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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 24th November, 2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
This action is in response to the amendment filed on 24th November, 2025. Claims 1, 10, and 19 have been amended. Claims 1-20 remain rejected in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to Claims 1, 10, and 19 filed on 24th November, 2025, with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103, regarding that the prior art does not teach the limitation(s): "the visibility pass generates tiles that of the shade space textures that are visible in the scene, and wherein the shade space textures comprise textures into which shader operations are applied to be used in texturing objects in a reconstruction operation" has been fully considered, but are moot because of new grounds for rejection. It has now been taught by the combination of Garvey and Golas.
Regarding arguments to Claims 2-9, 11-18, and 20, they directly/indirectly depend on independent Claims 1, 10, and 19 respectively. Applicant does not argue anything other than independent Claims 1, 10, and 19. The limitations in those claims, in conjunction with combination, was previously established as explained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-2, 5, 9-11, 14-15, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garvey et al. (US 20250095266 A1), hereinafter referenced as Garvey, in view of Golas et al. (US 20200143550 A1), hereinafter referenced as Golas.
Regarding Claim 1, Garvey discloses a method for rendering (Garvey, [0063]: teaches a rendering method), the method comprising:
performing a visibility pass that designates portions of shade space textures visible in a scene (Garvey, [0063]: teaches the rendering method dividing the scene into multiple bins for processing, which includes "a visibility pass that identifies the triangles that are visible in each bin <read on visible portions of shade space textures>"; [0071]: teaches texture space shading (TSS) 502, which is a shading process dynamically computes and stores shading values in a texture as texels in a texture space, sampling the visibility and the appearance of object textures at independent rates and in separate coordinate systems), wherein
the visibility pass generates tiles that of the shade space textures that are visible in the scene (Garvey, [0081]: teaches a device that marks certain patches in a patch ID buffer as visible and performs visibility sampling 508 during a visibility stage, where "a unit for determining visibility for geometry may be referred to as a patch, where the patch may include one or more adjacent triangles" as shown in FIG. 7; FIG. 7 teaches only visible triangle patches being added to shading atlas 708 <read on generating tiles of visible shade space textures>; Note: it should be noted that the shading atlas is being interpreted as a form of texture atlas; in addition, the shading atlas is utilized to provide for an improved TSS), and wherein
PNG
media_image1.png
401
551
media_image1.png
Greyscale
the shade space textures comprise textures into which shader operations are applied to be used in texturing objects [[in a reconstruction operation]] (Garvey, [0058]: teaches "a visibility stream can be generated, e.g., in a binning pass, to determine the visibility information of each primitive in an image or scene," where "this visibility stream can identify whether a certain primitive is visible or not" and "this information can be used to remove primitives that are not visible so that the non-visible primitives are not rendered, e.g., in the rendering pass"; [0080]: teaches the shading atlas referring to a 2D data structure that includes shading information of visible surfaces that correspond to rendered scenes; [0081]: teaches "a unit for determining visibility for geometry may be referred to as a patch, where the patch may include one or more adjacent triangles" and "the patch may be suitable for being packed into a texture for streaming");
[[performing a rate controller operation on output of the visibility pass using spatially-adaptive sampling;]]
performing a sparse shade space shading operation on the tiles that cover the shade space textures visible in the scene [[based on a result of the spatially-adaptive sampling]] (Garvey, [0120]: teaches VRS 2002 varying shading rates <read on perform sparse shade space shading operation> for different regions of a frame 2004, such as a first region 2006 at a first shading rate 2010 and a second region 2008 at a second shading rate 2012);
[[performing a regularization operation based on an output of the sparse shade space shading operation; and]]
[[performing the reconstruction operation using output from the regularization operation to produce a final scene.]]
However, Garvey does not expressly disclose
the shade space textures comprise textures into which shader operations are applied to be used in texturing objects in a reconstruction operation;
performing a rate controller operation on output of the visibility pass using spatially-adaptive sampling;
performing a sparse shade space shading operation on the tiles that cover the shade space textures visible in the scene based on a result of the spatially-adaptive sampling;
performing a regularization operation based on an output of the sparse shade space shading operation; and
performing the reconstruction operation using output from the regularization operation to produce a final scene.
