DETAILED ACTION
This communication is in responsive to amendment for Application 18/332405 filed on 2/26/2026. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims:
Claims 1-11, 13-18 and 20-22 are presented for examination.
Response to Arguments
3. Examiner statements in the mailed non-final with respect to obvious limitations including common knowledge or well-known in the art are taken to be admitted prior art because applicant failed to traverse the Examiner’s assertion, see MPEP 2144.03 C.
4. Applicant’s arguments in the amendment filed on 2/26/2026 regarding claim rejection under 35 USC § 102/103 have been considered and found unpersuasive. Some arguments were moot in view of the new art rejection.
Applicant argues (pages. 7-9 in remarks) what is already disclosed in the office action that Migu does not teach then claims 12 or 19 then argues that Bao II does not teach then claims 12 or 19 by appealing to examples from the specification. Examiner disagrees because the cited art still teaches the limitation.
First, the applicant alleges the teachings in Bao II to be conventional. The claims recite similar conventional limitation. Second, examples in the specification that do not appear in the claim language will not read into the claim. For example, all those cited paragraphs and examples of three PDCP are “nice,” but for sake of prosecution they are out because they were not claimed and the claims are the only boundaries setting the metes and bounds of the invention.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-8, 10-11 and 13-14 and 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Migu Cultural Technology CN108566408 (hereinafter Migu, IDS filed 12/31/2024, cite No 2 under Foreign Patent Documents) in view of Baek et al. (hereinafter Baek) US 2023/0007527 A1.
Regarding Claim 1, Migu teaches a communication method, comprising:
receiving first information from a first terminal device, wherein the first information comprises request information of a first task (P. 7, last three paragraphs “step 101...limited herein,” Fig. 1-step 101; server [first node] receives a service request [first information/first task] sent by a first client/user’s device [first terminal device]);
sending configuration information of a second task (P. 9, last three paragraphs & Fig. 2; server [first node] sends information after resource pool is selected…Here, the task splitting strategy/policy may be splitting tasks according to atomic computing capabilities, where the atomic computing capabilities are the smallest computing units integrated in the application program…the information corresponding to the divided calculation subtasks may include: serial number, input parameters, time when the business request was initiated, and calculation identifier [configuration information]. The server packages the calculation subtasks [second/third/etc. tasks], and sends each packaged calculation subtask to each second client in the resource pool according to the serial number), wherein the second task is a subtask of the first task (P. 9, fourth and fifth paragraphs “Step 103…resources is guaranteed,” Fig. 1-Step 103: According to a predetermined task splitting strategy, split the computing task corresponding to the business request to obtain at least two computing subtasks, and distribute the at least two computing subtasks to the second client, wherein , the second client is a client other than the first client accessing the resource pool), the configuration information of the second task is for configuring an execution resource corresponding to the second task (P. 9, last paragraph & Fig. 2; Here, the task splitting strategy may be splitting tasks according to atomic computing capabilities, where the atomic computing capabilities are the smallest computing units integrated in the application program. It should be noted that the information corresponding to the divided calculation subtasks may include: serial number, input parameters, time when the business request was initiated, and calculation identifier [configuration information]. The server packages the calculation subtasks, and sends each packaged calculation subtask to each second client in the resource pool according to the serial number), and the second task corresponds to a first node (P. 9 middle of the page “Step 103…resources is guaranteed”; Fig. 1-step 102; the server [first node] splits the computing task corresponding to the service request according to a present task splitting strategy to obtain at least two computing subtasks).
and receiving an execution result of the second task (abstract, Figs. 1-2; receive calculation results respectively generated by the second client for the at least two calculation subtasks, combine the calculation results, and combine the final calculation result is sent to the first client. The invention also discloses a service processing device and a storage medium at the same time. Note that each client according to Figs. 1-2 are not using same access network device),
Migu does not expressly teach wherein the execution result of the second task is mapped to a task-type packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) data protocol data unit, a task-type service data adaptation protocol (SDAP) data protocol data unit, a task-type data radio bearer (DRB), or a task-type quality of service (QoS) flow.
