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
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.
Status of the Claims
Claims 1, 4, 8 to 15 and 18 are now pending in the application, with Claim 5 having been cancelled herein and Claim 18 having been added herein. Claim 1 is independent.
Applicant has not addressed the official notice taken in claim 12. Accordingly, the facts noticed therein are deemed applicant admitted prior art. (“AAPA”)
The rejection under 35 USC 101 is withdrawn.
Response to Applicant Remarks
Applicant’s amendments are addressed by the newly cited art.
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 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.
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 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.
Claims 1,9-11, 13,14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Mitsugi, Checking Items in a Group”, 8/2010, https://www.rfidjournal.com/expert-views/checking-items-in-a-group-2/77109/ in view of
Zur 20190188431 in view of
Lickett, 20200372450
Regarding Claim 1,
a plurality of wireless devices that are respectively attached to a plurality of items;
a reading apparatus that is capable of reading identification information stored in a wireless device… ; and
a management unit configured to manage a database that stores position information of the plurality of items,
wherein the database further stores item aggregation data that defines an item aggregation including N items (N is an integer equal to or larger than two) out of the plurality of items…, and
(Mitsugi, p.1 , “We could RFID-tag each package to identify it accurately and swiftly, but an operator or driver would need to check every item against a master list to know if a group were missing a package—or contained an extra one. Such a list would typically be available on an electronic data interchange (EDI) system that runs on a network.” ; “To verify the integrity of a group, a worker could use a handheld reader to check each tag’s unique ID and group ID. An estimated group ID would be computed automatically from the unique IDs of packages that have the same group IDs. Then, the estimated group ID could be compared with the original group ID, to determine immediately if there are any missing or extra items.”)
wherein, when at least M wireless devices (M is an integer smaller than N) out of wireless devices attached to the N items have been detected by the reading apparatus...
(Mitsugi, p.1, “Group coding could be applied to other RFID applications, such as ensuring the correct items are loaded onto trucks or received at distribution centers. It also could prevent shrinkage. In addition, instead of trying to achieve perfect read rates at fixed RFID portals, we could determine that a group of items is valid if we can identify, say, 97 percent of its expected contents.”)
Mitsugi does not explicitly disclose
the management unit is configured to update the position information of the N items included in the item aggregation in accordance with the item aggregation data …
and to update the position information of the N items included in the item aggregation data based on the detection positions
Zur is directed to a system for tracking tracked objects. (Zur, abstract). Zur discloses that a tracking system location may be updated when a aggregated shipment of objects is delivered correctly. (Zur, para 0048, “Upon delivery to the room, the bellman uses the remote device (1509) to scan the luggage tags as they come off the cart, and the remote device (1509) matches the identifiers against the identifiers stored in the remote device for that assignment message that was received. Alternatively, the scans can be transmitted from the remote device (1509) to the server (1506) for verification. If there is a mismatch (i.e. a missing identifier or the wrong identifier), the remote device (1509) makes an alert, including by example, a sound, a visual indication or the like. The remote device (1509) may transmit this logical state to the server so as to update the status of the assignment. The client computer (1504), can also indicate an alarm, including by displaying an alarm on the display (1505) of the computer (1504). [0049] The remote device then checks the detected location data, which is determined by location beacon (1508) against the location data associated with the destination that is part of the assignment message. If there is a mismatch, an alert is generated as above. Alternatively, the scanned identifiers are sent to the server, and the match check for that job performed on the server, and for each identifier that is correctly matched, a stored status flag associated with the data record for that identifier is changed to a “delivered” state. Alternatively, the location of the remote device (1508) and the scanned luggage identifiers (1510, 1511) are transmitted to the server (1506), which then runs the logical test whether the received location matches with the guest room location recovered from the database (1507), and that all of the scanned luggage identifiers at the destination match the luggage identifiers associated with the guest at check in.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine Mitsugi with the location update of Zur with the motivation of tracking objects. Id.
