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 Amendment
Applicant's amendment filed on 06/30/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-2, 4, 7, 10, 12, 15-16, 18 and 20 have been amended. Claim 21 has been added. Claim 11 has been cancelled. Claims 1-10 and 12-21 are still pending in this application, with claims 1, 10 and 15, being independent.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 06/30/2026 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/30/2026 is considered. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-9 and 15-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Independent claims 1 and 15 recite the limitation "wherein the signal received…are combined into a distributed beam". It is not clear how combined received signals produce a “distributed beam” and thereby, renders the claim to be indefinite.
Using the published document of this application as reference, Par. 0090-0092 shows the SiP module combining the signals received at the antenna arrays. However, the SiP module (at the UE) does not combine the signals received at the antenna arrays into a distributed beam. Par. 0097 further shows “…the configuration information may indicate that the UE is to combine distributed beams, received at the UE across multiple antenna arrays…” The “distributed beams” are received and then, combined (emphasis). Therefore, the claim limitation as presented renders the claim to be indefinite as either the wording of the claim or the sequence of the claim is inconsistent with the disclosure of the application.
Applicant is advised to revise the independent claims in a manner that is consistent with the specification.
Dependent claims 2-9 and 16-21 are rejected by virtue of their dependencies to their respective independent claims.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 7-8, 10, 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (US 2022/0225320; hereinafter Li) in view of Kinamon et al. (US 2022/0013906; hereinafter Kinamon) and Ganesan et al. (US 2026/0074774; hereinafter Ganesan).
Regarding claim 1, Li shows a user equipment (UE) (Figure 8 shows a terminal performing in part the method of Figure 4.) for wireless communication, comprising:
one or more memories (Figure 4; memory 804); and
one or more processors, coupled to the one or more memories (Figure 4; processor 803 coupled to memory 804 and configured to perform the disclosed method.), configured to cause the UE to:
transmit a capability indication indicating a capability for steering beams across two or more antenna arrays (Figure 4; Par. 0088-0093; terminal reports antenna capability information for configuring beams to transmit in different directions across two or more antenna panels.),
wherein the capability indication further indicates that:
each of the beams is associated with one of the two or more antenna arrays (Figure 4; Par. 0088-0093; antenna capability information for configuring beams to transmit in different directions across two or more antenna panels.); and
receive signals via the beams of the two or more antenna arrays (Figure 4; Par. 0093, 0138; the terminal receives downlink data simultaneously through respective beams across the two or more antenna panels.).
Li shows all of the elements including the transmission of the capability information, as wells as, the reception of signals via the beams of the two or more antenna arrays, as discussed above. Li does not specifically show that the capability information includes combining beams across two or more arrays and signals received via the beams of the two or more antenna arrays are combined into a distributed beam.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Kinamon and Ganesan.
First, Kinamon shows signals received via the beams of the two or more antenna arrays are combined into a distributed beam (Figure 6; Par. 0064; a first 201sig1 and a second 201sig2 wireless signals arrive at said wireless communication system respectively, said first and second wireless signals are a mixture of a first and a second spatially multiplexed wireless signals generated by a remote transceiver 285 from a single data stream 299a using a first 286a and a second 286b remote antennas respectively. In step 1012: connecting 213a, 213b, by said wireless communication system 100: (i) a first 101b2 of said beam-ports, that is associated with said first direction, to a first input 105in1 of a receiver 105 belonging to wireless communication system 100, and (ii) a second 101bM of said beam-ports, that is associated with said second direction, to a second input 105in2 of said receiver. In step 1013: decoding, by said receiver, the first and second wireless signals 201sig1, 201sig2 received via said first and second inputs 105in1, 105in2, into said single data stream 299b.).
In view of the above, having the system of Li, then given the well-established teaching of Kinamon, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Li as taught by Kinamon, in order to provide motivation to improving the transmission efficiency for downlink transmission through the multi-antenna panels (Par. 0064 of Li).
Second, Ganesan shows the capability information includes combining beams across two or more arrays (Par. 0039, 0099; the UE 205 is configured with a list of up to M TCI-State configurations within the higher layer parameter PDSCH-Config to decode the physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) according to a detected physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) with DCI intended for the UE and the given serving cell, where the value ofM depends on the UE capability maxNumberConfiguredTCIstatesPerCC.).
In view of the above, having the system of Li, then given the well-established teaching of Ganesan, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Li as taught by Ganesan, in order to provide motivation to improving the transmission efficiency for downlink transmission through the multi-antenna panels (Par. 0064 of Li).
Regarding claim 7, modified Li shows wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to steer the beams of the two or more antenna arrays in different directions (Li: Figure 4; Par. 0092; If there is only one antenna panel entity in the terminal, and the antenna panel entity can point to different directions at different times, it is considered that the terminal can activate only one antenna panel simultaneously.).
