DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
This Action is in response to the amendment dated 6/30/2026, for which the amendment and corresponding arguments filed on the same date have been entered. Claims 2, 3, 5-13, 15-20 and 22-24 are currently pending in this application, with claims 2, 12 and 22 being independent. No claims have been amended, cancelled or added. This Action is made FINAL.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/30/2026 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s Arguments
On pages 8-11 of the arguments, the applicant argues that Imran does not teach “receive navigation data associated with the UE; perform, based at least in part on the navigation data, a mobility prediction associated with whether the UE will likely travel within a cell associated with a network node that is different from a serving node to which the UE is communicatively coupled; perform, based at least in part on the mobility prediction, one or more measurements associated with the cell; and transmit an indication of a measurement report associated with the one or more measurements”.
The reasons by the applicant for making this argument are:
On page 8, the cited apparatus is directed to network-side optimization. That separately described UE does not build the prediction model, map next cells to future user locations, determine network optimization, or perform the claimed UE-side operations.
On page 9, building a prediction model or mapping next cells to future user locations is not the same as "receiving…navigation data." IMRAN's paragraph 154 does not disclose that the cited apparatus, much less a UE, receives GPS navigation data via a transceiver. Instead, paragraph 154 describes "future user locations" used in connection with building a prediction model and mapping next cells. Thus, IMRAN's disclosure of mapping "next cells" to "future user locations," even if those future user locations may include "GPS coordinates," is not a disclosure of "receiving navigation data associated with the UE".
On page 10, Paragraph 154 states that "[t]he prediction model may be built" and that "[t]he next cells may be mapped to the future user locations, which may comprise location coordinates that may be GPS coordinates" (Office Action, pp. 4-5). Paragraph 175 states that an apparatus may be configured to "build a prediction model that predicts next cells of UEs in a future time step of a mobile network" and "map the next cells to future user locations" (Office Action, p. 5). However, these disclosures do not disclose performing a mobility prediction "based at least in part on the navigation data". Rather, IMRAN's paragraphs 154 and 175 describe building a model that "predicts next cells" and then mapping "the next cells to future user locations." Thus, the cited "future user locations," even if they include "GPS coordinates," are described as information to which predicted next cells are mapped, not as "navigation data" used as a basis for performing the mobility prediction. At most, IMRAN discloses building a prediction model that "predicts next cells of UEs" and mapping those predicted next cells "to future user locations." This is different from claim 2, which requires performing, based at least in part on navigation data, a mobility prediction associated with whether the UE will likely travel within a cell associated with a network node different from a serving node.
On page 11, paragraph 154 states that "[t]he prediction model may be built using at least one of handover reports, CDRs, or UE measurements," that "UE measurements" may comprise "at least one of a RSRP, a RSRQ, or a RSS," and that "[t]he next cells may be mapped to the future user locations using at least one of a RSRP, a RSRQ, or a RSS" (Office Action, p. 5). These disclosures do not teach the claimed relationship between "the mobility prediction" and the "one or more measurements associated with the cell." Claim 2 recites "perform[ing], based at least in part on the mobility prediction, one or more measurements associated with the cell." Thus, claim 2 requires an operative relationship in which "the mobility prediction" is used as a basis for performing the "one or more measurements associated with the cell.". IMRAN discloses the opposite relationship. In IMRAN's paragraph 154, "UE measurements" are used to build "[t]he prediction model," and "RSRP," "RSRQ," or "RSS" are used to map "[t]he next cells" to "future user locations." IMRAN does not disclose that "UE measurements" - including "RSRP," "RSRQ," or "RSS" - are performed "based at least in part on the mobility prediction." Nor does IMRAN disclose that "the mobility prediction" is used as a basis for performing "one or more measurements associated with the cell." Accordingly, IMRAN's use of "UE measurements" to build "[t]he prediction model," or its use of "RSRP," "RSRQ," or "RSS" to map "[t]he next cells" to "future user locations," does not disclose the claimed feature of "perform[ing], based at least in part on the mobility prediction, one or more measurements associated with the cell."
