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 .
This office action is in response to communications filed on 03/28/2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending and rejected
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDSs) submitted on 10/03/2024, 12/10/2024 and 03/06/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 15, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Gupta et al (US 20180255515 A1) (hereinafter “Gupta”).
Regarding claim 1, Gupta discloses a user equipment (UE) (see Fig. 3, para. [0005];[0036] discloses UE), comprising:
a transceiver configured to wirelessly communicate with a base station using a first frequency and a first bandwidth (see Fig. 3 (308), para. [0036];[0090] discloses UE includes circuitry, baseband, RF circuitry , with front-end module and one or more antennas (310); second receiver comprising a front-end module (FEM). Separated from low power wake up receiver (LP-WUR), FEM with second receiver to monitor a PDCCH and circuitry to transmit data to eNB);
a low-power receiver configured to wirelessly communicate with the base station using a second frequency and a second bandwidth (see Fig. 3 (350), para. [0058];[0090] discloses LP-WUR (350) is low power radio separated FEM, monitors wake up signal; LP-WUR in the UE monitoring downlink a channel for wake up signal from eNodeB, the wake up signal to comprise a narrow band signal),
wherein the second frequency is different from the first frequency (see Fig. 7A,7B ((PDCCH) and wake up signal 710), para. [0077]-[0078] discloses Wake up configuration using limited amount of PRBs, narrow frequency channel), and
wherein the second bandwidth is smaller than the first bandwidth ((see Fig. 7A, 7B ((PDCCH) and wake up signal 710), para. [0077]-[0078] discloses Wake up configuration using limited amount of PRBs, narrow frequency channel); and
a processor communicatively coupled to the transceiver and the low-power receiver (see para. [0038] discloses one or more processors (CPU, 304) may handle various functions via RF circuitry 306), and configured to:
receive, using the low-power receiver, a low-power wake-up signal (LP-WUS) (see Fig. 3 (350), para. [0036] ;[0056];[0070] discloses LP-WUR; the LP-WUR detects the wake up signal; eNB is aware that UE includes LP_WUR and executes the transmission of low power wake up signal) and ;
determine whether the LP-WUS comprises a downlink (DL) control channel monitoring indicator (see para. [0075]-[0076] discloses LP-WUR wake up signal configuration including PCFICH, Physical Control Format Indicator Channel, Physical HARQ Indication channel (PHICH), a PDSCH and a PDCCH.); and
in response to the LP-WUS comprising the DL control channel monitoring indicator (see para. [0090] discloses exit power saving mode (PSM) for the FEM to monitor PDCCH in response to the LP-WUR receiving low power wake up signal),
trigger the transceiver to transition to an awake state to monitor a DL control channel (see para. [0090] discloses exit power saving mode (PSM) for the FEM to monitor PDCCH in response to the LP-WUR receiving low power wake up signal).
Regarding claim 15, Gupta discloses a method performed by a user equipment (UE) (see para [0083] discloses machine able to perform one or more of the methodologies), the method comprising:
receiving, using a low-power receiver of the UE, a low-power wake-up signal (LP-WUS) from a base station (see Fig. 3 (350), para. [0058];[0090] discloses LP-WUR (350) is low power radio separated FEM, monitors wake up signal; LP-WUR in the UE monitoring downlink a channel for wake up signal from eNodeB, the wake up signal to comprise a narrow band signal),
wherein the low-power receiver is configured to wirelessly communicate with the base station using a first frequency and a first bandwidth (see Fig. 3 (308), para. [0036];[0090] discloses UE includes circuitry, baseband, RF circuitry , with front-end module and one or more antennas (310); second receiver comprising a front-end module (FEM). Separated from low power wake up receiver (LP-WUR), FEM with second receiver to monitor a PDCCH and circuitry to transmit data to eNB),
wherein the first frequency is different from a second frequency associated with a transceiver of the UE, and wherein the first bandwidth is smaller than a second bandwidth associated with the transceiver of the UE (see Fig. 7A,7B ((PDCCH) and wake up signal 710), para. [0077]-[0078] discloses Wake up configuration using limited amount of PRBs, narrow frequency channel);
determining whether the LP-WUS comprises a downlink (DL) control channel monitoring indicator (see para. [0075]-[0076] discloses LP-WUR wake up signal configuration including PCFICH, Physical Control Format Indicator Channel, Physical HARQ Indication channel (PHICH), a PDSCH and a PDCCH.); and in response to the LP-WUS comprising the DL control channel monitoring indicator (see para. [0090] discloses exit power saving mode (PSM) for the FEM to monitor PDCCH in response to the LP-WUR receiving low power wake up signal),
triggering the transceiver to transition to an awake state to monitor a DL control channel (see para. [0090] discloses exit power saving mode (PSM) for the FEM to monitor PDCCH in response to the LP-WUR receiving low power wake up signal).