Baek teaches wherein the execution result of the second task is mapped to a task-type packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) data protocol data unit, a task-type service data adaptation protocol (SDAP) data protocol data unit, a task-type data radio bearer (DRB), or a task-type quality of service (QoS) flow (Fig. 33 & ¶0242; For example, it may happen that both QoS flow 1 and QoS flow 2 are mapped to DRB 1 in a source base station (gNB) and QoS flow 1 and QoS 2 are mapped to DRB 1 and DRB 2, respectively, in a target base station (gNB). In this situation, a handover of the terminal from the source gNB to the target gNB may cause a change of the QoS flow-DRB mapping rule and a QoS flow-DRB remapping, which may lead to a packet out-of-order situation or packet loss. Also see ¶0235; defining a rule for mapping between a DRB defined through a PHY/MAC/RLC/PDCP layer and a newly introduced QoS flow. For a 3GPP RAN, a new layer that supports mapping between the DRB and QoS flow and is responsible for the mapping function is defined. This new layer is a user plane access stratum (AS) protocol layer, and the corresponding protocol is referred to as packet data association protocol (PDAP), service data adaptation protocol (SDAP), etc. This new layer also supports marking QoS flow ID in downlink and uplink packets as well as mapping between QoS flow and DRB. A QoS flow is determined by a terminal for UL and by a core network (CN) for DL, the rule for mapping between the QoS flow and DRB is determined by a RAN. It is also characterized that Multiple QoS flows can be mapped to one DRB).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teachings of Baek into the system of Migu in order to meet the demand for wireless data traffic increase since 5G communication (¶0003). Utilizing such teachings enable the system to decrease propagation loss of radio waves and increase the transmission distance. Id.
Regarding Claim 2, Migu further teaches communication method according to claim 1, wherein the first terminal device is served by a first access network device (Figs. 1-2; first terminal is served by access network device); and the receiving the first information from a from the first terminal device comprises: receiving the first information from the first terminal device through the first access network device (Figs. 1-2; first terminal or device access the network through access network device).
Regarding Claim 3, Migu further teaches the communication method according to claim 1, wherein the execution result corresponds to the first node from a second access network device, wherein the first node comprises one or more of the second access network device or a second terminal device, and the second terminal device is a terminal device served by the second access network device (abstract, Figs. 1-2; receive calculation results respectively generated by the second client for the at least two calculation subtasks, combine the calculation results, and combine the final calculation result is sent to the first client. The invention also discloses a service processing device and a storage medium at the same time. Note that each client according to Figs. 1-2 are not using same access network device); and sending the execution result of the second task corresponding to the first node to the first terminal device (abstract & Figs. 1-2; receive calculation results respectively generated by the second client for the at least two calculation subtasks, combine the calculation results, and combine the final calculation result is sent to the first client. The invention also discloses a service processing device and a storage medium at the same time. Note that each client according to Figs. 1-2 are not using same access network device).
Regarding Claim 4, Migu further teaches the communication method according to claim 3, wherein the sending the configuration information of the second task comprises: sending the configuration information of the second task corresponding to the first node to the second access network device (P. 9, last three paragraphs & Fig. 2; Here, the task splitting strategy may be splitting tasks according to atomic computing capabilities, where the atomic computing capabilities are the smallest computing units integrated in the application program. It should be noted that the information corresponding to the divided calculation subtasks may include: serial number, input parameters, time when the business request was initiated, and calculation identifier [configuration information]. The server packages the calculation subtasks, and sends each packaged calculation subtask to each second client in the resource pool according to the serial number. Nite that Figs. 1-2 provides different devices and different access network devices).
Regarding Claim 5, Migu further teaches the communication method according to claim 4, wherein the sending the configuration information of the second task comprises: verifying validity of the first task (P. 8, paragraph 7 to P. 9, paragraph 3; “specifically, when determining whether…Here, the performance evaluation of all clients receiving heartbeat messages includes: evaluating the hardware performance and battery capacity of all clients receiving heartbeat messages; Correspondingly, according to the evaluation result, selecting the second client that meets the access condition from all the clients includes: evaluating the hardware performance and battery capacity of all the clients according to the preset access standard Statistical calculation is performed, and when the calculation result satisfies the corresponding preset threshold range, it is determined that the client meeting the preset threshold range is the second client accessing the resource pool);
and sending the configuration information of the second task in response to verifying the first task is valid (same as above. Also, see P. 9, last three paragraphs & Fig. 2; the task splitting strategy may be splitting tasks according to atomic computing capabilities, where the atomic computing capabilities are the smallest computing units integrated in the application program. It should be noted that the information corresponding to the divided calculation subtasks may include: serial number, input parameters, time when the business request was initiated, and calculation identifier [configuration information]. The server packages the calculation subtasks, and sends each packaged calculation subtask to each second client in the resource pool according to the serial number).
Regarding Claim 6, Migu further teaches the communication method according to claim 5, further comprising: obtaining node capability information of the first node, wherein the node capability information indicates a task execution capability of the first node (see background; Each server node realizes business computing capability).
Regarding Claim 7, Migu teaches a communication method, comprising:
sending first information to a first network function entity, wherein the first information comprises request information of a first task (P. 7 last four paragraphs “Fig. 1 is a schematic…. not specifically limited herein,” Fig. 1-step 101; first client sends a service request to the server. The server includes network function entity to handle service request like a call or other types. For example, the task splitting strategy may be splitting tasks according to atomic computing capabilities, where the atomic computing capabilities are the smallest computing units integrated in the application program. It should be noted that the information corresponding to the divided calculation subtasks may include: serial number, input parameters, time when the business request was initiated, and calculation identifier [configuration information]. The server packages the calculation subtasks, and sends each packaged calculation subtask to each second client in the resource pool according to the serial number. See p. 9, last paragraph & Fig. 2);
and receiving an execution result of a second task (abstract, combining the calculation results and sending the combined calculation results to the first client. Also see P. 8, top of the page, Fig. 1-step 102; Perform performance evaluation on all clients that receive heartbeat messages, and obtain evaluation results…according to the evaluation result, selecting the second client that meets the access condition [performance/execution result] from all the clients includes: evaluating the hardware performance and battery capacity of all the clients according to the preset access standard Statistical calculation is performed, and when the calculation result satisfies the corresponding preset threshold range, it is determined that the client meeting the preset threshold range is the second client accessing the resource pool), wherein the second task is a subtask of the first task, and the second task corresponds to a first node (P. 9, “Step 103…resources is guaranteed,” Fig.1-step 103: According to a predetermined task splitting strategy, split the computing task corresponding to the business request to obtain at least two computing subtasks, and distribute the at least two computing subtasks to the second client, wherein , the second client is a client other than the first client accessing the resource pool. Note that this is done by the server [first node] e.g., P. 9, last three paragraphs & Fig. 2; server [first node] sends information after resource pool is selected…).
The rest of the limitations are substantially similar to claim 1, thus the same rationale applies.
Regarding Claim 8, Migu further teaches the communication method according to claim 7, wherein the sending the first information to the first network function entity comprises: sending the first information to the first network function entity through a first access network device (Figs. 2-3 different devices that are connected to a network send service requests to servers through the network).
Regarding Claim 10, Migu further teaches the communication method according to claim 7, wherein the receiving the execution result of the second task comprises: receiving the execution result of the second task corresponding to the first node from a first access network device (abstract & Figs. 1-2; receive calculation results respectively generated by the second client for the at least two calculation subtasks, combine the calculation results, and combine the final calculation result is sent to the first client. The invention also discloses a service processing device and a storage medium at the same time),
wherein the first node comprises one or more of a second access network device or a terminal device served by the second access network device (before performing performance evaluation on all clients receiving heartbeat messages, the method further includes: detecting the network status of all clients receiving heartbeat messages; detecting that the network status is the first In the fourth generation communication system (4G, The 4th Generation Communication System) or wireless fidelity (WIFI, Wireless Fidelity), performance evaluation is performed on all clients that receive the heartbeat message).
Regarding Claim 11, Migu further teaches the communication method according to claim 9, wherein the receiving the execution result of the second task comprises: receiving, from a second terminal device, the execution result of the second task corresponding to the second terminal device (abstract & Figs. 1-2; receive calculation results respectively generated by the second client for the at least two calculation subtasks, combine the calculation results, and combine the final calculation result is sent to the first client. The invention also discloses a service processing device and a storage medium at the same time…Correspondingly, according to the evaluation result, selecting the second client that meets the access condition from all the clients includes: evaluating the hardware performance and battery capacity of all the clients according to the preset access standard Statistical calculation is performed, and when the calculation result satisfies the corresponding preset threshold range, it is determined that the client meeting the preset threshold range is the second client accessing the resource pool).
Regarding Claim 13, Migu further teaches the communication method according to claim 7, wherein the receiving the execution result of the second task comprises: receiving the execution result of the second task from the first network function entity (abstract & Figs. 1-2; receive calculation results respectively generated by the second client for the at least two calculation subtasks, combine the calculation results, and combine the final calculation result is sent to the first client. The invention also discloses a service processing device and a storage medium at the same time…server/first network function entity sends a heartbeat messages to all clients…Correspondingly, according to the evaluation result, selecting the second client that meets the access condition from all the clients includes: evaluating the hardware performance and battery capacity of all the clients according to the preset access standard Statistical calculation is performed, and when the calculation result satisfies the corresponding preset threshold range, it is determined that the client meeting the preset threshold range is the second client accessing the resource pool).
