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 12/21/2023. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. IN202121038574 filed on 08/25/2021.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-2, 12, 15, 18-19, 29 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patel (US 20180035392 A1), hereinafter Patel, in view of Schafer (US 20210297141 A1) hereinafter Schafer.
Regarding to claim 1,
Patel teaches a first set of one or more antennas communicatively coupled to the at least one modem and having a first orientation (Fig.4, [0028]“vertically polarized antenna” can, for example, refer to an antenna that can emit and receive vertically polarized waves ... the term “horizontally-polarized antenna” can, for example, refer to an antenna that can emit and receive horizontally polarized waves. .... may be multiple configurations “with polarization diversity” )
a second set of one or more antennas communicatively coupled to the at least one modem and having a second orientation that is orthogonal to the first orientation ([0028] “vertically polarized antenna” can, for example, refer to an antenna that can emit and receive vertically polarized waves ... the term “horizontally-polarized antenna” can, for example, refer to an antenna that can emit and receive horizontally polarized waves. .... may be multiple configurations “with polarization diversity”)
determine first transmission power levels for the first set of one or more antennas and second transmission power levels for the second set of one or more antennas based on a polarization diversity setting for the wireless communication device, the polarization diversity setting being based on the first orientation of the first set of one or more antennas being orthogonal to the second orientation of the second set of one or more antennas ([0032] second transmit configuration of block 122 ... can have a transmit power level ... below a maximum allowable transmit level for orthogonal polarity. ... the maximum allowable transmit level for orthogonal polarity is based on a vector sum of individual powers of transmit streams in any point in space. ... based on a vector sum of individual powers of transmit streams ... . Such a limit can be based on a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rule for a given band frequency ... relating to maximum power from an intentional radiator, maximum antenna gain);
transmit, to a target device, first signals at the first transmission power levels using the first set of one or more antennas (Fig. 4, [0028] “vertically polarized antenna” can, for example, refer to an antenna that can emit and receive vertically polarized waves ... the term “horizontally-polarized antenna” can, for example, refer to an antenna that can emit and receive horizontally polarized waves. .... may be multiple configurations “with polarization diversity”... [0029] block 122 may determine that AP 108 can provide a better QoE to WD1 by employing polarization diversity at a higher transmit power (depicted using larger arrows 124 for stream 126);
transmit, to the target device, second signals at the second transmission power levels using the second set of one or more antennas, the first signals being (Fig. 4, [0028] “vertically polarized antenna” can, for example, refer to an antenna that can emit and receive vertically polarized waves ... the term “horizontally-polarized antenna” can, for example, refer to an antenna that can emit and receive horizontally polarized waves. .... may be multiple configurations “with polarization diversity”...[0029] block 122 may determine that AP 108 can provide a better QoE to WD1 by employing polarization diversity at a higher transmit power (depicted using larger arrows 124 for stream 126) ... [0021] transmit stream is cross-polarized with increased power... [0033] a transmit stream with the second transmit configuration when it is determined from block 122 that it will provide a better QoE than the first transmit configuration. For example, in a 4×4 antenna array, four streams of transmit may be sent over four or more antennas).
Patel does not explicitly teach... a wireless communication device, comprising: at least one modem; ... antennas communicatively coupled to the at least one modem a ... at least one processor communicatively coupled with the at least one modem and at least one memory communicatively coupled with the at least one processor and storing processor-readable code; and cross-polarized signals.
Schafer teaches a wireless communication device, comprising: at least one modem; ... antennas communicatively coupled to the at least one modem a ( [0045] the CPE may include a BPL interface and a modem coupled to the antenna(s) ) ... at least one processor communicatively coupled with the at least one modem; and at least one memory communicatively coupled with the at least one processor and storing processor-readable code (Fig. 2 and [0092] the CPE 108 may include one or more processor(s) 208, computer-readable media 210, the antenna(s) 120 ... , the processor(s) 208 may possess its own local memory, which also may store program modules, program data, and/or one or more operating systems. The processor(s) 208 may be coupled to the computer-readable media 210 and execute computer executable instructions stored in the computer-readable media 210);
cross-polarized signals ([0099]-[0100] the CPE 108 may include, or the antenna(s) 120 may represent, a multi-antenna array having antennas arranged with different polarizations. ... antenna(s) 120 may include sub-arrays having multiple elements and each sub-array of the multi-antenna array may include two orthogonally polarized elements. ... determining a geometry for a compact antenna, as well as gain and pattern objectives for the antenna array. ... the selected elements may be converted to orthogonal polarization to eliminate first order pattern peaks. ... phase and/or amplitude of cross-polarized elements may be adjusted to maximize polarization diversity).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Schafer to the teaching of Patel. The motivation for such an addition would be to improve signal levels ([0167] Schafer).
