State Estimation Apparatus, State Estimation Method, Non-Transitory Computer-Readable Storage Medium Storing Computer Program, and State Estimation System 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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/12/2023 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Furuta (JP 2017151846; “Furuta”).
Regarding claim 1, Furuta discloses, in figures 1-12, a state estimation apparatus (see fig. 3) comprising: a first acquisition circuit (41) configured to acquire a measurement result of a first sensor (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 3 & p. 5, ¶ 5, examiner notes terminal 41 provides the position of the delivery vehicle), the first sensor being a sensor mounted (see fig. 3) in a vehicle (6) in which a worker (C) is to ride and being configured to measure a state (see previous comment) of the vehicle (6); a second acquisition circuit (42) configured to acquire a measurement result of a second sensor (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 3 & p. 5, ¶ 5, examiner notes terminal 42 provides the position of the deliverer), the second sensor being a sensor carried (see fig. 3) by the worker (C) and being configured to measure a state (see previous comment) of the worker (C); and an estimation circuit (2) configured to estimate (212), based on the measurement result of the first sensor (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 8 – p. 3. ¶ 1, “the position information of the delivery terminal 41”) and the measurement result of the second sensor (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 8 – p. 3. ¶ 1, “the position of… the delivery terminal 42”), a state related to work of the worker (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 8 – p. 3. ¶ 1, examiner notes Furuta estimates the worker is on the delivery vehicle when the position of the information terminals is almost the same, and estimates the worker is moving to a delivery destination when the position of information terminal 41 remains the same and the position of information terminal 42 changes).
Regarding claim 2, Furuta discloses, in figures 1-12, the measurement result of the first sensor (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 3 & p. 5, ¶ 5, examiner notes terminal 41 provides the position of the delivery vehicle) is a position of the vehicle (6), the measurement result of the second sensor (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 3 & p. 5, ¶ 5, examiner notes terminal 42 provides the position of the deliverer) is a position of the worker (C), and the estimation circuit (2) is configured to estimate a state related to a ride of the worker in the vehicle (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 8 – p. 3. ¶ 1, examiner notes Furuta estimates the worker is on the delivery vehicle when the position of the information terminals is almost the same, and estimates the worker is moving to a delivery destination when the position of information terminal 41 remains the same and the position of information terminal 42 changes).
Regarding claim 3, Furuta discloses, in figures 1-12, the estimation circuit (2) is configured to estimate, based on a change in a distance between the vehicle (6) and the worker (C), the state of a ride of the worker in the vehicle (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 8 – p. 3. ¶ 1, examiner notes Furuta estimates the worker is on the delivery vehicle when the position of the information terminals is almost the same, and estimates the worker is moving to a delivery destination when the position of information terminal 41 remains the same and the position of information terminal 42 changes).
Regarding claim 9, Furuta discloses, in figures 1-12, a state estimation method (Title, delivery state notification method) comprising: acquiring, by a state estimation apparatus (41), a measurement result of a first sensor (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 3 & p. 5, ¶ 5, examiner notes terminal 41 provides the position of the delivery vehicle), the first sensor being a sensor mounted (see fig. 3) in a vehicle (6) in which a worker (C) is to ride and being configured to measure a state (see previous comment) of the vehicle (6); acquiring, by the state estimation apparatus (42), a measurement result of a second sensor (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 3 & p. 5, ¶ 5, examiner notes terminal 42 provides the position of the deliverer), the second sensor being a sensor carried (see fig. 3) by the worker (C) and being configured to measure a state (see previous comment) of the worker (C); and estimating (212), by the state estimation apparatus (2), based on the measurement result of the first sensor (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 8 – p. 3. ¶ 1, “the position information of the delivery terminal 41”) and the measurement result of the second sensor (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 8 – p. 3. ¶ 1, “the position of… the delivery terminal 42”), a state related to work of the worker (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 8 – p. 3. ¶ 1, examiner notes Furuta estimates the worker is on the delivery vehicle when the position of the information terminals is almost the same, and estimates the worker is moving to a delivery destination when the position of information terminal 41 remains the same and the position of information terminal 42 changes).
