DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1 – 20 have been amended.
Claims 1 – 20 have been examined and are pending.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following grammatical informalities: “causing data to be at least one or transmitted…” should be --causing data to be at least one of transmitted…--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: “The apparatus as claimed in claim 1” should be --The communication device as claimed in claim 1--. Appropriate correction is required.
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 – 7 and 10 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0354089 to Liu and in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0213896 to Faheem et al. (hereinafter Faheem et al.)
Claim 1, Liu discloses (¶1) quality of experience (QoE) awareness transmissions, which further includes:
communication device for communicating with an access node over an air interface, the communication device (¶Fig. 8, wireless communication device 80, communicating with an antenna 822, with a wireless network 90) comprising:
at least one processor (¶Fig. 8, processor 800); and
at least one memory (¶Fig. 8, storage unit 810) storing instructions (¶Fig. 8, program code 812) which, when executed by the at least one processor (¶Fig. 8, processor 800), cause the communication device (¶Fig. 8, wireless communication device 80) at least to perform:
receiving information, from the access node (¶170, UE received information from the gNB), the information) indicating a change to a different quality of experience level (¶170, UE received recommended encode or the allocated bandwidth information from the gNB), of a set of two or more quality of experience levels (¶19, ¶102, QoE metrics range i.e. maximum, average, minimum QoE metrics) for at least one service or application supported by the communication device (¶87, QoE measurement may be defined based on different applications), the at least one service or application associated with at least one logical connection between the communication device and a serving network comprising the access node (Fig. 7: 702 and ¶166, the data of service is transmitted between the UE and the application server (e.g. a video server) via the gNB and the UE forwards (Fig. 7: 705a-2 and ¶171) the recommended encode rate/bandwidth to the application server),
wherein the respective quality of experience level comprises an integer value indicating a respective level of quality of experience (Liu discloses ¶93-¶94, gNB stores QoS-QoE mapping list based on QoE measurement report/results and QoS measurement data received from multiple UEs. Liu discloses ¶11, QoE level is associated with at least one of: a QoE level identifier, a service type, a codec rate, a QoE Score, a QoE metrics range, and a maximum, minimum, average QoE metric. Liu discloses ¶138 QoE score as a number range, e.g., from 0 to 10, where 10 represents excellent quality and 0 represents poor quality)
Liu does not explicitly disclose a respective quality of experience level of the set of two or more quality of experience levels corresponding to a respective quality of service configuration of a set of two or more quality of service configurations provisioned at the communication device, the set of two or more quality of experience levels provisioned at the communication device, and based on the information that is received from the access node, changing configuration of the communication device to a quality of service configuration corresponding to the different quality of experience level for the at least one logical connection, the set of two or more quality of service configurations provisioned at the at least one communication device comprising the quality of service configuration. However, in an analogous art, Faheem teaches:
a respective quality of experience level of the set of two or more quality of experience levels corresponding to a respective quality of service configuration of a set of two or more quality of service configurations provisioned at the communication device (Faheem teaches providing adaptive service quality, or QoS (¶78-¶79) to certain applications and to dynamically calibrate and optimize QoS for certain application for an improved Quality of Experience (QoE). Faheem teaches two levels of QoS provisioned for applications, i.e. (Fig. 6, ¶81) an enhanced QoS level for latency-sensitive applications 622 (¶89), and (¶91) an initial or default QoS for legacy applications 624) the set of two or more quality of experience levels provisioned at the communication device (Faheem teaches (¶7) UE may access a “QoS policy” profile associated with the application stored on the UE, and it has two levels of QoS provisioned for applications, i.e. (Fig. 6, ¶81) an enhanced QoS level for latency-sensitive applications 622 (¶89), and (¶91-92) an initial or default QoS for legacy applications 624)
based on the information that is received from the access node, changing configuration of the communication device to a quality of service configuration corresponding to the different quality of experience level for the at least one logical connection (Faheem teaches (¶101, ¶103) UE 106 and cellular network 702 may perform routine procedures and communications in order to maintain and adaptively adjust the enhanced QoS configuration. The Policy Server 630 verify and perform policy control i.e., authentication and authorization regarding applications’ access to the enhanced QoS capabilities (¶97). If it is determined that the app's QoS request is valid, then the UE 106 may perform a procedure with the cellular network 702 in order to modify the QoS of the bearer, i.e., may perform a “QoS negotiation” procedure with the network and reconfigure (¶100) the air interface of the bearer of the application network traffic)
the set of two or more quality of service configurations provisioned at the at least one communication device comprising the quality of service configuration (Faheem teaches (Fig. 6, ¶81) an enhanced QoS level, and (¶91) an initial or default QoS level) the set of two or more quality of service configurations provisioned at the at least one communication device comprising the quality of service configuration (Faheem teaches (¶107) UE 702 host multiple applications associated with multiple bearers, which may take advantage of enhanced QoS capabilities).