Regarding to claim 2,
Patel and Schafer teach the wireless communication device of claim 1,
Patel further teaches determining antenna assignments for one or more communications at least in part by assigning the first set of one or more antennas and the second set of one or more antennas to the one or more communications (Fig. 4, [0028] and [0033] Method 116 includes transmitting (at block 132) a transmit stream with the second transmit configuration when it is determined from block 122 that it will provide a better QoE than the first transmit configuration. For example, in a 4×4 antenna array, four streams of transmit may be sent over four or more antennas (e.g., AP 108 of FIG. 4 with four vertically polarized antennas 117 and four horizontally polarized antennas 119). As used herein, the term “transmitting” can, for example, refer to the generation of an RF alternating current applied to an antenna);
selecting the first transmission power levels for the first set of one or more antennas and the second transmission power levels for the second set of one or more antennas based on the polarization diversity setting and the antenna assignments (Fig. 4, [0029] determine that AP 108 can provide a better QoE to WD1 by employing polarization diversity at a higher transmit power (depicted using larger arrows 124 for stream 126) and
[0032] the second transmit configuration of block 122 can have a transmit power level ... below a maximum allowable transmit level for orthogonal polarity. ... maximum allowable transmit level for orthogonal polarity is based on a vector sum of individual powers of transmit streams in any point in space. The maximum allowable transmit level for orthogonal polarity can... be based on a vector sum of individual powers of transmit streams. ... “maximum allowable transmit levels” ... refer to a regulatory restricted band limits for power transmission. Such a limit can be based on a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rule for a given band frequency .... relating to maximum power from an intentional radiator, maximum antenna gain).
Patel does not explicitly teach determining the polarization diversity setting for one or more communications, the polarization diversity setting indicating that the first signals and the second signals are cross-polarized signals.
Schafer further teaches determining the polarization diversity setting for one or more communications, the polarization diversity setting indicating that the first signals and the second signals are cross-polarized signals ([0099]-[0100] the CPE 108 may include, or the antenna(s) 120 may represent, a multi-antenna array having antennas arranged with different polarizations. ... antenna(s) 120 may include sub-arrays having multiple elements and each sub-array of the multi-antenna array may include two orthogonally polarized elements. ... determining a geometry for a compact antenna, as well as gain and pattern objectives for the antenna array. ... the selected elements may be converted to orthogonal polarization to eliminate first order pattern peaks. ... phase and/or amplitude of cross-polarized elements may be adjusted to maximize polarization diversity).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Schafer to the teaching of Patel. The motivation for such an addition would be to improve signal levels ([0167] Schafer).
Regarding to claim 12,
Patel and Schafer teach the wireless communication device of claim 2,
Patel does not explicitly teach further comprising: third one or more antennas fixed in a third orientation and communicatively coupled to the at least one modem, wherein the first orientation, the second orientation, and the third orientation are mutually orthogonal.
Schafer teaches third one or more antennas fixed in a third orientation and communicatively coupled to the at least one modem, wherein the first orientation, the second orientation, and the third orientation are mutually orthogonal (abstract, second planar dual-polarized sub-array has a second beamwidth and includes a third orthogonally polarized element communicatively coupled to the second feed port and a fourth orthogonally polarized element communicatively coupled to the first feed port).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Schafer to the teaching of Patel. The motivation for such an addition would be to improve signal levels ([0167] Schafer).
Regarding to claim 15,
Patel and Schafer teach the wireless communication device of claim 2,
Patel further teaches wherein the antenna assignments are determined based on polarization masks configured for a data packet (Fig. 1-2 and [0013] APs 108 includes a polarization diversity quality determination module 112 ....wireless controller 104 includes polarization diversity quality determination module 112. .... [0017] a data packet may be routed from a given switch 106 to a given wireless device 110 ... A given data path for data packets within environment 100 can be determined by wireless controller 104 .... based on one or more dynamic parameters (e.g., QoS, network latency, network throughput, network power consumption, etc. and Fig. 4, [0028] and [0033] Method 116 includes transmitting (at block 132) a transmit stream with the second transmit configuration when it is determined from block 122 that it will provide a better QoE than the first transmit configuration. For example, in a 4×4 antenna array, four streams of transmit may be sent over four or more antennas )
Claim(s) 18-19, 29, and 32 (method) are rejected under the same reasoning as claim(s) 1-2, 12, and 15 (apparatus), where Patel teaches both device and method ([0011] and [0042]).