Regarding claim 10, Furuta discloses, in figures 1-12, a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (914) storing computer program (see Furuta’s translation, p. 13, ¶ 2, “application programs”) for causing a computer (900) to function as: a first acquisition circuit (41) configured to acquire a measurement result of a first sensor (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 3 & p. 5, ¶ 5, examiner notes terminal 41 provides the position of the delivery vehicle), the first sensor being a sensor mounted (see fig. 3) in a vehicle (6) in which a worker (C) is to ride and being configured to measure a state (see previous comment) of the vehicle (6); a second acquisition circuit (42) configured to acquire a measurement result of a second sensor (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 3 & p. 5, ¶ 5, examiner notes terminal 42 provides the position of the deliverer), the second sensor being a sensor carried (see fig. 3) by the worker (C) and being configured to measure a state (see previous comment) of the worker (C); and an estimation circuit (2) configured to estimate (212), based on the measurement result of the first sensor (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 8 – p. 3. ¶ 1, “the position information of the delivery terminal 41”) and the measurement result of the second sensor (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 8 – p. 3. ¶ 1, “the position of… the delivery terminal 42”), a state related to work of the worker (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 8 – p. 3. ¶ 1, examiner notes Furuta estimates the worker is on the delivery vehicle when the position of the information terminals is almost the same, and estimates the worker is moving to a delivery destination when the position of information terminal 41 remains the same and the position of information terminal 42 changes).
Regarding claim 11, Furuta discloses, in figures 1-12, a state estimation system (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2. ¶ 4, “delivery status notification system”) comprising: a vehicle-mounted apparatus (41) mounted in a vehicle (6) in which a worker (C) is to ride and configured to provide a measurement result (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 3 & p. 5, ¶ 5, examiner notes terminal 41 provides the position of the delivery vehicle) about a state of the vehicle (6); a terminal (42) carried by the worker (C) and configured to provide a measurement result (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 3 & p. 5, ¶ 5, examiner notes terminal 42 provides the position of the deliverer) about a state of the worker (C); and a state estimation apparatus (2) configured to estimate (212), based on the measurement result provided by the vehicle-mounted apparatus (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 8 – p. 3. ¶ 1, “the position information of the delivery terminal 41”) and the measurement result provided by the terminal (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 8 – p. 3. ¶ 1, “the position of… the delivery terminal 42”), a work state of the worker (see Furuta’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 8 – p. 3. ¶ 1, examiner notes Furuta estimates the worker is on the delivery vehicle when the position of the information terminals is almost the same, and estimates the worker is moving to a delivery destination when the position of information terminal 41 remains the same and the position of information terminal 42 changes).
Claims 1-2, 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xiao (CN 111275372; “Xiao”).
Regarding claim 1, Xiao discloses, in figures 1-6, a state estimation apparatus (100) comprising: a first acquisition circuit (101) configured to acquire a measurement result of a first sensor (see Xiao’s translation, p. 7, ¶ 3, examiner notes location information collected by the vehicle mounted terminal includes position, time and speed), the first sensor being a sensor mounted in a vehicle (see Xiao’s translation, p. 6, ¶ 4, “vehicle mounted terminal 101”) in which a worker is to ride (see Xiao’s translation, p. 6, ¶ 6, examiner notes the hand held terminal is carried by the driver of the vehicle) and being configured to measure a state of the vehicle (see Xiao’s translation, p. 6, ¶ 5, “the vehicle mounted terminal 101 can be mounted on the vehicle for collecting location information of the vehicle”); a second acquisition circuit (102) configured to acquire a measurement result of a second sensor (see Xiao’s translation, p. 6, ¶ 6, “the handheld terminal 102 may be the driver of the vehicle carried, for collecting location information of the driver”), the second sensor being a sensor carried by the worker (see previous comment) and being configured to measure a state of the worker (see previous comment); and an estimation circuit (105) configured to estimate, based on the measurement result of the first sensor and the measurement result of the second sensor (302), a state related to work of the worker (see Xiao’s translation, p. 3, ¶ 4, examiner notes when a distance between the vehicle and the driver does not satisfy a predetermined condition, Xiao indicates the goods are in an abnormal state, the examiner construes the state of the goods delivered by the driver to be related to the work of the driver).
Regarding claim 2, Xiao discloses, in figures 1-6, the measurement result of the first sensor is a position of the vehicle (see Xiao’s translation, p. 7, ¶ 3, examiner notes location information collected by the vehicle mounted terminal includes position, time and speed), the measurement result of the second sensor is a position of the worker (see Xiao’s translation, p. 6, ¶ 6, “the handheld terminal 102 may be the driver of the vehicle carried, for collecting location information of the driver”), and the estimation circuit (105) is configured to estimate a state related to a ride of the worker in the vehicle (see Xiao’s translation, p. 15, ¶ 4-5, examiner notes when a distance between the vehicle and the driver satisfies a predetermined condition, Xiao indicates the goods are in a normal state which indicates the goods are in an appointed unloading area, the examiner construes the state of the goods are in an appointed unloading area to mean the driver has arrived and is no longer traveling in the vehicle).
Regarding claim 7, Xiao discloses, in figures 1-6, the measurement result of the first sensor is a velocity of the vehicle (see Xiao’s translation, p. 7, ¶ 3, examiner notes location information collected by the vehicle mounted terminal includes position, time and speed, the examiner construes the translation of position and speed to be velocity), and the estimation circuit (105) is configured to estimate, based on a measurement result about the velocity of the vehicle, a state of movement of the worker by the vehicle (see Xiao’s translation, p. 6, ¶ 5-6, examiner notes Xiao’s vehicle mounted terminal measures speed and the handheld terminal is carried by the driver, therefore the first sensor measures the speed and position of the driver when the driver is driving the vehicle).
Regarding claim 14, Xiao discloses, in figures 1-6, the measurement result of the first sensor is a velocity of the vehicle (see Xiao’s translation, p. 7, ¶ 3, examiner notes location information collected by the vehicle mounted terminal includes position, time and speed, the examiner construes the translation of position and speed to be velocity), and the estimation circuit (105) is configured to estimate, based on a measurement result about the velocity of the vehicle, a state of movement of the worker by the vehicle (see Xiao’s translation, p. 6, ¶ 5-6, examiner notes Xiao’s vehicle mounted terminal measures speed and the handheld terminal is carried by the driver, therefore the first sensor measures the speed and position of the driver when the driver is driving the vehicle).
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 4 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furuta (JP 2017151846; “Furuta”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kubota (JP 2019128642; “Kubota”).
Regarding claim 4, Furuta fails to disclose acquiring a wireless connection state between a vehicle mounted device and a worker carrier device.
Kubota teaches, in figures 1 and 3, a connection state acquisition circuit (see fig. 1, (20) “reception strength information acquisition unit”) configured to acquire a connection state in wireless communication between a communication device (20) mounted in the vehicle (see Kubota’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 3, “the terminal device 20 mounted on a vehicle”) and a communication device (10) carried by the worker (see Kubota’s translation, p. 2, ¶ 3, “the wireless signal transmission device 10 is provided for a worker who goes out”), wherein the estimation circuit (30) is configured to estimate, based on the acquired connection state (see Kubota’s translation, p. 3, ¶ 1, examiner notes the reception signal strength of the worker radio signal transmission device is acquired continuously), a state of a ride or absence of the worker in the vehicle (see Kubota’s translation, p. 4, ¶ 2, examiner notes the worder status determination unit when a worder leaves and returns to the vehicle).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Kubota’s scheme determining when a worker is present at a vehicle using a local wireless connection into Furuta’s scheme monitoring vehicle, deliverer and parcel status since it is well known to combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Doing so provides a reliable way process for verifying worker status.
Regarding claim 16, Furuta and Kubota disclose, in Kubota’s figures 1 and 3, the measurement result of the first sensor (Kubota (20)) is a velocity of the vehicle (see Kubota’s translation, p. 3, ¶ 7 – p. 4, ¶ 1, examiner notes speed information is acquired by the terminal device mounted in the vehicle), and the estimation circuit (Kubota (30)) is configured to estimate, based on a measurement result about the velocity of the vehicle, a state of movement of the worker by the vehicle (see Kubota’s translation, p. 3, ¶ 7 – p. 4, ¶ 1, examiner notes Kubota judges the vehicle and worker are in traffic based on vehicle speed and parking time not exceeding a predetermined time).