Regarding claim 20, Gupta discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that when executed by a processor of a user equipment (UE) (see Fig. 9 (storage device), para. [0082]-[0086] discloses embodiments implemented as instructions stored on a computer readable storage device which can read and execute the operation) cause the UE to perform operations comprising:
receiving, using a low-power receiver of the UE, a low-power wake-up signal (LP-WUS) from a base station, wherein the low-power receiver is configured to wirelessly communicate with the base station using a first frequency and a first bandwidth (see Fig. 3 (308), para. [0036];[0090] discloses UE includes circuitry, baseband, RF circuitry , with front-end module and one or more antennas (310); second receiver comprising a front-end module (FEM). Separated from low power wake up receiver (LP-WUR), FEM with second receiver to monitor a PDCCH and circuitry to transmit data to eNB),
wherein the first frequency is different from a second frequency associated with a transceiver of the UE, and wherein the first bandwidth is smaller than a second bandwidth associated with the transceiver of the UE (see Fig. 7A,7B ((PDCCH) and wake up signal 710), para. [0077]-[0078] discloses Wake up configuration using limited amount of PRBs, narrow frequency channel);
determining whether the LP-WUS comprises a downlink (DL) control channel monitoring indicator (see Fig. 7A,7B ((PDCCH) and wake up signal 710), para. [0077]-[0078] discloses Wake up configuration using limited amount of PRBs, narrow frequency channel); and
in response to the LP-WUS comprising the DL control channel monitoring indicator (see para. [0090] discloses exit power saving mode (PSM) for the FEM to monitor PDCCH in response to the LP-WUR receiving low power wake up signal), triggering the transceiver to transition to an awake state to monitor a DL control channel (see para. [0090] discloses exit power saving mode (PSM) for the FEM to monitor PDCCH in response to the LP-WUR receiving low power wake up signal).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta et al (US 20180255515 A1) (hereinafter “Gupta”) in view of Elshafie et al (US 20240284329 A1) (hereinafter “Elshafie”).
Regarding claim 2, Gupta discloses a UE (see Fig. 3, para. [0005];[0036] discloses UE).
Gupta fails to disclose but Bar discloses wherein the second frequency is in a licensed band (see para. [0091] discloses the wireless communication system may utilize licensed RF spectrum bands, per example License Assisted Access, LAA).
Gupta and Elshafie are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods, apparatus and LP-WUS.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gupta to include unlicensed band as described by Elshafie.
The motivation to combine both references would come from improved WUS monitoring.
Claims 3, 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta et al (US 20180255515 A1) (hereinafter “Gupta”) in view of Park et al (US 20210168720 A1) (hereinafter ‘Park”).
Regarding claim 3, Gupta discloses a UE (see Fig. 3, para. [0005];[0036] discloses UE).
Gupta fails to disclose but Park wherein the second frequency is in an unlicensed band (see Fig.3, Fig. 4 para. [0015] discloses wake up radio signal using narrow frequency band between ISM band (unlicensed band) and guard band in the ISM band).
