DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to amended claims filed on 03 February 2026. Claims 1-17, and 20-22 are pending examination.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 03 February 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant states Li and Gurney, alone and in combination, fails to disclose claim 1, 20 and 21 limitations, “determining that a third cell of the plurality of cells that supports CATM communication services is within a threshold distance of the first cell and utilizes a frequency band that is different from a frequency band utilized by the first cell, resulting in a third determination.” The examiner respectfully disagrees with applicant. Li teaches determining neighboring candidate target cells for handover based on proximity and inter-frequency mobility relationships. Specifically, Li teaches identifying neighboring cells within a defined service relationship relative to a serving cell and further teaches candidate target cells operating on different carrier frequencies/bands for mobility support (Li, fig. 1a-1f, fig. 2a-2c, [0040]-[0087], [0088]-[0112], [0113]-[0124]). Gur further teaches determining whether a candidate cell possess sufficient available resources using threshold-based sector loading analysis. Gur expressly teaches determining network loading for a given sector/cell and comparing the determined loading against threshold values based on sector capacity (Gur, fig. 1, fig. 3, fig. 9-13, [0033]-[0093], [0094]-[0150], [0152]-[0178], [0180]-[0189]).
Applicant states Li and Gurney, alone and in combination, fails to disclose claim 1, 20 and 21 limitations, “establishing, based on the third determination, a relation between the first cell and the third cell to provide a handover of operations supporting CATM services.” The examiner respectfully disagrees with applicant. Li teaches establishing mobility relationships between serving and candidate target cells to enable inter-cell handover opinations, including handover between cells operating on different frequency bands (Li, fig. 1a-1f, fig. 2a-2c, [0040]-[0087], [0088]-[0112], [0113]-[0124]). Li further teaches selecting a target neighboring cell and establishing the corresponding inter-cell relationship necessary to support transfer of communication operations from the serving cell to the target cell (Li, fig. 1a-1f, fig. 2a-2c, [0040]-[0087], [0088]-[0112], [0113]-[0124]). Gur further teaches determining whether a candidate cell possesses sufficient available resources using threshold based sector loading analysis. Gur expressly teaches determining network loading for a given sector/cell and comparing the determined loading against threshold values corresponding to sector capacity (Gur, fig. 1, fig. 3, fig. 9-13, [0033]-[0093], [0094]-[0150], [0152]-[0178], [0180]-[0189]).
Accordingly, the examiner maintains 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 1, 20, and 21 as well as their dependents based on Li et al. (hereinafter Li) (US 2017/0118758 A1), and further in view of Gurney et al. (hereinafter Gurney) (US 2025/0071619 A1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 1- 17, and 20-22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (US 2017/0118758 A1) (hereinafter Li ‘758) in view of Gurney et al. (US 20250071619 A1) (hereinafter Gur):
Regarding Claim 1, 20, and 21, Li’ ‘758 and Gur teach a device / a method / A non-transitory machine-readable medium comprising:
a processing system including a processor (Li ‘758, Fig. 3, [0088]-[0096]); and
a memory that stores executable instructions that, when executed by the processing system, facilitate performance of operations, the operations comprising (Li ‘758, Fig. 3, [0088]-[0096]):
obtaining indications of a respective priority level of each cell of a plurality of cells in respect of supporting Category M (CATM) communication services (Li ‘758, Fig. 1d-1f, Fig. 2a, [0054]-[0062], [0064]-[0068]: [0065] When the wireless device is performing the random access control procedure to become connected to a network node, one task for the wireless device is to select a carrier to use for subsequent use to engage in a service provided by means of a wireless communication network of which the network node is comprised. There may be a plurality of different parameters and/or factors that form a basis by means of which different carriers are more or less suitable to use for the service the wireless device will engage in. Thus, the wireless device receives information from the network node about available and/or offered carrier frequency and frequency band type. Based at least partially on the frequency band type and carrier frequency available and/or offered by the network node, the wireless device selects a carrier of a frequency band type offered by the network node to camp on.);
determining, at a first point in time, that CATM is active in a first cell of the plurality of cells, resulting in a first determination (Li ‘758, Fig. 1a-1f, [0036], [0045]-[0046], [0055]-[0062]: [0058] The method may further comprise assigning 103 a first priority of the served wireless device in the non-licensed frequency band, the first priority being higher than a second priority assigned to a second wireless device engaged in an initial random access control procedure, wherein if the non-licensed frequency band becomes unavailable, the served wireless device is prioritized before the second wireless device with regards to the configured fallback carrier, see also FIG. 1f.);
activating, based on the second determination, CATM in at least a second cell of the plurality of cells (Li ‘758, Fig. 2a-2c, [0063]--[0086]: [0083] Thus, for a wireless device served by non-licensed frequency band carrier only, the wireless device may maintain one or multiple several configured fallback carriers (licensed carrier preferred) to enable fast cell reselection when served carrier (in non-licensed frequency band) is becoming unavailable.).
