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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 12/29/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Arguments directed to patentability of the newly amended language are addressed by the updated reasons for rejection below.
Further, Applicant argues: “Regarding features (iv), (v) and (vi), Jeon et al. discloses a multi-camera system in which the imaging ranges of the cameras do not overlap each other (see, for example, paragraph [0030] as well as paragraphs [0001] and [0005]). Jeon et al. thus does not disclose the above feature (iv), which relates to transmitting tracking information to nearby tracking devices whose imaging range overlaps …”
Examiner notes that overlap or non-overlap of the camera range does not materially affect the capability of transmitting information between smart camera devices. While Jeon is concerned with a problem where the cameras are non-overlapping, tracking information can be transmitted to overlapping cameras in the same way they can be transmitted to other networked devices as noted in Wang. See reasons for rejection below.
Applicant argues: “Applicant respectfully submits that "resetting" the subnetwork is not the transmission of tracking information from one tracking device to another (nearby) tracking device. Resetting in Jeon et al. relates to changing of the subnetwork configuration (in the Fig. 2 example, it is changing the cameras whose image information will be reviewed from the cameras in 11 (used for review after the object disappears from camera 1 l c)”
Examiner disagrees. As defined in Jeong, subnetwork information contains information that tracks cameras and objects. This information can be transmitted between the networked devices for purposes of tracking. See reasons for rejection of the newly amended claim language below.
Applicant argues: “Furthermore, the resetting is performed by the server 12, not by the cameras 10 or by the client module(s) 30. See Jeon et al. paragraphs [0038], [0042] and [0048].”
Examiner notes that distributing computing operations to local processors on the network does not appear to be novel, and it is more common now that smart cameras have more processing power that older generation cameras. See updated reasons for rejection below.
Applicant argues regarding the newly amended claim language: “Furthermore, the resetting in Jeon et al. occurs after the object disappears (exits) from the imaging range of a camera. Accordingly, even if "resetting" involves the transmission of tracking information, it is not performed "periodically" "at a predetermined time interval."”
Examiner notes that prior art appears to transmit data at regular time intervals and during tracking events. See updated reasons for rejection below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-6 recite the feature: “a stored database in which is stored information from which it can be determined whether the imaging ranges of tracking devices overlap” however Applicant did not cite and Examiner did not find support for this embodiment in the Specification. Applicant generally cited Paragraphs 22 and 38 as supporting the amended feature, however paragraph 22 describes a database but it “stores the tracking information” and does not mention “information from which it can be determined whether the imaging ranges of tracking devices overlap.” Paragraph 38 does not describe a database, but broadly to information that is stored.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Claims 1-4 recite: “a tracking unit configured to track an object … a tracking information transmission unit configured to transmit tracking information … a determination unit configured to determine … an update unit configured to replace an identifier and transmit to the server … a verification unit configured to verify … an image acquisition unit configured to acquire an image … an identifier specification unit configured to specify an identifier … a retrieval unit configured to acquire tracking information” generic terms (unit) modified by functional language but not modified by structure or a structural term and not naming a structure readily recognized by persons of skill in the art to perform the claimed function. The limitation invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph, and shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Specification supports the claimed units as computer program routines executed by a computer. See Specification, Paragraphs 18, 25-26.
Claims 5-6 recite: “a plurality of tracking devices and a server device” generic terms (device) modified by functional language but not modified by structure or a structural term and not naming a structure readily recognized by persons of skill in the art to perform the claimed function. The limitation invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph, and shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Specification supports the claimed devices as computers executing computer program routines. See Specification, Paragraphs 25-26.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20200175697 to Jeon (“Jeon”) in view of US 10664705 to Oami (“Oami”) in view of US 20170205783 to Tannenbaum (“Tannenbaum”) in view of US 20130166711 to Wang (Wang”).
Regarding Claim 1: “A tracking system comprising:
a server device; and (“receiving transmits the global object tracking information and the multi-camera tracking results to the server module.” Jeon, Paragraphs 9, 43, 48 and Fig. 1.)
a plurality of tracking devices, each of the plurality of tracking devices including … an imaging apparatus; (“tracking an object of interest in a multi-camera environment … locally tracking the object of interest for the image frame from the determined camera;” Jeon, Paragraph 6 and Fig. 1.)
a tracking unit configured to track an object based on a captured image acquired by the imaging apparatus; (“tracking an object of interest in a multi-camera environment … locally tracking the object of interest for the image frame from the determined camera;” Jeon, Paragraph 6.)
a tracking information transmission unit configured to transmit tracking information, which includes at least features and an identifier of the object, (“the client module generates global object tracking information and multi-camera tracking results and transmits the global object tracking information and the multi-camera tracking results to the server module … transmits information about the subnetwork to a client module” Jeon, Paragraphs 47-48, 6, 43, and Fig. 2.)
(1) directly to nearby tracking devices without passing through the server device and (“a network is set up such that the plurality of cameras 10 can perform data communication with each other” thus each camera or client module is configured to transmit to another camera or client module. Jon, Paragraph 30 and Fig. 2. See similarly in Tannenbaum, Paragraphs 49-50. See statement of motivation below.)
(2) directly to the server device; (“the client module generates global object tracking information and multi-camera tracking results and transmits the global object tracking information and the multi-camera tracking results to the server module” Jeon, Paragraphs 47-48, 6, 43, and Fig. 2.)
a memory in which is stored the tracking information of currently tracked objects that are currently being tracked by the tracking device;” ( “Referring to FIG. 5A, which shows an exemplary structure of the data variables of the subnetwork configuration information, N1 to N8 bits store a camera index, and N9 and N 10 bits store an ID of the object of interest.” Jeon, Paragraph 50.
Note that Jeon does not discuss components of the smart device, such as the claimed memory. Tannenbaum teaches this feature in the context of networked smart devices: “"the smart devices") are capable of data communications and information sharing with other smart devices … FIG. 6 is a block diagram illustrating a representative smart device 204 … camera device 118, … includes one or more processing units (e.g., CPUs, ASICs, FPGAs, microprocessors, and the like) 602, one or more communication interfaces 604, memory 606, … memory 606, optionally, stores a subset of the modules and data structures identified above.” Tannenbaum, Paragraphs 49, 80, 102.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to supplement the teachings of Jeon and Oami in order to share tracking information by storing it in the smart device memory as taught in Tannenbaum, in order to share pertinent information and to distribute the processing load among the networked devices. See Tannenbaum, Paragraphs 49, 62.)
a determination unit configured to, in a case of receiving the tracking information from another tracking device, (“in the client module 30, the local tracking unit 31 determines whether the object of interest is present in an image frame received from the first camera” Jeon, Paragraph 39. Also note that the processing can be performed on any networked computing units, also including other smart cameras and servers. Tannenbaum, Paragraphs 49, 62 and statement of motivation above.)
determine whether an object coincided with the object specified by the tracking information transmitted from the other tracking device is included in the currently tracked objects stored in memory … by comparing the features of the tracking information received from the other tracking device with the features of the tracking information of the currently tracked objects stored in the memory of the tracking device; and (On comparison of image frames, “when it is determined that an object which is most similar [coincided] to the object of interest appears from image information obtained by another camera (a second camera, a third camera, or the like) constituting the first subnetwork 11, the subnetwork may be reset to a new subnetwork on the basis of the corresponding camera.” Jeon, Paragraph 35.)
an update unit configured to, in a case where it is determined that an object coincided with the object specified by the tracking information transmitted from the other tracking device is included in the currently tracked objects, (“when it is determined that an object which is most similar to the object of interest appears from image information obtained by another camera (a second camera, a third camera, or the like) constituting the first subnetwork 11, the subnetwork may be reset [updated] to a new subnetwork on the basis of the corresponding camera.” Jeon, Paragraphs 35, 6-7.)
(a) replace an identifier of the object that was stored in the memory with the identifier included in the tracking information, and (“In the local tracking, it is possible to identify a moving object using color information in one image frame, an image filtering technique, and the like, assign a temporary identifier (ID) to each individual object, and determine whether the corresponding object matches the object of interest … when the data is associated, the client module generates global object tracking information … Thereafter, the subnetwork may be reset by the server module on the basis of the global object tracking information …” thus replacing the old and the temporary with the global object id information. Jeon, Paragraphs 44, 47-51.)
transmit to the server device coincidence information which indicates the object received from the nearby tracking device coincides with a currently tracked object; and (“when the object of interest is re-identified; generating global object tracking information and multicamera tracking result by associating the data and transmitting the global object tracking information and the multicamera tracking result data to the server module;” Jeon, Paragraphs 9, 47-48.)
a server device includes a [storage unit] configured to store the tracking information transmitted from each of the plurality of tracking devices (“transmitting the global object tracking information and the multicamera tracking result data to the server module … an exemplary structure of the data variables of the subnetwork configuration information, N1 to N8 bits store a camera index, and N9 and N 10 bits store an ID of the object of interest.” Jeon, Paragraphs 9, 50, Fig. 5A. See treatment of server-side storage unit below.)