Gupta and Park are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods, apparatus and LP-WUS.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gupta to include unlicensed band as described by Park.
The motivation to combine both references would come from improved WUS monitoring.
Regarding claim 4, Gupta discloses a UE (see Fig. 3, para. [0005];[0036] discloses UE).
Gupta fails to disclose but Park teaches wherein the second frequency is in a guard band associated with the first frequency and the first bandwidth (see Fig. 3 (Guard band and Narrow frequency band for wake-up signal).
Gupta and Park are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods, apparatus and LP-WUS.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gupta to include guard band as described by Park.
The motivation to combine both references would come from improved WUS monitoring.
Claims 5, 6, 7, 16, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta et al (US 20180255515 A1) (hereinafter “Gupta”) in view of Sun et al (US 20240155499 A1) (hereinafter “Sun”).
Regarding claim 5, Gupta discloses a UE (see Fig. 3, para. [0005];[0036] discloses UE).
wherein the processor is further configured to receive, using the low-power receiver (see Fig. 3 (350), para. [0058];[0090] discloses LP-WUR (350) is low power radio separated FEM, monitors wake up signal; LP-WUR in the UE monitoring downlink a channel for wake up signal from eNodeB, the wake up signal to comprise a narrow band signal).
Gupta fails to disclose but Sun teaches a second LP-WUS, wherein the second LP-WUS is associated with a third frequency different from the first frequency and the second frequency (see para. [0005] discloses second signal processing circuit performs monitoring of the third frequency that is different from the first and second frequency).
Gupta and Sun are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods, apparatus and LP-WUS.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gupta to include the third frequency as described by Sun.
The motivation to combine both references would come from improved WUS monitoring.
Regarding claim 6, Gupta discloses a UE (see Fig. 3, para. [0005];[0036] discloses UE).
Gupta fails to disclose but Sun teaches wherein a time domain gap exists between the LP-WUS and the second LP-WUS (see Fig. 11 (t1, tn+1, t2, tn+2)) para. [0140] discloses the transmitter using frequency 1 to transmit at Moment t1, Moment tn+1, used by for wake up signal, and frequency 2 on Moment t2 and Moment tn+2).
Gupta and Sun are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods, apparatus and LP-WUS.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gupta to include the gap as described by Sun.
The motivation to combine both references would come from improved WUS monitoring.
Regarding claim 7, Gupta discloses a UE (see Fig. 3, para. [0005];[0036] discloses UE).
Gupta fails to disclose but Sun discloses wherein a duration of the time domain gap is set by the base station (see para. [0017];[0140] discloses the wakeup signal is transmitted by a first electronic device at a plurality of transmit frequencies; the transmitter using frequency 1 to transmit at Moment t1, Moment tn+1, used by for wake up signal, and frequency 2 on Moment t2 and Moment tn+2) or is reported by the UE to the base station (This part is optional).
Gupta and Sun are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods, apparatus and LP-WUS.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gupta to include the gap as described by Sun.
The motivation to combine both references would come from improved WUS monitoring.
Regarding claim 16, Gupta discloses a method (see para [0083] discloses machine able to perform one or more of the methodologies), further comprising receiving, using the low-power receiver (see Fig. 3 (350), para. [0058];[0090] discloses LP-WUR (350) is low power radio separated FEM, monitors wake up signal; LP-WUR in the UE monitoring downlink a channel for wake up signal from eNodeB, the wake up signal to comprise a narrow band signal).
Gupta fails to disclose but Sun teaches a second LP-WUS, wherein the second LP-WUS is associated with a third frequency different from the first frequency and the second frequency (see para. [0005] discloses second signal processing circuit performs monitoring of the third frequency that is different from the first and second frequency).
Gupta and Sun are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods, apparatus and LP-WUS.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gupta to include the third frequency as described by Sun.