determining that a third cell of the plurality of cells that supports CATM communication services is within a threshold distance of the first cell and utilizes a frequency band that is different from a frequency band utilized by the first cell, resulting in a third determination (Li, fig. 1a-1f, fig. 2a-2c, [0040]-[0087], [0088]-[0112], [0113]-[0124]: [0054] As described above, there may be some additional signalling format change on measurement, reporting procedure or power control (e.g. primary system detection request) which is not needed in licensed band. For new wireless devices supporting licensed band and non-licensed band simultaneously, they may not be able to decide if there is need to do this without knowledge of band type. Thus a wireless device may send a request for information about frequency band type of the carrier by means of which the wireless device is connected to the network node. This is received 115 by the network node, which subsequently informs 116 the wireless device of the frequency band type of the carrier, see also FIG. 1d. FIG. 1d illustrates that this may happen at different points in time, which is illustrated in FIG. 1d and subsequently also in FIGS. 1e and 1f by arrows indicating “from XXX, YYY” and the arrows “to ZZZ, CCC”. This is to illustrate that all actions and/or events possibly taking place may do so in different orders so that one has not necessarily have to occur before another.). And (Gur, fig. 1, fig. 3, fig. 9-13, [0033]-[0093], [0094]-[0150], [0152]-[0178], [0180]-[0189]: [0086] Furthermore, the command is understood to cause the fourth group of the cameras 108-4 to increase the respective scene classification threshold 126-4 from a current value (e.g. of “80”) to a higher value (e.g. such as “85”, “90”, “95”, amongst other possibilities), causing the cameras to be less likely to determine that a given scene contains given (e.g., interesting) content (and thus requiring lower average bitrates to transmit the less interesting video information). In some examples, the command may cause the fourth group of the cameras 108-4 to increase the respective scene classification threshold 126-4 from a current value to a higher value by a given amount (e.g. such as “4”, “5”, “6”, and the like, amongst other possibilities) and/or by a given percentage (e.g. such as 5%, 10%, 15%, and the like, amongst other possibilities.); and
establishing, based on the third determination, a relation between the first cell and the third cell to provide a handover of operations supporting CATM services (Li, fig. 1a-1f, fig. 2a-2c, [0040]-[0087], [0088]-[0112], [0113]-[0124]) and (Gur, fig. 1, fig. 3, fig. 9-13, [0033]-[0093], [0094]-[0150], [0152]-[0178], [0180]-[0189]: [0091] However, in some examples, interference may occur between the sectors 106, and adjusting the first threshold 122 may occur taking such interference into account. For example, when interference between the given sector 106-1 and an adjacent sector 106 (e.g. one or more of the sector 106-2, 106-3) is above a threshold interference level, a capability of the given sector 106-1 to handle a given network load may be reduced. Hence, when interference between the given sector 106-1 and an adjacent sector 106 is above a threshold interference level, the first threshold 122 for the given sector 106-1 (e.g. and of adjacent sector 106) may be lowered (e.g. by the computing device 102) from a given value and/or initial value to a lower value (e.g. which may be 60%, 70%, 80%, amongst other possibilities of the given value and/or initial value), to account for the reduced or limited capacity of the given sector 106-1. Similarly, the second threshold 124 may also be adjusted in such interference examples, to help account for the reduced or limited capacity of the given sector 106-1.).