Mitsugi does not explicitly disclose
and to measure a relative movement amount of the reading apparatus based on sensor data output from one or more motion sensors;
Luckett is directed to a system for determining location of product RFID tags that considers the orientation of the RFID reader device. (Luckett, abstract; para 0028, “[0028] Aspects of the present disclosure provide techniques to identify the orientation of the EPC tag (120 or 130) in order to improve the accuracy of the virtual shielding in an inventory management system. In some examples, the orientation of the EPC tag may be obtained by tracking the signal strength of the same EPC tag (e.g., first EPC tag 120) with an RFID reader (fixed 135 or mobile 140, separately and collectively referred to as “RFID reader” 140) based on multiple reads made by the RFID reader 135 and 140 in different known orientations and/or locations.”)
and stores positional coordinates of a reference tag installation position of a reference tag for each of a plurality of places, the reference tag for a place having a tag identifier readable by the reading apparatus when the reading apparatus is used in the place,
Lickett discloses that the rfid reader device could derive position information from location tags. (Luckett, para 0041, “ In one example, the inputs to the model may include RFID reader location(s) (e.g., the location of the fixed RFID reader 135, which may be precisely known, and the location of the mobile RFID reader 140, with the location of the mobile RFID reader 140 determined based on one or more of user input, GPS, wireless fidelity (Wi-Fi), RFID beacons and/or an external derived localization scheme such as proximity to one or more other tags of known locations…”)
derive detection positions as positional coordinates based on (i) positional coordinates of a most recently detected reference tag by the reading apparatus and (ii) the relative movement amount,
Lickett discloses localizing the position of tagged items more accurately by consideration of changes in orientation of the reader device. (Luckett, para 0007, “[0007] In one example, a method for inventory management utilizing RFID technology is disclosed. The method may include detecting, via an antenna of a RFID reader, a first signal from an EPC tag during a first time period, wherein the RFID reader is positioned in a first RFID orientation during the first time period. The method may further include detecting, via the antenna of the RFID reader, a second signal from the EPC tag during a second time period, wherein the RFID reader is positioned in a second RFID orientation during the second time period. The method may further include measuring variance of received signal strength between the first signal and the second signal from the EPC tag. The method may further include determining an orientation of the EPC tag relative to the antenna of the RFID reader based in part on one or more of the variance of the received signal strength, the first RFID orientation, or the second RFID orientation. The method may further include identifying a location of the EPC tag based on the orientation of the EPC tag relative to the antenna of the RFID reader.”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine Mitsugi and Zur with the movement consideration of Lickett with the motivation of more accurately localizing objects. Id.
Regarding Claim 9, Mitsugi, Zur and Lickett disclose the system of claim 1.
Mitsugi does not explicitly disclose
wherein the management unit is configured to:
cause a display of a user terminal to display a screen for a user to designate an item that constitutes the item aggregation; and
register an item designated by the user on the screen in the database as an item that constitutes the item aggregation.
(Zur, para 0026, “Similarly, if the bellman moves the luggage from the guest room to the reception area upon departure of the guest, the bellman can scan the luggage tags to confirm which luggage is associated with the departing guest. In addition, when loading a taxi, bus or other conveyance, the bellman can scan the luggage so that these identifiers are transmitted to the server.”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine Mitsugi and Lickett with the item designation of Zur with the motivation of tracking items. Id.
Regarding Claim 10, Mitsugi, Zur and Lickett disclose the system of claim 9.
wherein the database further stores respective names of the plurality of items, and
the screen includes a screen element for the user to designate or select a name of an item that constitutes the item aggregation.
Zur, para 0025, “[0025] The Smart Luggage Tracking System enables bell-hops to access luggage flow information digitally for real-time location tracking. As depicted in FIG. 1, through bar coded luggage tags, which are customized to fit the hotel organization's existing luggage tag design, (FIG. 5 and FIG. 6), luggage tags are electronically scanned by the system and inputted into the MS Bell system using the mobile application (FIG. 10, 11). The system includes auto-fill technology which eliminates the need to scan each barcode separately. Claim tickets with barcodes associated with guest name, room number, luggage descriptions and handling instructions are used by desk staff to efficiently locate luggage. The capability to identify luggage as fragile or high value with the addition of photos helps document any items that arrive damaged. The MS Bell computer system also allows for the capture of digital signatures, documenting and holding guests accountable for receipt of luggage. As each touch point is scanned by the system, a time-stamp is recorded under the user's login, holding staff accountable for all tasks.”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine Mitsugi and Lickett with the item designation of Zur with the motivation of tracking items. Id.
Regarding Claim 11, Mitsugi, Zur and Lickett disclose the system of claim 9.
wherein the management unit is configured to:
present a detection result of a wireless device by the reading apparatus to the user on the screen; and
let the user designate an item that constitutes the item aggregation based on the detection result.
