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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Applicant's amendment filed on 3/2/2026 have been entered and fully considered. Claims 1, 9 and 15 are amended, and claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the Abstract recites “This disclosure relates to …”. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 8 recites “determining to not generate cellular connectivity event information” on line 9. Examiner recommend changing the limitation to “determining to not generate the cellular connectivity event information”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 of this title, 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 1-4, 9-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Myllymaki (US 20020115445 A1), in view of Ramiro Moreno et al. (US 20230224055 A1 and Ramiro Moreno hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Myllymaki teaches a method (Figure 1 and Paragraph 0013), comprising:
by a wireless device (Figure 1 and Paragraph 0013; wireless device):
receiving cellular connectivity event information (Paragraph 0057; Susan B. is driving on a country road, and LCD display on Susan's cell phone tells her that there is no cellular phone service in her current location);
determining, based at least in part on the cellular connectivity event information, a closest cellular service availability location for the wireless device (Paragraph 0023; even though the wireless device may have lost its capability to transmit signals, it can still display information that was received prior to the failure, the information may include directions to the nearest location offering wireless coverage. Paragraph 0057; the LCD display on Susan's cell phone tells her that the last location where she did have network coverage was five miles earlier along that same road. Cell phone service provider has continuously tracked Susan’s location, and transmit the GPS coordinates of their nearest cellular base stations to her phone); and
presenting an indication of the closest cellular service availability location via one or more user interface elements (Paragraph 0023; even though the wireless device may have lost its capability to transmit signals, it can still display information that was received prior to the failure, the information may include directions to the nearest location offering wireless coverage), wherein the closest cellular service availability location is different than a most recent cellular service availability location (Paragraph 0057; the last location where Susan has cellular phone service was five miles earlier along the road, and the nearest location providing cellular service is 8 miles down the road, thus different location).
Myllymaki does not explicitly teach cellular event information comprising respective location information and respective elevation information corresponding to respective cellular connectivity events; determining, based at least in part on the respective location information, the respective elevation information, and estimated cellular service availability location information from crowd-sourced information aggregated from one or more other wireless devices, cellular service availability. In an analogous art, Ramiro Moreno teaches cellular event information comprising respective location information and respective elevation information corresponding to respective cellular connectivity events (Paragraph 0054; alternatively or in addition, the measurement data representing signal strength levels could also be obtained by from processing of geo-located call traces, via Minimization of Drive Tests (MDT), or various traditional triangulation methods. Further, the input data may be derived from altitude measurements, indicating measured altitudes in a location-specific manner); determining, based at least in part on the respective location information, the respective elevation information (Paragraph 0054; alternatively or in addition, the measurement data representing signal strength levels could also be obtained by from processing of geo-located call traces, via Minimization of Drive Tests (MDT), or various traditional triangulation methods. Further, the input data may be derived from altitude measurements, indicating measured altitudes in a location-specific manner. Further, the input data may be derived from geographical maps, including clutter maps, terrain maps, and/or clutter height maps), and estimated cellular service availability location information from crowd-sourced information aggregated from one or more other wireless devices (Paragraph 0038; source signal strength map(s) may be generated from signal level measurements from crowdsourcing data or from geolocated call traces. Paragraph 0054; input data may be derived from crowdsourcing data, and may be used as a source of various measurement data, such as signal strength levels per cell, e.g., Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP) measurements per cell in LTE), cellular service availability location (Paragraphs 0053 and 0054; the input data [signal strength measurement, location, altitude, crowdsourcing data] are used for estimating one or more target signal strength maps [interpreted as cellular service availability location]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Myllymaki and Ramiro Moreno because there is a need for techniques which allow for accurately, cost efficiency and efficiently managing a wireless communication network (Ramiro Moreno, Paragraphs 0008, 0009 and 0092).
Regarding claim 9, Myllymaki teaches a wireless device (Figure 1 and Paragraph 0013), comprising:
an antenna (Paragraph 0057; Susan’s cell phone has cellular service from nearest cellular base station. Examiner asserts cell phone has an antenna to communicate with base station);
a radio coupled to the antenna (Paragraph 0057; Susan’s cell phone has cellular service from nearest cellular base station. Examiner asserts cell phone has a radio to communicate with base station); and
a processor operably coupled to the radio (Paragraph 0057; Susan’s cell phone has cellular service from nearest cellular base station. Examiner asserts cell phone has processor to instruct a radio to communicate with base station);
wherein the wireless device (Paragraphs 0013 and 0057) is configured to:
receive cellular connectivity event information (Paragraph 0057; Susan B. is driving on a country road, and LCD display on Susan's cell phone tells her that there is no cellular phone service in her current location);
determine, based at least in part on the cellular connectivity event information, one or more possible cellular service availability locations (Paragraph 0023; even though the wireless device may have lost its capability to transmit signals, it can still display information that was received prior to the failure, the information may include directions to the nearest location offering wireless coverage. Paragraph 0057; the LCD display on Susan's cell phone tells her that the last location where she did have network coverage was five miles earlier along that same road. Cell phone service provider has continuously tracked Susan’s location, and transmit the GPS coordinates of their nearest cellular base stations to her phone);
determine a closest cellular service availability location among the one or more possible cellular service availability locations (Paragraph 0023; the wireless device display information that was received prior to the failure, the information may include directions to the nearest location offering wireless coverage. Paragraph 0057; the LCD display on Susan's cell phone tells her that the last location where she did have network coverage was five miles earlier along that same road. Cell phone service provider has continuously tracked Susan’s location, and transmit the GPS coordinates of their nearest cellular base stations to her phone); and
present, on a map overlay (Paragraphs 0023, 0047 and 0068; the information may also include directions to the nearest location where network coverage may be regained. Examiner asserts that when a direction is provided to a user to the nearest location, the nearest location is overlaid on the route guidance [such as a map]), a visual indication of the closest cellular service availability location via one or more user interface elements (Paragraph 0023; even though the wireless device may have lost its capability to transmit signals, it can still display information that was received prior to the failure, the information may include directions to the nearest location offering wireless coverage. Paragraph 0057; the LCD display on Susan's cell phone tells her that the last location where she did have network coverage was five miles earlier along that same road. Cell phone service provider has continuously tracked Susan’s location, and transmit the GPS coordinates of their nearest cellular base stations to her phone), wherein the closest cellular service availability location is different than a most recent cellular service availability location (Paragraph 0057; the last location where Susan has cellular phone service was five miles earlier along the road, and the nearest location providing cellular service is 8 miles down the road, thus different location).
Myllymaki does not explicitly teach cellular event information comprising respective location information and respective elevation information corresponding to respective cellular connectivity events; determining, based at least in part on the respective location information, the respective elevation information, and estimated cellular service availability location information from crowd-sourced information aggregated from one or more other wireless devices, cellular service availability. In an analogous art, Ramiro Moreno teaches cellular event information comprising respective location information and respective elevation information corresponding to respective cellular connectivity events (Paragraph 0054; alternatively or in addition, the measurement data representing signal strength levels could also be obtained by from processing of geo-located call traces, via Minimization of Drive Tests (MDT), or various traditional triangulation methods. Further, the input data may be derived from altitude measurements, indicating measured altitudes in a location-specific manner); determining, based at least in part on the respective location information, the respective elevation information (Paragraph 0054; alternatively or in addition, the measurement data representing signal strength levels could also be obtained by from processing of geo-located call traces, via Minimization of Drive Tests (MDT), or various traditional triangulation methods. Further, the input data may be derived from altitude measurements, indicating measured altitudes in a location-specific manner. Further, the input data may be derived from geographical maps, including clutter maps, terrain maps, and/or clutter height maps), and estimated cellular service availability location information from crowd-sourced information aggregated from one or more other wireless devices (Paragraph 0038; source signal strength map(s) may be generated from signal level measurements from crowdsourcing data or from geolocated call traces. Paragraph 0054; input data may be derived from crowdsourcing data, and may be used as a source of various measurement data, such as signal strength levels per cell, e.g., Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP) measurements per cell in LTE), cellular service availability location (Paragraphs 0053 and 0054; the input data [signal strength measurement, location, altitude, crowdsourcing data] are used for estimating one or more target signal strength maps [interpreted as cellular service availability location]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Myllymaki and Ramiro Moreno because there is a need for techniques which allow for accurately, cost efficiency and efficiently managing a wireless communication network (Ramiro Moreno, Paragraphs 0008, 0009 and 0092).
Regarding claims 2 and 10, the combination of Myllymaki and Ramiro Moreno teaches all of the limitations of claims 1 and 9, as described above. Further, Myllymaki teaches wherein the cellular connectivity event information indicates, for each cellular connectivity event of one or more cellular connectivity events: a timestamp for the cellular connectivity event (Paragraphs 0035 and 0057; location is stored with time, and LCD display on Susan's cell phone tells her that there is no cellular phone service in her current location); a cellular service availability status before the cellular connectivity event (Paragraph 0057; the last location where she did have network coverage was five miles earlier along that same road); and a cellular service availability status after the cellular connectivity event (Paragraph 0057; her cell phone was able to tell her that the town has cellular phone service and is just 8 miles down the road).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Myllymaki and Ramiro Moreno teaches all of the limitations of claim 2, as described above. Further, Myllymaki teaches wherein the cellular connectivity event information further indicates, for each cellular connectivity event of the one or more cellular connectivity events: an associated location for the cellular connectivity event (Paragraph 0057; Susan B. is driving on a country road and encounters two cars that have collided moments earlier. The LCD display on Susan's cell phone tells her that there is no cellular phone service in her current location).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Myllymaki and Ramiro Moreno teaches all of the limitations of claim 2, as described above. Further, Myllymaki teaches wherein the method further comprises: receiving location history information for the wireless device (Paragraphs 0027 and 0035; the wireless device of the user is modified so that it periodically sends its location coordinates (latitude and longitude) (e.g., its global positioning system coordinates) to the Location Tracker 110. The information is marked with a timestamp and stored in the Database 120); and determining, for each cellular connectivity event of the one or more cellular connectivity events (Paragraph 0057; Susan B. is driving on a country road, and LCD display on Susan's cell phone tells her that there is no cellular phone service in her current location), a location of the wireless device at the timestamp for the cellular connectivity event (Paragraph 0035; the Location Tracking Database 120 stores the GPS coordinates (latitude and longitude) of each user. The database records have the following exemplary schema: location (user, device, timestamp, location). Paragraph 0037; output of the Finder 130 contains information on the location of nearby pay phones, houses and other buildings, and locations offering wireless coverage and/or recharging facilities).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Myllymaki and Ramiro Moreno teaches all of the limitations of claim 10, as described above. Further, Myllymaki teaches wherein the cellular service availability statuses are selected from a set of possible cellular service availability statuses that includes at least: in service; emergency service; no service; and airplane mode (Paragraphs 0035 and 0057; location is stored with time, and LCD display on Susan's cell phone tells her that there is no cellular phone service in her current location. The cell phone displays the last location where she did have network coverage was five miles earlier along that same road, and that the town has cellular phone service and is just 8 miles down the road).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Myllymaki and Ramiro Moreno teaches all of the limitations of claim 9, as described above. Further, Myllymaki teaches wherein the wireless device is further configured to: determine that the wireless device is in a low-power mode (Paragraphs 0053 and 0054; cellular phone has exhausted all (or near all) battery power, thereby making it impossible for the phone to be used for its intended purpose [such as conduct cellular connectivity]. Peter is driving on a country road and his cell phone had exhausted all battery power) with no cellular service (Paragraph 0057; Susan B. is driving on a country road, and LCD display on Susan's cell phone tells her that there is no cellular phone service in her current location); and estimate whether cellular service is available in a current location of the wireless device (Paragraph 0023; even though the wireless device may have lost its capability to transmit signals, it can still display information that was received prior to the failure, the information may include directions to the nearest location offering wireless coverage. Paragraph 0057; the LCD display on Susan's cell phone tells her that the last location where she did have network coverage was five miles earlier along that same road. Cell phone service provider has continuously tracked Susan’s location, and transmit the GPS coordinates of their nearest cellular base stations to her phone) based at least in part on the wireless device being in the low-power mode (Paragraphs 0053 and 0054; cellular phone has exhausted all (or near all) battery power, thereby making it impossible for the phone to be used for its intended purpose [such as conduct cellular connectivity]. Peter is driving on a country road and his cell phone had exhausted all battery power) with no cellular service (Paragraph 0057; Susan B. is driving on a country road, and LCD display on Susan's cell phone tells her that there is no cellular phone service in her current location).
In addition, Ramiro Moreno teaches estimate whether cellular service is available using crowdsourced cellular connectivity event information, wherein the crowdsourced cellular connectivity event information is harvested with user consent (Paragraph 0038; source signal strength map(s) may be generated from signal level measurements from crowdsourcing data or from geolocated call traces. Paragraph 0054; input data may be derived from crowdsourcing data, and may be used as a source of various measurement data, such as signal strength levels per cell, e.g., Reference Signal Received Power (RSRP) measurements per cell in LTE). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Myllymaki and Ramiro Moreno because there is a need for techniques which allow for accurately, cost efficiency and efficiently managing a wireless communication network (Ramiro Moreno, Paragraphs 0008, 0009 and 0092).
Claims 8 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Myllymaki and Ramiro Moreno, as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, further in view of Manepalli et al. (US 9807661 B1 and Manepalli hereinafter).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Myllymaki and Ramiro Moreno teaches all of the limitations of claim 1, as described above. Further, Myllymaki teaches wherein the method further comprises: receiving the cellular connectivity event information (Paragraph 0057; Susan B. is driving on a country road, and LCD display on Susan's cell phone tells her that there is no cellular phone service in her current location).
The combination of Myllymaki and Ramiro Moreno does not explicitly teach determining that the wireless device and a companion wireless device are paired wireless devices; determining that the companion wireless device is a primary device of the paired wireless devices; receiving information from the companion wireless device based at least in part on the companion wireless device being the primary device of the paired wireless devices; and determining to not generate cellular connectivity event information based at least in part on the companion wireless device being the primary device of the paired wireless devices. In an analogous art, Manepalli teaches determining that the wireless device and a companion wireless device are paired wireless devices (Col 11 Lines 1-14; the wireless device may be an accessory device, such as a smart watch, with a smartphone paired as a companion device); determining that the companion wireless device is a primary device of the paired wireless devices (Col 11 Lines 1-14; the wireless device may be an accessory device, such as a smart watch, with a smartphone paired as a companion device. Col 11 Lines 35-48; it may (at least some of the time) be desirable for the wireless device to utilize the cellular service communication capabilities of the companion device when available instead of performing cellular communication directly, and/or to obtain assistance from the companion device to facilitate acquisition of cellular service by the wireless device); receiving information from the companion wireless device based at least in part on the companion wireless device being the primary device of the paired wireless devices (Col 11 Lines 35-48; it may (at least some of the time) be desirable for the wireless device to utilize the cellular service communication capabilities of the companion device when available instead of performing cellular communication directly, and/or to obtain assistance from the companion device to facilitate acquisition of cellular service by the wireless device. Col 11 Lines 49-56; the wireless device may receive (e.g., using a short range wireless communication technology) cell-specific historical service information from the companion device to the wireless device, and may store the received information. The cell-specific historical service information from the companion device may include similar and/or different types of information than is maintained by the wireless device); and determining to not generate cellular connectivity event information based at least in part on the companion wireless device being the primary device of the paired wireless devices (Col 11 Lines 35-48; it may (at least some of the time) be desirable for the wireless device to utilize the cellular service communication capabilities of the companion device when available instead of performing cellular communication directly, and/or to obtain assistance from the companion device to facilitate acquisition of cellular service by the wireless device). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Myllymaki, Ramiro Moreno and Manepalli because it would be desirable to reduce the power requirements of communication devices (Manepalli, Col 1 Lines 18-27).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Myllymaki and Ramiro Moreno teaches all of the limitations of claim 9, as described above. Further, Myllymaki teaches wherein the wireless device is further configured to: receive the cellular connectivity event information (Paragraph 0057; Susan B. is driving on a country road, and LCD display on Susan's cell phone tells her that there is no cellular phone service in her current location).
The combination of Myllymaki and Ramiro Moreno does not explicitly teach establish a wireless link with a companion wireless device; and receive the cellular connectivity event information from the companion wireless device via the wireless link with the companion wireless device. In an analogous art, Manepalli teaches establish a wireless link with a companion wireless device (Col 11 Lines 1-14; the wireless device may pair with the companion device using one or more short range wireless communication technologies. Pairing the accessory device with the companion device may create a link between the devices such that the devices may be able to wirelessly communicate when within communication range of one another); and receive information from the companion wireless device via the wireless link with the companion wireless device (Col 11 Lines 35-48; it may (at least some of the time) be desirable for the wireless device to utilize the cellular service communication capabilities of the companion device when available instead of performing cellular communication directly, and/or to obtain assistance from the companion device to facilitate acquisition of cellular service by the wireless device. Col 11 Lines 49-56; the wireless device may receive (e.g., using a short range wireless communication technology) cell-specific historical service information from the companion device to the wireless device, and may store the received information. The cell-specific historical service information from the companion device may include similar and/or different types of information than is maintained by the wireless device). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Myllymaki, Ramiro Moreno and Manepalli because it would be desirable to reduce the power requirements of communication devices (Manepalli, Col 1 Lines 18-27).
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Crane et al. (US 20230007466 A1) discloses when determining a cellular signal of a first computing device is below a threshold, transmitting to a second computing device data representing a request for operational data of the second computing device.
Howe et al. (US 20250317826 A1) discloses network quality mapping and crowdsourcing, leveraging real-time data from connected SIM devices to create maps of carrier performance by region based on signal strength, latency and coverage gap.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-7 and 12 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.
Claims 15-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Applicant's invention is drawn to determining and presenting an indication of a closest cellular service location in a wireless communication system.
The prior arts of record, Myllymaki, Orcutt, Ramiro Moreno, Crane, Howe and a thorough search discloses various aspects and features of applicant's claimed invention but fail to explicitly or implicitly teach or disclose
receiving network registration status information for a first subscriber identity module (SIM) of the wireless device; and generating the cellular connectivity event information based at least in part on the network registration status information for the first SIM of the wireless device, as disclosed in dependent claims 5 and 12, in addition to limitations from their respective parent independent claims 1 and 9; and
determine network registration status information for one or more subscriber identity modules (SIMs) of the wireless device; generate cellular connectivity event information based at least in part on the network registration status information for the one or more SIMs of the wireless device, wherein the cellular connectivity event information comprises respective location information and respective elevation information corresponding to respective cellular connectivity events; estimate, based at least in part on the cellular connectivity event information, the respective location information, the respective elevation information, and estimated cellular service availability location information from crowd-sourced information aggregated from one or more other wireless devices, a closest cellular service availability location; and present an indication of the closest cellular service availability location via one or more user interface elements, wherein the closest cellular service availability location is closer in terms of physical distance than a most recent cellular service availability location, as disclosed in independent claim 15.
These functions, in combination of remaining functions are neither taught nor disclosed by the prior art.
Accordingly, Applicant’s dependent claim 5 and 12 would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, and independent claim 15 is allowed for these reasons and for the reasons recited by Applicant in Applicant Arguments/Remarks filed on 3/2/2026.
Claims 6-7 and 16-20 are allowed by the virtue of their dependency from allowed parent claims 5 and 15.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jing Gao whose telephone number is (571)270-7226. The examiner can normally be reached on 9am - 6pm M-F.
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 Alison Slater can be reached on (571) 270-0375. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Jing Gao/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2647