Response to Arguments
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
As explained in [0175], the UE receives navigation data including future landmarks to be visited location coordinates that are GPS coordinates and then performs a prediction based on having received that data, the prediction including a mapping of next cells to future locations of most probable cells, along with, as clearly indicated in [0191], the cells that UE is being handed over to, the hand over to indicating that the UE is predicting that it is going to be now in a non-serving node. In addition, based off of the prediction the UE performs UE measurements as stated in both of [0175] and [0191]. In addition, for clarification purposes only, [0175] has been emphasized more in the Office Action. In turn, the teachings of the prediction model and the optimization argued throughout in pages 8-11 do not prevent Imaran from performing the steps, as required by the claim.
Therefore, Imran teaches the argued limitations and the rejections using Imran are maintained as repeated below.
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.
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.
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.
Claims 2, 3, 5-13, 15-20 and 22-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Imran, et al (US PG Publication 2022/0225127), hereafter Imran, in view of Da Silva, et al (US PG Publication 2023/0025432), hereafter Da Silva.
Regarding claim 2, Imran teaches
a user equipment (UE)
([0175] Apparatus UE), comprising:
one or more transceivers
([0175] Apparatus UE);
one or more memories comprising instructions
([0175] Apparatus comprises: a memory; and a processor coupled to the memory and configured to); and
one or more processors configured to execute the instructions and cause the UE to
([0175] Apparatus comprises: a memory; and a processor coupled to the memory and configured to):
receive, via at least one of the one or more transceivers, navigation data associated with the UE
([0154] The prediction model may be built. The next cells may be mapped to the future user locations, which may comprise location coordinates that may be GPS coordinates
[0175] The processor is further configured to map the next cells to the future user locations using most-probable landmarks of the UEs. The future user locations comprise location coordinates that are GPS coordinates);
perform, based at least in part on the navigation data, a mobility prediction associated with whether the UE will likely travel within a cell associated with a network node that is different from a serving node to which the UE is communicatively coupled
([0175] The processor is further configured to build the prediction model using at least one of UE measurements. The processor is further configured to map the next cells to the future user locations using most-probable landmarks of the UEs
[0191] The UE 101 may predict mobility information such as radio conditions of serving and/or neighbor cells, in serving and/or neighbor frequencies, list of cells the UE 101 is moving or being handed over to, and the inclusion of these predictions in measurement reports, such as the existing periodic measurement reports and event-triggered measurement reports);
perform, based at least in part on the mobility prediction, one or more measurements associated with the cell
([0154] The prediction model may be built using UE measurements that comprise at least one of an RSRP, an RSRQ, or an RSS. The next cells may be mapped to the future user locations using at least one of an RSRP, an RSRQ, or an RSS
[0175] The processor is further configured to build the prediction model using at least one of UE measurements. The processor is further configured to map the next cells to the future user locations using most-probable landmarks of the UEs).
Imran does not explicitly teach
transmit, via the at least one of the one or more transceivers, an indication of a measurement report associated with the one or more measurements.
In the same field of endeavor, Da Silva teaches
transmit, via the at least one of the one or more transceivers, an indication of a measurement report associated with the one or more measurements
([0191] The UE 101 may predict mobility information such as radio conditions of serving and/or neighbor cells, in serving and/or neighbor frequencies, list of cells the UE 101 is moving or being handed over to, and the inclusion of these predictions in measurement reports, such as the existing periodic measurement reports and event-triggered measurement reports).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Imran, which includes a UE predicting mobility to a cell, to include Da Silva’s teaching of a UE predicting mobility to a cell, for the benefit of handling mobility information in a communications network [0001].
Regarding claim 3, Imran, in view of Da Silva, teaches the UE of claim 2.
Da Silva further teaches
wherein the one or more measurements include a radio resource management (RRM) measurement
([0569] The term real measurement or current measurement used herein may also be called RRM measurements. These measurements to be performed by the UE 101 and reported).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Imran, in view of Da Silva, which includes a UE predicting mobility to a cell, to include Da Silva’s teaching of a UE predicting mobility to a cell, for the benefit of handling mobility information in a communications network [0001].
Regarding claim 5, Imran, in view of Da Silva, teaches the UE of claim 2.
Imran further teaches
wherein the navigation data is global positioning system (GPS) navigation data
([0154] The next cells may be mapped to the future user locations, which may comprise location coordinates that may be GPS coordinates
[0175] The processor is further configured to map the next cells to the future user locations using most-probable landmarks of the UEs. The future user locations comprise location coordinates that are GPS coordinates).
