DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/01/2024 was in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a data acquisition module,” “a first Lissajous curve construction module,” “a first fault positioning module,” “a section dividing module,” “a second Lissajous curve construction module,” and “a second fault positioning module,” in claim 7.
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.
According to MPEP 2181, II, B, “In cases involving a special purpose computer-implemented means-plus-function limitation, the Federal Circuit has consistently required that the structure be more than simply a general purpose computer or microprocessor and that the specification must disclose an algorithm for performing the claimed function. See, e.g., Noah Systems Inc. v. Intuit Inc., 675 F.3d 1302, 1312, 102 USPQ2d 1410, 1417 (Fed. Cir. 2012); Aristocrat, 521 F.3d at 1333, 86 USPQ2d at 1239. Image… the specification must sufficiently disclose an algorithm to transform a general purpose microprocessor to a special purpose computer so that a person of ordinary skill in the art can implement the disclosed algorithm to achieve the claimed function. Aristocrat, 521 F.3d at 1338, 86 USPQ2d at 1241.” A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding algorithm for performing the claimed function as described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation: Fig. 16 and para. [0065].
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 § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Specifically, representative Claim 1 recites:
A high-impedance fault positioning method based on synchronous Lissajous curve characteristics, comprising:
acquiring a bus zero-sequence differential voltage and a feeder zero-sequence current of a faulty line;
constructing a first Lissajous curve in a characteristic frequency band range based on the bus zero-sequence differential voltage and the feeder zero-sequence current of the faulty line;
when a proportion of the faulty line is less than a set threshold value and a slope of the first Lissajous curve is negative, determining that a high-impedance fault has occurred in the faulty line;
when the proportion of the faulty line is greater than the set threshold value, dividing a topological line of a power distribution network into sections, and synchronously acquiring a section zero-sequence current of each of the sections;
constructing a second Lissajous curve based on the bus zero-sequence differential voltage and the section zero-sequence current of each of the sections, and performing a linear fitting on discrete data points of the second Lissajous curve to obtain a fitted curve; and
when a slope of the fitted curve is negative for at least three consecutive periods, determining that the high-impedance fault has occurred in the section;
wherein in a resonant system, due to an action of an arc suppression coil, a direction of a faulty line zero-sequence current is uncertain;
a current is a capacitative current when overcompensation occurs, and the current is an inductive current when undercompensation occurs; if the action of the arc suppression coil is ignored, a formula is simplified as:
∆
u
0
c
=
1
/
(
C
0
n
-
C
0
∑
.
i
0
n
=
k
n
.
i
0
n
wherein Δu0c represents the bus zero-sequence differential voltage, C0n represents an equivalent capacitance of the faulty line to ground, C0Σ represents a total capacitance of the resonant system to ground, i0n represents the faulty line zero-sequence current, and kn represents a linear relationship between the bus zero-sequence differential voltage and the faulty line zero-sequence current;
a synchronous Lissajous curve is obtained in combination with mathematical relationships and a characteristic frequency band selection, comprising:
under an action of a power frequency, a relationship between an inductance of the arc suppression coil and the total capacitance of the resonant system to ground is as follows:
w
0
L
p
=
1
/
(
1
-
v
)
w
0
C
0
∑
wherein w0 represents an angular frequency of the power frequency, Lp represents a zero-sequence inductance of the arc suppression coil, C0Σ represents the total capacitance of the resonant system to ground, and v represents a detuning degree of the resonant system, usually between −0.1 and 0.1;
the sum of currents of other healthy lines: i0C0n-i0C0Σ; a current of the arc suppression coil: i0Lp; an amplitude ratio of any two current components at any non-power frequency is obtained as follows:
I
0
f
C
0
n
-
I
o
f
C
Σ
=
U
0
f
c
.
j
w
f
(
C
0
n
-
C
0
∑
)
I
0
L
p
=
U
0
f
c
f
W
f
L
p
I
0
f
C
0
n
-
I
o
f
C
0
∑
I
0
L
p
=
w
f
2
C
0
∑
-
C
0
n
L
0
=
w
f
2
C
0
Σ
-
C
0
n
(
1
-
v
)
w
0
C
0
∑
the characteristic frequency band selection and faulty section threshold value design are performed based on a formula described above, comprising:
when the equivalent capacitance of the faulty line to ground is ignored as compared to the total capacitance of the resonant system to ground, a current ratio is about kw=(wf/w0)2/(1−v), wherein kw, decreases with a decrease of v; when v=−0.1, if wf is at least three times the angular frequency, kw has a minimum value, and an effect of the arc suppression coil on a current of the faulty line is approximately ignored; therefore, a lower limit of a characteristic frequency band is selected to be 150 Hz, and meanwhile, main harmonic components in the high-impedance fault are 3, 5, and 7 odd harmonics, and 350 Hz is selected as an upper limit of the characteristic frequency band;
an experiment is performed on an effect of different faulty line lengths on the synchronous Lissajous curve based on the characteristic frequency band, with analysis results as follows:
Cn represents the proportion of the faulty line, and when Cn varies in a range of 0-0.4, an inductive current component brought by the arc suppression coil is ignored, and the synchronous Lissajous curve is approximately a straight line with a negative slope; when Cn varies in a range of 0.4-0.6, the synchronous Lissajous curve shows a nonlinear distortion, but still has a negative overall slope; when Cn varies in a range of 0.6-1.0, the synchronous Lissajous curve has an increased degree of nonlinearity, and approximately becomes a straight line with a positive slope after Cn is greater than 0.8, and loses characteristics of the faulty line.
The claim limitations in the abstract idea have been highlighted in bold above; the remaining limitations are “additional elements.”
Step 1: under the Step 1 of the eligibility analysis, we determine whether the claims are to a statutory category by considering whether the claimed subject matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35 U.S.C. 101: Process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. The above claim is considered to be in a statutory category (Process).
Step 2A, Prong One: under the Step 2A, Prong One, we consider whether the claim recites a judicial exception (abstract idea). In the above claim, the highlighted portion constitutes an abstract idea because, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, it recites limitations that fall into/recite an abstract idea exceptions. Specifically, under the 2019 Revised Patent Subject matter Eligibility Guidance, it falls into the groupings of subject matter when recited as such in a claim limitation that falls into the grouping of subject matter when recited as such in a claim limitation, that covers mathematical concepts - mathematical relationships, mathematical formulas or equations, mathematical calculations and mental processes – concepts performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgement, and/or opinion.
For example, the additional element of “constructing a first Lissajous curve in a characteristic frequency band range based on the bus zero-sequence differential voltage and the feeder zero-sequence current of the faulty line; when a proportion of the faulty line is less than a set threshold value and a slope of the first Lissajous curve is negative, determining that a high-impedance fault has occurred in the faulty line; when the proportion of the faulty line is greater than the set threshold value, dividing a topological line of a power distribution network into sections, and synchronously acquiring a section zero-sequence current of each of the sections; constructing a second Lissajous curve based on the bus zero-sequence differential voltage and the section zero-sequence current of each of the sections, and performing a linear fitting on discrete data points of the second Lissajous curve to obtain a fitted curve; and when a slope of the fitted curve is negative for at least three consecutive periods, determining that the high-impedance fault has occurred in the section; wherein in a resonant system, due to an action of an arc suppression coil, a direction of a faulty line zero-sequence current is uncertain; a current is a capacitative current when overcompensation occurs, and the current is an inductive current when undercompensation occurs; if the action of the arc suppression coil is ignored, a formula is simplified as:
∆
u
0
c
=
1
/
(
C
0
n
-
C
0
∑
.
i
0
n
=
k
n
.
i
0
n
wherein Δu0c represents the bus zero-sequence differential voltage, C0n represents an equivalent capacitance of the faulty line to ground, C0Σ represents a total capacitance of the resonant system to ground, i0n represents the faulty line zero-sequence current, and kn represents a linear relationship between the bus zero-sequence differential voltage and the faulty line zero-sequence current; a synchronous Lissajous curve is obtained in combination with mathematical relationships and a characteristic frequency band selection, comprising: under an action of a power frequency, a relationship between an inductance of the arc suppression coil and the total capacitance of the resonant system to ground is as follows:
w
0
L
p
=
1
/
(
1
-
v
)
w
0
C
0
∑
wherein w0 represents an angular frequency of the power frequency, Lp represents a zero-sequence inductance of the arc suppression coil, C0Σ represents the total capacitance of the resonant system to ground, and v represents a detuning degree of the resonant system, usually between −0.1 and 0.1; the sum of currents of other healthy lines: i0C0n-i0C0Σ; a current of the arc suppression coil: i0Lp; an amplitude ratio of any two current components at any non-power frequency is obtained as follows:
I
0
f
C
0
n
-
I
o
f
C
Σ
=
U
0
f
c
.
j
w
f
(
C
0
n
-
C
0
∑
)
I
0
L
p
=
U
0
f
c
f
W
f
L
p
I
0
f
C
0
n
-
I
o
f
C
0
∑
I
0
L
p
=
w
f
2
C
0
∑
-
C
0
n
L
0
=
w
f
2
C
0
Σ
-
C
0
n
(
1
-
v
)
w
0
C
0
∑
the characteristic frequency band selection and faulty section threshold value design are performed based on a formula described above, comprising: when the equivalent capacitance of the faulty line to ground is ignored as compared to the total capacitance of the resonant system to ground, a current ratio is about kw=(wf/w0)2/(1−v), wherein kw, decreases with a decrease of v; when v=−0.1, if wf is at least three times the angular frequency, kw has a minimum value, and an effect of the arc suppression coil on a current of the faulty line is approximately ignored; therefore, a lower limit of a characteristic frequency band is selected to be 150 Hz, and meanwhile, main harmonic components in the high-impedance fault are 3, 5, and 7 odd harmonics, and 350 Hz is selected as an upper limit of the characteristic frequency band; an experiment is performed on an effect of different faulty line lengths on the synchronous Lissajous curve based on the characteristic frequency band, with analysis results as follows: Cn represents the proportion of the faulty line, and when Cn varies in a range of 0-0.4, an inductive current component brought by the arc suppression coil is ignored, and the synchronous Lissajous curve is approximately a straight line with a negative slope; when Cn varies in a range of 0.4-0.6, the synchronous Lissajous curve shows a nonlinear distortion, but still has a negative overall slope; when Cn varies in a range of 0.6-1.0, the synchronous Lissajous curve has an increased degree of nonlinearity, and approximately becomes a straight line with a positive slope after Cn is greater than 0.8, and loses characteristics of the faulty line” are mathematical calculations. Constructing a first and second Lissajous curves are indicative of mathematical calculations (see and Figs. 1-6 and paras. [0013]-[0048], [00124]-[0131]). The limitation of bus zero-sequence differential voltage and the feeder zero-sequence current of the faulty line merely describes or defines the data that is performed by the abstract idea, which is mathematical calculations (i.e. constructing the first and second Lissajous curves). If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers mathematical calculations, then it falls within “Mathematical concepts” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Similar limitations comprise the abstract ideas of Claim 7.
Step 2A, Prong Two: under the Step 2A, Prong Two, we consider whether the claim that recites a judicial exception is integrated into a practical application. In this step, we evaluate whether the claim recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Therefore, none of the additional elements indicate a practical application.
Therefore, the claims are directed to a judicial exception and require further analysis under the Step 2B.
Step 2B:
The above claims comprise the following additional elements:
In Claim 1: a high-impedance fault positioning method based on synchronous Lissajous curve characteristics (preamble); acquiring a bus zero-sequence differential voltage and a feeder zero-sequence current of a faulty line;
In Claim 7: a high-impedance fault positioning system based on synchronous Lissajous curve characteristics, used for realizing the high-impedance fault positioning method based on the synchronous Lissajous curve characteristics according to claim 1 (preamble); acquire the bus zero-sequence differential voltage and the feeder zero-sequence current of the faulty line;
The additional elements such as a high-impedance fault positioning system, a data acquisition module, a first Lissajous curve construction module, a first fault positioning module, a section dividing module, a second Lissajous curve construction module, and a second fault positioning module are recited at a high-level of generality without descriptions of its specific structure/features to perform the claimed features for producing the mathematical or mental processes addressed above (MPEP 2106.05(d)). Further, the additional element of “a high-impedance fault positioning method based on synchronous Lissajous curve characteristics” and “a high-impedance fault positioning system based on synchronous Lissajous curve characteristics, used for realizing the high-impedance fault positioning method based on the synchronous Lissajous curve characteristics according to claim 1” are preamble statements reciting purpose or intended use (See MPEP 2111.02)(II)). Further, note that steps of “acquiring a bus zero-sequence differential voltage and a feeder zero-sequence current of a faulty line” are insignificant (gathering data) extra-solution activity to perform abstract idea that is mathematical calculations (i.e. constructing a fist and second Lissajous curves) (MPEP 2106.05(g)). Therefore, independent claims 1 and 7 are not patent eligible.
Claim 1 does not present tangible or physical elements/components and/or integration of improvements to be indicative of specific features/structure/acts, for example, how and or with what to construct a fist and second Lissajous curves for a high-impedance fault positioning. Further, an abstract idea itself is just that, abstract, and whether such feature is or is not significant does not preclude it from being considered abstract. An abstract idea by itself, whether it or not it has a benefit, does not reasonably overcome a 101 rejection because it is still an abstract idea. Therefore, the above advantages relate to abstract idea limitations which are not considered. The Improvements in the abstract idea are not qualified as improvements indicating a practical application. The pending claims are not patent eligible since a claim for a new abstract idea is still an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(a).I) and an improvement in the abstract idea itself is not an improvement in technology (see MPEP 2106.05(a).II and MPEP 2106.05(a).II: Examples that the courts have indicated may not be sufficient to show an improvement to technology include: iii. Gathering and analyzing information using conventional techniques and displaying the result, TLI Communications, 823 F.3d at 612-13, 118 USPQ2d at 1747-48)). This is just a processor running mathematics. Similar limitations comprise the abstract ideas of Claim 7. Therefore, the independent claims 1 and 7 are ineligible.
Regarding claims 2-6 and 8-12,
All features recited in these claims are abstract ideas, as all features found in these claims are directed towards mathematical relationship/calculation steps (Claims 2-6 and 9-12) and represent insignificant extra-solution activity (Claim 8). The explanation for the rejection of Claims 1 and 7 therefore are incorporated herein and applied to Claims 2-6 and 8-12. These claims therefore stand rejected for similar reasons as explained in above Claims 1 and 7.
No prior art is being applied to Claims 1-12 because the prior art does not disclose or make obvious “constructing a first Lissajous curve in a characteristic frequency band range based on the bus zero-sequence differential voltage and the feeder zero-sequence current of the faulty line; when a proportion of the faulty line is less than a set threshold value and a slope of the first Lissajous curve is negative, determining that a high-impedance fault has occurred in the faulty line; when the proportion of the faulty line is greater than the set threshold value, dividing a topological line of a power distribution network into sections, and synchronously acquiring a section zero-sequence current of each of the sections; constructing a second Lissajous curve based on the bus zero-sequence differential voltage and the section zero-sequence current of each of the sections, and performing a linear fitting on discrete data points of the second Lissajous curve to obtain a fitted curve; and when a slope of the fitted curve is negative for at least three consecutive periods, determining that the high-impedance fault has occurred in the section; wherein in a resonant system, due to an action of an arc suppression coil, a direction of a faulty line zero-sequence current is uncertain; a current is a capacitative current when overcompensation occurs, and the current is an inductive current when undercompensation occurs; if the action of the arc suppression coil is ignored, a formula is simplified as:
∆
u
0
c
=
1
/
(
C
0
n
-
C
0
∑
.
i
0
n
=
k
n
.
i
0
n
wherein Δu0c represents the bus zero-sequence differential voltage, C0n represents an equivalent capacitance of the faulty line to ground, C0Σ represents a total capacitance of the resonant system to ground, i0n represents the faulty line zero-sequence current, and kn represents a linear relationship between the bus zero-sequence differential voltage and the faulty line zero-sequence current; a synchronous Lissajous curve is obtained in combination with mathematical relationships and a characteristic frequency band selection, comprising: under an action of a power frequency, a relationship between an inductance of the arc suppression coil and the total capacitance of the resonant system to ground is as follows:
w
0
L
p
=
1
/
(
1
-
v
)
w
0
C
0
∑
wherein w0 represents an angular frequency of the power frequency, Lp represents a zero-sequence inductance of the arc suppression coil, C0Σ represents the total capacitance of the resonant system to ground, and v represents a detuning degree of the resonant system, usually between −0.1 and 0.1; the sum of currents of other healthy lines: i0C0n-i0C0Σ; a current of the arc suppression coil: i0Lp; an amplitude ratio of any two current components at any non-power frequency is obtained as follows:
I
0
f
C
0
n
-
I
o
f
C
Σ
=
U
0
f
c
.
j
w
f
(
C
0
n
-
C
0
∑
)
I
0
L
p
=
U
0
f
c
f
W
f
L
p
I
0
f
C
0
n
-
I
o
f
C
0
∑
I
0
L
p
=
w
f
2
C
0
∑
-
C
0
n
L
0
=
w
f
2
C
0
Σ
-
C
0
n
(
1
-
v
)
w
0
C
0
∑
the characteristic frequency band selection and faulty section threshold value design are performed based on a formula described above, comprising: when the equivalent capacitance of the faulty line to ground is ignored as compared to the total capacitance of the resonant system to ground, a current ratio is about kw=(wf/w0)2/(1−v), wherein kw, decreases with a decrease of v; when v=−0.1, if wf is at least three times the angular frequency, kw has a minimum value, and an effect of the arc suppression coil on a current of the faulty line is approximately ignored; therefore, a lower limit of a characteristic frequency band is selected to be 150 Hz, and meanwhile, main harmonic components in the high-impedance fault are 3, 5, and 7 odd harmonics, and 350 Hz is selected as an upper limit of the characteristic frequency band; an experiment is performed on an effect of different faulty line lengths on the synchronous Lissajous curve based on the characteristic frequency band, with analysis results as follows: Cn represents the proportion of the faulty line, and when Cn varies in a range of 0-0.4, an inductive current component brought by the arc suppression coil is ignored, and the synchronous Lissajous curve is approximately a straight line with a negative slope; when Cn varies in a range of 0.4-0.6, the synchronous Lissajous curve shows a nonlinear distortion, but still has a negative overall slope; when Cn varies in a range of 0.6-1.0, the synchronous Lissajous curve has an increased degree of nonlinearity, and approximately becomes a straight line with a positive slope after Cn is greater than 0.8, and loses characteristics of the faulty line,” as currently claimed, in the combination, and as best understood.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANGKYUNG LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-3669. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, LEE RODAK can be reached at 571-270-5628. 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.
/SANGKYUNG LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/LEE E RODAK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights