CTNF 18/610,067 CTNF 81081 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-2, 8-9, 13, 15-16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sambhwani et al. (US 2022/0408378) in view of Haraguchi (US 2016/0112582) . Regarding claim 1 , Sambhwani teaches a method of wireless communication by a wireless device, comprising: controlling radio frequency (RF) exposure associated with a plurality of radios via a controller (see Fig. 1, control circuitry 14; Paragraph [0018]) for a first time period ( Paragraphs [0031-0034, especially Paragraph [0032]…… RF exposure metric manager 26 may generate RF exposure budgets BGT for radios 28 (e.g., a first RF exposure budget BGT0 for radio 28-0, a second RF exposure budget BGT1 for radio 28-1, an (n+1)th RF exposure budget BGTn for radio 28- n , etc.). RF exposure metric manager 26 may provide RFE budgets BGT to radios 28 over control paths 30. Each RFE budget BGT may include a corresponding SAR budget BGT.sub.SAR and/or a corresponding MPE budget BGT.sub.MPE (e.g., depending on whether the radio subject to that budget is subject to SAR and/or MPE limits….Each SAR budget BGT.sub.SAR may specify the amount of SAR that may be generated by the corresponding radio 28 in transmitting radio-frequency signals over the regulatory averaging period while still satisfying the overall SAR regulatory limits. Each MPE budget BGT.sub.MPE may specify the amount of MPE that may be generated by the corresponding radio 28 in transmitting radio-frequency signals over the regulatory averaging period while still satisfying the overall MPE regulatory limits. The circuitry in radios 28 may adjust the maximum transmit (TX) power level of its transmitted radio-frequency signals (e.g., using a maximum power reduction (MPR) command, etc.) to ensure that the RF exposure budget BGT for that radio remains satisfied over the averaging period means first time period can be different than second time period) ; and controlling the RF exposure associated with one or more radios of the plurality of radios via controller for a second time period different from the first time period ( Paragraph [0034]…..RF exposure metric manager 26 may dynamically allocate SAR and MPE budgets to radios 28 over time (e.g., over the averaging period (different time period)). RF exposure metric manager 26 may dynamically allocate SAR and MPE budgets to radios 28 based on feedback from radios 28. For example, as shown in FIG. 1, each radio 28 may be coupled to RF exposure metric manager 26 over feedback path 32. Each radio 28 may generate a SAR/MPE report RPT that identifies the amount of the assigned SAR and/or MPE budget that was consumed by that radio during different sub-periods (sometimes referred to herein as instantaneous periods) of the averaging period) , but does not specifically teach a plurality of controller capable of controlling the radios. However, in related art, Haraguchi teaches a plurality of controller capable of controlling the radios ( Paragraph [0012] and claim 17…… a communication unit configured to perform communication with one of a plurality of controllers capable of controlling the radiation detector, and a control unit configured to control whether to permit imaging under control of a first controller, based on whether the radiation image data obtained under control of a second controller is held in the storage unit at the time of connection to the first controller ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA) to use Haraguchi’s teaching about a plurality of controller capable of controlling the radios with Sambhwani’s invention in order to achieve desired performance and keep the gain relatively constant across operating conditions. Regarding claims 2 and 16 , the combination of Sambhwani and Haraguchi teach all the claimed elements in claim 1. In addition, Sambhwani teaches the method of claim 1, wherein controlling the RF exposure associated with the one or more radios comprises controlling the RF exposure associated with the one or more radios in response to detecting one or more criteria being satisfied (Paragraph [0034]….. RF exposure metric manager 26 may generate updated RF exposure budgets BGT for radios 28 based on the received SAR/MPE reports RPT and based on the current or expected communication needs of device 10 to ensure that radios 28 can continue to transmit radio-frequency signals to meet the active and dynamic needs of device 10 while still satisfying the SAR and MPE limits imposed on device 10 over the averaging period. In this way, RF exposure metric manager 26 may assign SAR/MPE budgets across RATs while ensuring an SAR/MPE compliant overall RF exposure across the RATs). Regarding claim 8 , the combination of Sambhwani and Haraguchi teach all the claimed elements in claim 1. In addition, Sambhwani teaches the method of claim 1, wherein at least some of the plurality of radios are associated with different radio access technologies (Paragraphs [0027, 0048], especially Paragraphs 0027…….. Each radio 28 may transmit and/or receive radio-frequency signals according to a respective radio access technology (RAT) that determines the physical connection methodology for the components in the corresponding radio. One or more radios 28 may implement multiple RATs if desired). Regarding claim 9 , the combination of Sambhwani and Haraguchi teach all the claimed elements in claim 1. In addition, Sambhwani teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the one or more radios consist of one or more radios associated with the second controller (Paragraph [0042]….. control circuitry 14 may include baseband circuitry (e.g., one or more baseband processors) or other control circuitry that forms part of radios 28). Regarding claim 13 , the combination of Sambhwani and Haraguchi teach all the claimed elements in claim 1. In addition, Sambhwani