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 Amendment
Applicant’s reply filed on 01/28/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-30 remain pending.
Response to Arguments
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 over Tsai
Applicant argues Tsai does not teach or suggest “select, in association with a delay parameter for an uplink communication, a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) process identifier from a plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in a HARQ process identifier pool, the HARQ process identifier being associated with the uplink communication,” as recited in claim 1. Remarks, page 12-13. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
For example, [0260] of Tsai recites “For configured uplink grants configured with cg-RetransmissionTimer, the UE implementation may select an HARQ Process ID among the HARQ process IDs available for the configured grant configuration. If the UE/MAC entity is configured with intraCG-Prioritization, for HARQ Process ID selection, the UE may prioritize the HARQ Process ID with the highest priority, where the priority of HARQ process is determined by the highest priority among priorities of the logical channels that are multiplexed (e.g., the MAC PDU to transmit is already stored in the HARQ buffer) or have data available that may be multiplexed (e.g., the MAC PDU to transmit is not stored in the HARQ buffer) in the MAC PDU, according to the mapping restrictions.” Thus, Tsai describes for configured uplink grants, an HARQ process ID is selected based on the priority levels of the logical channels that are multiplexed or have data available that may be multiplexed which include the MAC PDU to transmit, where an HARQ process ID with a higher priority is selected before a HARQ process ID with a lower priority. The priority level of the logical channels described by Tsai can be considered a delay parameter for an uplink communication by the broadest reasonable interpretation.
For at least the foregoing reasons, Examiner submits that Tsai teaches “select, in association with a delay parameter for an uplink communication, a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) process identifier from a plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in a HARQ process identifier pool, the HARQ process identifier being associated with the uplink communication,” recited in claim 1.
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Tsai and Yang
Applicant argues Yang does not teach or suggest “receive an indication of a preferred subset of HARQ process identifiers of the plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in the HARQ process identifier pool,” as recited in claim 12. Remarks, page 13-14. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
For example, [0048] of Yang recites “the CC may be configured with 16 HARQ processes. HARQ process IDs 1-8 (e.g., ID(0,1) . . . ID(0,8) are to be used for the retransmission of low priority HARQ feedback (e.g., priority level 0) and HARQ process IDs 9-16 (e.g., ID(1,1) . . . ID(1,8)) are to be used for the retransmission of high priority HARQ feedback (e.g., priority level 1). Thus, when the UE 110 transmits the type 3 HARQ feedback, high priority HARQ-ACK bits will be assigned to HARQ process IDs from a first group and the low priority HARQ-ACK bits will be assigned to HARQ process IDs from a second different group.” Thus, Yang describes HARQ process IDs are grouped based on priority levels of HARQ-ACK bits, where a first group of HARQ process IDs is selected to be used for high priority HARQ-ACK bits, and a second group of HARQ process IDs is used for low priority HARQ-ACK bits. A group of HARQ process IDs specifically used for a priority level of HARQ-ACK bits can be considered a preferred subset of HARQ process identifiers by the broadest reasonable interpretation.
For at least the foregoing reasons, Examiner submits that Yang teaches ““receive an indication of a preferred subset of HARQ process identifiers of the plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in the HARQ process identifier pool,” as recited in claim 12.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claims 1, 2, 8, 11, 13, 14, 16, 21, 22, 27, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tsai et al., US 2024/0406956 A1, (“Tsai”).
Regarding claim 1:
Tsai discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a user equipment (UE) (e.g., Fig. 15, 1502), comprising: one or more memories (Fig. 15, 1524) storing processor-readable code; and one or more processors (Fig. 15, 1518, 1520, 1522) coupled with the one or more memories, at least one processor of the one or more processors operable to cause the UE to:
select, in association with a delay parameter for an uplink communication, a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) process identifier from a plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in a HARQ process identifier pool, the HARQ process identifier being associated with the uplink communication (e.g., [0260]-[0261], “the UE implementation may select an HARQ Process ID among the HARQ process IDs available for the configured grant configuration…the UE may prioritize the HARQ Process ID with the highest priority, where the priority of HARQ process is determined by the highest priority among priorities of the logical channels that are multiplexed (e.g., the MAC PDU to transmit is already stored in the HARQ buffer) …”);
transmit an indication of the HARQ process identifier (e.g., [0365], “the wireless device may transmit the HARQ process ID via UCI (via a CGO) …”); and
transmit the uplink communication (e.g., [0344], “the wireless device may determine a HARQ process ID for a UL transmission of the CG…).
