DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
The pending application 18/417,036, filed on 19 JAN 2024, claims priority from provisional application 63/480,656 application 63/480,656, filed on 19 JAN 2023.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed on 14 APR 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-9, 11-12, and 14-16 have been amended. Claims 1-20 are still pending in this application, with claims 1 and 11 being independent.
Applicant’s amendments to the drawings have overcome the objection(s) raised in the previous office action dated 14 JAN 2026.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome the objection(s) raised in the previous office action dated 14 JAN 2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see p. 8 of applicant’s remarks, filed 14 JAN 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Molisch et al. (EP 3,613,243 B1).
Applicant’s arguments, see p. 9 of applicant’s remarks, filed 14 JAN 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 11 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Molisch et al. (EP 3,613,243 B1).
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, 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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (“Joint Radar and Communication Design: Applications, State-of-the-Art and the Road Ahead,” cited by applicant in IDS dated 19 JAN 2024, previously relied upon by the examiner) in view of Molisch et al. (EP 3,613,243 B1, newly cited by the examiner).
Regarding claim 1 (Currently Amended), Liu et al. discloses:
A method comprising:
receiving one or more radar data frames from one or more antennas of a base station or a user equipment device in an environment (Liu et al. “To be more specific, we consider a MIMO mmWave BS that serves a multi-antenna UE and at the same time detects multiple targets, where part of the targets are also the scatterers fall in the communication channel.” – p. 3843, section C, left column);
processing the one or more radar data frames to identify one or more attributes of one or more (Liu et al. “A novel mmWave mMIMO DRFC architecture that can simultaneously detect targes while communicated with the UE… A joint signal processing strategy that can search for unknown targets while estimating the communication channel” – p. 3843, section C, right column); and
estimating one or more communication channels for the user equipment device and the base station based on the one or more attributes of the one or more (Liu et al. “In Stage 1, we estimate the parameters of all the potential targets and the communication channel parameters by using both DL and UL pilots.” - p. 3843, section C, left column) that are identified .
Molisch et al. discloses:
A method comprising:
receiving one or more data frames from one or more antennas of a base station (Molisch et al. transmitter 101, Fig. 1) or a user equipment device in an environment (Molisch et al. network 100, Fig. 1);
processing the one or more radar data frames to identify one or more attributes of one or more static objects and one or more attributes of one or more dynamic objects in the environment (Molisch et al. “The corresponding model splits the channel into two components: one is time-invariant from the static reflectors (called the static component) and the other is due to moving reflectors ( called the dynamic component).” - ¶ [0049]; “As noted, the time-invariant part is not necessarily the mean of the observations, but rather the result of a Doppler filtering that retains only the v = 0 components.” - ¶ [0059]; where the attribute is the Doppler velocity, which is determined for the static and dynamic objects); and
estimating one or more communication channels for the user equipment device and the base station based on the one or more attributes of the one or more static objects that are identified and the one or more attributes of the one or more dynamic objects that are identified (Molisch et al. “estimating, for each of multiple UEs, a channel factor indicative of time-invariance of a wireless channel between a base station and a corresponding UE, classifying the multiple UEs into at least two groups based on values of the channel factors, and assigning different amount of transmission resources to pilot signal transmissions in the wireless communication system to each group based on the values of the channel factors for UEs in that group.” - ¶ [0109]; “classifying the plurality of far-end communication apparatuses into at least two groups based on values of the channel factor for each of the plurality of far-end communication apparatuses” - ¶ [0124]).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Molisch et al. into the invention of Liu et al. to yield the invention of claim 1 above. Both Liu et al. and Molisch et al. are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose channel estimation in communication systems. Liu et al. discloses the limitation of claim 1 outlined above. However, Liu et al. fails to explicitly disclose identifying and estimating the channels of static and dynamic objects. This feature is disclosed by Molisch et al. where “estimating, for each of multiple UEs, a channel factor indicative of time-invariance of a wireless channel between a base station and a corresponding UE, classifying the multiple UEs into at least two groups based on values of the channel factors, and assigning different amount of transmission resources to pilot signal transmissions in the wireless communication system to each group based on the values of the channel factors for UEs in that group.” (Molisch et al. ¶ [0109]). The combination of Liu et al. and Molisch et al. would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to subtract the static component in order to improve spatial pilot reuse (Molisch et al. ¶ [0061]).