(Zur, para 0036, “An exemplary process may be comprised of the following steps: [0036] Upon guest check-in, input into the system through the client (1503) a number of pieces of luggage. [0037] Generate the same number of unique luggage identifiers (1501. 1502), one for each of the pieces of luggage. [0038] Generate a data record in the database (1507) that is associated with the guest, that contains the number of luggage identifier numbers as the number input, the guest room and the guest room identifier. [0039] Print the luggage tags (1502), (or program an RFID (1501)) one for each piece of luggage, with the one corresponding luggage identifier on each tag. [0040] Attach luggage tags to luggage (FIG. 1). [0041] Update the assignment queue data structure to add the luggage move job to the list. [0042] Upon the assignment being at the top of the queue, calculate an assignment of a bellman, using the guest room to determine a destination floor, the locations of all the available bellman and the status of their carts. [0043] Transmit, the assignment to the selected remote device (1509) of the selected bellman. The assignment message may contain the set of luggage identifiers, current luggage location, the room destination, and room identifier. [0044] Receive confirmation from the assigned bellman's remote device (1509). [0045] The bellman, arriving at the check in desk, uses their remote device (1509) to scan the luggage tags (1510) on the luggage (1511), or detect the RFID numbers (1510), and transmit them to the server (1506) from the remote device (1509), then loads them on the cart when the server has received them, checked the scanned tags against the data record for the job and verified that the scans are valid and complete, as in all the bags are accounted for. On the server, a data record associated with the bellman is updated to indicate the number of items on the cart and which job they are doing and stored in the database (1507). At that point, the server can logically check that the scanned luggage identifiers match the luggage identifiers associated with the guest data record that is associated with the job data record in order to prevent an error before it occurs.”; para 0025, “[0025] The Smart Luggage Tracking System enables bell-hops to access luggage flow information digitally for real-time location tracking. As depicted in FIG. 1, through bar coded luggage tags, which are customized to fit the hotel organization's existing luggage tag design, (FIG. 5 and FIG. 6), luggage tags are electronically scanned by the system and inputted into the MS Bell system using the mobile application (FIG. 10, 11). The system includes auto-fill technology which eliminates the need to scan each barcode separately. Claim tickets with barcodes associated with guest name, room number, luggage descriptions and handling instructions are used by desk staff to efficiently locate luggage. The capability to identify luggage as fragile or high value with the addition of photos helps document any items that arrive damaged. The MS Bell computer system also allows for the capture of digital signatures, documenting and holding guests accountable for receipt of luggage. As each touch point is scanned by the system, a time-stamp is recorded under the user's login, holding staff accountable for all tasks.”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine Mitsugi and Lickett with the item designation of Zur with the motivation of tracking items. Id.
Regarding Claim 13, Mitsugi, Zur and Lickett disclose the system of claim 1.
wherein updating the position information of the N items included in the item aggregation in the case where the at least M wireless devices have been detected by the reading apparatus includes at least one of: updating position information associated with each of the N items; and updating position information associated with the item aggregation including the N items.
See prior art rejection of claim 1 regarding Zur.
Regarding Claim 14, Mitsugi, Zur and Lickett disclose the system of claim 1.
wherein the wireless device is a radio frequency identification (RFID) tag, and
the reading apparatus is configured to emit an electromagnetic wave to a reading range and detect the wireless device by reading the identification information sent back from the wireless device utilizing energy of the electromagnetic wave
See prior art rejection of claim 1.
Claims 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Mitsugi, Checking Items in a Group”, 8/2010, https://www.rfidjournal.com/expert-views/checking-items-in-a-group-2/77109/ in view of
Zur 20190188431 in view of
Lickett in view of
Luo, An efficient protocol for RFID multigroup threshold-based classification, 2013, https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6566877/references#references
Regarding Claim 4, Mitsugi, Zur and Lickett disclose the system of claim 1.
Mitsugi does not explicitly disclose
wherein the integer M is variably set by a user.
Luo is directed to a RFID tracking system utilizing detection thresholds. (Luo, abstract; p.890, “Precise classification requires us to know the precise number of tags in each group. Tag identification protocols [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11] can do that, but it takes them significant time to complete if the number of tags is very large. One way to improve efficiency is relaxing the problem from accurate classification to approximate classification [2], where the classification accuracy can be tuned to meet a pre-defined requirement.”; “Yet, the new protocol is able to perform threshold-based classification with an accuracy that can be pre-set to any desirable level, allowing tradeoff between time efficiency and accuracy.”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine Mitsugi, Zur and Lickett with the threshold setting of Luo with the motivation of improving efficiency of tracking items. Id.