It would have been obvious as of the effective filing date to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the communication device for communicating with an access node over an air interface, the communication device comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory storing instructions which, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the communication device at least to perform: receiving information, from the access node, the information indicating a change to a different quality of experience level, of a set of two or more quality of experience levels, for at least one service or application supported by the communication device, the at least one service or application associated with at least one logical connection between the communication device and a serving network comprising the access node, wherein the respective quality of experience level comprises an integer value indicating a respective level of quality of experience, as disclosed by Liu, and a respective quality of experience level of the set of two or more quality of experience levels corresponding to a respective quality of service configuration of a set of two or more quality of service configurations provisioned at the communication device, the set of two or more quality of experience levels provisioned at the communication device, based on the information that is received from the access node, changing configuration of the communication device to a quality of service configuration corresponding to the different quality of experience level for the at least one logical connection, the set of two or more quality of service configurations provisioned at the at least one communication device comprising the quality of service configuration, the set of two or more quality of service configurations provisioned at the at least one communication device comprising the quality of service configuration, as taught by Faheem, for the purpose of implementing methods for achieving adaptive, enhanced QoS for UE applications (¶65) that perform wireless communications with QoS requirements.
Claim 2, Liu in view of Faheem discloses all the elements of claim 1. Further, they disclose:
causing data to be at least one of transmitted or received on the at least one logical connection, using the configuration of the communication device comprising the quality of service configuration corresponding to the different quality of experience level (Liu discloses ¶137-¶138, gNB receives QoE measurement report(s) from the UE and calculates a QoE score, and the gNB retrieves an specific QoS level from the QoE-QoS level mapping list and accordingly decides the appropriate QoS parameters for the QoS flow of the PDU session based on the retrieved QoS level.)
The motivation to combine the references is similar to the reasons in Claim 1.
Claim 3, Liu in view of Faheem discloses all the elements of claim 1. Further, they disclose:
wherein the respective quality of service configuration corresponding to the respective quality of experience level comprises, for one or more quality of service parameters, a respective setting for the respective quality of experience level (Liu discloses ¶21 determining a QoS level based on the QoE policy and a mapping list comprising at least one mapping pair of a QoE level and a QoS level, and determining a recommended QoS configuration based on the determined QoS level, wherein the recommended QoS configuration is used for performing the at least one data transmission.)
The motivation to combine the references is similar to the reasons in Claim 1.
Claim 4, Liu in view of Faheem discloses all the elements of claim 1. Further, they disclose:
wherein the information indicating the change to the different quality of experience level comprises a command (Liu discloses ¶122,124 the gNB-DU may take the QoE policy into account for packet transmission scheduling of the UE, to fulfill the QoE score target and/or the QoE metrics target in the QoE policy for the UE. For fulfilling the QoE score target or the QoE metrics target, the gNB-DU may increase or decrease the bandwidth, increase the priority of some kinds of service to reduce delay, etc.)
The motivation to combine the references is similar to the reasons in Claim 1.
Claim 5, Liu in view of Faheem discloses all the elements of claim 4. Further, they disclose:
monitoring for the command (¶27, determining a QoE score of a QoS flow or a service type), the command being a common command for a plurality of communication devices, the plurality of communication devices including the communication device (Liu discloses ¶122,124, the gNB-DU may increase or decrease the bandwidth, increase the priority of some kinds of service to reduce delay, etc. ¶164 - ¶169, to achieve the QoE quality target, the encode rate is adjusted by the network side (e.g. gNB) by sending the recommend encode rate allocated bandwidth to application server(s) e.g. a video server and this achieves better performance on improving QoE quality and avoid wasting network resources.)
The motivation to combine the references is similar to the reasons in Claim 1.
Claim 6, Liu in view of Faheem discloses all the elements of claim 1. Further, they disclose:
wherein the information indicating the change to the different quality of experience level indicates a step change to the different quality of experience level of the set of two or more quality of experience levels; Liu discloses, ¶105, QoE guaranteed information for one or more QoE levels and optionally for recommend slice ID(s) for the specific QoE level(s).