Thus, Li ‘758 does not explicitly teach determining, based on the first determination, that a utilization of resources of the first cell is greater than a first threshold, resulting in a second determination or the term threshold.
Similar to the system of Li ‘758, Gur teaches a network loading level and compares the network loading level to the first threshold where the device determines that the network loading level is greater than the first threshold, which can be seen as, determining, based on the first determination, that a utilization of resources of the first cell is greater than a first threshold, resulting in a second determination and threshold (Gur, Fig. 3, Fig. 4, [0112]-[0150], [0152]-[0156]: [0155] As also depicted in FIG. 4, the computing device 102 determines (e.g. at the block 302 of the method 300) a network loading level 404 of the given sector 106-1 and compares (e.g. at the block 304 of the method 300) the network loading level 404 to the first threshold 122. As depicted, computing device 102 determines that the network loading level 404 is greater than the first threshold 122 (e.g. a “YES” decision at the block 304 of the method 300).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Li with Gur to improve how CATM services activation decisions are made. Li teaches prioritizing and activating CATM communication services across cells, while Gur teaches determining when network utilization exceeds a threshold to guide operation. Doing so would yield more efficient and adaptive CATM activation decisions. Moreover, Gur mentions that high threshold levels correspond to high-quality service, reinforcing the benefit of integrating those determinations into Li’s system (Gur, [0082]).
Regarding Claim 2, Li ‘758 teaches the device of claim 1:
wherein the first cell has a first priority level in respect of supporting CATM communication services and the second cell has a second priority level in respect of supporting CATM communication services, the second priority level being different from the first priority level (Li ‘758, Fig.1a-1f, [0040]-[0062]: [0059] A situation may arise where the network node has to prioritizes between different wireless devices, e.g. when the network node becomes heavily loaded and/or when frequency resources are running low. By assigning a higher priority to the wireless device currently being served by means of the non-licensed frequency band than to the wireless device currently engaged in the initial random access control procedure, the wireless device already being served by the network node will not be dropped in case e.g. frequency resources are running low. The wireless device engaged in the initial random access control procedure has not yet become served by the network node. The two wireless devices may have the same, or different, handling priority when it comes to e.g. subscription or quality of service, QoS, but this priority is not regarded when it comes to prioritizing between the wireless device currently being served by means of the non-licensed frequency and the wireless device currently engaged in the initial random access control procedure.).
Regarding Claim 3, Li ‘758 teaches the device of claim 2:
wherein the first priority level is greater than the second priority level (Li ‘758, Fig.1a-1f, [0040]-[0062]: [0058] The method may further comprise assigning 103 a first priority of the served wireless device in the non-licensed frequency band, the first priority being higher than a second priority assigned to a second wireless device engaged in an initial random access control procedure, wherein if the non-licensed frequency band becomes unavailable, the served wireless device is prioritized before the second wireless device with regards to the configured fallback carrier, see also FIG. 1f.).
Regarding Claim 4, Li ‘758 teaches the device of claim 1:
wherein the operations further comprise: determining, at a second point in time that is subsequent to the first point in time, that CATM is inactive in the first cell, resulting in a fourth determination (Li ‘758, Fig.2a-2c, [0064]-[0075], [0076]-[0086]: [0076] This is still a further example of how to determine that the carrier in the non-licensed frequency band is becoming unavailable. When the wireless device is being served by the network node by means of the carrier in the non-licensed frequency band, the wireless device may both transmit and receive data. Generally, a wireless device may not transmit data in uplink freely, but instead requests a scheduling grant which tells the wireless device e.g. when the wireless device may transmit data in uplink. It shall be pointed out that the wireless device may not need to actively send requests for scheduling grants. The scheduling grants may be sent to the wireless device from the network node without the wireless device actively having to request them.).
