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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/09/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/09/2026 have been fully considered but some of them are not persuasive.
On pages 7-8, Applicant argues that,
“When rejecting claim 1, the Examiner cites Henry for disclosing one or more gray background fields to influence the auto-exposure settings of a camera. See Nov. 7, 2025 Office Action, p.4. Henry, however, does this by holding a target/gray card in front of the camera, depressing the shutter release button half-way to thereby automatically set the exposure settings of the camera without capturing an image, removing the target/gray card from the scene and then fully depressing the shutter release to capture an image without the target/gray card in it. See para. [0040], see also paras. [0015], [0016].
Henry explicitly teaches removing the target/gray card from the field of view of the camera before taking a photograph. See paras. [0015], [0016]. This fails to teach or suggest capturing an image that comprises a scene that includes at least part of the one or more gray background fields as called for in claim 1. It is noteworthy that claim 1 is directed toward capturing an image of at least part of a color reference card and at least part of a test field of an optical test strip. One example of such an optical test strip is a test strip used by a patient to determine their blood glucose level. See, e.g., para. [0002]. Such patients may have limited dexterity and fine motor control. The method disclosed by Henry would require such patients to partially depress the shutter release button while focusing on the target/gray card, then remove the target/gray card from the field of view of the camera while maintaining the shutter release button in a partially depressed position before finally focusing on the desired scene and capturing an image. This scenario would present significant difficulties for a person with limited dexterity and/or fine motor control.
The method called for in claim 1, however, presents a method for setting the auto- exposure settings that only requires the user to take a picture with the camera. There is no multi- step process requiring moving an item out of the field of view while maintaining a shutter release button in a partially depressed position.
Thus, it is respectfully submitted that claims 1, 3, 6, 8-19 and 25 are all patentably distinct over the cited references.”
(original emphases)
In response, Examiner respectfully disagrees, when combining Henry into the method of Argawal, one of ordinary skill in the art would have either (1) used the one or more gray background fields in the reference card of Argawal to influence the auto-exposure settings, or (2) incorporated the one or more gray background fields taught by Henry into in the reference card of Argawal to influence the auto-exposure settings. In either of scenarios (1) or (2), the user does not have to remove the target/gray card from the field of view of the camera before taking a photograph because Argawal already teaches the reference card is captured with the scene.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 6, 8-19, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Argawal et al. (WO 2015/038717 A1 – hereinafter Argawal), Henry (US 2011/0123182 A1 – hereinafter Henry), and Satish et al. (US 2015/0294460 A1 – hereinafter Satish).
Regarding claim 1, Argawal discloses a method of auto-controlling exposure settings of a mobile device having a camera ([0059] – a method for setting auto-exposure for a mobile camera, e.g. a smartphone 206 as described at least in [0033] and illustrated in Fig. 1) when capturing an image with the camera of at least part of a color reference card ([0010]; [0022]; [0033]; [0059] – capturing an image of a color reference card, i.e. the color standard, or color calibration reference attached to a test card) and of at least part of a test field of an optical test strip having a sample applied thereto ([0010]; [0022]; [0033] – a test card with a sample, e.g. a fluid such as urine, blood, water, etc., applied to), the method comprising: a) providing a color reference card ([0010]; [0022]; [0033]; [0044] – providing a color reference card, e.g. provided with or attached to the test card) and an optical test strip having a test field having a sample applied thereto ([0010]; [0022]; [0033]; [0044] – a test card having a test field, which is color changing indicator, having a sample of a fluid to be tested applied thereto), wherein the color reference card comprises a plurality of different color reference fields having known reference color values and one or more gray background fields having defined gray values (Fig. 2; [0064]; Fig. 11 – the color reference card 220 having known reference color values, e.g. red, green, blue, cyan, magenta, yellow, etc. and one or more gray background fields, as either the grey field in the card 220 or described in [0038], [0056] the grey of the base material of the test card 202 when the color calibration reference 220 attached to the test card as described in [0044]); b) setting an exposure metering area and determining auto-exposure settings based on a scene in the set exposure metering area, wherein the scene in the set exposure metering area comprises at least part of the test field having the sample applied thereto, at least part of the plurality of different color reference fields and at least part of the one or more gray background fields ([0010]; [0022]; [0033]; [0057]; [0059] – setting an exposure metering area and determining auto-exposure settings based on a scene in the set exposure metering area comprising the test card 202 with color reference card 220 attached thereto); c) using the camera to capture an image comprising the scene of step b), wherein the determined exposure settings of step b) are used ([0059] – capturing the image with the determined exposure settings for the camera).