Regarding claim 2 (Currently Amended), Liu et al. as modified above discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the one or more attributes of the one or more static objects and the one or more attributes of the one or more dynamic objects comprise angle of arrival (AoA), angle of departure (AoD), delay, and Doppler velocity and the one or more attributes of the one or more channels comprise a power gain, a complex gain, delay, angle of arrival, and angle of departure of the one or more channels (Liu et al. “the BS first sends omnidirectional DL pilots (DP), and then estimates the K AoAs in Θ as well as the associated range and Doppler parameters of all K targets… the BS is able to identify those targets which also play the role of scatterers in the communication link, and will further estimate the Doppler and delay parameters of the corresponding communication paths.” – p. 3846, Section IV.1, left column; “After the first stage, the BS will have the estimates of θk, pk, qk, ∀k for all the targets.” – p. 3846, Section IV.2, left column).
Regarding claim 11 (Currently Amended), Liu et al. discloses:
A computer system (Liu et al. discusses computational efficiency – p. 3839-3842) comprising:
a hardware processor (Liu et al. “a HAD receiver that can simultaneously process signals from the UE and echo waves from the targets.” - abstract);
receiving one or more radar data frames from one or more antennas of a base station or a user equipment device in an environment (Liu et al. “To be more specific, we consider a MIMO mmWave BS that serves a multi-antenna UE and at the same time detects multiple targets, where part of the targets are also the scatterers fall in the communication channel.” – p. 3843, section C, left column);
processing the one or more radar data frames to identify one or more attributes of one or more (Liu et al. “A novel mmWave mMIMO DRFC architecture that can simultaneously detect targes while communicated with the UE… A joint signal processing strategy that can search for unknown targets while estimating the communication channel” – p. 3843, section C, right column); and
estimating one or more communication channels for the user equipment device and the base station based on the one or more attributes of the one or more that are identified (Liu et al. “In Stage 1, we estimate the parameters of all the potential targets and the communication channel parameters by using both DL and UL pilots.” - p. 3843, section C, left column).
Molisch et al. discloses:
a non-volatile computer readable medium (Molisch et al. non-volatile memory, media and memory devices - ¶ [0139]) that stores instruction that when executed by the hardware processor (Molisch et al. “The apparatus 800 includes a processor 802, a memory 804 that stores processor-executable instructions and data during computations performed by the processor – “ ¶ [0134]) perform a method comprising:
receiving one or more data frames from one or more antennas of a base station (Molisch et al. transmitter 101, Fig. 1) or a user equipment device in an environment (Molisch et al. network 100, Fig. 1);
processing the one or more radar data frames to identify one or more attributes of one or more static objects and one or more attributes of one or more dynamic objects in the environment (Molisch et al. “The corresponding model splits the channel into two components: one is time-invariant from the static reflectors (called the static component) and the other is due to moving reflectors ( called the dynamic component).” - ¶ [0049]; “As noted, the time-invariant part is not necessarily the mean of the observations, but rather the result of a Doppler filtering that retains only the v = 0 components.” - ¶ [0059]; where the attribute is the Doppler velocity, which is determined for the static and dynamic objects); and
estimating one or more communication channelsthat are identified and the one or more dynamic objects that are identified (Molisch et al. “estimating, for each of multiple UEs, a channel factor indicative of time-invariance of a wireless channel between a base station and a corresponding UE, classifying the multiple UEs into at least two groups based on values of the channel factors, and assigning different amount of transmission resources to pilot signal transmissions in the wireless communication system to each group based on the values of the channel factors for UEs in that group.” - ¶ [0109]; “classifying the plurality of far-end communication apparatuses into at least two groups based on values of the channel factor for each of the plurality of far-end communication apparatuses” - ¶ [0124]).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Molisch et al. into the invention of Liu et al. to yield the invention of claim 11 above. Both Liu et al. and Molisch et al. are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they both disclose channel estimation in communication systems. Liu et al. discloses the limitation of claim 11 outlined above. However, Liu et al. fails to explicitly disclose identifying and estimating the channels of static and dynamic objects. This feature is disclosed by Molisch et al. where “estimating, for each of multiple UEs, a channel factor indicative of time-invariance of a wireless channel between a base station and a corresponding UE, classifying the multiple UEs into at least two groups based on values of the channel factors, and assigning different amount of transmission resources to pilot signal transmissions in the wireless communication system to each group based on the values of the channel factors for UEs in that group.” (Molisch et al. ¶ [0109]). The combination of Liu et al. and Molisch et al. would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to subtract the static component in order to improve spatial pilot reuse (Molisch et al. ¶ [0061]).