Regarding Claim 14, Migu teaches a communication method, comprising:
receiving configuration information of a second task corresponding to a second terminal device from a second access network device (P. 9, last paragraph & Fig. 2; Here, the task splitting strategy may be splitting tasks according to atomic computing capabilities, where the atomic computing capabilities are the smallest computing units integrated in the application program. It should be noted that the information corresponding to the divided calculation subtasks may include: serial number, input parameters, time when the business request was initiated, and calculation identifier [configuration information]. The server packages the calculation subtasks, and sends each packaged calculation subtask to each second client in the resource pool according to the serial number.
Also, p. 15, second paragraph; Migu teaches second terminal device, etc. Referring to FIG. 9, FIG. 9 is a schematic diagram of the hardware structure of a business processing device provided by an embodiment of the present invention. In practical applications, it can be applied to various servers or terminal devices that run the aforementioned application programs. Here, in a fifth aspect, an embodiment of the present invention provides a service processing device, the device comprising: a second sending module and a second receiving module; see p.6, second line from top, paragraphs “[i]n a fifth aspect…request by the server”);
executing the second task corresponding to the second terminal device (same citation as above, the second sending module is configured to send a service request to a server; The second receiving module is configured to receive the calculation result generated based on the service request sent by the server);
and sending an execution result of the second task corresponding to the second terminal device (abstract & Figs. 1-2; receive calculation results respectively generated by the second client for the at least two calculation subtasks, combine the calculation results, and combine the final calculation result is sent to the first client. The invention also discloses a service processing device and a storage medium at the same time Wherein, the calculation result is obtained by merging the calculation results respectively generated by the server for at least two calculation subtasks, and the at least two calculation subtasks are obtained by the server splitting the calculation task corresponding to the service request).
The rest of the limitations are substantially similar to claim 1, thus the same rationale applies.
Regarding Claim 20, Migu in view of Baek teaches the communication method according to claim 1, Baek further teaches wherein the execution result of the second task is transmitted through a calculating radio bearer (CRB) (see ¶0020-¶0021 & Fig. 67).
Regarding Claim 21, Migu in view of Baek teaches the communication method according to claim 3, Baek further teaches wherein the second access network device identifies the execution result of the second task based on the mapping to the task- type PDCP data protocol data unit, the task-type SDAP data protocol data unit, the task-type DRB, or the task-type QoS flow, and directly sends the execution result of the second task to the first terminal device (Fig. 33 & ¶0242; For example, it may happen that both QoS flow 1 and QoS flow 2 are mapped to DRB 1 in a source base station (gNB) and QoS flow 1 and QoS 2 are mapped to DRB 1 and DRB 2, respectively, in a target base station (gNB). In this situation, a handover of the terminal from the source gNB to the target gNB may cause a change of the QoS flow-DRB mapping rule and a QoS flow-DRB remapping, which may lead to a packet out-of-order situation or packet loss. Also see ¶0235; defining a rule for mapping between a DRB defined through a PHY/MAC/RLC/PDCP layer and a newly introduced QoS flow. For a 3GPP RAN, a new layer that supports mapping between the DRB and QoS flow and is responsible for the mapping function is defined. This new layer is a user plane access stratum (AS) protocol layer, and the corresponding protocol is referred to as packet data association protocol (PDAP), service data adaptation protocol (SDAP), etc. This new layer also supports marking QoS flow ID in downlink and uplink packets as well as mapping between QoS flow and DRB. A QoS flow is determined by a terminal for UL and by a core network (CN) for DL, the rule for mapping between the QoS flow and DRB is determined by a RAN. It is also characterized that Multiple QoS flows can be mapped to one DRB).
Regarding Claim 22, Migu in view of Baek teaches the communication method according to claim 1, Baek further teaches wherein the execution result of the second task is distinguished from connection-oriented service data through a QoS flow identifier (QFI) (obvious from ¶0437; system may configure a QoS for a bearer between a base station and a network using a QCI(QoS Class Identifier) among QoS Classifications. The QCI may be derived from 4 QoS Classifications. The 4 parameters are as follows. A Resource Type is defined to indicate supportability of GBR/Non-GBR. A Priority is defined to indicate a data transmission priority. A Packet Delay is defined to indicate a minimum packet transmission delay. A Packet Loss Rate is defined to indicate an initial packet transmission reliability).
Claims 9 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Migu-Baek in view of Bao Wei et al. (hereinafter Bao) US 2021/0345155 A1.
Regarding Claims 9 and 15, Migu teaches the communication method according to claim 14, wherein the configuration information of the second task corresponding to the second terminal device is but does not teach
transmitted through one or more of a task-type radio resource control (RRC) container, task-type non-access stratum (NAS) signaling, or a task-type signaling radio bearer (SRB).
Bao teaches different functions of communication protocols. For example, Bao teaches transmitted through one or more of a task-type radio resource control (RRC) container, task-type non-access stratum (NAS) signaling, or a task-type signaling radio bearer (SRB) (¶0027; functions of communication transmitting-receiving protocols corresponding to a smart card, for example, protocol stacks including Non-Access Stratum (NAS), Radio Resource Control (RRC), Packet Data Convergence Protocol (PDCP), and Radio Link Control (RLC)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teachings of Bao’s communication protocols into the system of Migu-Baek in order for the UE to independently receive a dispatch, configuration, or power control command from a network device (¶0027). Utilizing such teachings enable the system to receive and send data under the control of the network device where the UE is a physical carrier of a plurality of logical UE functions (¶0027-¶0028).
Claims 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Migu in view of Bao Jingchao et al. (hereinafter Bao II) US 2022/0053461 A1.
Regarding Claim 16, Migu further teaches the communication method according to claim 14, further comprising: receiving third information from the second access network device (Fig. 1 steps 101-103 illustrate receiving third/fourth etc. information based on the number of clients and subtasks);
Migu teaches execution results in abstract & Figs. 1-2; receive calculation results respectively generated by the second client for the at least two calculation subtasks, combine the calculation results, and combine the final calculation result is sent to the first client. The invention also discloses a service processing device and a storage medium at the same time but
Migu does not expressly teach and determining a transmission link for the execution result of the second task corresponding to the second terminal device based on the third information.
Bao II teaches and determining a transmission link for the execution result of the second task corresponding to the second terminal device based on the third information (¶0053 & ¶0083; The system determines UEs capability of communication this includes determining whether the UE is sidelink or PC5 interface/air interface capable UE).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teachings of Bao’s II transmission capability determination into the system of Migu-Baek in order to allow either direct communication between two or more UEs without the communication needing to go through a base station (SL-UEs) or communicate with base stations over communication links using Uu interface (¶0053). Utilizing such teachings enable the system to use transmission method according to UEs capability. Id.
Regarding Claim 17, Migu in view of Bao II further teaches the communication method according to claim 16, Migu further teaches and the sending the execution result of the second task corresponding to the second terminal device comprises: sending the execution result of the second task corresponding to the second terminal device to the first terminal device (abstract & Figs. 1-2; receive calculation results respectively generated by the second client for the at least two calculation subtasks, combine the calculation results, and combine the final calculation result is sent to the first client. The invention also discloses a service processing device and a storage medium at the same time).
Bao II teaches wherein the transmission link is a sidelink between the second terminal device and a first terminal device (¶0053 & ¶0083; The system determines UEs capability of communication this includes determining whether the UE is sidelink or PC5 interface/air interface capable UE).
Regarding Claim 18, Migu in view of Bao II further teaches the communication method according to claim 16, and the sending the execution result of the second task corresponding to the second terminal device comprises: sending the execution result of the second task corresponding to the second terminal device to the second access network device (abstract & Figs. 1-2; receive calculation results respectively generated by the second client for the at least two calculation subtasks, combine the calculation results, and combine the final calculation result is sent to the first client. The invention also discloses a service processing device and a storage medium at the same time. This limitation is obvious from Figs. 1-2 where more than one access network device is provided).
Bao II teaches wherein the transmission link is an air interface link between the second terminal device and the second access network device (¶0053 & ¶0083; The system determines UEs capability of communication this includes determining whether the UE is sidelink or PC5 interface/air interface capable UE).
ConclusionApplicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 MAHRAN ABU ROUMI whose telephone number is (469)295-9170. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6AM-5PM.
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, Emmanuel Moise can be reached at 571-272-3865. 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.
MAHRAN ABU ROUMI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2455
/MAHRAN Y ABU ROUMI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2455
Prosecution Insights