However, Argawal does not disclose the at least part of the one or more gray background fields influences the auto- exposure settings; and d) determining if the image is admissible or inadmissible for the purpose of determining an analytical measurement result value by determining whether a predetermined group of pixels in the image corresponding to the at least part of the plurality of color reference fields exhibit brightness values within acceptable limits.
Henry discloses at least part of the one or more gray background fields influences the auto- exposure settings ([0005] – one or more gray background fields of a gray card influences the auto-exposure settings of a camera).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Henry into the method taught by Argawal to automatically set a desired exposure of the camera accurately (Henry: [0005]).
Argawal and Henry do not disclose d) determining if the image is admissible or inadmissible for the purpose of determining an analytical measurement result value by determining whether a predetermined group of pixels in the image corresponding to the at least part of the plurality of color reference fields exhibit brightness values within acceptable limits.
Satish discloses determining if an image is admissible or inadmissible for a purpose of determining an analytical measurement result value by determining whether a predetermined group of pixels in the image corresponding to at least part of a plurality of color reference fields exhibit brightness values within acceptable limits ([0065]; [0067]; Fig. 6B – determining suitability of an image by determining a predetermined group of pixels of a selected color element in the image corresponding to at least part of a plurality of color reference fields, i.e. red, green, and blue exhibit brightness values within the limits defined by the corresponding reference color to generate an adjusted image).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Satish into the method taught by Argawal and Henry to provide accurate readings.
Regarding claim 3, see the teachings of Argawal, Henry, and Satish as discussed in claim 1 above. Satish also discloses the color reference card and/or the test strip comprises a position marker ([0065] – a position marker that can be addressed).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the further teachings of Satish into the method to assist in correctly addressing a reference color.
Regarding claim 6, Argawal also discloses the test field is in a defined position with respect to the color reference card during one or both of determining the auto-exposure settings for the camera and capturing the image ([0033]; [0044] – the color reference card attached to the test card at a defined position).
Regarding claim 8, Argawal also discloses the percentage of the scene in the set exposure metering area is selected from the group consisting of at least 5%, at least 10% and at least 15% of at least part of the one or more gray background fields (Fig. 2 – the scene in the set exposure metering area comprising 100% of the one or more gray background fields, thus being at least 5%, at least 10% and at least 15% of at least part of the one or more gray background fields).
Regarding claim 9, Argawal also discloses the scene in the set exposure metering area comprises the entire color reference card (Fig. 2; [0033]; [0044]).
Regarding claim 10, see the teachings of Argawal, Henry, and Satish as discussed in claim 1 above. Satish also discloses the image is determined to be admissible if the predetermined group of pixels exhibit brightness values within limits selected from the group consisting of between 50 and 240 and between 80 and 220 ([0065]). The motivation for incorporating the teachings of Satish into the method has been discussed in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 11, Argawal also discloses determining the concentration of the analyte in the sample by using the image and at least part of the plurality of different color reference fields ([0013]-[0014]; [0050]-[0051]; [0060] – table 1, table 2).
Regarding claim 12, Argawal also discloses a mobile device having a camera and a display, the mobile device configured for performing at least steps b) and c) of claim 1 (Fig. 1; [0058]-[0059] – a smartphone 206 having a display, and for performing the steps as discussed in claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 13, Argawal also discloses a kit for determining the concentration of an analyte in a bodily fluid, the kit comprising: the mobile device according to claim 12 (see discussion of claim 12 above); an optical test strip having a reagent test field ([0010]; [0022]; [0033] – a test card having a regeant test field with a sample, e.g. a fluid such as urine, blood, water, etc., applied to); and a color reference card having a plurality of different color reference fields with known reference color values and one or more gray background fields having a defined gray value (Fig. 2; [0064]; Fig. 11 – the color reference card 220 having known reference color values, e.g. red, green, blue, cyan, magenta, yellow, etc. and one or more gray background fields, as either the grey field in the card 220 or described in [0038], [0056] the grey of the base material of the test card 202 when the color calibration reference 220 attached to the test card as described in [0044]).
