A METHOD OF DETERMINING A LAYOUT OF A WIND ENERGY PLANT

§101 §103

DETAILED ACTION Claims 1 – 11 have been presented for examination. This office action is in response to submission of the 371 national application on 10/10/2023. The instant application is a 371 National Stage filing of International Application PCT/DK2022/050045 and has identical claims to a grandfather application 17/227279. Examiner notes that Applicant has the option of filing a continuation application under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) instead of a national stage application under 35 U.S.C. 371 (see MPEP 1895.01 a bypass application). Examiner further notes that identical claims may be finally rejected on a new application when it is a continuing application (see MPEP 706.07(b) “For a new application, claims may be finally rejected in the first Office action when (A) the new application is a continuing application of, or a substitute for, an earlier application”). Since this is a 371 application to an international application instead of a continuation, the instant claims are not finally rejected. 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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 1 – 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., an abstract idea) without significantly more. Independent claim 1 recites a statutory category (i.e. a process) method of determining a layout of a wind energy plant comprising a plurality of wind turbines at a site, the wind turbines being configured for connection to a power grid having a power demand, the method comprising: providing an initial layout by arranging the plurality of wind turbines at initial positions within the site; estimating an expected power output of the wind energy plant based on the initial layout and on the site condition data for a predetermined time period; forecasting the power demand within the power grid for the predetermined time period; and performing an optimising process on the initial layout based on the estimated expected power output and on the forecasted power demand in order to match the expected power output to the forecasted power demand to obtain an optimised layout of the wind energy plant. The recited limitations, alone or in combination, amount to steps that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitations in the mind in combination with using a pen and paper (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)). For example, the “providing an initial layout by arranging”, “estimating”, “forecasting” and “performing an optimising process” amount to modeling and optimizing steps recited at a high-level of generality. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application since the claimed invention further claims: obtaining site condition data for the initial positions of the plurality of wind turbines, wherein the site condition data comprises expected wind speed data; and erecting the wind turbines in accordance with the optimised layout. The “obtaining” amounts to insignificant data gathering since it is recited at a high-level of generality, and since the “estimating” step relies on the received elements in a generic manner (see MPEP 2106.04(d)). The “erecting” amounts to reciting the words “apply it” since the process of erecting the wind turbines is disclosed at a high-level of generality and merely uses the results of the abstract idea (i.e. the optimized layout) (see the instant application Page 13, Lines 24 – 25 “In step 106, wind turbines are erected in accordance with the optimised layout, thereby providing a wind energy plant 1 as illustrated in Fig. 1”). The claim is directed to an abstract idea. The claim does not recite additional elements that, alone or in an ordered combination, are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to the integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the recited “obtaining” amount(s) to insignificant data gathering, and the “erecting” amounts to reciting the words “apply it”. For at least these reasons, the claim is not patent eligible. Dependent claim 2 and 10 recite(s) the same statutory category as the parent claim(s), and further recite(s): wherein the performing the optimising process comprises a step of changing the position of at least one of the wind turbines in claim 2; and wherein the estimating the expected power output of the wind energy plant comprises a step of estimating an expected power output of each of the wind turbines individually in claim 10. The recited limitations, alone or in combination, amount to steps that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitations in the mind in combination with using a pen and paper (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)). For example, the “changing the position” and “estimating” amount to modeling and optimizing steps recited at a high-level of generality. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application since the claimed invention does not further recite any limitations. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. The claim(s) do not recite additional elements that, alone or in an ordered combination, are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception since there are no further recited limitations. For at least these reasons, the claim(s) are not patent eligible. Dependent claim 3 - 8 recite(s) the same statutory category as the parent claim(s). Accordingly, the claim(s) recite(s) an abstract idea. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application since the claimed invention further claims: obtaining site condition data for the changed position of the at least one wind turbine in claim 3; wherein the site condition data further comprises estimated wind direction data in claim 4; wherein the site condition data is based at least partly on meteorological data obtained at the site during a measurement period in claim 5; wherein the measurement period is at least one year in claim 6; wherein the site condition data represents variations as a function of time of year in claim 7; and wherein the site condition data represents variations as a function of time of day in claim 8. For example, the “obtaining” amounts to insignificant data gathering since it is recited at a high-level of generality (see MPEP 2106.04(d)). For example, the “site condition data further comprises”, “site condition data is based at least partly on”, “measurement period is” and “site condition data represents” further modifies the “obtaining site condition data” in the parent claim merely with regard to what it comprises, what it is based on, or what it represents. Therefore, the limitations amount to insignificant data gathering since it does not further limit the means of obtaining the site condition data, and does not further limit how it is further utilized. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. The claim(s) do not recite additional elements that, alone or in an ordered combination, are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to the integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the “obtaining”, “site condition data further comprises”, “site condition data is based at least partly on”, “measurement period is” and “site condition data represents” further modifies the “obtaining site condition data” amount(s) to insignificant data gathering. For at least these reasons, the claim(s) are not patent eligible. Dependent claim 9 recite(s) the same statutory category as the parent claim(s), and further recite(s): wherein the providing an initial layout is based on at least one of historical meteorological data and terrain data in claim 9. The recited limitations, alone or in combination, amount to steps that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitations in the mind in combination with using a pen and paper (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)). For example, the “providing an initial layout is based on” further limits the parent “providing an initial layout by arranging” without precluding the step from being performed in the mind. Indeed, the further reciting of based on specific data does not limit how this data is obtained or in what form it exists (e.g. could be read from a book and processed mentally). Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application since the claimed invention does not further recite any limitations. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. The claim(s) do not recite additional elements that, alone or in an ordered combination, are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception since there are no further recited limitations. For at least these reasons, the claim(s) are not patent eligible. Independent claim 11 recites a statutory category (i.e. a process) method of determining a layout of a wind energy plant comprising a plurality of wind turbines at a site, the wind turbines being configured for connection to a power grid having a power demand, the method comprising: estimating an expected power output of the wind energy plant based on at least two inputs for a predetermined time period; forecasting the power demand within the power grid for the predetermined time period; and generating an optimised layout of the wind energy plant by performing an optimising process on the initial layout based on the estimated expected power output and on the forecasted power demand in order to match the expected power output to the forecasted power demand. The recited limitations, alone or in combination, amount to steps that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitations in the mind in combination with using a pen and paper (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)). For example, the “estimating”, “forecasting” and “performing an optimising process” amount to modeling and optimizing steps recited at a high-level of generality. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application since the claimed invention further claims: the at least two inputs comprising: an initial layout of the plurality of wind turbines arranged at initial positions within the site; and site condition data for the initial positions of the plurality of wind turbines, wherein the site condition data comprises expected wind speed data. The inputs comprising “initial layout of the plurality of wind turbines arranged” and “site condition data” amounts to insignificant data gathering since the means for providing the inputs is not explicitly recited and therefore encompasses any known means (see MPEP 2106.04(d)). Examiner notes that “initial layout of the plurality of wind turbines arranged” is written in passive voice (i.e. the initial layout was previously arranged and is merely input), as compared to the claim 1 “providing an initial layout by arranging” which implies and active arranging as contrasted with merely inputting. The claim is directed to an abstract idea. The claim does not recite additional elements that, alone or in an ordered combination, are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to the integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the recited “initial layout of the plurality of wind turbines arranged” and “site condition data” amount(s) to insignificant data gathering. For at least these reasons, the claim is not patent eligible. 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. 