The motivation to combine the references is similar to the reasons in Claim 1.
Claim 7, Liu in view of Faheem discloses all the elements of claim 1. Further, they disclose:
wherein the information indicating the change to the different quality of experience level identifies the different quality of experience level (Liu discloses, ¶11 wherein the QoE level is associated with at least one of: a QoE level identifier, a service type, a codec rate, a QoE Score, a QoE metrics range.)
The motivation to combine the references is similar to the reasons in Claim 1.
Claim 10, Liu in view of Faheem discloses all the elements of claim 1. Further, they disclose:
receiving quality of service configuration information for the respective quality of service configuration for each of the quality of experience levels of the set of two or more quality of experience levels (Liu discloses (Fig. 7:705a-1 and ¶170), the gNB sends following information to the UE: a recommend encode or the allocated bandwidth.)
The motivation to combine the references is similar to the reasons in Claim 1.
Claim 11, Liu in view of Faheem discloses all the elements of claim 1. Further, they disclose:
updating an application layer of one or more quality of service settings based on the information indicating the change to the different quality of experience level of the set of two or more quality of experience levels that is received from the access node (Liu discloses (Fig. 7:705a-1 and ¶170), the gNB sends following information to the UE: a recommend encode or the allocated bandwidth. The application layer of the UE forwards (Fig. 7:705a-2) the received recommend encode and/or received allocated bandwidth to the application server, and the application server adjusts the encode rate based on the received recommender encode rate and/or the received allocated bandwidth.)
The motivation to combine the references is similar to the reasons in Claim 1.
Claim 12, Liu discloses (¶1) quality of experience (QoE) awareness transmissions, which further includes:
an access node (Fig. 9: 90) for communicating with at least communication device (Fig. 8: 80) over an air interface (Fig. 9: 922), the access node (¶178) comprising:
at least one processor (¶178 processor 900); and
at least one memory (¶178 storage unit 910) storing instructions (¶178 program code 912) which, when executed by the at least one processor (¶178 processor 900), cause the access node (¶178, wireless network node 90) at least to perform:
determining that there is to be a change to a different quality of experience level of a set of two or more quality of experience levels (¶19, ¶102, QoE metrics range i.e. maximum, average, minimum QoE metrics) for at least one service or application supported by the at least one communication device (Liu discloses ¶137-¶138, gNB receives QoE measurement report(s) and accordingly decides the appropriate QoS parameters for the QoS flow of the PDU session based on the retrieved QoS level) the at least one service or application associated with at least one logical connection between each of the at least one communication device and a serving network comprising an access node (¶172, in step 705a-2, the application layer of the UE forwards the received recommend encode and/or received allocated bandwidth to the application server) wherein the respective quality of experience level comprises an integer value indicating a respective level of quality of experience (Liu discloses ¶138 QoE score as a number range, e.g., from 0 to 10, where 10 represents excellent quality and 0 represents poor quality) and causing information to be transmitted from the access node to the at least one communication device when there is to be the change to the different quality of experience level for the at least one service or application supported by the at least one communication device (Liu discloses ¶170, in step 705a-1, the gNB sends the following information to the UE: a recommend encode or the allocated bandwidth) the information for causing a change to a quality of service configuration corresponding to the different quality of experience level for the at least one logical connection, the set of two or more quality of service configurations provisioned at each of the at least one communication device comprising the quality of service configuration (Liu discloses (Fig. 7:705a-1 and ¶170), the gNB sends following information to the UE: a recommend encode or the allocated bandwidth. The application layer of the UE forwards (Fig. 7:705a-2) the received recommend encode and/or received allocated bandwidth to the application server, and the application server adjusts the encode rate based on the received recommender encode rate and/or the received allocated bandwidth.)
the set of two or more quality of experience levels provisioned at each of the at least one communication device (Faheem teaches two levels of QoS provisioned for applications, i.e. (Fig. 6, ¶81) an enhanced QoS level for latency-sensitive applications 622 (¶89), and (¶91-92) an initial or default QoS for legacy applications 624) a respective quality of experience level of the set of two or more quality of experience levels corresponding to a respective quality of service configuration of a set of two or more quality of service configurations provisioned at each of the at least one communication device (Faheem teaches (¶7 and ¶75) UE may access a “QoS policy” profile associated with the application stored on the UE, and two levels of QoS (Fig. 6) provisioned for applications)
The motivation to combine the references is similar to the reasons in Claim 1.
Claim 13, Liu discloses all the elements of claim 12. Further, it discloses:
determining that there is to be the change (¶0144 Step 507c-1: The gNB-DU calculates the QoE score of specific QoS flow or specific service type based on the received QoE measurement results from the UE. ¶164, detecting that the data delay or that the throughput is too large or too low in the application layer) to the different quality of experience in response to a trigger received from a control function of the serving network (Liu discloses, ¶124 fulfilling the QoE score target and/or the QoE metrics target, the gNB-DU may increase or decrease the bandwidth, increase the priority of some kinds of service to reduce delay, etc.
Claim 14, Liu in view of Faheem discloses all the elements of claim 12. Further, they disclose:
determining that there is to be the change to the different quality of experience in response to an addition or admission, a modification or reconfiguration (¶111, if the QoE target is not in the RAN guaranteed QoE level list), a removal or release (¶111, then the 5GC may reject the service request or release the PDU session), or a handover that impacts one or more communication devices, the one or more communication devices including the at least one communication device (¶170, the gNB sends at least one of the following information to the UE: a recommend encode or the allocated bandwidth.)
The motivation to combine the references is similar to the reasons in Claim 1.
Claim 15, Liu in view of Faheem discloses all the elements of claim 12. Further, they disclose:
determining that there is to be the change to the different quality of experience in response to an addition or admission, a modification or reconfiguration, a removal or release, or a handover, that impacts one or more logical connections (¶111, if the QoE target is not in the RAN guaranteed QoE level list, then the 5GC may reject the service request or release the PDU session, or the 5GC may decide to reconfigure the slice(s) associated with the determined QoE target) the one or more logical connections including the at least one logical connection between each of the at least one communication device and the serving network (¶172-¶173, the gNB sends the following information to the application server: a recommended encode rate or the allocated bandwidth, and the application server adjusts the encode rate based on the received recommender encode rate and/or the received allocated bandwidth.)
The motivation to combine the references is similar to the reasons in Claim 1.
Claim 16, Liu in view of Faheem discloses all the elements of claim 12. Further, they disclose:
wherein the information indicating the change to the different quality of experience level (¶111, the 5GC may decide to reconfigure the slice(s) associated with the determined QoE target) comprises a command (¶240, a person having ordinary skill in the art would understand that information and signals can be represented using any one of a variety of different technologies and techniques. For example, data, instructions, commands, information, signals etc.)
The motivation to combine the references is similar to the reasons in Claim 1.
Claim 17, Liu in view of Faheem discloses all the elements of claim 16. Further, they disclose:
causing the command to be transmitted to the at least one communication device, the command being a common command for each of the at least one communication device (Liu discloses (Fig. 7:705a-1 and ¶170), the gNB sends following information to the UE: a recommend encode or the allocated bandwidth. The application layer of the UE forwards (Fig. 7:705a-2) the received recommend encode and/or received allocated bandwidth to the application server, and the application server adjusts the encode rate based on the received recommender encode rate and/or the received allocated bandwidth.)
The motivation to combine the references is similar to the reasons in Claim 1.
Claim 18, do not teach or further define over the limitations in Claim 1. Therefore, claim 18 is rejected for the same rationale of rejection as set forth in Claim 1.
Claim 19, do not teach or further define over the limitations in Claim 12. Therefore, claim 19 is rejected for the same rationale of rejection as set forth in Claim 12.
Claim 20, do not teach or further define over the limitations in Claim 1. Therefore, claim 20 is rejected for the same rationale of rejection as set forth in Claim 1.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0354089 to Liu, in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0213896 to Faheem and in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0322127 to Sha et al. (hereinafter Sha).
Claim 8, Liu in view of Faheem discloses all the elements of claim 1. Liu in view of Faheem does not explicitly disclose causing a response to be sent to the access node in response to the receiving the information from the access node. However, in an analogous art, Sha teaches:
causing a response to be sent to the access node in response to the receiving the information from the access node (Sha teaches (Fig. 2 and ¶23-¶35) the network element 2 (e.g. gNB) send a QoE measurement request to network element 1 (e.g. UE). The UE performs measurements according to QoE measurement request, and reports the measurement results to the gNB.)
It would have been obvious as of the effective filing date to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the communication device for communicating with an access node over an air interface, the communication device comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory storing instructions which, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the communication device at least to perform: receiving information, from the access node, the information indicating a change to a different quality of experience level, of a set of two or more quality of experience levels, for at least one service or application supported by the communication device, the at least one service or application associated with at least one logical connection between the communication device and a serving network comprising the access node, wherein the respective quality of experience level comprises an integer value indicating a respective level of quality of experience, and a respective quality of experience level of the set of two or more quality of experience levels corresponding to a respective quality of service configuration of a set of two or more quality of service configurations provisioned at the communication device, the set of two or more quality of experience levels provisioned at the communication device, based on the information that is received from the access node, changing configuration of the communication device to a quality of service configuration corresponding to the different quality of experience level for the at least one logical connection, the set of two or more quality of service configurations provisioned at the at least one communication device comprising the quality of service configuration, the set of two or more quality of service configurations provisioned at the at least one communication device comprising the quality of service configuration, as disclosed by Liu in view of Faheem, and causing a response to be sent to the access node in response to the receiving the information from the access node, as taught by Sha, for the purpose of implementing methods, systems, and devices (¶4) for quality-of-service (QoS) and quality-of-experience (QoE) monitoring in mobile communication technology, including 5th Generation (5G) and New Radio (NR) communication systems.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0354089 to Liu, in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0213896 to Faheem, and in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0280871 to Khirallah et al. (hereinafter Khirallah).
Claim 9, Liu in view of Faheem discloses all the elements of claim 1. Liu in view of Faheem does not explicitly disclose wherein the response to be sent to the access node comprises a one bit indicator, a value of the one bit indicator changed each time there is a change of the quality of service configuration to correspond to the different quality of experience level for the at least one logical connection. However, in an analogous art, Khirallah teaches:
wherein the response to be sent to the access node comprises a one bit indicator, a value of the one bit indicator changed each time there is a change of the quality of service configuration to correspond to the different quality of experience level for the at least one logical connection (¶66-67, the QoE information provided comprises one or more QoE degradation flags that indicate whether or not the QoE has degraded beyond an acceptable limit. The QoE flag may comprise, for example, a 1-bit flag set to ‘1’ to indicate QoE degradation and ‘0’ to indicate no degradation or vice versa.).
It would have been obvious as of the effective filing date to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the communication device for communicating with an access node over an air interface, the communication device comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory storing instructions which, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the communication device at least to perform: receiving information, from the access node, the information indicating a change to a different quality of experience level, of a set of two or more quality of experience levels, for at least one service or application supported by the communication device, the at least one service or application associated with at least one logical connection between the communication device and a serving network comprising the access node, wherein the respective quality of experience level comprises an integer value indicating a respective level of quality of experience, and a respective quality of experience level of the set of two or more quality of experience levels corresponding to a respective quality of service configuration of a set of two or more quality of service configurations provisioned at the communication device, the set of two or more quality of experience levels provisioned at the communication device, based on the information that is received from the access node, changing configuration of the communication device to a quality of service configuration corresponding to the different quality of experience level for the at least one logical connection, the set of two or more quality of service configurations provisioned at the at least one communication device comprising the quality of service configuration, the set of two or more quality of service configurations provisioned at the at least one communication device comprising the quality of service configuration, as disclosed by Liu in view of Faheem, and wherein the response to be sent to the access node comprises a one bit indicator, a value of the one bit indicator changed each time there is a change of the quality of service configuration to correspond to the different quality of experience level for the at least one logical connection, as taught by Khirallah, for the improvements in a quality of service architecture for a cellular communications system (¶1).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and amendments, filed on 12/15/2025 with respect to the Claims 1 – 20 have been fully considered and they are persuasive. Hence, the 35 USC § 102 rejection is withdrawn. However, based on the claim amendments and the newly introduced limitations, the search is updated and two new references (US Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0213896 to Faheem et al., and US Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0322127 to Sha et al.) are being introduced for the 35 USC § 103 rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant'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 HASSAN ABDUR-RAHMAN KHAN whose telephone number is (313)446-6574. The examiner can normally be reached TEAPP - (M-Sa) 9/30/17-9/30/18, 6am-10pm IFP.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christopher Parry can be reached at (571) 272-8328. 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.
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.
/H. A. K./
Examiner, Art Unit 2451
/Chris Parry/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2451