Regarding claim 2:
Tsai further discloses wherein at least one processor of the one or more processors is operable to cause the UE to: receive an indication of the HARQ process identifier pool in at least one of: a radio resource control (RRC) configuration, or a dynamic control information (DCI) configuration (e.g., [0229], [0238], [0385], [0386]).
Regarding claim 8:
Tsai further discloses wherein at least one processor of the one or more processors is operable to cause the UE to: select, in association with another uplink communication, another HARQ process identifier from the plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in the HARQ process identifier pool (e.g., [0355]-[0357], “the wireless device may determine a second HARQ process ID for a second UL transmission of the CG”); and transmit an indication of the other HARQ process identifier along with the indication of the HARQ process identifier (e.g., [0365], [0390], “the wireless device may transmit the HARQ process ID via UCI for each CGO used for transmission”).
Regarding claim 11:
Tsai further discloses wherein at least processor one of the one or more processors, to cause the UE to transmit the indication of the HARQ process identifier, is operable to cause the UE to at least one of: transmit the indication of the HARQ process identifier in a subset of uplink resources in which the uplink communication is transmitted, or transmit the indication of the HARQ process identifier in a radio resource control (RRC) communication (e.g., [0365]).
Regarding claim 13
Tsai further discloses wherein at least one processor of the one or more processors, to cause the UE to transmit the uplink communication, is operable to cause the UE to: transmit an initial transmission of the uplink communication, wherein the HARQ process identifier is associated with the initial transmission of the uplink communication (e.g., [0261]).
Regarding claim 14:
Tsai further discloses wherein at least one processor of the one or more processors, to cause the UE to transmit the uplink communication, is operable to cause the UE to: transmit a retransmission of the uplink communication, wherein the HARQ process identifier is associated with the retransmission of the uplink communication (e.g., [0261]).
Regarding claim 16:
Tsai discloses a method of wireless communication performed at a user equipment (UE), comprising: selecting, in association with a delay parameter for an uplink communication, a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) process identifier from a plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in a HARQ process identifier pool, the HARQ process identifier being associated with the uplink communication; transmitting an indication of the HARQ process identifier; and transmitting the uplink communication. (See similar features in rejection of independent claim 1.)
Regarding claim 21:
Tsai discloses an apparatus for wireless communication at a network node (e.g., Fig. 15, 1504), comprising: one or more memories (Fig. 15, 1514); and one or more processors (Fig. 15, 1508) coupled with the one or more memories, at least one processor of the one or more processors operable to cause the network node to: transmit an indication of a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) process identifier pool associated with a user equipment (UE); receive an indication of a HARQ process identifier among a plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in the HARQ process identifier pool; and receive an uplink communication associated with the HARQ process identifier. (See similar features in rejections of claims 1-2.)
Regarding claim 22:
Tsai further discloses wherein at least one processor of the one or more processors, to cause the network node to transmit the indication of the HARQ process identifier pool, is operable to cause the network node to: transmit an indication of the HARQ process identifier pool in at least one of: a radio resource control (RRC) configuration, or a dynamic control information (DCI) configuration. (See similar features in rejections of claim 2.)
Regarding claim 27:
Tsai discloses a method of wireless communication performed at a network node, comprising: transmitting an indication of a hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) process identifier pool associated with a user equipment (UE); receiving an indication of a HARQ process identifier among a plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in the HARQ process identifier pool; and receiving an uplink communication associated with the HARQ process identifier. (See similar features in rejection of claim 21.)
Regarding claim 28:
Tsai further discloses receiving an indication of another HARQ process identifier, associated with another uplink communication, along with the indication of the HARQ process identifier. (See similar features in rejection of claim 8.)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 3, 18, 23, 24, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai in view of Khoshvevisan et al., US 2021/0385838 A1, (“Khoshvevisan”).
Regarding claim 3:
Tsai does not disclose wherein at least one processor of the one or more processors is operable to cause the UE to: receive an explicit indication of a first HARQ process identifier of the plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in the HARQ process identifier pool, and an indication of a quantity of HARQ process identifiers in the HARQ process identifier pool starting from the first HARQ process identifier.