Claims 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Mitsugi, Checking Items in a Group”, 8/2010, https://www.rfidjournal.com/expert-views/checking-items-in-a-group-2/77109/ in view of
Zur 20190188431 in view of
Lickett in view of
Greenberger 9843898
Regarding Claim 8, Mitsugi, Zur and Lickett disclose the system of claim 1.
Mitsugi does not explicitly disclose
wherein the management unit is configured to cancel the definition of the item aggregation including the N items by giving the item aggregation data defining the item aggregation a flag indicating disablement, by deleting the item aggregation data, or by excluding some items from the definition of the item aggregation.
Greenberger is directed to a system for grouping devices within a threshold distance. (Greenberger, abstract). Greenberger discloses that a devices may be ungrouped from a group if a distance threshold is exceeded. (Id., Col.13,lns.6-25, “In embodiments, the device grouping server 230 may use the user device location information to determine the fine locations of user devices 210 (e.g., using one or more triangulation and/or location determination techniques). Further, the device grouping server 230 may track the distance between user devices 210 at various time indexes. As described in greater detail below with respect to FIG. 8, the device grouping server 230 may store information identifying the distance between user devices 210 at various time indexes in a table. As described herein, the information identifying the distance between user devices 210 at various time indexes may be used to group one or more user devices 210 together. Further, the information identifying the distance between user devices 210 at various time indexes may be used to ungroup previously grouped user devices 210. As described herein, step 710 may be ongoing throughout process 700. More specifically, the device grouping server 230 may continue to monitor the location of user devices 210 within the particular area, and track the distance between the user devices 210 at various time indexes.”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine Mitsugi, Zur and Lickett with the ungrouping of Greenberger with the motivation of
maintaining a grouping. Id.
Claims 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Mitsugi, Checking Items in a Group”, 8/2010, https://www.rfidjournal.com/expert-views/checking-items-in-a-group-2/77109/ in view of
Zur 20190188431 in view of
Lickett 10088547 in view of
AAPA
Regarding Claim 12, Mitsugi, Zur and Lickett disclose the system of claim 11.
Mitsugi does not explicitly disclose
the management unit is configured to present the detection result to the user by displaying a detection position of a wireless device detected by the reading apparatus on a map image of a place where the reading apparatus has been used.
AAPA teaches that it is old and well known for to present positions of a detected device on a map. For example, Apple’s “Find My” app can help a user with a mobile device locate another mobile device or Air Tag on a map display. It can be seen that all the claimed elements are taught by Mitsugi, Zur, Seitz or Official notice. A detection map taught by official notice does not change the functions taught by Mitsugi, Zur or Seitz. Tracking tagged objects would be performed the same way independent whether the system had a map interface. Since the function of the elements in Mitsugi, Zur, Seitz and AAPA do not interfere with each other the results would be predictable. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary still in the art to include in the system of Mitsui, Zur and Seitz a detection map display as taught by AAPA since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Claims 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Mitsugi, Checking Items in a Group”, 8/2010, https://www.rfidjournal.com/expert-views/checking-items-in-a-group-2/77109/ in view of
Zur 20190188431 in view of
Lickett in view of
Yoshizawa 20100198591
Regarding Claim 15, Mitsugi, Zur and Lickett disclose the system of claim 1.
Mitsugi does not explicitly disclose
wherein the reading apparatus is configured to measure the relative movement amount of the reading apparatus with respect to a reference position based on sensor data output from a three-axis acceleration sensor, a gyro sensor, and a geomagnetic sensor.
Yoshizawa is directed to a portable terminal for managing workers. (Yoshizawa, background). Yoshizawa discloses that the terminal may employ various sensors to determine the position of the terminal/worker. (Yoshizawa, para 0093, “[0093] The detection results of the 3-axis gyroscopic sensor 1-2a, 3-axis acceleration sensor 1-2b, barometric pressure sensor 1-2c, and geomagnetic sensor 1-2d that are the relative position detection sensors rendering the relative position detection unit 1-2 are sent to the position detection CPU 1-2e (step S1).”; para 0081, “[0081] Based on the detection output of these relative position detection sensors 1-2a to 1-2d and the application of the portable terminal and management system, the position detection CPU 1-2e calculates relative position data indicating at what speed or how many steps the portable terminal moved in which direction at a specific time.”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine Mitsugi, Zur and Lickett with the reader of Yoshizawa with the motivation of tracking position. Id.