as a graph structure, (See tracking information embodying a graph structure of the tracking subnetwork of devices and their connections in Jeon, Fig. 2: “in FIG. 2, an example in which a subnetwork is set up by some of overall cameras will be described. For example, when it is expected that an object to be tracked, that is, an object of interest, is disposed at a reference numeral llc, a first subnetwork 11 may be set or selected with cameras that are geographically adjacent to (neighboring) a camera positioned at the reference numeral llc” Jeon, Paragraphs 32-33.)
in which nodes of tracking information which are indicated to coincide with each other in the coincidence information are connected to eachother by links indicating a moving route of the object represented by the nodes, and a node of identification information of the object is connected to each node of the tracking information that represents a same object,” (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification and ordinary skill in the art, each node can represent (a) an object location or (b) an ID of a particular tracking device that tracks the object. See Specification, Paragraph 22. Prior art also documents such information, by (a) tracing the object with an ID through the local locations, and also (b) “the client module generates global object tracking information … Referring to FIG. 5A, which shows an exemplary structure of the data variables of the multi-camera tracking results, colunm A records an index of a target camera, colunm B records a local ID of an object of interest in the target camera, colunm C records an index of a camera as a next candidate target camera, and colunm D records a local ID of an object of interest within the next candidate target camera,” exemplifying two nodes that become part of a global object tracking information. Jeon, Paragraphs 47, 51. See illustration of tracking information embodying a graph structure of the tracking subnetwork in Jeon, Fig. 2 and Paragraphs 32-33.)
and wherein for each of the plurality of tracking devices: … the tracking information transmission unit of the tracking device is configured to periodically transmit, at a predetermined time interval, (As a general embodiment, “the smart home provider server system 164 retrieves and transmits the data at appropriate times ( e.g., at regular intervals,” Tannenbaum, Paragraph 61 and statement of motivation above. In a more specific example, “the server module 20 may select a subnetwork among the plurality of cameras 10, and the one or more client modules 30 may perform data communication with the plurality of cameras 10 and the server module 20 and receive image frames from the one or more cameras 10 constituting the subnetwork in a first time interval to detect and track the object of interest.” Jeon, Paragraph 31.)
the tracking information of the currently tracked objects that are within an imaging range of the imaging apparatus of the tracking device to a nearby tracking device having an imaging range that [overlaps] with the imaging range of the imaging apparatus, among the nearby tracking devices, while the currently tracked objects remain in the imaging range of the imaging apparatus of the tracking device, and (Prior art teaches this as: “in the local tracking of the object of interest, local path tracking information (tracklet) and interest object result information (region of interest (ROI) information) may be generated on the basis of image frames received from the first camera (the camera for which it is determined that the object of interest is present) constituting the subnetwork at a predetermined interval (it may be a different interval from the first time interval in which image frames are received from one or more cameras constituting the subnetwork) from the time when the object of interest is present. The local path tracking information is a record of a tracking path through which the corresponding object of interest moves …” Jeon, Paragraph 45.)
Note that Jeon is configured to transmit the information to all networked devices but does not discuss cameras “having an imaging range that overlaps.” However, overlapping range of the cameras does not appear to be a requirement for the system to transmit or receive the information. See Jeon, Paragraph 1 and similarly in Specification Paragraph 20 and Fig. 1.
Wang confirms that such information can be communicated to devices with overlapping and non-overlapping cameras in the context of tracking objects using cameras: “The camera network monitoring service 116 manages multiple cameras, which can have overlapping or non-overlapping monitoring areas.” Wang, Paragraph 53.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to supplement the teachings of Jeon, Oami, Tannenbaum to network cameras having an imaging range that overlaps as taught in Wang, because it is easier to track objects across overlapping cameras than non-overlapping cameras. See Wang, Paragraph 40.
the tracking information transmission unit of the tracking device is configured to transmit the tracking information in accordance with an exit event of the object from the imaging range of the imaging apparatus of the tracking device, to a nearby tracking device having the imaging range that does not overlap with the imaging range of the imaging apparatus, among the nearby tracking devices, (“the interest object result information may include an ID of the corresponding object of interest at a moment when the corresponding object of interest disappears from a corresponding image frame,” representing the end of a first time interval and the beginning of the second. Jeon, Paragraphs 45, 39. “when the data is associated, the client module generates global object tracking information and multi-camera tracking results and transmits the global object tracking information and the multi-camera tracking results to the server module.” Jeon, Paragraphs 45 and 47.)
wherein the tracking information transmission unit of each of the tracking devices determines whether or not the nearby tracking devices have an imaging range that overlaps with the imaging range of the imaging apparatus of the tracking device by referring to a stored database in which is stored information from which it can be determined whether the imaging ranges of tracking devices overlap, and (Prior art teaches to generate a subnetwork data structure stored at the server for documenting “The plurality of cameras 10 are cameras capable of capturing images of different zones so as not to overlap each other. … a first subnetwork 11 may be set or selected with cameras that are geographically adjacent to (neighboring) a camera positioned” Jeon, Paragraphs 30-33, and Fig. 2. Thus, prior art can determine whether the imaging ranges of the cameras overlap from the subnetwork data structure created by the server (and shared with the client modules). In another embodiment Wang registers cameras that overlap each other in a common map. See Wang, Paragraph 40 and statement of motivation above.)
wherein whether or not a newly tracked object coincides with a currently tracked object is determined by the determination units of the tracking devices and not by the server device.” (“and the client module 30 [not the server] includes a local tracking unit 31, an object re-identification unit 32, and a data association unit 33. … The object re-identification unit 32 re-identifies the object of interest by comparing image frames from the first camera and the second camera constituting the subnetwork on the basis of the local path tracking information.” Jeon, Paragraphs 37, 40. Cumulatively, “a processing engine 306, which may be concentrated at a single server or distributed among several different computing entities. In some implementations, the processing engine 306 includes engines configured to receive data from the devices of smart home environments” Tannenbaum, Paragraph 62. See statement of motivation above.)
Jeon does not explicitly teach “a server device including a storage unit.” Note that computers such as the server ordinarily store and buffer received information in storage units such as memories.
Oami teaches this in the context of computer systems used for tracking objects in camera images: “the memory unit 220 may be configured to store data and the like used in the object tracking 25 apparatus 10.” Oami, Column 16, lines 23-25.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to supplement the teachings of Jeon to use computers that store object tracking data in memories as taught in Oami, in order to use the tracking information in computing and transmission. See Oami, Column 16, lines 23-25.
Finally, in reviewing the present application, there does not seem to be objective evidence that the claim limitations are particularly directed to: addressing a particular problem which was recognized but unsolved in the art, producing unexpected results at the level of the ordinary skill in the art, or any other objective indicators of non-obviousness.
Regarding Claim 3: “The tracking system according to claim 1, wherein
the server device further includes a verification unit configured to verify a connection relationship of the tracking information stored in the storage unit, and (“the method according to the present invention may further include re-identifying the object of interest by comparing image frames from a first camera and a second camera constituting the subnetwork … resetting, by the server module, the subnetwork on the basis of global object tracking information and the multi-camera tracking result.” Jeon, Paragraph 9.)
in a case where an inconsistent relationship is discovered in the connection relationship, notify the inconsistency to a user, or correct the inconsistent connection relationship.” (“resetting [correcting], by the server module, the subnetwork [connection relationship] on the basis of global object tracking information and the multi-camera tracking result.” Jeon, Paragraph 9, Fig. 2. See similarly in Wang, Paragraph 40.)
Regarding Claim 4: “The tracking system according to claim 1, wherein
the server device includes: … an image acquisition unit configured to acquire an image capturing an object; (“transmitting the global object tracking information and the multicamera tracking result data to the server module;” Jeon, Paragraph 9. In the server, “the memory unit 220 may be configured to store data and the like used in the object tracking 25 apparatus 10. For example, the memory unit 220 may store camera videos captured by the cameras 20, camera parameters for the respective cameras 20,” Oami, Column 16, lines 23-27. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
an identifier specification unit configured to specify an identifier of the object in the image; and (“selecting, by a server module, a subnetwork in the multi-camera environment; … receiving, by a client module, subnetwork configuration information, … the subnetwork configuration information may include an identifier (ID) of the object of interest and a camera index, … transmits information about the subnetwork to a client module” Jeon, Paragraphs 6, 43, 48.)
a retrieval unit configured to acquire tracking information of the object in the image from the storage unit and output the tracking information that has been acquired.” In the server, “the memory unit 220 may be configured to store [and retrieve] data and the like used in the object tracking 25 apparatus 10. For example, the memory unit 220 may store camera videos captured by the cameras 20, camera parameters for the respective cameras 20,” Oami, Column 16, lines 23-27. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
Claim 5, “A tracking method used by a tracking system which includes a plurality of tracking devices and a server device,” is rejected for reasons stated for Claims 1 and 4 because the method of Claim 1 is executed by the plurality of tracking devices and a server of Claims 1-4.)
Claim 6, “A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program used by a tracking system, which includes a plurality of tracking devices and a server device,” is rejected for reasons stated for Claim 5, and because prior art teaches: “a computer readable storage media recording a computer program for executing the method according to the one aspect of the present invention.” Jeon, Paragraph 10.)
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MIKHAIL ITSKOVICH whose telephone number is (571)270-7940. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Thu. 9am - 8pm.
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, Joseph Ustaris can be reached at (571)272-7383. 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.
/MIKHAIL ITSKOVICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2483
Prosecution Insights