The motivation to combine both references would come from improved WUS monitoring.
Regarding claim 17, Gupta discloses a method (see para [0083] discloses machine able to perform one or more of the methodologies).
Gupta fails to disclose but Sun teaches wherein a time domain gap exists between the LP-WUS and the second LP-WUS and wherein a duration of the time domain gap is set by the base station or is reported by the UE to the base station (see Fig. 11 (t1, tn+1, t2, tn+2)) para. [0140] discloses the transmitter using frequency 1 to transmit at Moment t1, Moment tn+1, used by for wake-up signal, and frequency 2 on Moment t2 and Moment tn+2).
Gupta and Sun are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods, apparatus and WUS.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gupta to include the gap as described by Sun.
The motivation to combine both references would come from improved WUS monitoring.
Claims 8, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta et al (US 20180255515 A1) (hereinafter “Gupta”) in view of Wei et al (US 20260006552 A1) (hereinafter “Wei”).
Regarding claim 8, Gupta discloses a UE (see Fig. 3, para. [0005];[0036] discloses UE).
Gupta fails to disclose but Wei teaches wherein the processor is further configured to: perform RRM measurement based on the LP-WUS (see para. [0088] disclose LP monitoring configuration includes RRM measurement associated with LP-WUS).
Gupta and Wei are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods, apparatus and LP-WUS.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gupta to include the RRM measurement as described by Wei.
The motivation to combine both references would come from improved WUS monitoring.
Regarding claim 18, Gupta discloses a method (see para [0083] discloses machine able to perform one or more of the methodologies).
Gupta fails to disclose but Wei teaches further comprising: performing RRM measurement based on the LP-WUS (see para. [0088] disclose LP monitoring configuration includes RRM measurement associated with LP-WUS).
Gupta and Wei are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods, apparatus and LP-WUS.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gupta to include the RRM measurement as described by Wei.
The motivation to combine both references would come from improved WUS monitoring.
Claims 9-12, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta et al (US 20180255515 A1) (hereinafter “Gupta”) in view of Paris et al (US 20240284330 A1) (hereinafter “Paris”).
Regarding claim 9, Gupta discloses a UE of (see Fig. 3, para. [0005];[0036] discloses UE)
Gupta fails to disclose but Paris teaches wherein the processor is further configured to: transmit, using the transceiver, a message to the base station indicating a desired transmission power boost for the LP-WUS (see para. [0087] discloses network node detects the absence of WUS-ACK the network node may increase the transmission power; the power boost may be performed before the step transmitting the WUS); and
receive, using the low-power receiver, a second LP-WUS from the base station, the second LP-WUS having an increased transmission power relative to that of the LP-WUS and based on the desired transmission power boost for the LP-WUS (see Fig. 8 (ramp-up ), para. [0087] discloses incremental power retransmissions until the maximum transmission power is reached).
Gupta and Paris are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods, apparatus and LP-WUS.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gupta to include the power boost as described by Paris.
The motivation to combine both references would come from improved WUS monitoring.
Regarding claim 10, Gupta discloses a UE (see Fig. 3, para. [0005];[0036] discloses UE)
Gupta fails to disclose but Paris teaches wherein the desired transmission power boost comprises: an absolute transmission power value (This part is optional), an absolute transmission power offset value (This part is optional), an absolute transmission power adjustment (This part is optional), or an accumulative transmission power adjustment (see para. [0087] discloses power increase can be performed incrementally until maximum power).
Gupta and Paris are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods, apparatus and LP-WUS.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gupta to include the power boost as described by Paris.
The motivation to combine both references would come from improved WUS monitoring.
Regarding claim 11, Gupta discloses a UE (see Fig. 3, para. [0005];[0036] discloses UE).