Claim(s) 3-11 and 20-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patel in view of Schafer and further in view of Musante (US 20220295420 A1), hereinafter Musante.
Regarding to claim 3,
Patel and Schafer teach the wireless communication device of claim 2,
Patel and Schafer do not explicitly teach determining a first array gain for the first set of one or more antennas based on the antenna assignments; determining a second array gain for the second set of one or more antennas based on the antenna assignments; and determining a transmission power level for each antenna of the first set of one or more antennas based on the first array gain and for each antenna of the second set of one or more antennas based in the second array gain.
Musante teaches determining a first array gain for the first set of one or more antennas based on the antenna assignments (Fig. 6-7 and [0044] In operation 615, an antenna gain directed above a predetermined angle above the horizon is determined based on the device's orientation. ... utilize antenna gain information, such as the antenna gain information discussed above with respect to FIG. 5, to determine a portion of transmit power directed above a predefined angle above the horizon based on the orientation of the device. ...the determination is also based on information identifying a configuration of the device, such as a number of antennas of the device and position(s) of the antenna(s) relative to an orientation of the device);
determining a second array gain for the second set of one or more antennas based on the antenna assignments (Fig. 6-7 and [0044] In operation 615, an antenna gain directed above a predetermined angle above the horizon is determined based on the device's orientation. ... utilize antenna gain information, such as the antenna gain information discussed above with respect to FIG. 5, to determine a portion of transmit power directed above a predefined angle above the horizon based on the orientation of the device. ...the determination is also based on information identifying a configuration of the device, such as a number of antennas of the device and position(s) of the antenna(s) relative to an orientation of the device);
determining a transmission power level for each antenna of the first set of one or more antennas based on the first array gain and for each antenna of the second set of one or more antennas based in the second array gain ([0107] determining a gain of an antenna based on the orientation; and determining, based on the gain, the transmit power limit).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Musante to the teaching of Patel and Schafer. The motivation for such an addition would be To reduce the risk of interference ([0013] Musante).
Regarding to claim 4,
Patel and Schafer and Musante teach the wireless communication device of claim 3,
Patel further teaches ... computing at least one of the first array gain for the first set of one or more antennas and the second array gain for the second set of one or more antennas using data (Fig.2 and [0092]) and [0032]The maximum allowable transmit level for orthogonal polarity can, for example, be based on a vector sum of individual powers of transmit stream).
Patel and Schafer do not explicitly teach a control table.
Musante teaches a control table (Fig. 6-7 and [0044] In operation 615, an antenna gain directed above a predetermined angle above the horizon is determined based on the device's orientation. ... utilize antenna gain information, such as the antenna gain information discussed above with respect to FIG. 5, to determine a portion of transmit power directed above a predefined angle above the horizon based on the orientation of the device. ...the determination is also based on information identifying a configuration of the device, such as a number of antennas of the device and position(s) of the antenna(s) relative to an orientation of the device).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Musante to the teaching of Patel and Schafer. The motivation for such an addition would be To reduce the risk of interference ([0013] Musante).
Regarding to claim 5,
Patel and Schafer and Musante teach the wireless communication device of claim 4,
Patel and Schafer do not explicitly teach wherein the data from the control table includes one or more static values for a configuration of the wireless communication device.
Musante teaches wherein the data from the control table includes one or more static values for a configuration of the wireless communication device. ([0044] predefined gain constants in a data store such as the table 500).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Musante to the teaching of Patel and Schafer. The motivation for such an addition would be To reduce the risk of interference ([0013] Musante).
Regarding to claim 6,
Patel and Schafer and Musante teach the wireless communication device of claim 4,
Patel further teaches computing at least one of the first array gain for the first set of one or more antennas and the second array gain for the second set of one or more antennas using one or more dynamic values from one or more settings for the one or more communications. ([0017] dynamic parameters (e.g., QoS, network latency, network throughput, network power consumption, etc.) and (fig.2 and [0092]) and [0032]The maximum allowable transmit level for orthogonal polarity can, for example, be based on a vector sum of individual powers of transmit stream ))
Regarding to claim 7,
Patel and Schafer and Musante teaches the wireless communication device of claim 4,
Patel further teaches wherein a first communication of the one or more communications is assigned to a first antenna of the first set of one or more antennas and a first antenna of the second set of one or more antennas (Fig. 4, [0028] and [0033] Method 116 includes transmitting (at block 132) a transmit stream with the second transmit configuration when it is determined from block 122 that it will provide a better QoE than the first transmit configuration. For example, in a 4×4 antenna array, four streams of transmit may be sent over four or more antennas (e.g., AP 108 of FIG. 4 with four vertically polarized antennas 117 and four horizontally polarized antennas 119). As used herein, the term “transmitting” can, for example, refer to the generation of an RF alternating current applied to an antenna);
and wherein a transmit power for the first antenna of the first set of one or more antennas and the first antenna of the second set of one or more antennas is calculated based on a polarization diversity between the first antenna of the first set of one or more antennas and the first antenna of the second set of one or more antennas ([0032] second transmit configuration of block 122 ... can have a transmit power level ... below a maximum allowable transmit level for orthogonal polarity. ... the maximum allowable transmit level for orthogonal polarity is based on a vector sum of individual powers of transmit streams in any point in space. ... based on a vector sum of individual powers of transmit streams ... . Such a limit can be based on a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rule for a given band frequency ... relating to maximum power from an intentional radiator, maximum antenna gain).