Claim 14 is rejected for the same reason as discussed in claim 1 above in view of Argawal also disclosing a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored thereon computer-executable instructions for performing the method (Fig. 2; [0045]; [0048]; [0060] – a non-transitory computer readable storage medium in the smartphone storing software instructions for performing the recited method discussed in claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 15, Argawal also disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein light conditions during the determining of the auto-exposure settings for the camera and the capture of the image are predominated by an illumination source of the mobile device ([0059] – the test card is solely illuminated using the camera flash).
Regarding claim 16, see the teachings of Argawal, Henry, and Satish as discussed in claim 1 above, in which Argawal also discloses the one or more gray background fields form a portion of the color reference card and surround the plurality of different color reference fields (Fig. 2; [0064] – when the color reference card is attached to the test card, the base material provides white/grey values of image regions surrounding the color reference fields in the color reference card).
Argawal, Henry, and Satish do not explicitly disclose the one or more gray background fields surround the plurality of different color reference fields.
However, Argawal discloses one or more gray background fields surround a plurality of different color fields of the test card (Fig. 2; [0056] – the test card 202 has a base material providing white/grey values surrounding the plurality of color fields 204).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the color layout of the test card into the color layout of the reference color card of Argawal, Henry, and Satish to provide a consistent design layout of the test card and the color reference card, thus for easy matching for comparison.
Regarding claim 17, see the teachings of Argawal, Henry, and Satish as discussed in claim 1 above, in which Argawal also discloses the one or more gray background fields form a portion of the color reference card (Fig. 2; [0064]). Argawal, Henry, and Satish do not explicitly disclose the one or more gray background fields frame the color reference card.
However, Argawal discloses one or more gray background fields frame a test card (Fig. 2; [0056] – the test card 202 has a base material providing white/grey values surrounding the plurality of color fields 204).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the color layout of the test card into the color layout of the reference color card of Argawal, Henry, and Satish to provide a consistent design layout of the test card and the color reference card, thus for easy matching for comparison.
Regarding claim 18, Argawal also discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising using the image captured in step c) to determine a concentration of an analyte in the sample applied to the test field ([0013]-[0014]; [0050]-[0051]; [0060] – table 1, table 2).
Regarding claim 19, Argawal also discloses the method according to claim 18, wherein the concentration is a glucose concentration and the sample is a blood sample ([0033] – analysis of a blood sample with indicator reagents for glucose concentration similar to analysis of urine testing described in table 1 and table 2 in [0060]).
Regarding claim 25, see the teachings of Argawal, Henry, and Satish as discussed in claim 1 above. Satish also discloses the predetermined group of pixels is determined in a field of view of the camera based on the position marker ([0065] – an address marks the position).
The motivation for incorporating the teachings of Satish into the method has been discussed in claim 1 above.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Argawal, Henry, and Satish as applied to claims 1, 3, 6, 8-19, and 25 above, and further in view of Adiri et al. (US 2020/0126226 A1 – hereinafter Adiri, provided in IDS document 04/27/2023).
Regarding 2, see the teachings of Argawal, Henry, and Satish as discussed in claim 1 above. Argawal also discloses the mobile device comprises a display (Fig. 2 – the smartphone 206 has a display); and providing for positioning the camera relative to an object ([0055]), the object comprising at least part of the optical test strip and/or at least part of the color reference card ([0033]; [0044] – the object, i.e. the cup, comprising the test card with the color reference card attached thereto).
However, Argawal, Henry, and Satish do not disclose the step of providing visual guidance on the display for positioning the camera relative to an object.
Adiri discloses a mobile device comprises a display (Fig. 4A) and a of providing visual guidance on the display for positioning a camera relative to an object.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Adiri into the method taught by Argawal, Henry, and Satish to further assist the user in correctly positioning and orienting the camera with respect to the object to acquire images of good quality.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Argawal, Henry, and Satish as applied to claims 1, 3, 6, 8-19, and 25 above, and further in view of Carrier, Jr. et al. (US 2018/0125610 A1 – hereinafter Carrier) and Mui (US 2018/0146175 A1 – hereinafter Mui, provided in IDS document 04/27/2023).
Regarding claim 4, see the teachings of Argawal, Henry, and Satish as discussed in claim 3 above. However, Argawal, Henry, and Satish do not disclose determining the auto-exposure settings is initiated automatically when it is determined that the camera is in a defined position with respect to the color reference card based on the position marker.
