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 .
Status of Claims
This is in response to Applicant’s case, no. 18/614,247, with an effective filing date of 3/22/2024. Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Response to Amendments
In response to Applicant’s amendments dated June 23, 2026, Examiner withdraws the previous specification objections; withdraws the previous claim objections; withdraws the previous rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b); and maintains the previous prior art rejections.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, filed June 23, 2026, have been fully considered but they
are not persuasive.
Regarding the 35 USC § 102 rejection of claims 1-5, 10-15, and 20 as being anticipated by Vilar et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 2021/0316713 A1) [hereinafter referred to as Vilar], Applicant argues (see pp.11-13) that Vilar allegedly does not disclose the limitation determining, from at least the position and the predicted position, the operational mode for the agricultural machine. However, Vilar discloses in [0011] operating modes corresponding to each remaining mission of the one or more missions to be performed may comprise at least one of a travel mode, a work mode, and an idle mode. The applicant argues that because the system determines the travel time of the vehicle, that the operation mode is not therefore tied to the position and the predicted position of said vehicle. However, this rationale is flawed as the system accounts for a current location of the work vehicle to respective locations of one or more other missions to be performed in a work mode (e.g., a travel mode from a current location to a worksite and a work mode at the predicted location of a worksite). Further, Vilar discloses in [0035] s.1, receive location data corresponding to the current geolocation of the work vehicle and one or more destination locations of the work vehicle including for example at least a final destination with a charging station, and/or route information there between which is construed as a predicted position of the work vehicle, and is further interpreted to determine an operational mode between a predicted position and current position. Furthermore, Applicant argues that what Vilar discloses in [0056] does not sufficiently alter the alleged flaw pointed out in [0011] as discussed above. However, Vilar discloses that the system will optimize a sequence of operating modes (i.e., at least one of a travel mode, a work mode, and an idle mode) associated with a specified mission at a work site and the controller may be configured to optimize operating parameters for the work vehicle, (e.g., by setting maximums to one or more operating parameters or by determining and applying a functional relationship between a variable which is characteristic of the specified mission (e.g., corresponding to work site conditions, load severity, or the like) and of one or more operating parameters of the work vehicle), where in either of these embodiments, the controller may automatically implement changes in the operating parameters of the work vehicle for optimization purposes, or the controller may generate recommended settings for operator confirmation or implementation thereof. Regardless of the energy consumption use, this is construed as further disclosing a system that may determine an operation mode based on the location and the predicted location of the agricultural machine as an already planned mission is construed as a predicted work mode for a predicted location.
Therefore, this argument is not persuasive.
Regarding claim(s) 11, Applicant argues that, while differing in scope, this/these claim(s) recite(s) similar features to claim 1 and its/their rejection(s) should likewise be withdrawn. However, this argument is unpersuasive for the same reasons as given above.
Applicant argues that the dependent claims are patentable by virtue of their dependency. This argument is unpersuasive as each independent claim has been fully rejected for the reasons as given above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 10-15, and 20 are rejected under 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vilar et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 2021/0316713 A1), hereinafter referred to as Vilar.