Khoshvevisan teaches receiveing an explicit indication of a first HARQ process identifier of a plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in a HARQ process identifier pool (e.g., Fig. 4, “HPN field = 3”, [0057]), and an indication of a quantity of HARQ process identifiers in the HARQ process identifier pool starting from the first HARQ process identifier (e.g., Fig. 4, “NDI field = 0010”, [0057]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Tsai in view of the teaching by Khoshvevisan to include the feature that at least one processor of the one or more processors is operable to cause the UE to: receive an explicit indication of a first HARQ process identifier of the plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in the HARQ process identifier pool, and an indication of a quantity of HARQ process identifiers in the HARQ process identifier pool starting from the first HARQ process identifier, because it would enable dynamic scheduling for multiple uplink transmissions using a single DCI message.
Regarding claim 18:
Tsai does not disclose receiving an explicit indication of the plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in the HARQ process identifier pool.
Khoshvevisan teaches receiving an explicit indication of the plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in the HARQ process identifier pool (e.g., Fig. 4, “HPN field = 3”, [0057]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Tsai in view of the teaching by Khoshvevisan to include the feature receiving an explicit indication of the plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in the HARQ process identifier pool, because it would enable dynamic scheduling for multiple uplink transmissions using a single DCI message.
Regarding claim 23:
Tsai does not disclose at least one processor of the one or more processors is operable to cause the network node to: transmit an explicit indication of the plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in the HARQ process identifier pool. (See similar features in rejections of claim 18.)
Khoshvevisan teaches transmit an explicit indication of the plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in the HARQ process identifier pool (e.g., Fig. 4, “HPN field = 3”, [0057]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Tsai in view of the teaching by Khoshvevisan to include the feature transmit an explicit indication of the plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in the HARQ process identifier pool, because it would enable dynamic scheduling for multiple uplink transmissions using a single DCI message.
Regarding claim 24:
Tsai does not disclose wherein at least one processor of the one or more processors is operable to cause the network node to: transmit an explicit indication of a first HARQ process identifier of the plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in the HARQ process identifier pool, and an indication of a quantity of HARQ process identifiers in the HARQ process identifier pool starting from the first HARQ process identifier.
Khoshvevisan teaches receiving an explicit indication of a first HARQ process identifier of a plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in a HARQ process identifier pool (e.g., Fig. 4, “HPN field = 3”, [0057]), and an indication of a quantity of HARQ process identifiers in the HARQ process identifier pool starting from the first HARQ process identifier (e.g., Fig. 4, “NDI field = 0010”, [0057]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Tsai in view of the teaching by Khoshvevisan to include the feature that wherein at least one processor of the one or more processors is operable to cause the network node to: transmit an explicit indication of a first HARQ process identifier of the plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in the HARQ process identifier pool, and an indication of a quantity of HARQ process identifiers in the HARQ process identifier pool starting from the first HARQ process identifier, because it would enable dynamic scheduling for multiple uplink transmissions using a single DCI message.
Regarding claim 29:
Tsai further discloses wherein receiving the indication of the HARQ process identifier comprises: receiving the indication of the HARQ process identifier in an uplink control information (UCI) communication in one or more first uplink resources (e.g., [0199]-[0202], PUCCH resource) and wherein receiving the uplink communication comprises: receiving the uplink communication in one or more second uplink resources that are different from the one or more first uplink resources (e.g., [0337]-[0338], PUSCH resource).
Claims 4-7, 12, 17, 20, 25, 26, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai in view of Yang et a., US 2023/0171038 A1, (“Yang”).
Regarding claim 4:
Tsai does not disclose wherein the HARQ process identifier pool is one of a plurality of HARQ process identifier pools associated with the UE; and wherein at least one processor of the one or more processors is operable to cause the UE to: select the HARQ process identifier pool from the plurality of HARQ process identifier pools.
Yang teaches a configuration of a plurality of HARQ process identifier pools, and selecting a HARQ process identifier pool from the plurality of HARQ process identifier pools (e.g., [0047]-[0050], [0076]-[0078], HARQ process ID groups).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Tsai in view of the teaching by Yang to include the feature that the HARQ process identifier pool is one of a plurality of HARQ process identifier pools associated with the UE; and wherein at least one processor of the one or more processors is operable to cause the UE to: select the HARQ process identifier pool from the plurality of HARQ process identifier pools, because it would improve overhead for high priority feedback and enhance scheduling flexibility.
Regarding claim 5:
Tsai does not disclose wherein at least one processor of the one or more processors is operable to cause the UE to: cooperate with a network node to configure one or more parameters for assigning HARQ process identifiers to the plurality of HARQ process identifier pools.