Carrier discloses determining auto-exposure settings is initiated automatically when it is determined that a camera is in a defined position with respect to a scene to be captured ([0056]; [0144]-[0145]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Carrier into the method taught by Argawal, Henry, and Satish to automate the exposure settings.
Argawal, Henry, Satish, and Carrier do not disclose a camera is in a defined position with respect to a scene to be captured as the camera is in a defined position with respect to the color reference card based on the position marker.
Mui discloses a camera is in a defined position with respect to a scene to be captured as the camera is in a defined position with respect to a reference card based on position markers ([0131]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Mui into the method taught by Argawal, Henry, Satish, and Carrier to facilitate the alignment of the camera with respect to the color reference card.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Argawal, Henry, and Satish as applied to claims 1, 3, 6, 8-19, and 25 above, and further in view of Mui.
Regarding claim 5, see the teachings of Argawal, Henry, and Satish as discussed in claim 3 above. Argawal also discloses the position of the camera with respect to the color reference card is determined and the exposure metering area is set as a function of the determined position ([0055]; [0069]).
However, Argawal, Henry, and Satish do not disclose the position of the camera with respect to the color reference card is determined based on the position marker.
Mui discloses the position of a camera with respect to a reference card is determined based on a position marker ([0131]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Mui into the method taught by Argawal, Henry, and Satish to facilitate the alignment of the camera with respect to the color reference card.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Argawal, Henry, and Satish as applied to claims 1, 3, 6, 8-19, and 25 above, and further in view of Carrier.
Regarding claim 7, see the teachings of Argawal, Henry, and Satish as discussed in claim 1 above. Argawal also discloses the object comprising at least part of the optical test strip and/or at least part of the color reference card ([0033]; [0044]).
However, Argawal, Henry, and Satish do not disclose determining the auto-exposure settings and/or capturing the image is initiated automatically once the presence of at least one object within a field of view and/or within a predetermined sector of the field of view of the camera is automatically detected.
Carrier discloses determining auto-exposure settings and/or capturing the image is initiated automatically once the presence of at least one object within a field of view and/or within a predetermined sector of the field of view of the camera is automatically detected ([0056]; [0144]-[0145]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Carrier into the method taught by Argawal, Henry, and Satish to automate the image capturing process without user instruction, thus making it more convenient for the user.
Claims 20-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Argawal, Henry, and Satish as applied to claims 1, 3, 6, 8-19, and 25 above, and further in view of Hillman (US 2022/0005224 A1 – hereinafter Hillman).
Regarding 20, see the teachings of Argawal, Henry, and Satish as discussed in claim 1 above. Argawal and Henry also disclose the one or more gray background fields each have a gray value between 0% and 30% gray level (Argawal: [0064] - one or more ground background fields include a black value which is 100% gray level. Henry: [0005] – one or more gray background fields of a gray card have a gray value of 18%). However, Argawal, Henry, and Satish do not disclose the color reference card further defines a plurality of gray fields having a gray value between 30% and 70%.
Hillman discloses a color reference card further defines a plurality of gray fields having a gray value between 30% and 70% (Fig. 2; [0022] – one or more gray fields White, Neutral 8, Neutral 6.5, Neutral 5, Neutral 3.5 of Macbeth chart having RGB codes as #f3f3f3, #c8c8c8, #a0a0a0, #7a7a7a, #555555, and #343434 which correspond to gray values of 4.7%, 21.6%, 37.3%, 52%, 67%, and 79,6% respectively).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Hillman into the method taught by Argawal, Henry, and Satish to control the auto-exposure settings more accurately.
Regarding claim 21, see the teachings of Argawal, Henry, and Satish as discussed in claim 1 above. Argawal and Henry also disclose the one or more gray background fields each have a gray value between 0% and 20% gray level (Argawal: [0064] - one or more ground background fields include a black value which is 0% gray level. Henry: [0005] – one or more gray background fields of a gray card have a gray value of 18%). However, Argawal, Henry, and Satish do not disclose the color reference card further defines a plurality of gray fields having a gray value between 30% and 70%.