Regarding claim 8, modified Li shows wherein the signals are received over a single layer (Li: Figure 4; Par. 0092; If there is only one antenna panel entity in the terminal, and the antenna panel entity can point to different directions at different times, it is considered that the terminal can activate only one antenna panel simultaneously.).
Regarding claim 9, modified Li shows wherein the signals are received over multiple layers (Li: Figure 4; Par. 0093; regarding whether the N antenna panels are capable of performing downlink reception simultaneously when the value of N is greater than or equal to 2 and the N antenna panels are capable of being activated simultaneously, in the embodiment of the present disclosure, when the terminal includes two or more antenna panels, and the two or more antenna panels can be activated simultaneously, the terminal may also report to the base station whether the two or more antenna panels can receive downlink data simultaneously.).
Regarding claim 10, Li shows a network node (Figure 9 shows a base station performing in part the method of Figure 4.) for wireless communication, comprising:
one or more memories (Figure 9; memory 903.); and
one or more processors, coupled to the one or more memories (Figure 9; processor 902 coupled to memory 903 and configured to perform the disclosed method.), configured to cause the network node to:
receive a capability indication indicating a user equipment (UE) capability for steering beams across two or more antenna arrays (Figure 4; Par. 0088-0093; base station receives antenna capability information for configuring beams to transmit in different directions across two or more antenna panels.),
wherein the capability indication further indicates that:
each of the beams is associated with one of the two or more antenna arrays (Figure 4; Par. 0088-0093; antenna capability information for configuring beams to transmit in different directions across two or more antenna panels.); and
output, to the UE, signals over a single layer via a distributed beam (Figure 4; Par. 0092; If there is only one antenna panel entity in the terminal, and the antenna panel entity can point to different directions at different times, it is considered that the terminal can activate only one antenna panel simultaneously.).
Li shows all of the elements including the reception of the capability information, as wells as, the outputting of signals via the beams of the two or more antenna arrays, as discussed above. Li does not specifically show that the capability information includes combining beams across two or more arrays and signals formed by combining the beams of two or more antenna arrays.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Kinamon and Ganesan.
First, Kinamon shows signals formed by combining the beams of two or more antenna arrays (Figure 6; Par. 0064; a first 201sig1 and a second 201sig2 wireless signals arrive at said wireless communication system respectively, said first and second wireless signals are a mixture of a first and a second spatially multiplexed wireless signals generated by a remote transceiver 285 from a single data stream 299a using a first 286a and a second 286b remote antennas respectively. In step 1012: connecting 213a, 213b, by said wireless communication system 100: (i) a first 101b2 of said beam-ports, that is associated with said first direction, to a first input 105in1 of a receiver 105 belonging to wireless communication system 100, and (ii) a second 101bM of said beam-ports, that is associated with said second direction, to a second input 105in2 of said receiver. In step 1013: decoding, by said receiver, the first and second wireless signals 201sig1, 201sig2 received via said first and second inputs 105in1, 105in2, into said single data stream 299b.).
In view of the above, having the system of Li, then given the well-established teaching of Kinamon, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Li as taught by Kinamon, in order to provide motivation to improving the transmission efficiency for downlink transmission through the multi-antenna panels (Par. 0064 of Li).
Second, Ganesan shows the capability information includes combining beams across two or more arrays (Par. 0039, 0099; the UE 205 is configured with a list of up to M TCI-State configurations within the higher layer parameter PDSCH-Config to decode the physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) according to a detected physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) with DCI intended for the UE and the given serving cell, where the value ofM depends on the UE capability maxNumberConfiguredTCIstatesPerCC.).
In view of the above, having the system of Li, then given the well-established teaching of Ganesan, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Li as taught by Ganesan, in order to provide motivation to improving the transmission efficiency for downlink transmission through the multi-antenna panels (Par. 0064 of Li).
Regarding claim 15, Li shows a method (Figure 4 shows a method performed in part by a terminal of Figure 8.) of wireless communication performed by a user equipment (UE), comprising:
transmitting a capability indication indicating a capability for steering beams across two or more antenna arrays (Figure 4; Par. 0088-0093; terminal reports antenna capability information for configuring beams to transmit in different directions across two or more antenna panels.),
wherein the capability indication further indicates that:
each of the beams is associated with one of the two or more antenna arrays (Figure 4; Par. 0088-0093; antenna capability information for configuring beams to transmit in different directions across two or more antenna panels.); and
receiving signals via the beams of the two or more antenna arrays (Figure 4; Par. 0093, 0138; the terminal receives downlink data simultaneously through respective beams across the two or more antenna panels.).