Claims 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Mitsugi, Checking Items in a Group”, 8/2010, https://www.rfidjournal.com/expert-views/checking-items-in-a-group-2/77109/ in view of
Zur 20190188431 in view of
Lickett in view of
Schueller 20150278719
Regarding Claim 18, Mitsugi, Zur and Lickett disclose the system of claim 1.
Mitsugi does not explicitly disclose
wherein the management unit is configured to derive positional coordinates (U, V) of the detection position according to:
(U, V) = (Uo + (X - X₀), V₀ + (Y - Y₀)),
(X, Y) is the relative movement amount of the reading apparatus at a time when a wireless device attached to an item is detected by the reading apparatus, and
(X₀, Y₀) is the relative movement amount of the reading apparatus at a time when the reference tag is detected by the reading apparatus.
Schueller is directed to a system for collecting agricultural picking and planting data. (Schueller, abstact). Schueller discloses that the collecting device could localize itself using a variety of techniques including dead reckoning. (Schueller, para 0063-66, “[0063] In an embodiment of the present technology, referring still to FIG. 1, the position determination device comprises a dead reckoning system (not shown).
[0064] In navigation, dead reckoning (also ded (for deduced) reckoning or DR) is the process of calculating one's current position by using a previously determined position, or fix, and advancing that position based upon known or estimated speeds over elapsed time, and course. Dead reckoning is subject to cumulative errors. The inertial navigation systems, which provide very accurate directional information, use dead reckoning and are very widely applied.
[0065] In an embodiment of the present technology, referring still to FIG. 1, the dead reckoning system (like an inertial, gyroscope, pedometer, etc.) mounted on a manual laborer is reset or recalibrated by an object positioned at a known location like a basket, or by a moving platform.
[0066] An inertial navigation system (INS) is a navigation aid that uses a computer, motion sensors (accelerometers, see discussion below) and rotation sensors (gyroscopes, see discussion below) to continuously calculate via dead reckoning the position, orientation, and velocity (direction and speed of movement) of a moving object.”) The examiner interprets dead reckoning to entail obtaining a known determined position (Uo,Yo) and estimate associated movements of the subject based on course and speed (X,Y; Xo,Yo) to determine the current location (U,V).
where (U₀, V₀) are positional coordinates of the most recently detected reference tag installation position stored in the database,
Schueller discloses that a position fix may be determined using a RFID tag. (Schueller, para 0076, “[0076] In an embodiment of the present technology, referring still to FIG. 1, the position determination device comprises a permanently installed device (not shown) such as a marker, a beacon, a bar code, or a RFID tag.”) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the invention to combine Mitsugi, Zur and Lickett with the dead reckoning of Schueller with the motivation of localizing products. (Schueller para 0134, “0134] In an embodiment of the present technology, after the harvested product is inspected for ripeness and different diseases, and after its location is determined and recorded in the prior steps, the block 116 of the flow chart 100 of FIG. 2 depicts the step of logging an agricultural manual operation.”)
Conclusion
Relevant art not relied on but made of record include
Hayward, “A novel inertial positioning update method, using passive RFID tags, for indoor asset localization”, 2021, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1755581721001735
Hayward is directed to a indoor location positioning system using inertial measurement in conjunction with RFID orientation tags. (Hayward, abstract; Hawyard, p.972, “The novelty in this method lies in the use of feature extraction
from passing Passive RFID tags in a location where a magnetometer
cannot be used to obtain a heading. The method utilises the rela
tively short range of passive RFID tags (i.e. a maximum stated range
of < 10 m [41]), to enable more accurate location updates than si
milar methods which use the variation in RSSI to determine position
in order to reduce the variability in the update of the inertial unit’s
position. It is noted however, that the location of the RFID tags needs
to consider the material of its surroundings since metallic surfaces
greatly reduce the read range of RFID tags therefore RFID tags will be
positioned with sufficient clearance of metal objects where practical.”)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALLEN C CHEIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7985. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am -5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Florian Zeender can be reached at (571) 272-6790. 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.
/ALLEN C CHEIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3627
Prosecution Insights