Hillman discloses a color reference card further defines a plurality of gray fields having a gray value between 30% and 70% (Fig. 2; [0022] – one or more gray fields White, Neutral 8, Neutral 6.5, Neutral 5, Neutral 3.5 of Macbeth chart having RGB codes as #f3f3f3, #c8c8c8, #a0a0a0, #7a7a7a, #555555, and #343434 which correspond to gray values of 4.7%, 21.6%, 37.3%, 52%, 67%, and 79,6% respectively).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Hillman into the method taught by Argawal, Henry, and Satish to control the auto-exposure settings more accurately.
Regarding claim 22, see the teachings of Argawal, Henry, and Satish as discussed in claim 1 above. Argawal also discloses the one or more gray background fields each have a gray value between 0% and 10% gray level (Argawal: [0064] - one or more ground background fields include a black value which is 0% gray level). However, Argawal, Henry, and Satish do not disclose the color reference card further defines a plurality of gray fields having a gray value between 30% and 70%.
Hillman discloses a color reference card further defines a plurality of gray fields having a gray value between 30% and 70% (Fig. 2; [0022] – one or more gray fields White, Neutral 8, Neutral 6.5, Neutral 5, Neutral 3.5 of Macbeth chart having RGB codes as #f3f3f3, #c8c8c8, #a0a0a0, #7a7a7a, #555555, and #343434 which correspond to gray values of 4.7%, 21.6%, 37.3%, 52%, 67%, and 79,6% respectively).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Hillman into the method taught by Argawal, Henry, and Satish to control the auto-exposure settings more accurately.
Regarding claim 23, see the teachings of Argawal, Henry, and Satish as discussed in claim 1 above. However, Argawal, Henry, and Satish do not disclose the one or more gray background fields each have a gray value between 70% and 100% gray level and wherein the color reference card further defines a plurality of gray fields having a gray value between 30% and 70%.
Hillman discloses one or more gray background fields each have a gray value between 70% and 100% gray level (Fig. 2; [0022] – one or more gray fields White, Neutral 8, Neutral 6.5, Neutral 5, Neutral 3.5 of Macbeth chart having RGB codes as #f3f3f3, #c8c8c8, #a0a0a0, #7a7a7a, #555555, and #343434 which correspond to gray values of 4.7%, 21.6%, 37.3%, 52%, 67%, and 79,6% respectively) and wherein a color reference card further defines a plurality of gray fields having a gray value between 30% and 70% (Fig. 2; [0022] – one or more gray fields White, Neutral 8, Neutral 6.5, Neutral 5, Neutral 3.5 of Macbeth chart having RGB codes as #f3f3f3, #c8c8c8, #a0a0a0, #7a7a7a, #555555, and #343434 which correspond to gray values of 4.7%, 21.6%, 37.3%, 52%, 67%, and 79,6% respectively).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Hillman into the method taught by Argawal, Henry, and Satish to control the auto-exposure settings more accurately.
Regarding claim 24, see the teachings of Argawal, Henry, and Satish as discussed in claim 1 above. However, Argawal, Henry, and Satish do not disclose the one or more gray background fields each have a gray value between 80% and 100% gray level and wherein the color reference card further defines a plurality of gray fields having a gray value between 30% and 70%.
Hillman discloses one or more gray background fields each have a gray value between 80% and 100% gray level (Fig. 2; [0022] – one or more gray fields White, Neutral 8, Neutral 6.5, Neutral 5, Neutral 3.5 of Macbeth chart having RGB codes as #f3f3f3, #c8c8c8, #a0a0a0, #7a7a7a, #555555, and #343434 which correspond to gray values of 4.7%, 21.6%, 37.3%, 52%, 67%, and 79,6% respectively) and wherein a color reference card further defines a plurality of gray fields having a gray value between 30% and 70% (Fig. 2; [0022] – one or more gray fields White, Neutral 8, Neutral 6.5, Neutral 5, Neutral 3.5 of Macbeth chart having RGB codes as #f3f3f3, #c8c8c8, #a0a0a0, #7a7a7a, #555555, and #343434 which correspond to gray values of 4.7%, 21.6%, 37.3%, 52%, 67%, and 79,6% respectively).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Hillman into the method taught by Argawal, Henry, and Satish to control the auto-exposure settings more accurately.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 26-29 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNG Q DANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1116. The examiner can normally be reached IFT.
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, Thai Q Tran can be reached on 571-272-7382. 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.
/HUNG Q DANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2484
Prosecution Insights