Golas discloses
the shade space textures comprise textures into which shader operations are applied to be used in texturing objects in a reconstruction operation (Golas, [0048]: teaches a reconstruction submodule 211, where "a first option to reduce the number of pixels rendered in a tile is reconstruction <read on reconstruction operation> via higher order polynomial interpolation and filtering in a tile to generate missing pixel data for that tile");
performing a rate controller operation on output of the visibility pass using spatially-adaptive sampling (Golas, [0098]: teaches varying shading rates <read on rate controller operation>, such as "a higher shading rate may provide more visual fidelity" at a higher GPU cost and "a lower shading rate may provide a lower visual fidelity at a lower GPU cost"; [0113]: teaches "the rasterization stage 1816 produces its output (e.g., a raster image) <read on visibility pass output> based on the vector information received from the geometry shader stage 1814 as well as the shading rate image generated from the shading rate image stage 1808" as shown in FIG. 18; [0114]: teaches "the shading reduction pipeline state 1806 includes a sampling rate stage <read on spatially adaptive sampling> (or heuristic) 1820 (e.g., the sampling rate required as a function of quality reducing filter (depth-of-field (DoF), motion blur, etc.))");
PNG
media_image2.png
403
589
media_image2.png
Greyscale
performing a sparse shade space shading operation on the tiles that cover the shade space textures visible in the scene based on a result of the spatially-adaptive sampling (Golas, [0113]: teaches "the shading rate image stage 1808 may generate the shading rate image based on the output from the shading reduction pipeline state 1806 <read on perform sparse shade space shading operation>," where the raster image is composed of pixels <read on tiles>; Note: it should be noted that a block of pixels are referred to as screen tiles; see Paragraph [0002]; FIG. 20 teaches the system detecting a quality reduction in a rendered image and computing a shading rate image based on the detected number of samples <read on spatially-adaptive sampling result>);
PNG
media_image3.png
357
447
media_image3.png
Greyscale
performing a regularization operation based on an output of the sparse shade space shading operation (Golas, FIG. 21 teaches after determining a first shading rate, the previous image frame is rendered based on the first shading rate, where changes are determined in the underlying assets between the current image frame and a previous image frame <read on sparse shade space shading operation output>, where a portion of the current image frame is rendered by reusing image data from the previous image frame); and
PNG
media_image4.png
404
556
media_image4.png
Greyscale
performing the reconstruction operation using output from the regularization operation to produce a final scene (Golas, FIG. 21 teaches after determining a first shading rate, the previous image frame is rendered based on the first shading rate, where changes are determined <read on regularization operation output> in the underlying assets between the current image frame and a previous image frame, where a portion of the current image frame is rendered by reusing image data from the previous image frame; [0158]: teaches "areas of a render target (e.g., image) that do not require fine scale details may often be rendered at a lower resolution without suffering noticeable visual artifacts," where adaptive de-sampling (AD) "may sparsely render a full resolution image, and reconstruct the pixels in-between <read on reconstruction operation>" such that "in order to accomplish such results, AD may employ a rendering scheme whereby quads (e.g., the 2×2 block of pixels that is the basic unit of work in rendering) are re-mapped within a 4×4 block (e.g., a Multi-Quad) to a non-contiguous set of 4 pixels within a 3×3 region (e.g., a 3×3 quad)"; Note: it should be noted that it is being interpreted that the final image <read on final scene> is being reconstructed using parts of the current and previous frames).
Golas is analogous art with respect to Garvey because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely GPU tile-rendering. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to implement a shading reduction pipeline as taught by Golas into the teaching of Garvey. The suggestion for doing so would allow the system to reuse tile data from prior frames and combine them with the current frame, thereby reducing rendering overhead and improving overall rendering efficiency. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Golas with Garvey.
Regarding Claim 10, it recites the limitations that are similar in scope to Claim 1, but in a system. As shown in the rejection, the combination of Garvey and Golas discloses the limitations of Claim 1. Additionally, Garvey discloses a system (Garvey, [0048]: teaches a processing unit 120 <read on system>) comprising:
a processor (Garvey, [0048]: teaches the processing unit 120 including one or more processors); and
a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to perform operations including (Garvey, [0048]: teaches the processing unit 120 including internal memory 121, which further include instructions for the processors to execute to perform techniques <read on operations>):…
Thus, Claim 10 is met by Garvey according to the mapping presented in the rejection of Claim 1, given the method corresponds to a system.
Regarding Claim 19, it recites the limitations that are similar in scope to Claim 1, but in a non-transitory computer-readable medium. As shown in the rejection, the combination of Garvey and Golas discloses the limitations of Claim 1. Additionally, Garvey discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform operations (Garvey, [0048]: teaches a processing unit 120 that includes internal memory 121, which is a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, that further includes executable instructions for one or more processors to perform techniques <read on operations>) comprising:…
Thus, Claim 19 is met by Garvey according to the mapping presented in the rejection of Claim 1, given the method corresponds to a non-transitory computer-readable medium.
Regarding Claims 2, 11, and 20, the combination of Garvey and Golas discloses the method, the system, and the non-transitory computer-readable medium of Claims 1, 10, and 19 respectively. Garvey does not expressly disclose the limitations of Claims 2, 11, and 20; however, Golas discloses wherein the spatially-adaptive sampling comprises
sampling at a higher spatial sampling rate proximate a high-frequency detail in a tile (Golas, [0098]: teaches a higher shading rate <read on higher spatial sampling rate>, which provides more visual fidelity), and
sampling at a lower spatial sampling rate in other areas of the tile (Golas, [0098]: teaches a lower shading rate <read on lower spatial sampling rate>, which provides less visual fidelity; [0158]: teaches "areas <read on other areas> of a render target (e.g., image) that do not require fine scale details may often be rendered at a lower resolution without suffering noticeable visual artifacts").
Golas is analogous art with respect to Garvey because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely GPU tile-rendering. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to implement a shading reduction pipeline as taught by Golas into the teaching of Garvey. The suggestion for doing so would allow the system to reuse tile data from prior frames and combine them with the current frame, thereby reducing rendering overhead and improving overall rendering efficiency. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Golas with Garvey.
Regarding Claims 5 and 14, the combination of Garvey and Golas discloses the method and the system of Claims 1 and 10 respectively. Garvey does not expressly disclose the limitations of Claims 5 and 14; however, Golas discloses wherein the spatially-adaptive sampling comprises:
(i) dithering a spatial sampling pattern within a tile (Golas, [0059]: teaches performing dithering 540 for sampling patterns <read on spatial sampling pattern>, which are for given tiles, such as a 4x4 block/tile 535 as shown in FIG. 5),
PNG
media_image5.png
242
606
media_image5.png
Greyscale
(ii) determining whether the dithered spatial sampling pattern provides additional information during the shade space shading operation (Golas, [0058]: teaches additional checks being performed "to determine if pixels from the previous frame may be used <read on additional information> in the current frame"), and
(iii) determining whether to further dither a spatial sampling pattern within the tile in response to the result of step (ii) (Golas, [0060]: teaches a dithering module selecting a sample pattern <read on spatial sampling pattern>, where "the sample patterns are selected so that each pixel is guaranteed to be rendered at least <read on determining whether to further dither within tile> once every k frames, where
n
*
n
k
is the minimum number of samples per
n
×
n
tile"; Note: it should be noted that temporal dithering is being interpreted as a continuous dither over a period of time; additionally, the process is only performed when a pixel change between the previous and current frames exceed a threshold).
Golas is analogous art with respect to Garvey because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely GPU tile-rendering. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to implement a shading reduction pipeline as taught by Golas into the teaching of Garvey. The suggestion for doing so would allow the system to reuse tile data from prior frames and combine them with the current frame, thereby reducing rendering overhead and improving overall rendering efficiency. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Golas with Garvey.
Regarding Claims 9 and 15, the combination of Garvey and Golas discloses the method and the system of Claims 1 and 10 respectively. Garvey does not expressly disclose the limitations of Claims 9 and 15; however, Golas discloses wherein:
the reconstruction operation is part of a sequence of reconstruction frames (Golas, [0149]: teaches the GPU checking for changes in the underlying assets (e.g., camera and viewport) between an input image frame an output image frame, where it determines which data should be reused <read on reconstruction operation> from the previous frame to reduce rendering overhead and reconstruct a frame <read on part of sequence of reconstruction frames>; Note: it should be noted that it is being interpreted that the constant process of checking between previous and current frames to construct an updated frame is creating a set of reconstruction frames);
the shade space shading operation is part of a sequence of shade space shading frames (Golas, [0113]: teaches "the shading rate image stage 1808 may generate the shading rate image <read on part of sequence of shade space shading frames> based on the output from the shading reduction pipeline state 1806 <read on shade space shading operation>"); and
the sequence of reconstruction frames is processed at a higher frequency than the sequence of shade space shading frames (Golas, [0098]: teaches a higher shading rate <read on higher frequency>, which provides more visual fidelity).
