 of FIG. 22 and/or portions of radio interface 4527 of FIG. 26) including a transmitter and a receiver configured to provide uplink and downlink radio communications with mobile terminals” and paragraphs (36-39), “a network can attempt to detect an imposter node using measurement reports from UEs connected to it. A network may be able to detect an imposter node since the network has the knowledge of the network topology (e.g., where each legitimate base station resides) and the network inventory”… “The radio channel can be monitored for different base station signals and their relative strength. This can allow the UE to monitor the radio environment and decide the best base station for the UE to connect to with respect to radio characteristics. When at least one false base station re-using an existing PCI is in the vicinity of the reporting UE, the false base station may not be detected since measurements are typically filtered”).
Regarding claims 28 and 44, Tsiatsis discloses wherein obtaining the one or more predicted values for the one or more measurements of downlink reference signals to be performed by the UE comprises receiving the one or more predicted values from a location server (Tsiatsis: paragraph (27), “a transceiver, e.g., corresponding to portions of interface 4190 of FIG. 22 and/or portions of radio interface 4527 of FIG. 26) including a transmitter and a receiver configured to provide uplink and downlink radio communications with mobile terminals” and paragraphs (36-39), “a network can attempt to detect an imposter node using measurement reports from UEs connected to it. A network may be able to detect an imposter node since the network has the knowledge of the network topology (e.g., where each legitimate base station resides) and the network inventory”… “The radio channel can be monitored for different base station signals and their relative strength. This can allow the UE to monitor the radio environment and decide the best base station for the UE to connect to with respect to radio characteristics. When at least one false base station re-using an existing PCI is in the vicinity of the reporting UE, the false base station may not be detected since measurements are typically filtered”).
Regarding claims 29 and 45, Tsiatsis discloses wherein the indication of whether the attacking device is present comprises a report indicating the attacking device has been detected by the UE (Tsiatsis: paragraphs (36) and (38), “an advanced attacker/fraudster may be aware of this detection mechanism and may use an existing PCI for its broadcast messages, which can allow an imposter node to go undetected if it uses a PCI that currently belongs to a legitimate base station in the vicinity of a UE.”).
Regarding claims 30 and 46, Tsiatsis discloses wherein the indication of whether the attacking device is present comprises a report providing the one or more measurements performed by the UEfor the current downlink reference signals received by the UE (“Tsiatsis: paragraph (27), “a transceiver, e.g., corresponding to portions of interface 4190 of FIG. 22 and/or portions of radio interface 4527 of FIG. 26) including a transmitter and a receiver configured to provide uplink and downlink radio communications with mobile terminals” and paragraphs (36-39), “a network can attempt to detect an imposter node using measurement reports from UEs connected to it. A network may be able to detect an imposter node since the network has the knowledge of the network topology (e.g., where each legitimate base station resides) and the network inventory”… “The radio channel can be monitored for different base station signals and their relative strength. This can allow the UE to monitor the radio environment and decide the best base station for the UE to connect to with respect to radio characteristics. When at least one false base station re-using an existing PCI is in the vicinity of the reporting UE, the false base station may not be detected since measurements are typically filtered”).
Regarding claims 31 and 47, Tsiatsis discloses updating the one or more predicted values for the one or more measurements of downlink reference signals to be performed by the UE based on the one or more measurements performed by the UE for the current downlink reference signals (Tsiatsis: paragraphs (35) and (44), “In additional or alternative embodiments, a subset of these measurements (e.g. RSRP and RSRQ) are forwarded by the measurement logic to a separate node unfiltered. This forwarding can be a default option on the UE or configured by the network. A corresponding node can exist in the Core Network (“CN”) to receive a message including an indication of a false base station and determine whether to initiate further actions.”… “The UE can make measurements for different quantities as stated earlier and in order to account for UE mobility of radio reflections the measurements for the same RAN node (e.g., the base station with the same Physical Cell Identifier (“PCI”)) can be smoothen out by a formula standardized in 3GPP TS 38.331, version 15.7.0.”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 7, 19, 35 and 51 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsiatsis et al. (US 12348967) (hereinafter Tsiatsis) in view of Siomina (US 20150257118) (hereinafter Siomina).
Regarding claims 7, 19, 35 and 51, Tsiatsis does not explicitly disclose the following limitation which is disclosed by Siomina, wherein the one or more predicted values for one or more measurements of downlink reference signals comprises at least one of one or more expected Reference Signal Time Difference (RSTD) values for the downlink reference signals received from the base station with respect to downlink reference signals received from one or more other base stations, one or more expected RSTD uncertainty, or a combination thereof (Siomina: paragraphs 0071 and 0165, “for determining UE position, [0074] A-GNSS (including A-GPS)--methods exploiting timing measurements performed on satellite signals, [0075] Observed Time Difference of Arrival (OTDOA)--is a method using timing measurements (e.g., RSTD in LTE) performed by UE on DL radio signals transmitted, e.g., by different eNodeBs, for determining the UE position, [0076] UL Time Difference of Arrival (UTDOA)--being currently standardized--is a method using timing measurements (e.g., UL RTOA in LTE) performed, e.g., by eNodeBs or LMUs, on UL radio signals transmitted by a UE for determining the UE position.”).