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: Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 1 and 4 - 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murcia, J. (WO 2020/038536) (henceforth “Murcia (536)”) in view of Ma et al. “Integrated sizing of hybrid PV-wind-battery system for remote island considering the saturation of each renewable energy resource” (henceforth “Ma”). Murcia (536) and Ma are analogous art because they solve the same problem of optimizing a wind farm, and because they are in the same field of renewable energy. With regard to claim 1, Murcia (536) teaches a method of determining a layout of a wind energy plant comprising a plurality of wind turbines at a site, the wind turbines being configured for connection to a power grid having a power demand, the method comprising: (Murcia (536) Page 3, Lines 6 – 18 “Thus, according to the first aspect, the invention provides a method for determining a wind turbine layout of a wind power plant … According to the method, a plurality of random layout candidates is initially generated, each of the plurality of random layout candidates fulfilling a set of basic requirements”, and Page 12, Lines 27 – 28 “In these cases, estimation of power generated by the wind power plant may be a parameter of relevance when the power plant is connected to a power grid.”) providing an initial layout by arranging the plurality of wind turbines at initial positions within the site; (Murcia (536) Page 3, Lines 6 – 18) obtaining site condition data for the initial positions of the plurality of wind turbines, wherein the site condition data comprises expected wind speed data; (Murcia (536) Page 2, Line 5 “The layout may then be optimized based on wind conditions on the site.”) estimating an expected power output of the wind energy plant based on the initial layout and on the site condition data for a predetermined time period; (Murcia (536) Page 9, Lines 17 – 19 power production is estimated based on wind resources “Therefore, having a physical model which applies the wind resources on the layout candidates may provide an estimate of power production of the power plant.”, and Page 15, Lines 7 – 9 site condition wind speed data based on one year of measurements (for a predetermined time period) “The wind resources map 204 represents the energy carried by the wind and which may be based on at least one year of wind measurements in a region of the site.”) performing an optimising process on the initial layout based on the estimated expected power output and on the required total power production in order to match the expected power output to the required total power production to obtain an optimized layout of the wind energy plant (Murcia (536) Page 10, Lines 11 - 15 a wind turbine layout is optimized based on predicted energy production (performing an optimizing process on the initial layout based on the estimated expected power output) “The detailed optimization may include applying a detailed physical model, applying statistical modelling, and/or identifying wind turbines that violate minimal spacing. The detailed physical model may include options in relation to technical feasibility, overall capital cost and the predicted energy production of the power plant”, and Page 4, Lines 26 - 28 a requirement of the final layout can be the total nominal power to be generated (based on required total power production) “The wind turbines defined by the layout should provide a required total power production of the wind power plant and/or a required number of wind turbines should be included in the layout”, and Page 2, Lines 18 – 19 the final layout fulfills the requirements (in order to match the expected power output to the required total power production) “generating a plurality of random layout candidates, each layout candidate fulfilling a set of basic requirements”) erecting the wind turbines in accordance with the optimised layout. (Murcia (536) Page 12, Lines 9 – 10 “The method may further comprise the step of erecting a wind power plant in accordance with the selected optimized layout”) Murcia (536) does not appear to explicitly disclose: forecasting the power demand within the power grid for the predetermined time period; and that performing the optimizing process is based on forecasted power demand in order to match the expected power output to the forecasted power demand. However Ma teaches: forecasting the power demand within the power grid for the predetermined time period; (Ma Figure 4 yearly energy consumption is computed PNG media_image1.png 865 565 media_image1.png Greyscale ) performing an optimizing process on a layout based on estimated expected power output and the forecasted power demand in order to match the expected power output to the forecasted power demand (Ma Figure 4 sizing wind turbine taking into account excess energy and cost (in order to match), and Page 182, Left LPSP can be computed just for wind turbine and battery system by setting P_PV to zero as desired (to obtain an optimized layout of a wind energy plant) “Loss of power supply probability (LPSP) phenomenon is widely used in literature to assess the system reliability [55].” PNG media_image2.png 123 444 media_image2.png Greyscale ) It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the optimization process of a wind energy plant layout disclosed by Murcia (536) with the load calculation during wind farm optimization disclosed by Ma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to specify desired constraints on the optimization (Ma Figure 4). With regard to claim 11, Murcia (536) teaches a method of determining a layout of a wind energy plant comprising a plurality of wind turbines at a site, the wind turbines being configured for connection to a power grid having a power demand, the method comprising: (Murcia (536) Page 3, Lines 6 – 18 “Thus, according to the first aspect, the invention provides a method for determining a wind turbine layout of a wind power plant … According to the method, a plurality of random layout candidates is initially generated, each of the plurality of random layout candidates fulfilling a set of basic requirements”, and Page 12, Lines 27 – 28 “In these cases, estimation of power generated by the wind power plant may be a parameter of relevance when the power plant is connected to a power grid.”) estimating an expected power