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furuta (JP 2017151846; “Furuta”) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Harabayshi (JP 2013180867; “Harabayshi”).
Regarding claim 5, Furuta fails to disclose the second sensor measures the velocity, acceleration, angular velocity or altitude of the worker.
Harabayshi teaches the measurement result of the second sensor (206) is at least one of an acceleration (see Harabayshi’s translation, p. 3, ¶ 1, “the acceleration detection unit 206 detects acceleration data”) of the worker (4), and the estimation circuit (207) is configured to estimate, based on a measurement result about at least the acceleration a state of work or standby (see Harabayshi’s translation, fig. 3, p. 3, ¶ 1 & ¶ 5, examiner notes acceleration is used to analyze the activity of the delivery person including a specific work item, fig. 3 illustrates careful walking while carrying a delivery item and less careful running once the item is delivered) of the worker (4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Harabayshi’s scheme of using acceleration data taken from a delivery terminal carrier by a delivery worker to analyze delivery person behavior to teach Furuta to incorporate measuring and analyzing acceleration data to determine delivery person behavior while not in the delivery vehicle. Doing so allows for the efficient detection of positive and negative behaviors.
Regarding claim 6, Furuta and Harabayshi disclose, in Harabayshi’s figs 1-4, the estimation circuit (Furuta (2)) is configured to estimate the state of work or standby of the worker within a time range in which the worker is estimated to be absent in the vehicle (see fig. 3, examiner notes Harabayshi’s analysis of delivery person behavior using acceleration data begins and ends during a time period when the position of the vehicle is constant and the car door opening/ closing sound has been detected indicating the delivery person has exited the vehicle).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furuta (JP 2017151846; “Furuta”) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nishikawa (US 20210035064; “Nishikawa”).
Regarding claim 8, Furuta fails to disclose analyzing the relationship between the delivery plan and delivery record.
Nishikawa teaches, in figures 1-12, an analysis circuit (1) configured to analyze, based on the state related to work of the worker (¶ 0219, the delivery person is at the delivery start point) estimated by the estimation circuit (2) and a delivery plan of the vehicle (S12), a relationship between the delivery plan and a delivery record (S13), and to output an analysis result (S15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Nishikawa’s scheme of using the vehicle stopping point, package database and delivery start point to determine optimized delivery routes into Furuta scheme of leveraging deliverer status to mitigate potential recipient irritation. Doing so allows for the efficient delivery of parcels.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furuta (JP 2017151846; “Furuta”) as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Harabayshi (JP 2013180867; “Harabayshi”).
Regarding claim 12, Furuta fails to disclose the second sensor measures the velocity, acceleration, angular velocity or altitude of the worker.
Harabayshi teaches the measurement result of the second sensor (206) is at least one of an acceleration (see Harabayshi’s translation, p. 3, ¶ 1, “the acceleration detection unit 206 detects acceleration data”) of the worker (4), and the estimation circuit (207) is configured to estimate, based on a measurement result about at least the acceleration a state of work or standby (see Harabayshi’s translation, fig. 3, p. 3, ¶ 1 & ¶ 5, examiner notes acceleration is used to analyze the activity of the delivery person including a specific work item, fig. 3 illustrates careful walking while carrying a delivery item and less careful running once the item is delivered) of the worker (4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Harabayshi’s scheme of using acceleration data taken from a delivery terminal carrier by a delivery worker to analyze delivery person behavior to teach Furuta to incorporate measuring and analyzing acceleration data to determine delivery person behavior while not in the delivery vehicle. Doing so allows for the efficient detection of positive and negative behaviors.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furuta (JP 2017151846; “Furuta”) and Kubota (JP 2019128642; “Kubota”), as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Harabayshi (JP 2013180867; “Harabayshi”).
Regarding claim 13, Furuta and Kubota fail to disclose the second sensor measures the velocity, acceleration, angular velocity or altitude of the worker.
Harabayshi teaches the measurement result of the second sensor (206) is at least one of an acceleration (see Harabayshi’s translation, p. 3, ¶ 1, “the acceleration detection unit 206 detects acceleration data”) of the worker (4), and the estimation circuit (207) is configured to estimate, based on a measurement result about at least the acceleration a state of work or standby (see Harabayshi’s translation, fig. 3, p. 3, ¶ 1 & ¶ 5, examiner notes acceleration is used to analyze the activity of the delivery person including a specific work item, fig. 3 illustrates careful walking while carrying a delivery item and less careful running once the item is delivered) of the worker (4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Harabayshi’s scheme of using acceleration data taken from a delivery terminal carrier by a delivery worker to analyze delivery person behavior to teach Furuta and Kubota to incorporate measuring and analyzing acceleration data to determine delivery person behavior while not in the delivery vehicle. Doing so allows for the efficient detection of positive and negative behaviors.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furuta (JP 2017151846; “Furuta”) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Nishikawa (US 20210035064; “Nishikawa”).
Regarding claim 19, Furuta fails to disclose analyzing the relationship between the delivery plan and delivery record.
Nishikawa teaches, in figures 1-12, an analysis circuit (1) configured to analyze, based on the state related to work of the worker (¶ 0219, the delivery person is at the delivery start point) estimated by the estimation circuit (2) and a delivery plan of the vehicle (S12), a relationship between the delivery plan and a delivery record (S13), and to output an analysis result (S15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Nishikawa’s scheme of using the vehicle stopping point, package database and delivery start point to determine optimized delivery routes into Furuta scheme of leveraging deliverer status to mitigate potential recipient irritation. Doing so allows for the efficient delivery of parcels.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Furuta (JP 2017151846; “Furuta”) as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Nishikawa (US 20210035064; “Nishikawa”).
Regarding claim 19, Furuta fails to disclose analyzing the relationship between the delivery plan and delivery record.
Nishikawa teaches, in figures 1-12, an analysis circuit (1) configured to analyze, based on the state related to work of the worker (¶ 0219, the delivery person is at the delivery start point) estimated by the estimation circuit (2) and a delivery plan of the vehicle (S12), a relationship between the delivery plan and a delivery record (S13), and to output an analysis result (S15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Nishikawa’s scheme of using the vehicle stopping point, package database and delivery start point to determine optimized delivery routes into Furuta scheme of leveraging deliverer status to mitigate potential recipient irritation. Doing so allows for the efficient delivery of parcels.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15 and 17-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 15, the examiner notes a search has not revealed prior art teaching or suggesting, at least, the subject matter combination of claims 1-3 including the measurement result of the first sensor is a velocity of the vehicle, and the estimation circuit is configured to estimate, based on a measurement result about the velocity of the vehicle, a state of movement of the worker by the vehicle. Examiner concludes prior existence of the combination, or a suggestion to combine all cited references, is improbable.
Regarding claim 17, the examiner notes a search has not revealed prior art teaching or suggesting, at least, the subject matter combination of claims 1-2 and 5 including the measurement result of the first sensor is a velocity of the vehicle, and the estimation circuit is configured to estimate, based on a measurement result about the velocity of the vehicle, a state of movement of the worker by the vehicle. Examiner concludes prior existence of the combination, or a suggestion to combine all cited references, is improbable.
Regarding claim 18, the examiner notes a search has not revealed prior art teaching or suggesting, at least, the subject matter combination of claims 1-2 and 5-6 including the measurement result of the first sensor is a velocity of the vehicle, and the estimation circuit is configured to estimate, based on a measurement result about the velocity of the vehicle, a state of movement of the worker by the vehicle. Examiner concludes prior existence of the combination, or a suggestion to combine all cited references, is improbable.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY P GRAVES whose telephone number is (469)295-9072. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 a.m. - 5 p.m..
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, Peter Macchiarolo can be reached at 571-272-2375. 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.
/TIMOTHY P GRAVES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855