Tsiatsis and Siomina are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, positioning measurements. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Tsiatsis and Siomina before him or her, to modify the system of Tsiatsis to include one or more predicted values for one or more measurements of downlink reference signals comprises at least one of one or more expected Reference Signal Time Difference (RSTD) values for the downlink reference signals of Siomina. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to calculate a position, or location, of a wireless device in communication with those receivers (Siomina: paragraph 0003).
Claim(s) 8-10, 20-22, 36-38 and 52-54 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsiatsis et al. (US 12348967) (hereinafter Tsiatsis) in view of Parkvall et al. (US 20170331670) (hereinafter Parkvall).
Regarding claims 8, 20, 36 and 52, Tsiatsis does not explicitly disclose the following limitation which is disclosed by Parkvall, wherein the one or more predicted values for one or more measurements of downlink reference signals comprises one or more expected Angle of Arrival (AoA) values for the downlink reference signals, one or more expected AoA uncertainty, or a combination thereof (Parkvall: paragraphs 0032, 0079 and 1285, “receiving a random access request message from a fourth wireless device, via an uplink beam formed using multiple antennas at the radio network equipment, estimating an angle-of-arrival corresponding to the random access request message and transmitting a random access response message, using a downlink beam formed using multiple antennas at the radio network equipment. Forming the downlink beam is based on the estimated angle-of-arrival. The uplink beam may be a swept uplink beam. A width of the downlink beam may be based on an estimated quality of the estimated angle-of-arrival.”).
Tsiatsis and Parkvall are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, positioning measurements. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Tsiatsis and Parkvall before him or her, to modify the system of Tsiatsis to include one or more predicted values for one or more measurements of downlink reference signals comprises one or more expected Angle of Arrival (AoA) values for the downlink reference signals of Parkvall. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to enable rate and link adaptation (Parkvall: paragraph 0571).
Regarding claims 9, 21, 37 and 53, Tsiatsis does not explicitly disclose the following limitation which is disclosed by Parkvall, wherein the one or more predicted values for one or more measurements of downlink reference signals comprises one or more expected Round Trip Time (RTT) values for the base station (Parkvall: paragraph 0778, “Fast ACK/NACK procedure is beneficial for high data rates, since it enables fast link adaptation and short round trip times. To enable Fast ACK/NACK feedback in the same subframe, PUCCH is placed at the end of the subframe;”).
Tsiatsis and Parkvall are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, positioning measurements. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Tsiatsis and Parkvall before him or her, to modify the system of Tsiatsis to include one or more predicted values for one or more measurements of downlink reference signals comprises one or more expected Round Trip Time (RTT) values of Parkvall. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to enable rate and link adaptation (Parkvall: paragraph 0571).
Regarding claims 10, 22, 38 and 54, Tsiatsis does not explicitly disclose the following limitation which is disclosed by Parkvall, receiving one or more predicted channel coefficients for pairs of Tx-Rx antennas or antenna ports based on measurements of previous downlink reference signals received from the base station (Parkvall: paragraph 0911, “On the other hand, to exploit the gains from frequency diversity, it is important to map the coded bits on the frequency resources having uncorrelated channel coefficients. Therefore, the required bandwidth would increase with the coherence bandwidth of the channel and thus make the exploitation of frequency diversity more bandwidth consuming”); and determining current channel coefficients from the received downlink reference signals (Parkvall: paragraph 0911, “On the other hand, to exploit the gains from frequency diversity, it is important to map the coded bits on the frequency resources having uncorrelated channel coefficients. Therefore, the required bandwidth would increase with the coherence bandwidth of the channel and thus make the exploitation of frequency diversity more bandwidth consuming”); wherein determining if the attacking device transmitted the received downlink reference signals is further based on the predicted channel coefficients and the current channel coefficients (Parkvall: paragraph 0911, “On the other hand, to exploit the gains from frequency diversity, it is important to map the coded bits on the frequency resources having uncorrelated channel coefficients. Therefore, the required bandwidth would increase with the coherence bandwidth of the channel and thus make the exploitation of frequency diversity more bandwidth consuming”).
Tsiatsis and Parkvall are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, positioning measurements. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Tsiatsis and Parkvall before him or her, to modify the system of Tsiatsis to include one or more predicted channel coefficients for pairs of Tx-Rx antennas or antenna ports based on measurements of Parkvall. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to enable rate and link adaptation (Parkvall: paragraph 0571).
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 TRANG T DOAN whose telephone number is (571)272-0740. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7-4 ET.
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, Lynn D Feild can be reached on (571)272-2092. 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.
/TRANG T DOAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2431