Golas is analogous art with respect to Garvey because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely GPU tile-rendering. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have the system check for changes in the underlying assets between the current and previous frames as taught by Golas into the teaching of Garvey. The suggestion for doing so would allow the system to determine which tile data to reuse from the previous frame, thereby reducing overall rendering workload and improving rendering efficiency. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Golas with Garvey.
Claims 3-4, 8, 12-13, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garvey et al. (US 20250095266 A1), hereinafter referenced as Garvey, in view of Golas et al. (US 20200143550 A1), hereinafter referenced as Golas as applied to Claims 1 and 10 above respectively, and further in view of Yang et al. (US 20210166441 A1, previously cited), hereinafter referenced as Yang.
Regarding Claims 3 and 12, the combination of Garvey and Golas discloses the method and the system of Claims 1 and 10 respectively. The combination of Garvey and Golas does not expressly disclose the limitations of Claims 3 and 12; however, Yang discloses wherein the spatially-adaptive sampling comprises
equalization of a spatial sampling rate between neighboring tiles in order to reduce a rate of change the spatial sampling rate between the neighboring tiles (Yang, [0056]: teaches applying a temporal smoothing scalar <read on equalization of spatial sampling rate> to generate adaptive velocity thresholds to reduce dramatic variability <read on reducing rate of change> of shading rate patterns across neighboring frames <read on neighboring tiles>).
Yang is analogous art with respect to Garvey, in view of Golas because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely applying variable rate shading to sets of pixels. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to implement a temporal smoothing scalar that generates adaptive velocity thresholds as taught by Yang into the teaching of Garvey, in view of Golas. The suggestion for doing so would allow the system to determine sampling discrepancies between neighboring frames, where the temporal smoothing scalar would smooth out the output tiles for each frame, thereby yielding consistent image quality. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Yang with Garvey, in view of Golas.
Regarding Claims 4 and 13, the combination of Garvey and Golas discloses the method and the system of Claims 1 and 10 respectively. The combination of Garvey and Golas does not expressly disclose the limitations of Claims 4 and 13; however, Yang discloses wherein the spatially-adaptive sampling comprises:
(i) changing a spatial sampling rate within a tile (Yang, [0045]: teaches an example of the system reducing shading rates <read on changing spatial sampling rate> of a tile at location (1, 5) "along both X and Y dimensions because animated object 135(3) covers all pixel in the tile and has moderate pixel velocity and both X and Y," where "selectively reducing shading rates in this way creates a broader tradeoff space between static shaded resolution per frame and frame rate, allowing systems to achieve better overall visual quality"),
(ii) determining whether the changed spatial sampling rate provides additional information during the shade space shading operation (Yang, [0055]: teaches performing multiple shading operations <read on shade space shading operation> per pixel "to effectively super sample a pixel shading result," where "super sampling may increase temporal stability and reduce aliasing artifacts appearing on high-frequency details" and "a higher per-pixel shading rate may provide additional detail <read on providing additional information> and perceived image quality at lower object motion speeds, as aliasing artifacts are more easily noticeable at lower speeds"; Note: it should be noted that shading operations are performed in the rasterization pipeline), and
(iii) determining whether to further vary the spatial sampling rate within the tile in response to the result of step (ii) (Yang, [0067]: teaches variable pixel shading rate being supported "by varying the shading resolution in texture MIP-level," where "since this form of shading rate can be determined on a per texture-tile basis, there is enough flexibility to vary shading rate adaptively at each visible surface location and respond to a shading rate determination <read on determining spatial sampling rate variation> based on screen-space motion").
Yang is analogous art with respect to Garvey, in view of Golas because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely applying variable rate shading to sets of pixels. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to perform variable pixel shading rates at varying shading resolutions as taught by Yang into the teaching of Garvey, in view of Golas. The suggestion for doing so would provide the rendering pipeline additional context for region-based shading rates, thereby improving the overall rendering process. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Yang with Garvey, in view of Golas.
Regarding Claims 8 and 18, the combination of Garvey and Golas discloses the method and the system of Claims 1 and 10 respectively. The combination of Garvey and Golas does not expressly disclose the limitations of Claims 8 and 18; however, Yang discloses wherein
an optimum pattern of samples are selected for the shade space operation in order to minimize the visual and perceptible impact of applying only a subset of the samples to the shading operation (Yang, [0037]: teaches determining the maximum shading rate difference <read on selecting an optimum pattern of samples> between a first and second shading rate, which is specified "as one list position difference from a list of possible shading rates (e.g., one, one half, one quarter, and so forth)," which is used for variable rate shading <read on applying only a subset of samples>).
Yang is analogous art with respect to Garvey, in view of Golas because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely applying variable rate shading to sets of pixels. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to perform variable pixel shading rates at varying shading resolutions as taught by Yang into the teaching of Garvey, in view of Golas. The suggestion for doing so would provide the rendering pipeline additional context for region-based shading rates, thereby improving the overall rendering process. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Yang with Garvey, in view of Golas.
Claims 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garvey et al. (US 20250095266 A1), hereinafter referenced as Garvey, in view of Golas et al. (US 20200143550 A1), hereinafter referenced as Golas as applied to Claims 1 and 10 above respectively, and further in view of Fuller et al. (US 20190005714 A1, previously cited), hereinafter referenced as Fuller.
Regarding Claims 6 and 16, the combination of Garvey and Golas discloses the method and the system of Claims 1 and 10 respectively. The combination of Garvey and Golas does not expressly disclose the limitations of Claims 6 and 16; however, Fuller discloses wherein
the spatially-adaptive sampling is implemented in accordance with a predetermined budget of samples to be shaded in the shade space operation (Fuller, [0019]: teaches analyzing a previous fragment (e.g., individually and/or as part of a larger area of the previous image) "to determine whether the previous fragment is subject to high frequency detail (e.g., that achieves at least a threshold frequency)" and "if so, the variable shading rate <read on spatially-adaptive sampling> selected for the current fragment can be increased or decreased and/or can otherwise be set to a certain value (e.g., a maximum value) <read on predetermined budget of samples> based on determining that the previous fragment is subject to the high frequency detail" for shading <read on shade space operation>).
Fuller is analogous art with respect to Garvey, in view of Golas because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely applying variable rate shading to sets of pixels in an input image. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to analyze a previous fragment to set a determined value based on frequency detail as taught by Fuller into the teaching of Garvey, in view of Golas. The suggestion for doing so would allow the system to adjust the type of variable shading rate based on fidelity, thereby offering a flexible and adaptive rendering system. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Fuller with Garvey, in view of Golas.
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Garvey et al. (US 20250095266 A1), hereinafter referenced as Garvey, in view of Golas et al. (US 20200143550 A1), hereinafter referenced as Golas, and further in view of Fuller et al. (US 20190005714 A1, previously cited), hereinafter referenced as Fuller as applied to Claims 6 and 16 above respectively, and further in view of Yang et al. (US 20210166441 A1, previously cited), hereinafter referenced as Yang.
Regarding Claims 7 and 17, the combination of Garvey, Golas, and Fuller discloses the method and the system of Claims 6 and 16 respectively. The combination of Garvey, Golas, and Fuller does not expressly disclose the limitations of Claims 7 and 17; however, Yang discloses wherein
an optimum spatial amount of samples are selected for the shade space operation in order to minimize the visual and perceptible impact of applying only a subset of the samples to the shading operation (Yang, [0041]: teaches "a pixel block size of 1×1 includes one pixel and is shaded from at least one color shading operation" and "a pixel block of 4×4 pixels comprises sixteen pixels <read on selecting an optimum spatial amount of samples>, which are collectively shaded from one color shading operation, thereby reducing computational workload relative to a 1×1 pixel block <read on applying only a subset of samples>").
Yang is analogous art with respect to the combination of Garvey, Golas, and Fuller because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely applying variable rate shading to sets of pixels. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to perform variable pixel shading rates at varying shading resolutions as taught by Yang into the combined teaching of Garvey, Golas, and Fuller. The suggestion for doing so would provide the rendering pipeline additional context for region-based shading rates, thereby improving the overall rendering process. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Yang with the combination of Garvey, Golas, and Fuller.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Baker et al. (US 20210118214 A1) discloses generating a graphic display of frame images comprising a collection of graphic objects to be rendered into a frame image using shadels; and
Golas et al. (US 20150379692 A1) discloses a reconstruction unit that samples tiles to reconstruct regions of an image.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KARL TRUONG whose telephone number is (703)756-5915. The examiner can normally be reached 10:30 AM - 7:30 PM.
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, Kent Chang can be reached at (571) 272-7667. 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.
/K.D.T./Examiner, Art Unit 2614
/KENT W CHANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2614