Gupta fails to disclose but Paris teaches wherein the processor is further configured to receive an uplink (UL) transmission power control for a UL transmission from the UE to the base station, wherein the UL transmission power control indicates a transmission power boost (see para. [0087] discloses transmission power can also be decreased after a certain number of LP-WUS signals are correctly received by the UE, N>0).
Gupta and Paris are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods, apparatus and LP-WUS.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gupta to include the power control as described by Paris.
The motivation to combine both references would come from improved WUS monitoring.
Regarding claim 12, Gupta discloses a UE (see Fig. 3, para. [0005];[0036] discloses UE).
Gupta fails to disclose but Paris teaches wherein the UL transmission power control comprises a loss parameter associated with the transmission power boost (see para. [0087] discloses after cerin number of losses M>0 losses of LP-WUS the mechanism (power control) is deactivated by the network).
Gupta and Paris are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods, apparatus and LP-WUS.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gupta to include the power control as described by Paris.
The motivation to combine both references would come from improved WUS monitoring.
Regarding claim 19, Gupta discloses a method (see para [0083] discloses machine able to perform one or more of the methodologies).
Gupta fails to disclose but Paris teaches further comprising: transmitting, using the transceiver, a message to the base station indicating a desired transmission power boost for the LP-WUS (see para. [0087] discloses network node detects the absence of WUS-ACK the network node may increase the transmission power; the power boost may be performed before the step transmitting the WUS); and
receiving, using the low-power receiver, a second LP-WUS from the base station, the second LP-WUS having an increased transmission power relative to that of the LP-WUS and based on the desired transmission power boost for the LP-WUS (see Fig. 8 (ramp-up), para. [0087] discloses incremental power retransmissions until the maximum transmission power is reached).
Gupta and Paris are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods, apparatus and LP-WUS.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gupta to include the power boost as described by Paris.
The motivation to combine both references would come from improved WUS monitoring.
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gupta et al (US 20180255515 A1) (hereinafter “Gupta”) in view of Ganesan et al (US 20230328841 A1) (hereinafter “Ganesan”).
Regarding claim 13, Gupta discloses a UE (see Fig. 3, para. [0005];[0036] discloses UE).
Gupta fails to disclose but Ganesan discloses wherein the processor is configured to receive the LP-WUS using a plurality of spatial domain filters over a frequency domain resource (see para. [0005] ;[0037] discloses apparatus includes a processor that configures a spatial filter relation between wake-up signal and reference signal; remote unit (UE) receive wake up signal with information of spatial filter) or over a time domain resource (This part is optional).
Gupta and Ganesan are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods, apparatus.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gupta to include the spatial filter as described by Ganesan.
The motivation to combine both references would come from improved WUS monitoring.
Regarding claim 14, Gupta discloses a UE (see Fig. 3, para. [0005];[0036] discloses UE).
Gupta fails to disclose but Ganesan discloses wherein the plurality of spatial domain filters are explicitly configured by the base station or the plurality of spatial domain filters are implicitly configured by the base station (see Fig. 5, para. [0038] discloses network unit transmits a wake-up signal, and sounding reference signal using a transmit spatial filter. The network unit may transmit a control signal using a corresponding receive spatial filter).
Gupta and Ganesan are considered analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of wireless communication methods, apparatus.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Gupta to include the spatial filter as described by Ganesan.
The motivation to combine both references would come from improved WUS monitoring.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Elshafie et al (US 20240224184 A1) discloses “Wake-UP signal for non-data services”.
Priyanto et al (US 20230189139 A1) discloses “Wake-Up signals and adaptive numerology”.
Hosseinian et al (US 20230337135 A1) discloses “Method and Apparatus for Low Power Wake-UP Signal Waveform Design and Multiplexing with New Radio Waveform”.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUIS GUILLERMO LEMA LEMOS whose telephone number is (571)-272-5710. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
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, Nishant Divecha, can be reached at 571-270-3125. 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.
/LUIS GUILLERMO LEMA LEMOS/Examiner, Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419