Regarding to claim 8,
Patel and Schafer and Musante teach the wireless communication device of claim 4,
Patel further teaches wherein a first communication of the one or more communications is assigned to a first antenna of the first set of one or more antennas and a second antenna of the first set of one or more antennas ([0033] the second transmit configuration when it is determined from block 122 that it will provide a better QoE than the first transmit configuration. For example, in a 4×4 antenna array, four streams of transmit may be sent over four or more antennas (e.g., AP 108 of FIG. 4 with four vertically polarized antennas 117 and four horizontally polarized antennas 119). As used herein, the term “transmitting” can, for example, refer to the generation of an RF alternating current applied to an antenna).
Regarding to claim 9,
Patel and Schafer and Musante teach the wireless communication device of claim 8,
Patel and Schafer do not explicitly teach wherein a transmit power for the first antenna of the first set of one or more antennas and the second antenna of the first set of one or more antennas is calculated with a power reduction based on a correlation between signals on the first antenna and the second antenna and a lack of polarization diversity between the first antenna of the first set of one or more antennas and the second antenna of the first set of one or more antennas
Musante teaches wherein a transmit power for the first antenna of the first set of one or more antennas and the second antenna of the first set of one or more antennas is calculated with a power reduction based on a correlation between signals on the first antenna and the second antenna and a lack of polarization diversity between the first antenna of the first set of one or more antennas and the second antenna of the first set of one or more antennas ([0051 -0056] MAXT a maximum allowed transmitter power, Threshold PWR a threshold of the maximum allowed transmission power above the horizon, and ATH Gain a gain of the antenna directed above the horizon. .... MAXT=Threshold PWR−ATH Gain).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Musante to the teaching of Patel and Schafer. The motivation for such an addition would be to reduce the risk of interference ([0013] Musante).
Regarding to claim 10,
Patel and Schafer and Musante teaches the wireless communication device of claim 4,
Patel further teaches wherein a first communication of the one or more communications is assigned to at least two antennas of the first set of one or more antennas and at least two antennas of the second set of one or more antennas (Fig. 4 and [0033] the second transmit configuration when it is determined from block 122 that it will provide a better QoE than the first transmit configuration. For example, in a 4×4 antenna array, four streams of transmit may be sent over four or more antennas (e.g., AP 108 of FIG. 4 with four vertically polarized antennas 117 and four horizontally polarized antennas 119). As used herein, the term “transmitting” can, for example, refer to the generation of an RF alternating current applied to an antenna).
Regarding to claim 11,
Patel and Schafer and Musante teach the wireless communication device of claim 10,
Patel and Schafer do not explicitly teach wherein transmit power for each antenna assigned to the first communication is determined based on an associated array gain computed for antennas associated with the first orientation and an associated array gain computed for antennas associated with the second orientation.
Musante teaches wherein transmit power for each antenna assigned to the first communication is determined based on an associated array gain computed for antennas associated with the first orientation and an associated array gain computed for antennas associated with the second orientation (Fig. 6-7, and [0044] In operation 615, an antenna gain directed above a predetermined angle above the horizon is determined based on the device's orientation. ... utilize antenna gain information, such as the antenna gain information discussed above with respect to FIG. 5, to determine a portion of transmit power directed above a predefined angle above the horizon based on the orientation of the device. ...the determination is also based on information identifying a configuration of the device, such as a number of antennas of the device and position(s) of the antenna(s) relative to an orientation of the device. … [0107] determining a gain of an antenna based on the orientation; and determining, based on the gain, the transmit power limit).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Musante to the teaching of Patel and Schafer. The motivation for such an addition would be To reduce the risk of interference ([0013] Musante).
Claim(s) 20-28 (method) are rejected under the same reasoning as claim(s) 3-11 (apparatus), where Patel teaches both device and method ([0011] and [0042]).
Claim(s) 16 and 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patel and Schafer and further in view of Ryu ( US 20200145929 A1), hereinafter Ryu
Regarding to claim 16,
Patel and Schafer teach the wireless communication device of claim 2,
Patel and Schafer do not explicitly teach wherein the antenna assignments based on frame types for the one or more communications.
Ryu teaches wherein the antenna assignments based on frame types for the one or more communications ([0009] method for wireless communication...selecting an antenna array of a plurality of antenna arrays for transmission of one or more frames, determining a transmit power for the transmission of the one or more frames via the antenna array, the transmit power being determined based on a path loss associated with the selected antenna array, generating the one or more frames, and transmitting the one or more frames via the antenna array using the determined transmit power).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Ryu to the teaching of Patel and Schafer. The motivation for such an addition would be to improve communications between access points and stations in a wireless network. ([0007] Ryu).
Claim(s) 33 (method) is rejected under the same reasoning as claim(s) 16 (apparatus), where Patel teaches both device and method ([0011] and [0042]).
Claim(s) 17 and 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patel and Schafer and further in view of Strong (US 20190334589 A1), hereinafter Strong.
Regarding to claim 17,
Patel and Schafer teach the wireless communication device of claim 1,
Patel further teaches transmit cross-polarized steering and sounding beamforming signals using the first set of one or more antennas and the second set of one or more antennas (fig. 1 and fig.2 and [0015] “wireless controller” ... handles control and management functions of a network or equipment ... channel assignment, beamforming, radio resource management (RRM), ... and [0027] Method 116 includes performing (at block 120) a channel sounding operation to estimate dynamic channel characteristics between AP 108 and one of wireless devices 110. As used herein, the term “channel sounding” can, for example, refer to a technique to evaluate a radio environment for wireless communication. In some implementations).
Patel and Schafer do not explicitly teach wherein the first signals and the second signals are beamformed transmissions based on the steering and sounding beamforming signals
Strong teaches wherein the first signals and the second signals are beamformed transmissions based on the steering and sounding beamforming signals (fig.2 and [0106] The access point in this example supports smart antenna modes including MU-MIMO data transmission mode and sounding mode. The access point may use the MU-MIMO mode to transmit and receive data in several parallel streams where each stream involves a different SM. The MU-MIMO operation consists of beamforming to maximise the uplink and downlink signal in one stream for each wanted SM, and null-steering to minimise the uplink and downlink signals for SMs that are associated with the other parallel streams. The resulting antenna beams will necessarily be at different azimuth angles such that the antenna beams are substantially non-overlapping).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add the teaching of Strong to the teaching of Patel and Schafer. The motivation for such an addition would be to increase data capacity ([0057] Strong).
Claim(s) 34 (method) is rejected under the same reasoning as claim(s) 17 (apparatus), where Patel teaches both device and method ([0011] and [0042]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-14 and 30-31 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.
The following is an examiner' s statement of reasons for allowance of Independent Claim(s) 13 and 14.
Regarding to claim 13,
The closest prior art, Patel and Schafer teaches the wireless communication device of claim 12.
None of the prior art teach or fairly suggest the limitations of compute an array gain for each antenna based on a dynamic per-packet gain contribution determined using a physical layer of the wireless communication device and using a target power from a control table fixed for the wireless communication device based on a reference antenna configuration, the target power identified based on a number of the one or more communications, a number of orientations associated with the antenna assignments, a polarization diversity status, and a number of co-polarized antennas for each orientation of the number of orientations in combination with the other limitation of Claim 13. Although the other limitations are used in the art, none of the prior art of record teach or provide motivation to combine to reach a similar result.
Regarding to claim 14,
The closest prior art, Patel and Schafer teaches the wireless communication device of claim 12.
None of the prior art teach or fairly suggest the limitations of the wireless communication device includes eight antennas distributed among available orientations, wherein each of the one or more communications is assigned one antenna from each available orientation, and wherein an array gain penalty for each available orientation is 3 decibels (dB).in combination with the other limitation of Claim 14. Although the other limitations are used in the art, none of the prior art of record teach or provide motivation to combine to reach a similar result.
Claim(s) 30-31 (method) are objected under the same reasoning as claim(s) 13-14 (apparatus).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VAN T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6178. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM (EST). 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, Ayman A Abaza can be reached at (571) 270-0422. 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.
/VAN TA NGUYEN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2465
/AYMAN A ABAZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465