Regarding claim 6, Imran, in view of Da Silva, teaches the UE of claim 2.
Imran further teaches
wherein the navigation data comprises one or more previous navigation destinations associated with the UE
([0123] That information is used for estimating the UE's future location coordinates in a next time step k+k′. Knowing that nodes in a network usually move around a set of well-visited landmarks with a fairly regular landmark trajectory, past mobility logs of UEs are used to estimate most probable landmarks visited by each UE in each cell).
Regarding claim 7, Imran, in view of Da Silva, teaches the UE of claim 2.
Imran further teaches
the mobility prediction is further based at least in part on an expected time duration during which the UE will likely travel within the cell
([0118] First, the probability that the user stays in cell i for a period of length r and then goes to cell m is given by ψ.sub.i,m.sup.(u)(τ)).
Regarding claim 8, Imran, in view of Da Silva, teaches the UE of claim 2.
Da Silva further teaches
wherein the mobility prediction is further based at least on a likelihood that the UE will travel within the cell
([0453] The first network node 403a may receive the reported list of cells that the UE 101 may move to or predicted measurement results per cell. By knowing where the UE 101 is going the first network node 403a knows with some level of likelihood where the UE 101 is moving).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Imran, in view of Da Silva, which includes a UE predicting mobility to a cell, to include Da Silva’s teaching of a UE predicting mobility to a cell, for the benefit of handling mobility information in a communications network [0001].
Regarding claim 9, Imran, in view of Da Silva, teaches the UE of claim 2.
Da Silva further teaches
wherein the mobility prediction is further based at least in part on a confidence level for the likelihood the UE will travel within the cell
([0453] The first network node 403a may receive the reported list of cells that the UE 101 may move to or predicted measurement results per cell. By knowing where the UE 101 is going the first network node 403a knows with some level of likelihood where the UE 101 is moving).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Imran, in view of Da Silva, which includes a UE predicting mobility to a cell, to include Da Silva’s teaching of a UE predicting mobility to a cell, for the benefit of handling mobility information in a communications network [0001].
Regarding claim 10, Imran, in view of Da Silva, teaches the UE of claim 2.
Da Silva further teaches
wherein the indication is transmitted for transmission to the serving node
([0191] The UE 101 may predict mobility information such as radio conditions of serving and/or neighbor cells, in serving and/or neighbor frequencies, list of cells the UE 101 is moving or being handed over to, and the inclusion of these predictions in measurement reports, such as the existing periodic measurement reports and event-triggered measurement reports).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Imran, in view of Da Silva, which includes a UE predicting mobility to a cell, to include Da Silva’s teaching of a UE predicting mobility to a cell, for the benefit of handling mobility information in a communications network [0001].
Regarding claim 11, Imran, in view of Da Silva, teaches the UE of claim 2.
Imran further teaches
wherein the one or more network nodes are a neighbor to the UE
([0175] In a first embodiment, an apparatus comprises: a memory; and a processor coupled to the memory and configured to: build a prediction model that predicts next cells of UEs)).
Regarding claim 12, Imran teaches
a method of wireless communication performed at a user equipment (UE), comprising:
receiving navigation data associated with the UE
([0154] The prediction model may be built. The next cells may be mapped to the future user locations, which may comprise location coordinates that may be GPS coordinates
[0175] The processor is further configured to map the next cells to the future user locations using most-probable landmarks of the UEs. The future user locations comprise location coordinates that are GPS coordinates);
performing, based at least in part on the navigation data, a mobility prediction associated with whether the UE will likely travel within a cell associated with a network node that is different from a serving node to which the UE is communicatively coupled
([0175] The processor is further configured to build the prediction model using at least one of UE measurements. The processor is further configured to map the next cells to the future user locations using most-probable landmarks of the UEs
[0191] The UE 101 may predict mobility information such as radio conditions of serving and/or neighbor cells, in serving and/or neighbor frequencies, list of cells the UE 101 is moving or being handed over to, and the inclusion of these predictions in measurement reports, such as the existing periodic measurement reports and event-triggered measurement reports);
performing, based at least in part on the mobility prediction, one or more measurements associated with the cell
([0154] The prediction model may be built using UE measurements that comprise at least one of an RSRP, an RSRQ, or an RSS. The next cells may be mapped to the future user locations using at least one of an RSRP, an RSRQ, or an RSS
[0175] The processor is further configured to build the prediction model using at least one of UE measurements. The processor is further configured to map the next cells to the future user locations using most-probable landmarks of the UEs).
