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. 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- 2, 4-5, 8 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi U.S. PGPub 2013/0342164 A1 (hereinafter Choi) in view of Krammer et al. U.S. PGPub 2017/0125993 A1 (hereinafter Krammer ) and Lucas WO-2023/186980 A1 (hereinafter Lucas ) . Regarding Claim 1, Choi teaches a charging cable (Choi, Fig. 1, Element 20; Para. [0027]) through which an electric vehicle (Choi, Fig. 1, Element 100; Para. [0027]) is charged from an external power supply (Choi, Fig. 1, Element 30; Para s . [0027] – [0030 , “socket”) , the charging cable comprising one or more electrically conductive cables having a first end and a second end (Choi, Fig. 1, Element s 21, 23 and 25 ; Paras. [0031] – [0032], “power cable” . Where the conductors of the cable are not illustrated. ) , a cover encompassing the one or more internal electrically conductive cables (Choi, Fig. 1. Understood) , a first coupler (Choi, Fig. 1, Element 21; Para. [0031]) that couples the first end to a vehicle charging port (Choi, Fig. 1, Element 120; Para. [0033]) , a second coupler (Choi, Fig. 1, Element 25; Para. [0031], “plug”) that couples the second end to the external power supply (Choi, Fig. 1, Element 30; Para. [0034]) , and a control device mounted to the one or more electrically conductive cables (Choi, Fig. 1, Element 200; Para. [0031], “in-cable charging control device” , and Para. [0035], Lines 5-9 ) , wherein the control device (Choi, Fig. 3, Element 200; Para. [0046]) includes a data storage component (Choi, Fig. 3, Element 260, “storage module”; Para. [0046]) that stores a usage history of the charging cable (Choi, Para. [0051]) , and a detection component (Choi, Fig. 3, Element 230, “detecting module”; Para. [0046]) that detects a charge level of the electric vehicle and that updates the usage history based on the detected charge level (Choi, Paras. [0048] and [0051]) , and a user interface (Choi, Figs. 1 and 4, Element 300; Paras. [0027] and [0035] – [0036] , “terminal” ), but does not explicitly teach the charging cable comprising one or more electrically conductive cables having a cover encompassing the conductive cables wherein the control device is mounted to the conductive cables . Krammer , however, teaches a charging cable ( Krammer , Figs. 3-4, Element 2; Paras. [0062] -[0063], “charging cable”) through which an electric vehicle is charged from an external power supply ( Krammer , Fig. 1; Para. [0060], and Abstract), the charging cable comprising one or more electrically conductive cables ( Krammer , Fig. 4, Elements 21-27; Para. [0064]. Krammer does not refer to the conductors of the cable as electrically conductive cables, but one skilled in the art understands the conductors can take many cross-sectional shapes and have various layers of insulation depending on choice as explained in Para. [0064], Lines 5-10 .), a cover encompassing the one or more internal electrically conductive cables ( Krammer , Fig. 4, Element 29; Para. [0064], “insulating sheath”), and a control device mounted to the one or more electrically conductive cables ( Krammer , Fig. 14, Element 6; Para. [0093], “in-cable box”). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that although Choi is silent as to the details of the conductors of the charging cable, Choi would inherently incorporate some type of conventional electrical conductors commonly understood in the art. The electrical conductors taught by Krammer , for transferring the electrical power from the external power source through the cable and to the vehicle, teaches one of the many conventional electrical conductors utilized in the art for conducting power through a charging cable . A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one taught by Krammer , to provide electrical power through the charging cable of Choi . The combined teaching of the Choi and Krammer references discloses the claimed invention as stated above, but does not explicitly teach one or more electrically conductive cables ( when one thinks of a cable as being individually insulated ) . Lucas , however, teaches a charging cable (Lucas, Fig. 1, Element 1) through which an electric vehicle is charged from an external power supply (Lucas, Fig. 1, Element 100; Abstract) , the charging cable comprising one or more electrically conductive cables (Lucas, Figs. 2a-3b, Elements 21-32) having a first end and a second end (Lucas, Fig. 1, Elements A and B) , a cover encompassing the one or more internal electrically conductive cables (Lucas, Figs. 2a-3b, Elements 10-10’ , “cable body” ) . 133350 346075 0 0 Excerpt from Lucas: It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that although Choi as modified by Krammer is silent as to the optional sizes, shapes and various insulation layers of the conductors within a charging cable , Choi would inherently incorporate some type of conventional electrical conductors commonly understood in the art. The electrical conductors taught by Lucas that offer a round shape and insulation layer design within a flat cable , teaches one of the many conventional electrical conductors utilized in the art for conducting power through a charging cable. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one taught by Lucas , to provide a safe method of electrical power through the charging cable of Choi . Regarding Claim 2, The combined teaching of the Choi, Krammer and Lucas references discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claim 1 . Furthermore, Lucas teaches characterized by a thickness of up to about 2.5 cm, a width of up to about 12 cm, and a length of up to about 20 feet. 199390 327660 0 Excerpts from Lucas: 199390 758190 0 199390 1499870 0 It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that although Choi as modified by Krammer is silent as to the optional numbers of conductors, as well as sizes, shapes and various insulation layers of the conductors within a charging cable, Choi would inherently incorporate some type of conventional cable dimensions/shape/protection to protect the cable conductors as well as providing safety for foot traffic commonly understood in the art. The cable taught by Lucas teaches one of the many conventional cables utilized in the art for conducting power through a charging cable. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one taught by Lucas , to provide a safe method of electrical power through the charging cable of Choi . Regarding Claim 4, The combined teaching of the Choi, Krammer and Lucas references discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claim 1. Furthermore, Lucas teaches wherein the electrically conductive cable(s) have a round cross-section (Lucas, Figs. 2a-3b, Elements 21-32) . It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that although Choi as modified by Krammer is silent as to the optional sizes, shapes and various insulation layers of the conductors within a charging cable, Choi would inherently incorporate some type of conventional electrical conductors commonly understood in the art. The electrical conductors taught by Lucas that offer a round shape and insulation layer design within a flat cable , teaches one of the many conventional electrical conductors utilized in the art for conducting power through a charging cable. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one taught by Lucas , to provide a safe method of electrical power through the charging cable of Choi . Regarding Claim 5, The combined teaching of the Choi, Krammer and Lucas references discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claim 1. Furthermore, Choi teaches wherein the first coupler is joined to a J1772 connector (Choi, Fig. 1, Element 21; Paras. [0033] and [0040]) . Regarding Claim 8, The combined teaching of the Choi, Krammer and Lucas references discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claim 1. Furthermore, Choi teaches wherein the second coupler is couplable to the external power supply via a device selected from the group consisting of a wall charger, a curb charging station, and a portable battery pack system (Choi, Fig. 1, Element 30; Paras. [0027] – [0030, “socket” of a wall charger) . Regarding Claim 13, The combined teaching of the Choi, Krammer and Lucas references discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claim 1. Furthermore, Choi teaches further comprising a microprocessor operative to store and return charging data, the microprocessor having a display screen operative to display a QR code (Choi, Figs. 1 and 4, Element 300; Paras. [0027] and [0035] – [0036], Where it is understood the terminal “mobile phone” incorporates microprocessor(s) and a display screen to display a QR code.) . Claim s 3 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi U.S. PGPub 2013/0342164 A1 (hereinafter Choi) in view of Krammer et al. U.S. PGPub 2017/0125993 A1 (hereinafter Krammer ) and Lucas WO-2023/186980 A1 (hereinafter Lucas) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of SON CHAN KR-2021/0018695-A (hereinafter SON). Regarding Claim 3, The combined teaching of the Choi, Krammer and Lucas references discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claim 1, but does not teach the user interface is electrically connected to a transformer, a PCB, and a booster. SON, however, teaches wherein the user interface is electrically connected to a transformer, a PCB, and a booster (SON, Fig. 2, Elements 113, “control unit”, 114, “transformer”. Where the transformed under control of the control unit can “increase” or “ boost ” the voltage) . 247650 308610 0 Excerpt from SON: It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that although Choi is silent as to the details of the componentry of the in-cable charging control, Choi would inherently incorporate some type of conventional charging control commonly understood in the art. The charging control taught by SON teaches one of the many conventional charging control methods utilized in the art for controlling and adjusting power from an external power supply to charge the battery of an electric vehicle. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one taught by SON , to provide a safe method of electrical power through the charging cable of Choi . Regarding Claim 7, The combined teaching of the Choi, Krammer and Lucas references discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claim 1, but does not teach the second coupler is joined to a J1772 connector. SON, however, teaches wherein the second coupler is joined to a J1772 connector (SON, Figs. 1 and 6, Elements 120 and 130). 104775 376555 0 Excerpt from SON: It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that although Choi teaches different connectors on each end of the charging cable, Choi would inherently incorporate some type of conventional connector selection commonly understood in the art. The optional connectors taught by SON teaches one of the many conventional methods utilized in the art for providing flexibility of the use of the charging cable based on the need of the instant application. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one taught by SON , to provide a flexible connection method for the charging cable of Choi . Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi U.S. PGPub 2013/0342164 A1 (hereinafter Choi) in view of Krammer et al. U.S. PGPub 2017/0125993 A1 (hereinafter Krammer ) and Lucas WO-2023/186980 A1 (hereinafter Lucas) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Brown et al. U.S. PGPub 2011/0169447 A1 (hereinafter Brown). Regarding Claim 6, The combined teaching of the Choi, Krammer and Lucas references discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claim 1, but does not teach the first coupler is joined to a wireless induction charging tile. Brown, however, teaches wherein the first coupler is joined to a wireless induction charging tile (Brown, Fig. 1, Para. [0003], Lines 4-6, and Para. [0061], Lines 5-8, “inductive”). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that although Choi explicitly teaches conductive charging, Choi would inherently incorporate some type of conventional charging commonly understood in the art. The optional inductive charging taught by Brown teaches one of the many conventional charging control methods utilized in the art for controlling and adjusting power from an external power supply to charge the battery of an electric vehicle. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one taught by Brown , to provide a safe method of electrical power through the charging cable of Choi . Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi U.S. PGPub 2013/0342164 A1 (hereinafter Choi) in view of Krammer et al. U.S. PGPub 2017/0125993 A1 (hereinafter Krammer ) and Lucas WO-2023/186980 A1 (hereinafter Lucas) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Restrepo et al. U.S. PGPub 2013/0271075 A1 (hereinafter Restrepo). Regarding Claim 9, The combined teaching of the Choi, Krammer and Lucas references discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claim 1, but does not teach at least one of the first coupler and the second coupler is rotatably joined to the charging cable. Restrepo, however, teaches wherein at least one of the first coupler and the second coupler is rotatably joined to the charging cable (Restrepo, Fig. 6; Paras. [0037] – [0039]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that although Choi teaches different connectors on each end of the charging cable, Choi would inherently incorporate some type of conventional connector selection such as a rotatable connector commonly understood in the art. The optional connectors taught by Restrepo teaches one of the many conventional methods utilized in the art for providing flexibility of the use of the charging cable based on the need of the instant application. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one taught by Restrepo , to provide a flexible connection method for the charging cable of Choi . Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi U.S. PGPub 2013/0342164 A1 (hereinafter Choi) in view of Krammer et al. U.S. PGPub 2017/0125993 A1 (hereinafter Krammer ) and Lucas WO-2023/186980 A1 (hereinafter Lucas) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Niederl EP-3453559-A1 (hereinafter Niederl ). Regarding Claim 10, The combined teaching of the Choi, Krammer and Lucas references discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claim 1 . Furthermore, Choi teaches further comprising insertable into an electrical socket (Choi, Fig. 1, Element 30; Paras. [0027] – [0030, “socket”) , but does not teach comprising at least one adapter couplable to the second coupler. Niederl , however, teaches further comprising at least one adapter couplable to the second coupler and insertable into an electrical socket ( Niederl , Fig. 1, Element 2) . 95250 374015 0 0 Excerpt from Niederl : It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that although Choi teaches different connectors on each end of the charging cable, Choi would inherently incorporate some type of conventional connector selection or adapter commonly understood in the art. The optional connectors taught by Niederl teaches one of the many conventional methods utilized in the art for providing flexibility of the use of the charging cable based on the need of the instant application. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one taught by Niederl , to provide a flexible connection method for the charging cable of Choi . Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi U.S. PGPub 2013/0342164 A1 (hereinafter Choi) in view of Krammer et al. U.S. PGPub 2017/0125993 A1 (hereinafter Krammer ) and Lucas WO-2023/186980 A1 (hereinafter Lucas) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of INRO DE-202021104997-U1 (hereinafter INRO). Regarding Claim 11, The combined teaching of the Choi, Krammer and Lucas references discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claim 1, but does not teach at least one of the first coupler and the second coupler has a lock. INRO, however, teaches wherein at least one of the first coupler and the second coupler has a lock selected from the group consisting of a magnetic lock, a mechanical lock, and a combination thereof (INRO, Fig. 1 . 114300 354330 0 0 Excerpt from INRO: 190500 1870710 0 0 It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that although Choi teaches different connectors on each end of the charging cable which may incorporate some type of locking mechanism, Choi would inherently incorporate some type of conventional connector selection, adapter or lock commonly understood in the art. The optional connectors taught by INRO teaches one of the many conventional methods utilized in the art for providing flexibility of the use of the charging cable based on the need of the instant application. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one taught by INRO , to provide a flexible connection method for the charging cable of Choi . Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi U.S. PGPub 2013/0342164 A1 (hereinafter Choi) in view of Krammer et al. U.S. PGPub 2017/0125993 A1 (hereinafter Krammer ) and Lucas WO-2023/186980 A1 (hereinafter Lucas) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Morgal et al. U.S. PGPub 2010/0228405 A1 (hereinafter Morgal ). Regarding Claim 12, The combined teaching of the Choi, Krammer and Lucas references discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claim 1, but does not teach the cover is formed of a high-density polyethylene (HDPE). Morgal , however, teaches wherein the cover is formed of a high-density polyethylene (HDPE) ( Morgal , Fig. 5, Element 210; Para. [0114]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that although Choi is silent in regards to the type of material used for the charging cable to provide long wear and resistance to the elements , Choi would inherently incorporate some type of conventional cable type commonly understood in the art. The cable type taught by Morgal teaches one of the many conventional materials utilized in the art for making a ruggedized, safe cable for outdoor use . A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one taught by Morgal , to provide the ruggedized, safe charging cable of Choi . Claims 14- 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi U.S. PGPub 2013/0342164 A1 (hereinafter Choi) in view of Krammer et al. U.S. PGPub 2017/0125993 A1 (hereinafter Krammer ) and Lucas WO-2023/186980 A1 (hereinafter Lucas) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Watson U.S. PGPub 2020/0180465 A1 (hereinafter Watson). Regarding Claim 14, The combined teaching of the Choi, Krammer and Lucas references discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claim 1. Furthermore, Choi teaches method of charging an electric vehicle with the charging cable of claim 1, comprising providing a smartphone application electronically coupled to the control device (Choi, Figs. 1 and 4, Element 300; Paras. [0035] – [0036]), detecting a charge level of the electric vehicle by the control device (Choi, Paras. [0050] – [0052]), storing a usage history based on the detected charge level by the control device (Choi, Paras. [0051]), charging the electric vehicle (Choi, Fig. 1; Paras. [0051]), but does not teach collecting payment for charging the electric vehicle by the smartphone application. Watson, however, teaches collecting payment for charging the electric vehicle by the smartphone application (Watson, Para. [0055]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that although Choi is silent regarding billing for the electricity use, Choi would inherently incorporate some type of conventional billing commonly understood in the art. The billing taught by Watson teaches one of the many conventional billing methods utilized in the art for charging a user for use of the charging system electricity. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one taught by Watson , to provide a billing system for electricity obtained when using the charging cable of Choi . Regarding Claim 15, The combined teaching of the Choi, Krammer , Lucas and Watson references discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claims 14/1. Furthermore, Watson teaches further comprising turning on the charging cable manually or by scanning a quick response (QR) code with the smartphone application (Watson, Para. [0102]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that although Choi is silent regarding billing for the electricity use, Choi would inherently incorporate some type of conventional billing commonly understood in the art. The billing taught by Watson teaches one of the many conventional billing methods utilized in the art for charging a user for use of the charging system electricity. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one taught by Watson , to provide a billing system for electricity obtained when using the charging cable of Choi. Regarding Claim 16, The combined teaching of the Choi, Krammer , Lucas and Watson references discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claims 15/14/1. Furthermore, Watson teaches further comprising disconnecting automatically once charging is complete or ending the charging by re-scanning the QR code (Watson, Fig. 13, Step 624; Para. [0173]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that although Choi is silent regarding billing for the electricity use, Choi would inherently incorporate some type of conventional billing commonly understood in the art. The billing taught by Watson teaches one of the many conventional billing methods utilized in the art for charging a user for use of the charging system electricity. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one taught by Watson , to provide a billing system for electricity obtained when using the charging cable of Choi . Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi U.S. PGPub 2013/0342164 A1 (hereinafter Choi) in view of Krammer et al. U.S. PGPub 2017/0125993 A1 (hereinafter Krammer ) and Lucas WO-2023/186980 A1 (hereinafter Lucas) and Watson U.S. PGPub 2020/0180465 A1 (hereinafter Watson) as applied to claims 14/1 above, and further in view of Kim et al. U.S. PGPub 2018/0001776 A1 (hereinafter Kim). Regarding Claim 17, The combined teaching of the Choi, Krammer , Lucas and Watson references discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claims 14/1, but does not teach forming a network of charging hosts. Kim, however, teaches further comprising forming a network of charging hosts (Kim, Fig. 2; Paras. [0007] and [0118]) . It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that although Choi is silent regarding billing network of hosts for the electricity use, Choi would inherently incorporate some type of conventional billing commonly understood in the art. The billing taught by Kim teaches one of the many conventional billing methods utilized in the art for charging a user for use of the charging system electricity. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one taught by Kim , to provide a billing system for electricity obtained when using the charging cable of Choi. Regarding Claim 18, The combined teaching of the Choi, Krammer , Lucas, Watson and Kim references discloses the claimed invention as stated above in claims 17/14/1, but does not teach comprising delivering the payment to one of the network of charging hosts via the smartphone application. Kim, however, teaches further comprising delivering the payment to one of the network of charging hosts via the smartphone application (Kim, Figs. 2-4; Para. [0137]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to understand that although Choi is silent regarding billing network of hosts for the electricity use, Choi would inherently incorporate some type of conventional billing commonly understood in the art. The billing taught by Kim teaches one of the many conventional billing methods utilized in the art for charging a user for use of the charging system electricity. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to choose based on desirability, one of the many known conventional methods, such as the one taught by Kim , to provide a billing system for electricity obtained when using the charging cable of Choi. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Watson U.S. PGPub 2020/0180460 teachers an in-cable charger. Choi U.S. PGPub 2015/0017921 teachers an in-cable charger. Kim et al. U.S. PGPub 2015/0329000 teachers an in-cable charger. Natter et al. U.S. PGPub 2015/0372469 teachers an in-cable charger. Eisner et al. U.S. PGPub 2017/0297442 teachers an in-cable charger. Vitale et al. U.S. PGPub 2010/0174667 teachers an in-cable charger. Poulin U.S. PGPub 2014/0077019 teachers an in-cable charger. Choi U.S. PGPub 2015/0015211 teachers an in-cable charger. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT JERRY D ROBBINS whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-7585 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT 9:00AM - 6:00PM Tuesday-Saturday . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Julian Huffman can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-2147 . 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. /JERRY D ROBBINS/ Examiner, Art Unit 2859