teaches the method of claim 12, wherein the RF exposure information includes: one or more target powers associated with the one or more radios; one or more RF exposure budgets associated with the one or more radios ( See abstract; Paragraphs [0006-0009, 0032-0034] ) ; an RF exposure history associated with the one or more radios; a transmit power history associated with the one or more radios; one or more reserve powers associated with the one or more radios; or any combination thereof. Regarding claim 15 , Sambhwani teaches an apparatus for wireless communication, comprising: one or more memories collectively storing executable instructions ( Paragraphs [0019 and 0081] ); and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories, the one or more processors being collectively configured to execute the executable instructions to cause the apparatus ( Paragraph [0019] ) to: control radio frequency (RF) exposure associated with a plurality of radios via a controller (see Fig. 1, control circuitry 14; Paragraph [0018]) for a first time period ( Paragraphs [0031-0034, especially Paragraph [0032]…… RF exposure metric manager 26 may generate RF exposure budgets BGT for radios 28 (e.g., a first RF exposure budget BGT0 for radio 28-0, a second RF exposure budget BGT1 for radio 28-1, an (n+1)th RF exposure budget BGTn for radio 28- n , etc.). RF exposure metric manager 26 may provide RFE budgets BGT to radios 28 over control paths 30. Each RFE budget BGT may include a corresponding SAR budget BGT.sub.SAR and/or a corresponding MPE budget BGT.sub.MPE (e.g., depending on whether the radio subject to that budget is subject to SAR and/or MPE limits….Each SAR budget BGT.sub.SAR may specify the amount of SAR that may be generated by the corresponding radio 28 in transmitting radio-frequency signals over the regulatory averaging period while still satisfying the overall SAR regulatory limits. Each MPE budget BGT.sub.MPE may specify the amount of MPE that may be generated by the corresponding radio 28 in transmitting radio-frequency signals over the regulatory averaging period while still satisfying the overall MPE regulatory limits. The circuitry in radios 28 may adjust the maximum transmit (TX) power level of its transmitted radio-frequency signals (e.g., using a maximum power reduction (MPR) command, etc.) to ensure that the RF exposure budget BGT for that radio remains satisfied over the averaging period means first time period can be different than second time period) ; and control the RF exposure associated with one or more radios of the plurality of radios via a controller for a second time period different from the first time period ( Paragraph [0034]…..RF exposure metric manager 26 may dynamically allocate SAR and MPE budgets to radios 28 over time (e.g., over the averaging period (different time period)). RF exposure metric manager 26 may dynamically allocate SAR and MPE budgets to radios 28 based on feedback from radios 28. For example, as shown in FIG. 1, each radio 28 may be coupled to RF exposure metric manager 26 over feedback path 32. Each radio 28 may generate a SAR/MPE report RPT that identifies the amount of the assigned SAR and/or MPE budget that was consumed by that radio during different sub-periods (sometimes referred to herein as instantaneous periods) of the averaging period) , but does not specifically teach a plurality of controller capable of controlling the radios. However, in related art, Haraguchi teaches a plurality of controller capable of controlling the radios ( Paragraph [0012] and claim 17…… a communication unit configured to perform communication with one of a plurality of controllers capable of controlling the radiation detector, and a control unit configured to control whether to permit imaging under control of a first controller, based on whether the radiation image data obtained under control of a second controller is held in the storage unit at the time of connection to the first controller ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA) to use Haraguchi’s teaching about a plurality of controller capable of controlling the radios with Sambhwani’s invention in order to achieve desired performance and keep the gain relatively constant across operating conditions. Regarding claim 20 , Sambhwani teaches a apparatus for wireless communication, comprising: means for controlling radio frequency (RF) exposure associated with a plurality of radios via a controller (see Fig. 1, control circuitry 14; Paragraph [0018]) for a first time period ( Paragraphs [0031-0034, especially Paragraph [0032]…… RF exposure metric manager 26 may generate RF exposure budgets BGT for radios 28 (e.g., a first RF exposure budget BGT0 for radio 28-0, a second RF exposure budget BGT1 for radio 28-1, an (n+1)th RF exposure budget BGTn for radio 28- n , etc.). RF exposure metric manager 26 may provide RFE budgets BGT to radios 28 over control paths 30. Each RFE budget BGT may include a corresponding SAR budget BGT.sub.SAR and/or a corresponding MPE budget BGT.sub.MPE (e.g., depending on whether the radio subject to that budget is subject to SAR and/or MPE limits….Each SAR budget BGT.sub.SAR may specify the amount of SAR that may be generated by the corresponding radio 28 in transmitting radio-frequency signals over the regulatory averaging period while still satisfying the overall SAR regulatory limits. Each MPE budget BGT.sub.MPE may specify the amount of MPE that may be generated by the corresponding radio 28 in transmitting radio-frequency signals over the regulatory averaging period while still satisfying the overall MPE regulatory limits. The circuitry in radios 28 may adjust the maximum transmit (TX) power level of its transmitted radio-frequency signals (e.g., using a maximum power reduction (MPR) command, etc.) to ensure that the RF exposure budget BGT for that radio remains satisfied over the averaging period means first time period can be different than second time period) ; and means for controlling the RF exposure associated with one or more radios of the plurality of radios via a controller for a second time period different from the first time period ( Paragraph [0034]…..RF exposure metric manager 26 may dynamically allocate SAR and MPE budgets to radios 28 over time (e.g., over the averaging period (different time period)). RF exposure metric manager 26 may dynamically allocate SAR and MPE budgets to radios 28 based on feedback from radios 28. For example, as shown in FIG. 1, each radio 28 may be coupled to RF exposure metric manager 26 over feedback path 32. Each radio 28 may generate a SAR/MPE report RPT that identifies the amount of the assigned SAR and/or MPE budget that was consumed by that radio during different sub-periods (sometimes referred to herein as instantaneous periods) of the averaging period) , but does not specifically teach a plurality of controller capable of controlling the radios. However, in related art, Haraguchi teaches a plurality of controller capable of controlling the radios ( Paragraph [0012] and claim 17…… a communication unit configured to perform communication with one of a plurality of controllers capable of controlling the radiation detector, and a control unit configured to control whether to permit imaging under control of a first controller, based on whether the radiation image data obtained under control of a second controller is held in the storage unit at the time of connection to the first controller ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA) to use Haraguchi’s teaching about a plurality of controller capable of controlling the radios with Sambhwani’s invention in order to achieve desired performance and keep the gain relatively constant across operating conditions . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 3 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sambhwani et al. (US 2022/0408378) in view of Haraguchi (US 2016/0112582), and further in view of Barbara et al. (US 2025/0199859) . Regarding claims 3 and 17 , the combination of Sambhwani and Haraguchi fail to teach the method of claim 2, wherein the one or more criteria include: traffic activity associated with the second controller; a duty cycle associated with the second controller; a processing load associated with the second controller; a quality of service associated with the second controller; one or more radio conditions associated with the second controller; a priority associated with the second controller; one or more capabilities associated with the second controller; or any combination thereof. However, in related art, Barbara teaches the method of claim 2, wherein the one or more criteria include: traffic activity associated with the second controller ( not selected ); a duty cycle associated with the second controller ( not selected ); a processing load associated with the second controller ( not selected ); a quality of service associated with the second controller ( not selected ); one or more radio conditions associated with the second controller ( not selected ); a priority associated with the second controller ( Claims 1 and 11……. receiving a plurality of event- criteria lists from a plurality of resource controllers, each respective event-criteria list specifying a corresponding priority level associated with a respective resource controller ); one or more capabilities associated with the second controller ( Not selected ); or any combination thereof. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA) to use Barbara’s teaching about method of claim 2, wherein the one or more criteria include: a priority associated with the second controller with Sambhwani’s and Haraguchi’s invention in order to enable an efficient data exchange of the data element between the control unit and the radios . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sambhwani et al. (US 2022/0408378) in view of Haraguchi (US 2016/0112582), and further in view of Bernardos et al. (US 2023/01107614) . Regarding claim 4 , the combination of Sambhwani and Haraguchi fail to teach the method of claim 2, wherein detecting the one or more criteria are satisfied comprises comparing the one or more criteria associated with the second controller to one or more criteria associated with another controller among the plurality of controllers or to a threshold, and wherein the one or more criteria are satisfied when the comparison indicates that the second controller should operate as a primary controller. However, in related art, Bernados teaches the method of claim 2, wherein detecting the one or more criteria are satisfied comprises comparing the one or more criteria associated with the second controller to one or more criteria associated with another controller among the plurality of controllers or to a threshold, and wherein the one or more criteria are satisfied when the comparison indicates that the second controller should operate as a primary controller (See Abstract; Paragraphs [0003] [0121-0128], especially abstract teaches a method for wireless communications includes determining, in a Service Function Chain, that a first SFC controller of a set of SFC controllers is a primary SFC controller, determining whether at least one trigger condition is satisfied, and selecting, from the set of SFC controllers, a second SFC controller as the primary SFC controller to substitute the first SFC controller based on the at least one trigger condition being satisfied). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA) to use Barbara’s teaching about wherein detecting the one or more criteria are satisfied comprises comparing the one or more criteria associated with the second controller to one or more criteria associated with another controller among the plurality of controllers or to a threshold, and wherein the one or more criteria are satisfied when the comparison indicates that the second controller should operate as a primary controller with Sambhwani’s and Haraguchi’s invention so that more efficient and highly reliable communication can be realized. Regarding claim 11 , the combination of Sambhwani and Haraguchi fail to teach the method of claim 1, further comprising obtaining, from the first controller at the second controller, information associated with the second controller operating as a primary controller, wherein controlling the RF exposure associated with the one or more radios comprises controlling the RF exposure associated with the one or more radios based at least in part on the information. However, in related art, Bernados teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising obtaining, from the first controller at the second controller, information associated with the second controller operating as a primary controller, wherein controlling the RF exposure associated with the one or more radios comprises controlling the RF exposure associated with the one or more radios based at least in part on the information (See Abstract; Paragraphs [0003] [0121-0128], especially Paragraph [0121]……. the method may also include determining, by the first SFC controller, that the first SFC controller is unable to operate as the primary SFC controller; sending, by the first SFC controller, a notification message to at least the second SFC controller using an SFC Network Service Header (NSH) extension; receiving, by the first SFC controller from at least the second SFC controller, a response message after sending the notification message; and selecting (or reselecting), by the first SFC controller, the second SFC controller as the primary SFC controller based on the received response message). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA) to use Barbara’s teaching about obtaining, from the first controller at the second controller, information associated with the second controller operating as a primary controller, wherein controlling the RF exposure associated with the one or more radios comprises controlling the RF exposure associated with the one or more radios based at least in part on the information with Sambhwani’s and Haraguchi’s invention so that more efficient and highly reliable communication can be realized. Regarding claim 12 , the combination of Sambhwani, Haraguchi, and Bernardos teach all the claimed elements in claim 11. In addition, Bernados teaches the method of claim 11, wherein the information includes: an indication for the second controller to operate as the primary controller when the first controller is in a particular state ( Paragraph [0121] ); RF exposure information associated with the one or more radios; or any combination thereof . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sambhwani et al. (US 2022/0408378) in view of Haraguchi (US 2016/0112582), and further in view of Penov et al. (US 2016/0205201) . Regarding claim 5 , the combination of Sambhwani and Haraguchi fail to teach the method of claim 2, wherein detecting the one or more criteria are satisfied comprises applying a precedence of a first criterion over a second criterion. However, in related art, Penov teaches the method of claim 2, wherein detecting the one or more criteria are satisfied comprises applying a precedence of a first criterion over a second criterion ( Claims 9 and19 ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA) to use Penov’s teaching about wherein detecting the one or more criteria are satisfied comprises comparing the one or more criteria associated with the second controller to one or more criteria associated with another controller among the plurality of controllers or to a threshold, and wherein the one or more criteria are satisfied when the comparison indicates that the second controller should operate as a primary controller with Sambhwani’s and Haraguchi’s invention in order to achieve a maximum transmission duration capability . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 6-7 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sambhwani et al. (US 2022/0408378) in view of Haraguchi (US 2016/0112582), and further in view of Hegde et al. (US 2022/0361109) . Regarding claims 6 and 18 , the combination of Sambhwani and Haraguchi fail to teach the method of claim 1, wherein controlling the RF exposure associated with the one or more radios comprises controlling the RF exposure associated with the one or more radios in response to detecting the first controller being in a particular state. However, in related art, Hegde teaches the method of claim 1, wherein controlling the RF exposure associated with the one or more radios comprises controlling the RF exposure associated with the one or more radios in response to detecting the first controller being in a particular state ( Paragraph 0042 ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA) to use Hedge’s teaching about wherein controlling the RF exposure associated with the one or more radios comprises controlling the RF exposure associated with the one or more radios in response to detecting the first controller being in a particular state with Sambhwani’s and Haraguchi’s invention in order to conserve battery power of the device(s). Regarding claims 7 and 19 , the combination of Sambhwani, Haraguchi, and Hedge teach all the claimed elements in claims 6 and 15. In addition, Hedge teaches the method of claim 6, wherein the particular state includes: the first controller being offline; the first controller being in a low power state ( Paragraph [0042]……electromagnetic radiation exposure to a user of a wireless device, these SAR levels may be utilized by the transmission power controller 250 to reduce power consumption (low power state) of the wireless communication device 200) ; the first controller being incommunicable for a particular duration; the first controller being unresponsive; or any combination thereof . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sambhwani et al. (US 2022/0408378) in view of Haraguchi (US 2016/0112582), and further in view of Viswanathan (US 2013/0259456) . Regarding claim 10 , the combination of Sambhwani and Haraguchi fail to teach the method of claim 1, wherein controlling the RF exposure via the second controller comprises operating the second controller in a standalone mode. However, in related art, Viswanathan teaches the method of claim 1, wherein controlling the RF exposure via the second controller comprises operating the second controller in a standalone mode ( Paragraph 0014 ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA) to use Viswanathan’s teaching about wherein controlling the RF exposure via the second controller comprises operating the second controller in a standalone mode with Sambhwani’s and Haraguchi’s invention in order to efficiently perform communication . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sambhwani et al. (US 2022/0408378) in view of Haraguchi (US 2016/0112582), and further in view of Jorgovanovic et al. (US Patent #11,452,110) . Regarding claim 14 , the combination of Sambhwani and Haraguchi teach all the claimed elements in claim 1. In addition, Sambhwani teaches the method of claim 1, wherein controlling the RF exposure associated with the one or more radios comprises: obtaining RF exposure information associated with the one or more radios; determining, for at least one of the radios, a maximum allowed transmit power for a time interval based at least in part on the RF exposure information (Paragraphs [0007-0009], especially paragraph [0033]…..….. each radio or RAT in device 10 is assigned a fixed SAR/MPE budget, such that the distribution of the total available RF exposure budget across RATs remains static over time to meet the overall SAR/MPE regulatory limits on the operation of device 10 (e.g., over the averaging period). In these scenarios, each radio uses look-up tables to derive the maximum transmit power levels allowed for its fixed SAR/MPE budget and then maintains its transmit power level below that maximum transmit power level to satisfy the SAR/MPE limits), but does not specifically teach providing an indication of the maximum allowed transmit power to a third controller among the plurality of controllers. However, in related art, Jorgovanovic teaches providing an indication of the maximum allowed transmit power to a third controller among the plurality of controllers ( Col 12, line 54-Col 13, line 7 ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made to use (pre-AIA) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA) to use Viswanathan’s teaching about wherein controlling the RF exposure via the second controller comprises operating the second controller in a standalone mode with Sambhwani’s and Haraguchi’s invention in order for transmission power to be maintained at an appropriate level . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Harel et al. (US 2024/0304072), Barnes et al. (US 2024/0205799), Ormond (US 2024/0203004), Aagiru et al. (US 2024/0196344), Liu et al. (US Patent #11,865,986), Yin et al. (US 2023/0388668), Sambhwani et al. (US 2023/03700107), Sambhwani et al. (US 2023/0370981), Zhang et al. (US Patent #11,747,879), Yao et al. (US 2023/0030482), Ghanam et al. (US 2022/0354587), Sambhwani et al. (US Patent #11,438,023), Sambhwani et al. (US Patent #11,432,249), Kingma et al. (US 2022/0240883), Mcelvain et al. (US 2021/0360139), Youngblood et al. (US 2021/0219736), Tosaki et al. (US 2021/0227118), Hou et al. (US 2021/0058104), Badic et al. (US Patent #10,812,125), Lai et al. (US 2019/0246996), Gaither (US 2019/0248243), Skrinak et al. (US 2019/0250772), Park et al. (US 2018/0076844), Nishino et al. (US Patent #8,173,969), Buszek et al. (US 2010/0262326), and Lagunas-Solar et al. (US 2006/0024195) . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOMINIC E REGO whose telephone number is (571)272-8132. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:00am-4:30pm. 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, Wesley Kim can be reached at 571-272-7867. 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. /DOMINIC E REGO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648 Tel 571-272-8132 Application/Control Number: 18/610,067 Page 2 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/610,067 Page 3 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/610,067 Page 4 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/610,067 Page 5 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/610,067 Page 6 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/610,067 Page 7 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/610,067 Page 8 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/610,067 Page 9 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/610,067 Page 10 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/610,067 Page 11 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/610,067 Page 12 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/610,067 Page 13 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/610,067 Page 14 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/610,067 Page 15 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/610,067 Page 16 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/610,067 Page 17 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/610,067 Page 18 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/610,067 Page 19 Art Unit: 2648 Application/Control Number: 18/610,067 Page 20 Art Unit: 2648
Prosecution Insights