Yang teaches a UE cooperates with a network node to configure one or more parameters for assigning HARQ process identifiers to a plurality of HARQ process identifier pools (e.g., [0047]-[0050], [0053]-[0056], [0076]-[0078], priority levels).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Tsai in view of the teaching by Yang to include the feature that at least one processor of the one or more processors is operable to cause the UE to: cooperate with a network node to configure one or more parameters for assigning HARQ process identifiers to the plurality of HARQ process identifier pools, because it would improve signaling overhead for high priority feedback and enhance scheduling flexibility.
Regarding claim 6:
Tsai further discloses wherein at least one processor of the one or more processors is operable to cause the UE to: receive, from the network node, an input for facilitating selection of the HARQ process identifier (e.g., [0391], [0392], [0404]-[0407]).
Regarding claim 7:
Tsai does not disclose wherein the one or more parameters comprise at least one of: a priority associated with the uplink communication, a quality of service (QOS) class associated with the uplink communication, a Twait parameter associated with the uplink communication, a remaining packet delay budget associated with the uplink communication, or an energy profile associated with the UE.
Yang teaches the one or more parameters comprise at least one of: a priority associated with the uplink communication, a quality of service (QOS) class associated with the uplink communication, a Twait parameter associated with the uplink communication, a remaining packet delay budget associated with the uplink communication, or an energy profile associated with the (e.g., [0047]-[0050], [0053]-[0056], priority levels).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Tsai in view of the teaching by Yang to include the feature that wherein the one or more parameters comprise at least one of: a priority associated with the uplink communication, a quality of service (QOS) class associated with the uplink communication, a Twait parameter associated with the uplink communication, a remaining packet delay budget associated with the uplink communication, or an energy profile associated with the UE, because it would improve signaling overhead for high priority feedback and enhance scheduling flexibility.
Regarding claim 12:
Tsai does not disclose wherein at least one processor of the one or more processors is operable to cause the UE to: receive an indication of a preferred subset of HARQ process identifiers of the plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in the HARQ process identifier pool, wherein at least one of the one or more processors, to cause the UE to select the HARQ process identifier, is operable to cause the UE to: select the HARQ process identifier from the preferred subset of HARQ process identifiers.
Yang teaches receiving an indication of a preferred subset of HARQ process identifiers of a plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in a HARQ process identifier pool, and selecting a HARQ process identifier from the preferred subset of HARQ process identifiers (e.g., [0048]-[0049], [0076]-[0078], [0080], [0084], [0101]-[0103]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Tsai in view of the teaching by Yang to include the feature that at least one processor of the one or more processors is operable to cause the UE to: receive an indication of a preferred subset of HARQ process identifiers of the plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in the HARQ process identifier pool, wherein at least one of the one or more processors, to cause the UE to select the HARQ process identifier, is operable to cause the UE to: select the HARQ process identifier from the preferred subset of HARQ process identifiers, because it would improve signaling overhead for high priority feedback and enhance scheduling flexibility.
Regarding claim 17:
Tsai does not disclose wherein the delay parameter comprises at least one of: a priority associated with the uplink communication, a quality of service (QOS) class associated with the uplink communication, a Twait parameter associated with the uplink communication, or a remaining packet delay budget associated with the uplink communication.
Yang teaches the delay parameter comprises at least one of: a priority associated with the uplink communication, a quality of service (QOS) class associated with the uplink communication, a Twait parameter associated with the uplink communication, or a remaining packet delay budget associated with the uplink communication (e.g., [0047]-[0050], [0053]-[0056], priority levels).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Tsai in view of the teaching by Yang to include the feature that the delay parameter comprises at least one of: a priority associated with the uplink communication, a quality of service (QOS) class associated with the uplink communication, a Twait parameter associated with the uplink communication, or a remaining packet delay budget associated with the uplink communication, because it would improve signaling overhead for high priority feedback and enhance scheduling flexibility.
Regarding claim 20:
Tsai does not disclose receiving a configuration of a quantity of HARQ process pools; and receiving a configuration of a mapping rule of HARQ processes to HARQ process pools in association with the delay parameter.
Yang teaches receiving a configuration of a quantity of HARQ process pools; and receiving a configuration of a mapping rule of HARQ processes to HARQ process pools in association with the delay parameter (e.g., [0047]-[0056], [0076]-[0078]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Tsai in view of the teaching by Yang to include the feature that receiving a configuration of a quantity of HARQ process pools; and receiving a configuration of a mapping rule of HARQ processes to HARQ process pools in association with the delay parameter, because it would improve signaling overhead for high priority feedback and enhance scheduling flexibility.
Regarding claim 25:
Tsai does not disclose wherein at least one processor of the one or more processors is operable to cause the network node to: receive an indication of a subset of HARQ process identifiers, of the plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in the HARQ process identifier pool, from which the HARQ process identifier was selected.
Yang teaches receiving an indication of a preferred subset of HARQ process identifiers of a plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in a HARQ process identifier pool, and selecting a HARQ process identifier from the preferred subset of HARQ process identifiers (e.g., [0048]-[0049], [0076]-[0078], [0080], [0084], [0101]-[0103]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Tsai in view of the teaching by Yang to include the feature that at least one processor of the one or more processors is operable to cause the network node to: receive an indication of a subset of HARQ process identifiers, of the plurality of HARQ process identifiers included in the HARQ process identifier pool, from which the HARQ process identifier was selected, because it would improve signaling overhead for high priority feedback and enhance scheduling flexibility.
Regarding claim 26:
Tsai discloses at least one processor of the one or more processors, to cause the network node to transmit the indication of the HARQ process identifier pool (e.g., [0229], [0238], [0385], [0386]),
Tsai does not disclose the one or more processors, to cause the network node is operable to: transmit an indication of a plurality of HARQ process identifier pools among which the HARQ process identifier pool is included.
Yang teaches transmitting an indication of a plurality of HARQ process identifier pools among which the HARQ process identifier pool is included (e.g., [0047]-[0056], [0076]-[0078], Fig. 6, 605).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Tsai in view of the teaching by Yang to include the feature the one or more processors, to cause the network node is operable to: transmit an indication of a plurality of HARQ process identifier pools among which the HARQ process identifier pool is included, because it would improve signaling overhead for high priority feedback and enhance scheduling flexibility.
Regarding claim 30:
Tsai does not disclose configuring the UE with a quantity of HARQ process pools; and configuring a rule for association between the HARQ process pool and a delay parameter.
Yang configuring a UE with a quantity of HARQ process pools; and configuring a rule for association between the HARQ process pool and a delay parameter (e.g., [0047]-[0056], [0076]-[0078]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Tsai in view of the teaching by Yang to include the feature configuring the UE with a quantity of HARQ process pools; and configuring a rule for association between the HARQ process pool and a delay parameter, because it would improve signaling overhead for high priority feedback and enhance scheduling flexibility.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai in view of Lei et al., US 2025/0203631 A1, (“Lei”).
Regarding claim 9:
Tsai teaches transmitting an indication of the HARQ process identifier in an uplink control information (UCI) communication (e.g., [0365], “the wireless device may transmit the HARQ process ID via UCI”).
Tsai does not disclose wherein the indication of the HARQ process identifier and the indication of the other HARQ process identifier are included in a bitmap in the UCI communication.
Lei teaches using a bitmap to indicate HARQ process identifiers (e.g., [0009]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Tsai in view of the teaching by Lei to include the feature that wherein the indication of the HARQ process identifier and the indication of the other HARQ process identifier are included in a bitmap in the UCI communication, because it would reduce signaling overhead for indicating HARQ process IDs.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsai in view of Akkarakaran et al., US 2020/0413289 A1, (“AkkarakaranB”).
Regarding claim 10:
Tsai teaches transmitting an indication of the HARQ process identifier in an uplink control information (UCI) communication (e.g., [0365], “the wireless device may transmit the HARQ process ID via UCI”).
Tsai does not disclose the indication of the HARQ process identifier and the indication of the other HARQ process identifier are included in respective codepoints in the UCI communication.
Akkarakaran teaches using respective codepoints in a UCI to indicate HARQ process identifiers (e.g., [0088], “the identifier of the HARQ process in the HARQ feedback may be implicit based on the ordering or position of the HARQ feedback bits … the N-th ACK/NACK bit may correspond to the N-th HARQ process.”)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Tsai in view of the teaching by Akkarakaran to include the feature that the indication of the HARQ process identifier and the indication of the other HARQ process identifier are included in respective codepoints in the UCI communication, because it would reduce signaling overhead for indicating HARQ process IDs.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15 and 19 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
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 Alvin ZHU whose telephone number is (571)270-1086. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 6am-9am and 2pm-7pm.
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, Gary Mui can be reached at 571-270-1420. 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.
/BO HUI A ZHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465