Imran does not teach
transmitting an indication of a measurement report associated with the one or more measurements.
In the same field of endeavor, Da Silva teaches
transmitting an indication of a measurement report associated with the one or more measurements
([0191] The UE 101 may predict mobility information such as radio conditions of serving and/or neighbor cells, in serving and/or neighbor frequencies, list of cells the UE 101 is moving or being handed over to, and the inclusion of these predictions in measurement reports, such as the existing periodic measurement reports and event-triggered measurement reports).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Imran, which includes a UE predicting mobility to a cell, to include Da Silva’s teaching of a UE predicting mobility to a cell, for the benefit of handling mobility information in a communications network [0001].
Regarding claim 13, Imran, in view of Da Silva, teaches the method of claim 12.
Da Silva further teaches
wherein the one or more measurements include a radio resource management (RRM) measurement
([0569] The term real measurement or current measurement used herein may also be called RRM measurements. These measurements to be performed by the UE 101 and reported).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Imran, in view of Da Silva, which includes a UE predicting mobility to a cell, to include Da Silva’s teaching of a UE predicting mobility to a cell, for the benefit of handling mobility information in a communications network [0001].
Regarding claim 15, Imran, in view of Da Silva, teaches the method of claim 12.
Imran further teaches
wherein the navigation data is global positioning system (GPS) navigation data
([0154] The next cells may be mapped to the future user locations, which may comprise location coordinates that may be GPS coordinates
[0175] The processor is further configured to map the next cells to the future user locations using most-probable landmarks of the UEs. The future user locations comprise location coordinates that are GPS coordinates).
Regarding claim 16, Imran, in view of Da Silva, teaches the method of claim 12.
Imran further teaches
wherein the navigation data comprises one or more previous navigation destinations associated with the UE
([0123] That information is used for estimating the UE's future location coordinates in a next time step k+k′. Knowing that nodes in a network usually move around a set of well-visited landmarks with a fairly regular landmark trajectory, past mobility logs of UEs are used to estimate most probable landmarks visited by each UE in each cell).
Regarding claim 17, Imran, in view of Da Silva, teaches the method of claim 12.
Imran further teaches
the mobility prediction is further based at least in part on an expected time duration during which the UE will likely travel within the cell
([0118] First, the probability that the user stays in cell i for a period of length r and then goes to cell m is given by ψ.sub.i,m.sup.(u)(τ)).
Regarding claim 18, Imran, in view of Da Silva, teaches the method of claim 12.
Da Silva further teaches
wherein the mobility prediction is further based at least on a likelihood that the UE will travel within the cell
([0453] The first network node 403a may receive the reported list of cells that the UE 101 may move to or predicted measurement results per cell. By knowing where the UE 101 is going the first network node 403a knows with some level of likelihood where the UE 101 is moving).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Imran, in view of Da Silva, which includes a UE predicting mobility to a cell, to include Da Silva’s teaching of a UE predicting mobility to a cell, for the benefit of handling mobility information in a communications network [0001].
Regarding claim 19, Imran, in view of Da Silva, teaches the method of claim 18.
Da Silva further teaches
wherein the mobility prediction is further based at least in part on a confidence level for the likelihood the UE will travel within the cell ([0453] The first network node 403a may receive the reported list of cells that the UE 101 may move to or predicted measurement results per cell. By knowing where the UE 101 is going the first network node 403a knows with some level of likelihood where the UE 101 is moving).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Imran, in view of Da Silva, which includes a UE predicting mobility to a cell, to include Da Silva’s teaching of a UE predicting mobility to a cell, for the benefit of handling mobility information in a communications network [0001].
Regarding claim 20, Imran, in view of Da Silva, teaches the method of claim 12.
Da Silva further teaches
wherein the indication is outputted for transmission to the serving node
([0191] The UE 101 may predict mobility information such as radio conditions of serving and/or neighbor cells, in serving and/or neighbor frequencies, list of cells the UE 101 is moving or being handed over to, and the inclusion of these predictions in measurement reports, such as the existing periodic measurement reports and event-triggered measurement reports).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Imran, in view of Da Silva, which includes a UE predicting mobility to a cell, to include Da Silva’s teaching of a UE predicting mobility to a cell, for the benefit of handling mobility information in a communications network [0001].
Regarding claim 22, Imran teaches
a wireless node, comprising:
means for receiving navigation data associated with the wireless node
([0154] The prediction model may be built. The next cells may be mapped to the future user locations, which may comprise location coordinates that may be GPS coordinates
[0175] The processor is further configured to map the next cells to the future user locations using most-probable landmarks of the UEs. The future user locations comprise location coordinates that are GPS coordinates);
means for performing, based at least in part on the navigation data, a mobility prediction associated with whether the wireless node will likely travel within a cell associated with a network node that is different from a serving node to which the wireless node is communicatively coupled
([0175] The processor is further configured to build the prediction model using at least one of UE measurements. The processor is further configured to map the next cells to the future user locations using most-probable landmarks of the UEs
[0191] The UE 101 may predict mobility information such as radio conditions of serving and/or neighbor cells, in serving and/or neighbor frequencies, list of cells the UE 101 is moving or being handed over to, and the inclusion of these predictions in measurement reports, such as the existing periodic measurement reports and event-triggered measurement reports);
means for performing, based at least in part on the mobility prediction, one or more measurements associated with the cell
([0154] The prediction model may be built using UE measurements that comprise at least one of an RSRP, an RSRQ, or an RSS. The next cells may be mapped to the future user locations using at least one of an RSRP, an RSRQ, or an RSS).
Imran does not teach
means for transmitting an indication of a measurement report associated with the one or more measurements.
In the same field of endeavor, Da Silva teaches
means for transmitting an indication of a measurement report associated with the one or more measurements
([0191] The UE 101 may predict mobility information such as radio conditions of serving and/or neighbor cells, in serving and/or neighbor frequencies, list of cells the UE 101 is moving or being handed over to, and the inclusion of these predictions in measurement reports, such as the existing periodic measurement reports and event-triggered measurement reports).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Imran, which includes a UE predicting mobility to a cell, to include Da Silva’s teaching of a UE predicting mobility to a cell, for the benefit of handling mobility information in a communications network [0001].
Regarding claim 23, Imran, in view of Da Silva, teaches the wireless node of claim 22.
Da Silva further teaches
wherein the one or more measurements include a radio resource management (RRM) measurement
([0569] The term real measurement or current measurement used herein may also be called RRM measurements. These measurements to be performed by the UE 101 and reported).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the invention of Imran, in view of Da Silva, which includes a UE predicting mobility to a cell, to include Da Silva’s teaching of a UE predicting mobility to a cell, for the benefit of handling mobility information in a communications network [0001].
Regarding claim 24, Imran, in view of Da Silva, teaches the wireless node of claim 22.
Imran further teaches
wherein the navigation data is global positioning system (GPS) navigation data
([0154] The next cells may be mapped to the future user locations, which may comprise location coordinates that may be GPS coordinates
[0175] The processor is further configured to map the next cells to the future user locations using most-probable landmarks of the UEs. The future user locations comprise location coordinates that are GPS coordinates).
Conclusion
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art Not Applied
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sarkar (US PG Publication 2016/0291121) teaches a computing device for backtracking user's movement trajectory, the computing device comprising: a processor; a particle filtering module, coupled to the processor, to apply a particle filter on an indoor map for estimating user's movement trajectory, based on accelerometer information and heading information associated with the computing device, the computing device being transportable by a user.
Cai, et al (US PG Publication 2016/0219409), hereafter Cai, teaches a wireless device checks the inter-cell pattern by comparing a first cell identifier of a target cell to a second cell identifier for a predicted subsequent cell according to the inter-cell pattern.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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 Examiner Frank Donado whose telephone number is (571) 270-5361. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays through Fridays between 8 am and 4 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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 Patent Examiner (SPE) Charles Appiah can be reached at 571-272-7904. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov.
Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/FRANK E DONADO/Examiner, Art Unit 2641
/CHARLES N APPIAH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2641
Prosecution Insights