Li shows all of the elements including the transmission of the capability information, as wells as, the reception of signals via the beams of the two or more antenna arrays, as discussed above. Li does not specifically show that the capability information includes combining beams across two or more arrays and signals received via the beams of the two or more antenna arrays are combined into a distributed beam.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Kinamon and Ganesan.
First, Kinamon shows signals received via the beams of the two or more antenna arrays are combined into a distributed beam (Figure 6; Par. 0064; a first 201sig1 and a second 201sig2 wireless signals arrive at said wireless communication system respectively, said first and second wireless signals are a mixture of a first and a second spatially multiplexed wireless signals generated by a remote transceiver 285 from a single data stream 299a using a first 286a and a second 286b remote antennas respectively. In step 1012: connecting 213a, 213b, by said wireless communication system 100: (i) a first 101b2 of said beam-ports, that is associated with said first direction, to a first input 105in1 of a receiver 105 belonging to wireless communication system 100, and (ii) a second 101bM of said beam-ports, that is associated with said second direction, to a second input 105in2 of said receiver. In step 1013: decoding, by said receiver, the first and second wireless signals 201sig1, 201sig2 received via said first and second inputs 105in1, 105in2, into said single data stream 299b.).
In view of the above, having the system of Li, then given the well-established teaching of Kinamon, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Li as taught by Kinamon, in order to provide motivation to improving the transmission efficiency for downlink transmission through the multi-antenna panels (Par. 0064 of Li).
Second, Ganesan shows the capability information includes combining beams across two or more arrays (Par. 0039, 0099; the UE 205 is configured with a list of up to M TCI-State configurations within the higher layer parameter PDSCH-Config to decode the physical downlink shared channel (PDSCH) according to a detected physical downlink control channel (PDCCH) with DCI intended for the UE and the given serving cell, where the value ofM depends on the UE capability maxNumberConfiguredTCIstatesPerCC.).
In view of the above, having the system of Li, then given the well-established teaching of Ganesan, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Li as taught by Ganesan, in order to provide motivation to improving the transmission efficiency for downlink transmission through the multi-antenna panels (Par. 0064 of Li).
Regarding claim 20, this claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 7.
Claim(s) 2 and 16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Kinamon, Ganesan and Zhai et al., "mm-Wave Active Phased Array SiP Module for UE Devices in 5G Communications," 2021, pages 1031-1034 (hereinafter Zhai).
Regarding claim 2, modified Li shows all of the elements including the steering of the beams the combining of the signals are performed by the UE, as discussed above. Modified Li does not specifically show UE includes a single system-in-package (SiP) module and a single radio frequency integrated circuit (RFIC) chip.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Zhai. Specifically, Zhai shows a single system-in-package (SiP) module (Figures 1 and 3; noted mm-Wave phased array system in package (SiP) module configured for beam steering/beamforming.) and a single radio frequency integrated circuit (RFIC) chip (Figures 1-2; noted single RFIC chip design for the mm-Wave phased array system.).
In view of the above, having the system of Li, then given the well-established teaching of Zhai, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Li as taught by Zhai, in order to provide motivation to efficiently complete spatial coverage for a UE (Conclusion of Zhai).
Regarding claim 16, this claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 2.
Claim(s) 3-4, 11-12 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Kinamon, Ganesan and Lim et al. (US 2025/0323756; hereinafter Lim)
Regarding claim 3, modified Li shows all of the elements except wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to transmit a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state indication message.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Lim. Specifically, Lim shows wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the UE to transmit a transmission configuration indicator (TCI) state indication message (Par. 0376; the UE may use a UE capability parameter, for example, tci-StatePDSCH. Here, the UE capability parameter, for example, tci-StatePDSCH, may define TCI states for a purpose of PDSCH transmission. The number of TCI states may be configured to be 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, or 128 in FR1, and may be configured to be 64 or 128 in FR2, and among the configured number, up to 8 states indicatable by 3 bits of a TCI field of DCI may be configured via an MAC CE message. The maximum number 128 denotes a value indicated by maxNumberConfiguredTCIstatesPerCC in the tci-StatePDSCH parameter included in capability signaling of the UE.).
In view of the above, having the system of Li, then given the well-established teaching of Lim, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Li as taught by Lim, in order to provide motivation to improve reliability relative to the single cell, TRP, and/or beam transmission (Par. 0359 of Lim).
Regarding claim 4, modified Li shows wherein the TCI state indication message indicates a set of TCI states that the UE supports for beam combining at a network node, the set of TCI states being indicated based on the capability indication (Lim: Par. 0376; the UE may use a UE capability parameter, for example, tci-StatePDSCH. Here, the UE capability parameter, for example, tci-StatePDSCH, may define TCI states for a purpose of PDSCH transmission. The number of TCI states may be configured to be 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, or 128 in FR1, and may be configured to be 64 or 128 in FR2, and among the configured number, up to 8 states indicatable by 3 bits of a TCI field of DCI may be configured via an MAC CE message. The maximum number 128 denotes a value indicated by maxNumberConfiguredTCIstatesPerCC in the tci-StatePDSCH parameter included in capability signaling of the UE.).
Regarding claims 12 and 18, these claims are rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 4.
Regarding claim 17, this claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 3.
Claim(s) 5-6, 13-14 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Kinamon, Ganesan Marupaduga et al. (US Pat. 11,723,096; hereinafter Marupaduga).
Regarding claim 5, modified Li shows all of the elements except wherein the capability indication includes an information element.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Marupaduga. Specifically, Marupaduga shows wherein the capability indication includes an information element (col. 8, lines 42-50; the UE could respond to the eNB with a “UE capability information” information element (IE). This UE capability information IE could take various forms. For instance, the IE could include a set of feature group indicator (FGI) bits, each mapped to a particular capability, and each having a value (0 or 1) indicating whether or not the UE has that capability.).
In view of the above, having the system of Li, then given the well-established teaching of Marupaduga, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Li as taught by Marupaduga, in order to provide motivation to stop further ping-ponging can advantageously leverage conventional UE-capability-reporting functionality, avoiding the need to introduce a new form of messaging for this purpose (col. 5, lines 18-34 of Marupaduga).
Regarding claim 6, modified Li shows wherein the capability indication includes a bit in the information element (Marupaduga: col. 8, lines 42-50; the UE could respond to the eNB with a “UE capability information” information element (IE). This UE capability information IE could take various forms. For instance, the IE could include a set of feature group indicator (FGI) bits, each mapped to a particular capability, and each having a value (0 or 1) indicating whether or not the UE has that capability.).
Regarding claims 13 and 19, these claims are rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 5.
Regarding claim 14, this claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 6.
Claim(s) 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Kinamon, Ganesan, Marupaduga and Zhai.
Regarding claim 21, modified Li shows wherein the capability indication comprises information indicating that the two or more antenna arrays are controlled by a processor (Li: Figure 8; Par. 0088-0093, 0231; processor 803 controls and manages the operation of the terminal 800, and is configured to execute the processing procedure performed by the terminal 800 in the embodiments of the present disclosure. For example, the processor 803 is further configured to perform the various operations of the terminal side in the method embodiments described above, and/or other operations of the technical solution described in the embodiments of the present disclosure. Terminal reports antenna capability information for configuring beams to transmit in different directions across two or more antenna panels.).
Modified Li does not specifically show wherein the capability indication comprises a single bit in an information element and a single system-in-package (SiP) module.
However, the above-mentioned claim limitations are well-established in the art as evidenced by Marupaduga and Zhai.
First, Marupaduga shows wherein the capability indication comprises a single bit in an information element t (col. 8, lines 42-50; the UE could respond to the eNB with a “UE capability information” information element (IE). This UE capability information IE could take various forms. For instance, the IE could include a set of feature group indicator (FGI) bits, each mapped to a particular capability, and each having a value (0 or 1) indicating whether or not the UE has that capability.).
In view of the above, having the system of Li, then given the well-established teaching of Marupaduga, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Li as taught by Marupaduga, in order to provide motivation to stop further ping-ponging can advantageously leverage conventional UE-capability-reporting functionality, avoiding the need to introduce a new form of messaging for this purpose (col. 5, lines 18-34 of Marupaduga).
Second, Zhai shows a single system-in-package (SiP) module (Figures 1 and 3; noted mm-Wave phased array system in package (SiP) module configured for beam steering/beamforming.).
In view of the above, having the system of Li, then given the well-established teaching of Zhai, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Li as taught by Zhai, in order to provide motivation to efficiently complete spatial coverage for a UE (Conclusion of Zhai).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20260223012 A1 USER EQUIPMENT, BASE STATION, AND METHOD FOR STxMP OPERATION
US 20260095215 A1 TECHNOLOGIES FOR PRECODING MATRIX WITH PHASE CALIBRATION ERROR COMPENSATION
US 20250126610 A1 COMMUNICATION METHOD AND COMMUNICATION APPARATUS
US 20230188308 A1 BEAM GROUP-BASED DOWNLINK TRANSMIT BEAM INDICATION
US 20200267536 A1 ANTENNA PANEL CAPABILITY DETERMINATION AND INDICATION IN WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS
US 20040185775 A1 Systems and methods for digital processing of satellite communications data
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 REDENTOR M PASIA whose telephone number is (571)272-9745. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays-Fridays 5am-245pm.
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, Un Cho can be reached at (571)272-7919. 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.
/REDENTOR PASIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2413
Prosecution Insights