Regarding Claim 5, Li ‘758 teaches the device of claim 4:
wherein the operations further comprise: determining, based on the fourth determination, that CATM is active in the second cell of the plurality of cells, resulting in a fifth determination (Li ‘758, Fig. 2a-2c, [0064]-[0086]: See above for paragraph [0065].).
Regarding Claim 6, Li ‘758 teaches the device of claim 5:
wherein the operations further comprise: activating, based on the fifth determination, CATM in the first cell (Li ‘758, Fig. 2a-2c, [0064]-[0086]: See above for paragraph [0065].).
Regarding Claim 7, Li ‘758 teaches the device of claim 6:
wherein the operations further comprise: deactivating, based on the fifth determination, CATM in the second cell (Li ‘758, Fig. 1a-1f, [0036], [0040]-[0046], [0055]-[0062]: [0041] The network node may support both licensed and non-licensed frequency band. At one point in time, the network node serves the wireless device in the non-licensed frequency band. As described above, the wireless communication system in which the network node is employed may not be in control of the non-licensed frequency band and may detect at any time (e.g. by receiving information from another node such as e.g. an LSA controller) that the non-licensed frequency band is becoming unavailable. Thus, the network node configures a fallback carrier in the licensed frequency band to the wireless device. Since the wireless communication system in which the network node is employed has full control over the licensed frequency band, the wireless network and thus the network node, has full control over the configured fallback carrier.).
Regarding Claim 8, Li ‘758 teaches the device of claim 4:
wherein the operations further comprise: determining, based on the fourth determination, that CATM is inactive in a remainder of the cells of the plurality of cells, resulting in a fifth determination, the remainder of the cells excluding the first cell (Li ‘758, Fig.2a-2c, [0064]-[0075], [0076]-[0086]: See above for paragraph [0076].).
Regarding Claim 9, Li ‘758 teaches the device of claim 8:
wherein the operations further comprise: activating, based on the fifth determination, CATM in the first cell (Li ‘758, Fig.2a-2c, [0064]-[0075], [0076]-[0086]: See above for paragraph [0076].).
Regarding Claim 10, Li ‘758 teaches the device of claim 1:
wherein the first threshold is based on a capacity of the resources in the first cell, and wherein the at least a second cell includes the second cell and a fourth cell of the plurality of cells (Li ‘758, Fig.1a-1f, [0039]-[0062], [0065], [0085]: [0059] A situation may arise where the network node has to prioritise between different wireless devices, e.g. when the network node becomes heavily loaded and/or when frequency resources are running low. By assigning a higher priority to the wireless device currently being served by means of the non-licensed frequency band than to the wireless device currently engaged in the initial random access control procedure, the wireless device already being served by the network node will not be dropped in case e.g. frequency resources are running low. The wireless device engaged in the initial random access control procedure has not yet become served by the network node. The two wireless devices may have the same, or different, handling priority when it comes to e.g. subscription or quality of service, QoS, but this priority is not regarded when it comes to prioritising between the wireless device currently being served by means of the non-licensed frequency and the wireless device currently engaged in the initial random access control procedure.).
Regarding Claim 11, Li ‘758 and Gur teach the device of claim 1:
Thus, Li ‘758 does not explicitly teach wherein the operations further comprise: determining, at a second point in time that is subsequent to the first point in time, that the utilization of the resources of the first cell is not greater than the first threshold, resulting in a fifth.
Similar to the system of Li ‘758, Gur teaches a network loading level and compares the network loading level to the first threshold where the device determines that the network loading level is not greater than a threshold, which can be seen as, wherein the operations further comprise: determining, at a second point in time that is subsequent to the first point in time, that the utilization of the resources of the first cell is not greater than the first threshold, resulting in a fifth determination (Gur, Fig. 12, [0169]-[0177], [0178]-[0179]: [0178] Attention is next directed to FIG. 12, which is understood to follow in time from FIG. 11. In FIG. 12, the computing device 102 again determines that a network loading level 1202 of the given sector 106-1 continues to be less than the second threshold 124. The computing device 102 identifies the next highest rank group of the cameras 108 (e.g. next highest relative to the highest rank first group of the cameras 108-1) by processing the ranks 120 to determine that the second group of the cameras 108-2 having the identifiers 118-2 are associated with the next highest rank 120-2 of “2”.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Li with Gur to improve how CATM services activation decisions are made. Li teaches prioritizing and activating CATM communication services across cells, while Gur teaches determining when network utilization exceeds a threshold to guide operation. Doing so would yield more efficient and adaptive CATM activation decisions. Moreover, Gur mentions that high threshold levels correspond to high-quality service, reinforcing the benefit of integrating such determinations into Li’s system (Gur, [0082]).
Regarding Claim 12, Li ‘758 teaches the device of claim 11:
wherein the operations further comprise: determining, based on the fourth determination, that a utilization of resources of the second cell of the plurality of cells is less than a second threshold, resulting in a fifth determination (Li ‘758, Fig. 1a-1f, [0036], [0045]-[0046], [0055]-[0062]: See above for paragraph [0074].).
Regarding Claim 13, Li ‘758 teaches the device of claim 12:
wherein the operations further comprise: deactivating, based on the fifth determination, CATM in the second cell (Li ‘758, Fig. 1a-1f, [0036], [0040]-[0046], [0055]-[0062]: See above for paragraph [0041].).
Regarding Claim 14, Li 758’ teaches the device of claim 11:
wherein the operations further comprise: determining, based on the forth determination, that a utilization of resources of the second cell of the plurality of cells is not less than a second threshold, resulting in a fifth determination (Li ‘758, Fig. 1a-1f, [0036], [0045]-[0046], [0055]-[0062]: See above for paragraph [0074].).
Regarding Claim 15, Li 758’ teaches the device of claim 14:
wherein the operations further comprise: performing, based on the fifth determination, a check within a threshold distance of the first cell (Li ‘758, [0057], [0061]-[0062],[0068], [0073]-[0074], [0102]: [0057] As described above, a network node may signal information to wireless devices by broadcasting MIB on a BCH and/or transmitting SIB on a DL-SCH. Another way to signaling information to the wireless device is by means of Resource Radio Control, RCC, signaling. Generally, cell specific information is signaled by means of MIB and/or SIB and information specific for the wireless device is signaled by means of RRC signaling. In this manner, a wireless device may be able to select a network node and/or a carrier in the licensed or non-licensed frequency band based on the parameters comprising information pertaining to carrier frequency and band type supported by the network node. It may be that not all network nodes support all different frequencies in the non-licensed frequency band. By determining and signaling this information to the wireless device, the wireless device may make a choice of carrier dependent on e.g. how delay tolerant the service is that the wireless device wishes to engage in.); and
determining, based on the performing of the check, that there is a fourth cell included in the plurality of cells with CATM activated, resulting in a sixth determination (Li ‘758, [0034]-[0036], [0044], [0076], [0086]: [0044] FIG. 1b illustrates an exemplifying network architecture of a heterogeneous wireless communication network employing heterogeneous frequency band. In this specific example, only low power network nodes 1210 and 1220 operate in non-licensed frequency band, whereas the macro network node 1100 operates in licensed frequency band. It shall be pointed out that this is merely an example, and the method may be implemented in heterogeneous and homogeneous wireless communication networks, and in case of heterogeneous wireless communication networks all network nodes may be operable in both the licensed and the non-licensed frequency band irrespective of the network node being a macro or a low power network node. FIG. 1b also illustrates the heterogeneous wireless communication network employing heterogeneous frequency band comprising a LSA controller 1000. The LSA controller 1000 may be responsible for monitoring the availability of the non-licensed frequency band and in case the non-licensed frequency band is becoming unavailable, the LSA controller 1000 may notify at least network nodes being operable to provide service by means of the non-licensed frequency band.):
Regarding Claim 16, Li 758’ teaches the device of claim 15:
wherein the first cell is operative in accordance with a first frequency band, and wherein the fourth cell is operative in accordance with a second frequency band that is different from the first frequency band (Li ‘758, Fig.1a-1f, Fig.3, [0040]-[0062], [0080], [0088]-[0096], [0112], [0114]: [0040] The network node is operative to serve wireless devices in a non-licensed frequency band and in a licensed frequency band; the network node is serving a wireless device in a non-licensed frequency band. FIG. 1a illustrates the method comprising configuring 110 a fallback carrier in the licensed frequency band to the wireless device, wherein if the network node determines that the wireless device should switch to the licensed frequency band, the method comprises handing over 130 the wireless device to the fallback carrier.).