output of the wind energy plant based on at least two inputs for a predetermined time period; the at least two inputs comprising: an initial layout of the plurality of wind turbines arranged at initial positions within the site; and (Murcia (536) Page 9, Lines 17 – 19 power production is estimated based on wind resources “Therefore, having a physical model which applies the wind resources on the layout candidates may provide an estimate of power production of the power plant.”) site condition data for the initial positions of the plurality of wind turbines, wherein the site condition data comprises expected wind speed data; (Murcia (536) Page 2, Line 5 “The layout may then be optimized based on wind conditions on the site.”, and Page 15, Lines 7 – 9 site condition wind speed data based on one year of measurements (for a predetermined time period) “The wind resources map 204 represents the energy carried by the wind and which may be based on at least one year of wind measurements in a region of the site.”) generating an optimised layout of the wind energy plant by performing an optimising process on the initial layout based on the estimated expected power output and on the required total power production in order to match the expected power output to the required total power production. (Murcia (536) Page 10, Lines 11 - 15 a wind turbine layout is optimized based on predicted energy production (performing an optimizing process on the initial layout based on the estimated expected power output) “The detailed optimization may include applying a detailed physical model, applying statistical modelling, and/or identifying wind turbines that violate minimal spacing. The detailed physical model may include options in relation to technical feasibility, overall capital cost and the predicted energy production of the power plant”, and Page 4, Lines 26 - 28 a requirement of the final layout can be the total nominal power to be generated (based on required total power production) “The wind turbines defined by the layout should provide a required total power production of the wind power plant and/or a required number of wind turbines should be included in the layout”, and Page 2, Lines 18 – 19 the final layout fulfills the requirements (in order to match the expected power output to the required total power production) “generating a plurality of random layout candidates, each layout candidate fulfilling a set of basic requirements”) Murcia (536) does not appear to explicitly disclose: forecasting the power demand within the power grid for the predetermined time period; and that performing the optimizing process is based on forecasted power demand in order to match the expected power output to the forecasted power demand. However Ma teaches: forecasting the power demand within the power grid for the predetermined time period; and (Ma Figure 4 yearly energy consumption is computed PNG media_image1.png 865 565 media_image1.png Greyscale ) performing an optimising process on a layout based on estimated expected power output and the forecasted power demand in order to match the expected power output to the forecasted power demand (Ma Figure 4 sizing wind turbine taking into account excess energy and cost (in order to match), and Page 182, Left LPSP can be computed just for wind turbine and battery system by setting P_PV to zero as desired (to obtain an optimized layout of a wind energy plant) “Loss of power supply probability (LPSP) phenomenon is widely used in literature to assess the system reliability [55].” PNG media_image2.png 123 444 media_image2.png Greyscale ) It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the optimization process of a wind energy plant layout disclosed by Murcia (536) with the load calculation during wind farm optimization disclosed by Ma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to specify desired constraints on the optimization (Ma Figure 4). With regard to claim 4, Murcia (536) in view of Ma teaches all the elements of the parent claim 1, and further teaches: wherein the site condition data further comprises estimated wind direction data (Murcia (536) Page 7, Lines 5 – 7 “The basic requirements may include boundaries of site, internal exclusion zones, variable minimal spacing between wind turbines according to wind speed and wind direction, wind resources”) With regard to claim 5, Murcia (536) in view of Ma teaches all the elements of the parent claim 1, and does not appear to explicitly disclose: wherein the site condition data is based at least partly on meteorological data obtained at the site during a measurement period. (Murcia (536) Page 15, Lines 7 – 9 “The wind resources map 204 represents the energy carried by the wind and which may be based on at least one year of wind measurements in a region of the site.”) With regard to claim 6, Murcia (536) in view of Ma teaches all the elements of the parent claim 5, and further teaches: wherein the measurement period is at least one year. (Murcia (536) Page 15, Lines 7 – 9 “The wind resources map 204 represents the energy carried by the wind and which may be based on at least one year of wind measurements in a region of the site.”) With regard to claim 7, Murcia (536) in view of Ma teaches all the elements of the parent claim 1, and further teaches: wherein the site condition data represents variations as a function of time of year. (Ma Figure 7 seasonal mean wind resource density by hour in the day PNG media_image3.png 252 368 media_image3.png Greyscale ) It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the optimization process of a wind energy plant layout disclosed by Murcia (536) with the historical wind data disclosed by Ma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to more accurately compute the energy generation (Ma Page 185, Left “Based on load consumption and metrological data, the proposed methodology is applied to the remote island by using Matlab 2017a to simulate the operating performance of each system with 50 values of (S).”). With regard to claim 8, Murcia (536) in view of Ma teaches all the elements of the parent claim 1, and further teaches: wherein the site condition data represents variations as a function of time of day. (Ma Figure 7 seasonal mean wind resource density by hour in the day) It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the optimization process of a wind energy plant layout disclosed by Murcia (536) with the historical wind data disclosed by Ma. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to more accurately compute the energy generation (Ma Page 185, Left “Based on load consumption and metrological data, the proposed methodology is applied to the remote island by using Matlab 2017a to simulate the operating performance of each system with 50 values of (S).”). With regard to claim 9, Murcia (536) in view of Ma teaches all the elements of the parent claim 1, and further teaches: wherein the providing an initial layout is based on at least one of historical meteorological data and terrain data. (Murcia (536) Page 3, Lines 23 – 26 the initial layout must conform to a boundary and exclusions within the boundary (based on terrain data) “Furthermore, the wind turbines should all be positioned within the boundaries of the site of the wind power plant, and no wind turbines should be positioned in exclusion zones within the site of the wind power plan”) With regard to claim 10, Murcia (536) in view of Ma teaches all the elements of the parent claim 1, and further teaches: wherein the estimating the expected power output of the wind energy plant comprises a step of estimating an expected power output of each of the wind turbines individually. (Murcia (536) Page 5, Lines 16 – 20 wake effects are taking into account in the estimated power generation (estimating an expected power output of each of the wind turbines individually) “Repositioning of the turbines will improve the layouts leading towards the optimal layout which will provide, e.g., a maximum possible power generation for the given site, e.g. by positioning more wind turbines at positions with high wind and/or by duly taking wake effects into account.”) Claims 2 – 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murcia (536) in view of Ma, and further in view of Tao et al. “Nonuniform wind farm layout optimization: A state-of-the-art review” (henceforth “Tao”). Murcia (536), Ma and Tao are analogous art because they solve the same problem of optimizing a wind farm, and because they are in the same field of renewable energy. With regard to claim 2, Murcia (536) in view of MA teaches all the elements of the parent claim 1, and does not appear to explicitly disclose: wherein the performing the optimising process comprises a step of changing the position of at least one of the wind turbines. However Tao teaches: wherein the performing the optimising process comprises a step of changing the position of at least one of the wind turbines. (Tao Page 9, Right the exact location of the wind turbines can change during the optimization “The decision variables usually contain a binary t_lw to decide if there is a WT to be installed in the cell at the l-th column and w-th row.”, and Page 8, Right “vo is the average wind speed just behind the WT.”) It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the optimization process of a wind energy plant layout disclosed by Murcia (536) in view of Ma with the nonuniform layout optimization disclosed by Tao. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to produce an optimized layout (Tao Figure 12 – 13 objective is to maximize AEP or LCOE). With regard to claim 3, Murcia (536) in view of Ma, and further in view of Tao teaches all the elements of the parent claim 2, and further teaches: wherein the performing the optimising process further comprises a step of obtaining site condition data for the changed position of the at least one wind turbine. (Tao Page 7, Left the wake modeling which determines the wind speed distribution for downstream wind turbines takes into account the specific layout (for the changed position the wind turbine) “An upstream WT extracts energy from wind and forms a wake that influences the downwind ones resulting in a reduced wind speed and taking this fact into account is vital for WF optimization modelling.”) Examiner General Comments With regard to the prior art rejection(s), any cited portion of the relied upon reference(s), either by pointing to specific sections or as quotations, is intended to be interpreted in the context of the reference(s) as a whole as would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention since the entire reference is considered to provide disclosure relating to the cited portions. Further, the claims and only the claims form the metes and bounds of the invention. Office personnel are to give the claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the supporting disclosure. Unclaimed limitations appearing in the specification are not read into the claim. Prior art was referenced using terminology familiar to one of ordinary skill in the art. Such an approach is broad in concept and can be either explicit or implicit in meaning. Examiner’s notes are provided with the cited references to assist the applicant to better understand how the examiner interprets the applied prior art. Such comments are entirely consistent with the intent and spirit of compact prosecution. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALFRED H. WECHSELBERGER whose telephone number is (571)272-8988. The examiner can normally be reached M - F, 10am to 6pm. 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, Emerson Puente can be reached at 571-272-3652. 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. /ALFRED H. WECHSELBERGER/ /EMERSON C PUENTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2187