Regarding claim 12, the same cited section and rationale as claim 2 is applied.
Claim(s) 3-7 and 13-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (“Joint Radar and Communication Design: Applications, State-of-the-Art and the Road Ahead,” cited by applicant in IDS dated 19 JAN 2024, previously relied upon by the examiner) in view of Molisch et al. (EP 3,613,243 B1, newly cited by the examiner) as applied to claims 1 and 12 above, and further in view of Sung (KR 102264941 B1, previously relied upon by the examiner).
Regarding claim 3 (Original), Liu et al. as modified above discloses:
[Note: what is not explicitly taught by Liu et al. has been struck-through]
The method of claim 1,
Sung discloses:
wherein the processing the one or more radar data frames comprises removing radar signals corresponding to the one or more static objects to yield one or more decluttered radar data frames (Sung “Step S50 is the step that performs object detection and tracking by applying the MTI (Moving Target Indication) algorithm” - ¶ [0058]; where the MTI suppresses returns from static objects).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Sung into the invention Liu et al. as modified above to yield the invention of claim 3. Liu et al., Sung and Molisch et al. are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they disclose processing signals to determine the locations of targets. Liu et al. as modified above discloses the method of claim 1. However, Liu et al. fails to explicitly disclose wherein the processing the one or more radar data frames comprises removing radar signals corresponding to the one or more static objects to yield one or more decluttered radar data frames. This feature is disclosed by Sung where a Moving Target Indication algorithm is used (Sung ¶ [0058]). The combination of Liu et al., Sung and Molisch et al. would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to subtract the static component in order to improve spatial pilot reuse (Molisch et al. ¶ [0061]) and to allow for clear identification of moving objects (Sung ¶ [0058]).
Regarding claim 4 (Currently Amended), Liu et al. as modified above discloses:
[Note: what is not explicitly taught by Liu et al. has been struck-through]
The method of claim 3
Sung discloses:
performing a first discrete Fourier transformation on the one or more decluttered radar data frames to extract range information corresponding to one or more dynamic objects in the one or more decluttered radar data frames (Sung “Step S10 corresponds to conventional signal processing algorithm that is performed in the manner of 1st distance FFT [Wingdings font/0xE0] 2nd velocity FFT [Wingdings font/0xE0] 3rd Dim FFT (Angle arrival).” - ¶ [0056])
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Sung into the invention Liu et al. as modified above to yield the invention of claim 4. Liu et al., Sung and Molisch et al. are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they disclose processing signals to determine the locations of targets. Liu et al. as modified above discloses the method of claim 3. However, Liu et al. fails to explicitly disclose performing a first discrete Fourier transformation on the one or more decluttered radar data frames to extract range information corresponding to one or more dynamic objects in the one or more decluttered radar data frames. This feature is disclosed by Sung where “Step S10 corresponds to conventional signal processing algorithm that is performed in the manner of 1st distance FFT [Wingdings font/0xE0] 2nd velocity FFT [Wingdings font/0xE0] 3rd Dim FFT (Angle arrival).” (Sung ¶ [0056]). The combination of Liu et al., Sung and Molisch et al. would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to subtract the static component in order to improve spatial pilot reuse (Molisch et al. ¶ [0061]) and to allow for clear identification of moving objects (Sung ¶ [0058]).