Regarding Claim 17, Li 758’ teaches the device of claim 15:
wherein the operations further comprise: based on the sixth determination, handing over a portion of a communication service involving an Internet of Things (IoT) device from the first cell to the fourth cell (Li 758’, Fig. 1a-1f, Fig. 2a-2b, [0116], [0040]-[0062], [0064]-[0084]: [0062] Different wireless device may be engaged in different services. Different services may be more or less delay tolerant. Thus, a wireless device being engaged in a delay tolerant service may be referred to as a delay tolerant wireless device. Similarly, a wireless device being engaged in a delay sensitive service may be referred to as a delay sensitive wireless device. Since the communication network is in control over the licensed frequency band but have less control, or is out of control, over the non-licensed frequency band, it may be preferable to have as many wireless devices as possible being served by means of the licensed frequency band. However, if the resources of the licensed frequency band are running low, then some wireless devices may need to be served by means of the non-licensed frequency band. Since the communication network is in control over the licensed frequency band, it is plausible that wireless devices being served by means of the licensed frequency band may suffer less delay, or is more likely to stay serviced and not dropped. Thus, in order to increase the probability that the delay sensitive wireless devices experience good or acceptable quality, they should remain serviced by means of the licensed frequency band as much as possible. Consequently, delay tolerant wireless devices may be handed over to the non-licensed frequency band in order to ensure, or increase probability, that delay sensitive wireless devices remain serviced by means of the licensed frequency band. Thus, the network node identifies a delay tolerant wireless device being served in the licensed frequency band, and hands over the delay tolerant wireless device to the non-licensed frequency band.).
Regarding Claim 22, Li ‘758 teach the non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 21:
wherein the first cell has a first priority level in respect of supporting CATM communication services and the second cell has a second priority level in respect of supporting CATM communication services, the second priority level being different from the first priority level (Li, fig. 1a-1f, fig. 2a-2c, [0040]-[0087], [0088]-[0112], [0113]-[0124]: [0058] The method may further comprise assigning 103 a first priority of the served wireless device in the non-licensed frequency band, the first priority being higher than a second priority assigned to a second wireless device engaged in an initial random access control procedure, wherein if the non-licensed frequency band becomes unavailable, the served wireless device is prioritised before the second wireless device with regards to the configured fallback carrier, see also FIG. 1f. [0059] A situation may arise where the network node has to prioritise between different wireless devices, e.g. when the network node becomes heavily loaded and/or when frequency resources are running low. By assigning a higher priority to the wireless device currently being served by means of the non-licensed frequency band than to the wireless device currently engaged in the initial random access control procedure, the wireless device already being served by the network node will not be dropped in case e.g. frequency resources are running low. The wireless device engaged in the initial random access control procedure has not yet become served by the network node. The two wireless devices may have the same, or different, handling priority when it comes to e.g. subscription or quality of service, QoS, but this priority is not regarded when it comes to prioritising between the wireless device currently being served by means of the non-licensed frequency and the wireless device currently engaged in the initial random access control procedure.).
Conclusion
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Francesca Lima Santos whose telephone number is (571)272-6521. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 7:30am-5pm, ET.
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, Marcus R Smith can be reached at (571) 270-1096. 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.
/FRANCESCA LIMA SANTOS/Examiner, Art Unit 2468
/Thomas R Cairns/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2468
Prosecution Insights