Regarding claim 1, Vilar discloses:
A method for determining, from a plurality of operational modes, an operational mode for an agricultural machine ([0011] sentence (s.) 1, operating mode corresponding to each remaining mission of the one or more missions to be performed may comprise at least one of a travel mode, a work mode, and an idle mode and [0056] optimize a sequence of operating modes associated with a specified mission at a work site, for the purpose of minimizing battery consumption in completing the mission, the controller may be configured to optimize operating parameters for the work vehicle, (e.g., by setting maximums to one or more operating parameters or by determining and applying a functional relationship between a variable which is characteristic of the specified mission (e.g., corresponding to work site conditions, load severity, or the like) and of one or more operating parameters of the work vehicle), where in either of these embodiments, the controller may automatically implement changes in the operating parameters of the work vehicle for optimization purposes, or the controller may generate recommended settings for operator confirmation or implementation thereof), the method comprising:
determining a position of the agricultural machine relative to at least one of a field, a boundary, a passageway, another agricultural machine, and a road ([0011] s.1, operating mode corresponding to each remaining mission of the one or more missions to be performed may comprise at least one of a travel mode, a work mode, and an idle mode; s. 2-3 linked to GPS positioning capabilities and able to obtain geolocation data for the work vehicle; and s.4 determine a travel time from a current location of the work vehicle to respective locations of one or more other missions to be performed in a work mode which is construed as relative to at least one of a field, boundary, crop material);
determining a predicted position of the agricultural machine relative to at least one of the field, the boundary, the passageway, and the road ([0035] s.1, receive location data corresponding to the current geolocation of the work vehicle and one or more destination locations of the work vehicle including for example at least a final destination with a charging station, and/or route information there between which is construed as a predicted position of the work vehicle);
determining, from at least the position and the predicted position, the operational mode for the agricultural machine ([0011] operating mode corresponding to each remaining mission of the one or more missions to be performed may comprise at least one of a travel mode, a work mode, and an idle mode where the missions define the operation mode from the position of the vehicle and the predicted position, specifically if the mission calls for the travel mode to operate to get to the final destination of the mission before engaging the work mode and [0035] s.1, receive location data corresponding to the current geolocation of the work vehicle and one or more destination locations of the work vehicle including for example at least a final destination with a charging station, and/or route information there between which is construed as a predicted position of the work vehicle, and is further interpreted to determine an operational mode between a predicted position and current position ); and
adjusting, in response to the determined operational mode, one or more settings of the agricultural machine to facilitate operating the agricultural machine in the determined operational mode ([0037 s. 4 controller may also be configured to generate control signals for controlling the operation of respective actuators, or signals for indirect control via intermediate control units, associated with a machine steering control system, a machine implement control system, and/or a machine drive control system and [0056] s.3, controller may automatically implement changes in the operating parameters of the work vehicle for optimization purposes, or the controller may generate recommended settings for operator confirmation).
Regarding claim 2, Vilar discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of operational modes comprises at least a transport mode and a field mode ([0011] sentence (s.) 1, operating mode corresponding to each remaining mission of the one or more missions to be performed may comprise at least one of a travel mode, a work mode, and an idle mode).
Regarding claim 3, Vilar discloses:
The method of claim 2, further comprising retrieving a field boundary map, and wherein the field boundary map comprises location information for at least one of the field, the boundary, the passageway, and the road, and wherein the position and the predicted position of the agricultural machine are determined relative to location information from the field boundary map ([0035] The controller as shown is further configured to receive location data corresponding to, e.g., the current geolocation of the work vehicle, one or more destination locations of the work vehicle, including for example at least a final destination with a charging station, and/or route information there between, which is interpreted as map data that comprises location information of at least one of the field and crop material).
Regarding claim 4, Vilar discloses:
The method of claim 1, further comprising:
determining, using information from a sensor, a current state of an auxiliary device of the agricultural machine ([0033] sensors may be provided to detect machine operating conditions or positioning, including for example an orientation sensor, global positioning system (GPS) sensors, vehicle speed sensors, vehicle implement positioning sensors, and the like, and whereas one or more of these sensors may be discrete in nature the sensor system may further refer to signals provided from the machine control system);
determining a predetermined state from a plurality of predetermined states for the auxiliary device that corresponds to the current state of the auxiliary device ([0056] s.2 controller may be configured to optimize operating parameters for the work vehicle which is construed as identifying a predetermined state for the auxiliary device that corresponds to the current
state of that device); and
identifying at least one operational mode from the plurality of operational modes that corresponds to the determined predetermined state ([0056] s.2 controller may be configured to optimize operating parameters for the work vehicle, such as for example by setting maximums to one or more operating parameters or by determining and applying a functional relationship between a variable which is characteristic of the specified mission (e.g., corresponding to work site conditions, load severity, or the like) and of one or more operating parameters of the work vehicle); and
wherein determining the operational mode for the agricultural machine comprises determining the operational mode is based, at least in part, on the identified at least one operational mode ([0056] as discussed above where the operation mode is determined by the identified operation mode as to be optimized by the system).
Regarding claim 5, Vilar discloses:
The method of claim 1, further comprising:
identifying a job status relating to an operation for which the agricultural machine is configured to perform ([0011] s.1, operating mode corresponding to each remaining mission of the one or more missions to be performed may comprise at least one of a travel mode, a work mode, and an idle mode),
wherein determining the operational mode for the agricultural machine is based at least in part on the identified job status ([0011] s.1, operating mode corresponding to each remaining mission of the one or more missions to be performed may comprise at least one of a travel mode, a work mode, and an idle mode and s.4 determine a travel time from a current location of the work vehicle to respective locations of one or more other missions to be performed in a work mode),
wherein the operation of the agricultural machine comprises a harvesting operation ([0001] agricultural industry machines which necessarily include those performing a harvesting operation), and wherein the job status relates to at least one of a harvested state or a non-harvested state of a crop material in the field ([0018] a workday is automatically planned for each of the plurality of work vehicles which completes each specified mission which is construed as a job status relating to a harvested or non-harvested crop material).
Regarding claim 10, Vilar discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein determining the predicted position of the agricultural machine comprises determining at least one of an identified travel path of the agricultural machine and a heading of the agricultural machine relative to the identified travel path ([0035] s.1, receive location data corresponding to the current geolocation of the work vehicle and one or more destination locations of the work vehicle including for example at least a final destination with a charging station, and/or route information there between which is construed as a predicted position of the work vehicle, which is construed as a travel mode from a current position to a final destination and the route between).
Regarding claim 11, Vilar discloses:
A system for determining, from a plurality of operational modes, an operational mode for a first agricultural machine ([0011] s.1, operating mode corresponding to each remaining mission of the one or more missions to be performed may comprise at least one of a travel mode, a work mode, and an idle mode and [0056] optimize a sequence of operating modes associated with a specified mission at a work site, for the purpose of minimizing battery consumption in completing the mission, the controller may be configured to optimize operating parameters for the work vehicle, (e.g., by setting maximums to one or more operating parameters or by determining and applying a functional relationship between a variable which is characteristic of the specified mission (e.g., corresponding to work site conditions, load severity, or the like) and of one or more operating parameters of the work vehicle), where in either of these embodiments, the controller may automatically implement changes in the operating parameters of the work vehicle for optimization purposes, or the controller may generate recommended settings for operator confirmation or implementation thereof), the system comprising:
a location system configured to identify a location of the first agricultural machine ([0011] s. 2-3 linked to GPS positioning capabilities and able to obtain geolocation data for the work vehicle);
at least one processor ([0038] controller includes or may be associated with a memory unit and a processor); and
a memory device coupled to the at least one processor ([0038] as discussed above), the memory device including instructions that when executed by the at least one processor cause one or more of the at least one processor to:
determine, using at least the location of the first agricultural machine , a position of the first agricultural machine relative to at least one of a field, a boundary, a crop material, a passageway, a second agricultural machine, and a road ([0011] s.1, operating mode corresponding to each remaining mission of the one or more missions to be performed may comprise at least one of a travel mode, a work mode, and an idle mode; s. 2-3 linked to GPS positioning capabilities and able to obtain geolocation data for the work vehicle; and s.4 determine a travel time from a current location of the work vehicle to respective locations of one or more other missions to be performed in a work mode which is construed as relative to at least one of a field, boundary, crop material);
determine a predicted position of the first agricultural machine relative to at least one of the field, the boundary, the crop material, the passageway, and the road ([0035] s.1, receive location data corresponding to the current geolocation of the work vehicle and one or more destination locations of the work vehicle including for example at least a final destination with a charging station, and/or route information there between which is construed as a predicted position of the work vehicle);
determine from at least one of the position and the predicted position the operational mode for the first agricultural machine ([0011] where the missions define the operation mode from the position of the vehicle and the predicted position, specifically if the mission calls for the travel mode to operate to get to the final destination of the mission before engaging the work mode); and
generate one or more signals, in response to the determination of the operational mode, to adjust one or more settings of the first agricultural machine to facilitate the operation of the first agricultural machine in the determined operational mode ([0037 s. 4 controller may also be configured to generate control signals for controlling the operation of respective actuators, or signals for indirect control via intermediate control units, associated with a machine steering control system, a machine implement control system, and/or a machine drive control system and [0056] s.3, controller may automatically implement changes in the operating parameters of the work vehicle for optimization purposes, or the controller may generate recommended settings for operator confirmation).
Regarding claim 12, Vilar discloses:
The system of claim 11, wherein the plurality of operational modes comprises at least a transport mode and a field mode ([0011] sentence (s.) 1, operating mode corresponding to each remaining mission of the one or more missions to be performed may comprise at least one of a travel mode, a work mode, and an idle mode).
Regarding claim 13, Vilar discloses:
The system of claim 12, wherein the memory device further includes instructions that when executed by the at least one processor cause one or more of the at least one processor to retrieve a field boundary map, and wherein the field boundary map comprises location information for at least one of the field, the boundary, the crop material, the passageway, and the road ([0035] The controller as shown is further configured to receive location data corresponding to, e.g., the current geolocation of the work vehicle, one or more destination locations of the work vehicle, including for example at least a final destination with a charging station, and/or route information there between, which is interpreted as map data that comprises location information of at least one of the field and crop material).
Regarding claim 14, Vilar discloses:
The system of claim 11, wherein the system further comprises a sensor, and wherein the memory device further includes instructions that when executed by the at least one processor cause one or more of the at least one processor to:
determine, using information from the sensor, a current state of an auxiliary device of the first agricultural machine ([0033] sensors may be provided to detect machine operating conditions or positioning, including for example an orientation sensor, global positioning system (GPS) sensors, vehicle speed sensors, vehicle implement positioning sensors, and the like, and whereas one or more of these sensors may be discrete in nature the sensor system may further refer to signals provided from the machine control system);
identify, from a plurality of predetermined states, a predetermined state for the auxiliary device that corresponds to the current state of the auxiliary device that was identified using information from the sensor ([0056] s.2 controller may be configured to optimize operating parameters for the work vehicle which is construed as identifying a predetermined state for the auxiliary device that corresponds to the current
state of that device); and
identify at least one operational mode from the plurality of operational modes that corresponds to the determined predetermined state ([0056] s.2 controller may be configured to optimize operating parameters for the work vehicle, such as for example by setting maximums to one or more operating parameters or by determining and applying a functional relationship between a variable which is characteristic of the specified mission (e.g., corresponding to work site conditions, load severity, or the like) and of one or more operating parameters of the work vehicle); and
wherein identification of the operational mode comprises the operation mode being determined based on the at least one operational mode ([0056] as discussed above where the operation mode is determined by the identified operation mode as to be optimized by the system).
Regarding claim 15, Vilar discloses:
The system of claim 11, wherein the memory device further includes instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, causes the at least one processor to identify a job status relating to an operation for which the first agricultural machine is configured to perform,
wherein the operational mode for the first agricultural machine is further determined, at least in part, on the job status (see claim 1 regarding missions), and
wherein the operation of the first agricultural machine comprises a harvesting operation ([0001] agricultural industry machines which necessarily include those performing a harvesting operation), and
wherein the job status relates to at least one of a harvested and a non-harvested state of the crop material ([0018] a workday is automatically planned for each of the plurality of work vehicles which completes each specified mission which is construed as a job status relating to a harvested or non-harvested crop material).
Regarding claim 20, Vilar discloses:
The system of claim 11, wherein the predicted position of the first agricultural machine is based, at least in part, on at least one of an identified travel path of the first agricultural machine and a heading of the first agricultural machine relative to the identified travel path ([0035] s.1, receive location data corresponding to the current geolocation of the work vehicle and one or more destination locations of the work vehicle including for example at least a final destination with a charging station, and/or route information there between which is construed as a predicted position of the work vehicle, which is construed as a travel mode from a current position to a final destination and the route between).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or non-obviousness.
Claims 6-8 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vilar et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 2021/0316713 A1), hereinafter referred to as Vilar, in view of Linsmeier et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 2024/0035254 A1), hereinafter referred to as Linsmeier.
Regarding claim 16, Vilar discloses:
The system of claim 11, wherein the system further comprises a sensor configured to obtain a captured information, wherein the memory device further includes instructions that when executed by the at least one processor cause one or more of the at least one processor to:
determine, using the captured information, a sensed location of the first agricultural machine ([0033] use of optical sensors and vehicle speed sensors to sense location),
but Vilar does not explicitly disclose:
confirm the location of the first agricultural machine based on a comparison of the sensed location of the first agricultural machine and the location identified by the location system.
However, Linsmeier teaches in [0035] s.2, the sensor array includes a GPS device, a LIDAR location device, inertial navigation, or other sensors structured to determine a position of the work machine relative to locations, maps, other equipment, objects or other reference points.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of agricultural machines and vehicle controls before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the agricultural machine operational mode determination system of Vilar, by incorporating the position sensor array teachings of Linsmeier, such that the combination would provide for the predictable result of a more robust and redundant system of determining a position of an agricultural vehicle.
Claim 6 recites a method having substantially the same features of claim 16 above, therefore claim 6 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 16.
Regarding claim 17, Vilar, as modified by Linsmeier, discloses:
The system of claim 16, wherein the sensor is an optical sensor ([0033] use of optical sensors),
wherein the captured information includes information representative of an environment in which the first agricultural machine is located ([0033] detect ambient conditions including for example obstacles in the path and/or vicinity of the work vehicle, and may include laser scanners, thermal sensors, imaging devices, structured light sensors, ultrasonic sensors, and other optical sensors and are provided and configured to optimize recognition of obstacles in a working path of the vehicle), and
wherein the memory device further includes instructions that when executed by the at least one processor cause one or more of the at least one processor to:
identify, from the captured information, at least one object from the environment ([0033] as discussed above in particular recognition of obstacles in a working path of the vehicle); and
identify, using at least the identified at least one object, the sensed location ([0035] s. 2, location data may be provided via a global positioning system (GPS) and/or from sensors/transceivers located on the work vehicle which may also be characterized as one of the sensors in the sensor system).
Claim 7 recites a method having substantially the same features of claim 17 above, therefore claim 7 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 17.
Regarding claim 18, Vilar, as modified by Linsmeier, discloses:
The system of claim 17, wherein the at least one object comprises a representation of at least one of the road, the passageway, the crop material, and the field ([0033] crop material may necessarily be seen as an obstacle such that the machine does not arbitrarily drive though the crop material).
Claim 8 recites a method having substantially the same features of claim 18 above, therefore claim 8 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 18.
____________________________________________
Claims 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vilar et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 2021/0316713 A1), hereinafter referred to as Vilar, in view of Linsmeier et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 2024/0035254 A1), hereinafter referred to as Linsmeier, and Laugen et al. (US Pat. No. 12,096,718 B1), hereinafter referred to as Laugen.
Regarding claim 19, Vilar, as modified by Linsmeier, discloses:
The system of claim 16, wherein the at least one sensor is a dynamic sensor ([0033] vehicle speed sensors which is construed as a dynamic sensor as an accelerometer would be used to sense the change in speed), and
wherein the determination of the sensed location comprises comparing the captured information to at least one predetermined threshold, the at least one predetermined threshold corresponding to one or more values anticipated to be sensed by the dynamic sensor when the first agricultural machine is on at least one of the road and the field.
However, Laugen teaches in column 9 line 56- column 10 line 19 where a road mode detector detects when agricultural harvester is in, or is changing to, a road mode in which agricultural harvester is about to travel out of a field. Further, the road mode detector receives an input indicative of the ground speed of agricultural harvester. If the ground speed of agricultural harvester exceeds a threshold level, this may indicate that agricultural harvester is in road mode and no longer located in a field.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art of agricultural machines and vehicle controls before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify the agricultural machine operational mode determination system of Vilar as modified by the position sensor array teachings of Linsmeier, by incorporating the speed based vehicle position teachings of Laugen, such that the combination would provide for the predictable result of a more robust and redundant system of determining a position of an agricultural vehicle based on speed thresholds.
Claim 9 recites a method having substantially the same features of claim 19 above, therefore claim 9 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 19.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see:
Brockhurst et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 2025/0206183 A1) is directed towards determining a location of a BEM allocated to a production circuit; determining a location of a charging station compatible with the BEM; based on the locations of the BEM and the charging station and the production circuit: determining a plurality of tasks of the BEM for executing the production circuit, predicting a corresponding duration and a corresponding energy use of each of the plurality of tasks, and determining a sequence of the plurality of tasks.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to KEITH ALLEN VON VOLKENBURG whose telephone number is (703)756-5886. The Examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 am-5:00 pm.
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, Erin D. Bishop can be reached at (571) 270-3713. 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.
/Keith A von Volkenburg/ Examiner, Art Unit 3665
/Erin D Bishop/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3665