Regarding claim 5 (Currently Amended), Liu et al. as modified above discloses:
[Note: what is not explicitly taught by Liu et al. has been struck-through]
The method of claim 4
Sung discloses:
performing a second discrete Fourier transformation on the one or more decluttered radar data frames to extract Doppler information corresponding to the one or more dynamic objects in the one or more decluttered radar data frames (Sung “Step S10 corresponds to conventional signal processing algorithm that is performed in the manner of 1st distance FFT [Wingdings font/0xE0] 2nd velocity FFT [Wingdings font/0xE0] 3rd Dim FFT (Angle arrival).” - ¶ [0056]).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Sung into the invention Liu et al. as modified above to yield the invention of claim 5. Liu et al., Sung and Molisch et al. are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they disclose processing signals to determine the locations of targets. Liu et al. as modified above discloses the method of claim 4. However, Liu et al. fails to explicitly disclose performing a second discrete Fourier transformation on the one or more decluttered radar data frames to extract Doppler information corresponding to the one or more dynamic objects in the one or more decluttered radar data frames. This feature is disclosed by Sung where “Step S10 corresponds to conventional signal processing algorithm that is performed in the manner of 1st distance FFT [Wingdings font/0xE0] 2nd velocity FFT [Wingdings font/0xE0] 3rd Dim FFT (Angle arrival).” (Sung ¶ [0056]). The combination of Liu et al., Sung and Molisch et al. would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to subtract the static component in order to improve spatial pilot reuse (Molisch et al. ¶ [0061]) and to allow for clear identification of moving objects (Sung ¶ [0058]).
Regarding claim 6 (Currently Amended), Liu et al. as modified above discloses:
[Note: what is not explicitly taught by Liu et al. has been struck-through]
The method of claim 5
Sung discloses:
performing a third discrete Fourier transformation on the one or more decluttered radar data frames to extract angle information corresponding to the one or more dynamic objects in the one or more decluttered radar data frames (Sung “Step S10 corresponds to conventional signal processing algorithm that is performed in the manner of 1st distance FFT [Wingdings font/0xE0] 2nd velocity FFT [Wingdings font/0xE0] 3rd Dim FFT (Angle arrival).” - ¶ [0056]).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Sung into the invention Liu et al. as modified above to yield the invention of claim 6. Liu et al., Sung and Molisch et al. are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they disclose processing signals to determine the locations of targets. Liu et al. as modified above discloses the method of claim 5. However, Liu et al. fails to explicitly disclose performing a third discrete Fourier transformation on the one or more decluttered radar data frames to extract angle information corresponding to the one or more dynamic objects in the one or more decluttered radar data frames. This feature is disclosed by Sung where “Step S10 corresponds to conventional signal processing algorithm that is performed in the manner of 1st distance FFT [Wingdings font/0xE0] 2nd velocity FFT [Wingdings font/0xE0] 3rd Dim FFT (Angle arrival).” (Sung ¶ [0056]). The combination of Liu et al., Sung and Molisch et al. would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to subtract the static component in order to improve spatial pilot reuse (Molisch et al. ¶ [0061]) and to allow for clear identification of moving objects (Sung ¶ [0058]).
Regarding claim 7 (Original), Liu et al. as modified above discloses:
[Note: what is not explicitly taught by Liu et al. has been struck-through]
The method of claim 6, further comprising generating a radar 3D heatmap based on the range information, the Doppler information, and the angle information.
Sung discloses:
generating a radar 3D-heatmap based on the range information, the Doppler information, and the angle information (Sung “In one embodiment, the system may have the second radar sensor (120) generate a UWB Range-Doppler-Angle Heat Map and wirelessly transmit it to the computing device (200).” - ¶ [0012]).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Sung into the invention Liu et al. as modified above to yield the invention of claim 7. Liu et al., Sung and Molisch et al. are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they disclose processing signals to determine the locations of targets. Liu et al. as modified above discloses the method of claim 6. However, Liu et al. fails to explicitly disclose performing a third discrete Fourier transformation on the one or more decluttered radar data frames to extract angle information corresponding to the one or more dynamic objects in the one or more decluttered radar data frames. This feature is disclosed by Sung where “In one embodiment, the system may have the second radar sensor (120) generate a UWB Range-Doppler-Angle Heat Map and wirelessly transmit it to the computing device (200).” (Sung ¶ [0012]). The combination of Liu et al., Sung and Molisch et al. would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to subtract the static component in order to improve spatial pilot reuse (Molisch et al. ¶ [0061]) and to allow for clear identification of moving objects (Sung ¶ [0058]).
Regarding claim 13 (Original), the same cited section and rationale as claim 3 is applied.
Regarding claim 14 (Currently Amended), the same cited section and rationale as claim 4 is applied.
Regarding claim 15 (Currently Amended), the same cited section and rationale as claim 5 is applied.
Regarding claim 16 (Currently Amended), the same cited section and rationale as claim 6 is applied.
Regarding claim 17 (Original), the same cited section and rationale as claim 7 is applied.
Claim(s) 8-10 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (“Joint Radar and Communication Design: Applications, State-of-the-Art and the Road Ahead,” cited by applicant in IDS dated 19 JAN 2024, previously relied upon by the examiner) in view of Molisch et al. (EP 3,613,243 B1, newly cited by the examiner) and Sung (KR 102264941 B1, previously relied upon by the examiner) as applied to claims 7 and 17 above, and further in view of Shah et al. (US 11,398,070 B1, previously relied upon by the examiner).
Regarding claim 8 (Currently Amended), Liu et al. as modified above discloses:
[Note: what is not explicitly taught by Liu et al. has been struck-through]
The method of claim 7
Shah et al. discloses:
determining one or more peaks in the radar 3D-heatmap (Shah et al. “Determine, utilizing sensor data, first data representing heatmap, heatmap representing three-dimensional representation of environment and wherein individual coordinates of heatmap indicate intensity of energy received by millimeter wave radar receiver” – S604, Fig. 6; “Generate, utilizing first data, second data representing point cloud, individual points of point cloud indicating rate of change of intensity associated with adjacent coordinates of heatmap” – S606, Fig. 6; “Determine first set of points of point cloud that corresponds to first set of energy intensity maximums…” – S608, Fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to someone with ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features as disclosed by Shah et al. into the invention Liu et al. as modified above to yield the invention of claim 8. Liu et al., Sung, Molisch et al. and Shah et al. are considered analogous arts to the claimed invention as they disclose processing signals to determine the locations of targets. Liu et al. as modified above discloses the method of claim 7. However, Liu et al. fails to explicitly disclose determining one or more peaks in the radar 3D-heatmap. This feature is disclosed by Shah et al. where the peak value of the discrete response of the DD domain radar channel is calculated and the peak value of the channel would correspond to the peak value of the 3D heatmap of Sung. The combination of Liu et al., Sung, Molisch et al. and Shah et al. would be obvious with a reasonable expectation of success to subtract the static component in order to improve spatial pilot reuse (Molisch et al. ¶ [0061]), to allow for clear identification of moving objects (Sung ¶ [0058]) and to “indicate the presence of a surface, and particularly a wall.” (Shah et al. Col. 3, lines 11-12).
Regarding claim 9 (Currently Amended), Liu et al. as modified above discloses:
[Note: what is not explicitly taught by Liu et al. has been struck-through]
The method of claim 8, further comprising estimating a channel or channel attributes based on the one or more peaks in the radar 3D heatmap (Liu et al. “After analog combination, the BS picks the specific L entries having the L largest moduli from GRFYUL1T+P. This is equivalent to identifying the L RF chains that output the L largest signal power, generated by the signals arriving from L AoAs θl, ∀l of the communication channel. By doing so, the BS can identify Θ1 from Θ.” – p. 3850. Section C, left column; where the largest signal power corresponds with the beamforming angle that aligns with the channel).
Regarding claim 10 (Original), Liu et al. as modified above discloses:
[Note: what is not explicitly taught by Liu et al. has been struck-through]
The method of claim 9, further comprising extracting one or more radar paths based on the one or more peaks that were determined (Liu et al. “After analog combination, the BS picks the specific L entries having the L largest moduli from GRFYUL1T+P. This is equivalent to identifying the L RF chains that output the L largest signal power, generated by the signals arriving from L AoAs θl, ∀l of the communication channel. By doing so, the BS can identify Θ1 from Θ.” – p. 3850. Section C, left column; where the largest signal power corresponds with the beamforming angle that aligns with the radar path; “By finding the K largest peaks of (31), we can readily locate the AoAs of the K targets” – p. 3848, section B, right column).
Regarding claim 18, the same cited section and rationale as claim 8 is applied.
Regarding claim 19, the same cited section and rationale as claim 9 is applied.
Regarding claim 20, the same cited section and rationale as claim 10 is applied.
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 NAOMI M WOLFORD whose telephone number is (571)272-3929. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30 am - 4:30 pm EST.
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, Resha Desai can be reached at (571)270-7792. 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.
NAOMI M. WOLFORD
Examiner
Art Unit 3648
/N.M.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3648
18 JUN 2026
/RESHA DESAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights