DETAILED ACTION
The following is a final office action in response to applicant’s remarks/arguments 7/24/2026 for
response of the office action mailed on 4/24/2026. Claims 1-21, 25, and 35 have been canceled. Claims 22, 24, 26, 28-32, 34, 36, and 38-42 have been amended. Claims 43 and 44 have been added. Claims 22-24, 26-34, and 36-44 remain pending in the application.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor
to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed on 7/24/2026 has been entered.
Response to Remarks/Arguments
Applicant’s remarks/arguments (page 7-10), filed on 7/24/2026, with respect to claim 22 have been
fully considered but are moot based on new ground of rejections to the amended claims using newly introduced references (TAKEDA et al., Kim, and 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #86bis R1-1608793) are applied in the current rejection.
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 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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that
are applied 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.
Claims 22, 31-32, 41-42, and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TAKEDA et al. (US 2023/0085896 Al, hereinafter “Takeda”) in view of 3GPP TSG RAN WG1 #86bis, R1-1608793 (Lisbon, Portugal 10th N 14th October 2016, Source: CATT, Title: Principle of DL DCI formats design, hereinafter “3GPP”).
Regarding claim 22, Takeda discloses:
A method performed by an apparatus, the method comprising (a method of wireless communication includes receiving, by a user equipment (UE), Takeda: [0007]):
receiving downlink control information (DCI) from a radio access network (RAN) (receiving, by a UE from a BS, a PDCCH that includes a DCI, Takeda: [0117]),
the DCI schedules both first time-frequency resources for the first traffic for the apparatus and second time-frequency resources for the second traffic for the apparatus (configuring, at a base station (BS) of a first serving cell, a joint-carrier scheduling scheme using a downlink control information (DCI), wherein in the joint-carrier scheduling scheme causes a first data to be communicated on a first shared channel associated with the first serving cell and second data to be communicated on a second shared channel associated with a second serving cell, and transmitting, by the BS to a user equipment (UE), Takeda: [0023]); and
decoding the first traffic on the first time-frequency resources and the second traffic on the second time-frequency resources (After decoding the MIB, the UE may receive RMSI, OSI, and/or one or more system information blocks (SIBs). receiving the first data using the first shared channel and the second data using the second shared channel, Takeda: [0062], [0127]).
Takeda does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the DCI indicates identifier (ID) information associated with the apparatus,
the ID information identifying at least first traffic associated with a first service and second traffic associated with a second service different from the first service, and
However, in the same field of endeavor, 3GPP teaches:
wherein the DCI indicates identifier (ID) information associated with the apparatus (The UE lD shouid be contained in the DCI. Either an explicit indication is contained in the DCI, 3GPP: Page 1 Section 2),
the ID information identifying at least first traffic associated with a first service and second traffic associated with a second service different from the first service (The DCI design in NR system targets to support different types of services and the resource allocation for a single UE or shared by multiple UEs, 3GPP: Page 1 Section 2), and
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Takeda in view of 3GPP in order to further modify the DCI which indicates identifier (ID) information, and the ID information identifying at least first traffic associated with a first service and second traffic from the teachings of 3GPP.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because in the case of multiple UEs sharing the same set of resources, explicit indication of all scheduled UE IDs should be included in the DCI format (3GPP: Page 1 Section 2).
Regarding claim 31, Takeda in view of 3GPP teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 22 above.
Takeda does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the ID information is explicitly or implicitly indicated within the DCI.
However, in the same field of endeavor, 3GPP teaches:
wherein the ID information is explicitly or implicitly indicated within the DCI (In the case of multiple UEs sharing the same set of resources. e,g. DL MU-MIMO and DL non-orthogonal access, explicit indication of all scheduled UE IDs should be included in the DCI format, 3GPP: Page 1 Section 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Takeda in view of 3GPP in order to further modify the ID information which is explicitly or implicitly indicated within the DCI from the teachings of 3GPP.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because the control channel ove1head should be minimized (3GPP: Page 1 Section 1).
Regarding claim 32, Takeda discloses:
A method performed by a device in a radio access network (RAN), the method comprising (a method of wireless communication, comprises configuring, at a base station (BS), Takeda: [0023]):
generating downlink control information (DCI) (causing a base station (BS) of a first serving cell to configure a joint-carrier scheduling scheme using a downlink control information (DCI), Takeda: [0132]),
the DCI schedules both first time-frequency resources for the first traffic for the apparatus and second time-frequency resources for the second traffic for the apparatus (configuring, at a base station (BS) of a first serving cell, a joint-carrier scheduling scheme using a downlink control information (DCI), wherein in the joint-carrier scheduling scheme causes a first data to be communicated on a first shared channel associated with the first serving cell and second data to be communicated on a second shared channel associated with a second serving cell, and transmitting, by the BS to a user equipment (UE), Takeda: [0023]); and
sending, for transmission, the DCI and the first traffic on the first time-frequency resources and the second traffic on the second time-frequency resources to the apparatus (transmitting, from the BS to the UE a DCI in the PDCCH. using the joint-carrier scheduling scheme in the DCI, first data for communication on a first shared channel associated with the first serving cell and second data for communication on a second shared channel associated with a second serving cell., Takeda: [0126]-[0127]).
Takeda does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the DCI indicates identifier (ID) information associated with an apparatus,
the ID information identifying at least first traffic associated with a first service and second traffic associated with a second service different from the first service, and
However, in the same field of endeavor, 3GPP teaches:
wherein the DCI indicates identifier (ID) information associated with an apparatus (The UE lD shouid be contained in the DCI. Either an explicit indication is contained in the DCI, 3GPP: Page 1 Section 2),
the ID information identifying at least first traffic associated with a first service and second traffic associated with a second service different from the first service (The DCI design in NR system targets to support different types of services and the resource allocation for a single UE or shared by multiple UEs, 3GPP: Page 1 Section 2), and
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Takeda in view of 3GPP in order to further modify the DCI which indicates identifier (ID) information, and the ID information identifying at least first traffic associated with a first service and second traffic from the teachings of 3GPP.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because in the case of multiple UEs sharing the same set of resources, explicit indication of all scheduled UE IDs should be included in the DCI format (3GPP: Page 1 Section 2).
Regarding claim 41, Takeda in view of 3GPP teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 32 above.
Takeda does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the ID information is explicitly or implicitly indicated within the DCI.
However, in the same field of endeavor, 3GPP teaches:
wherein the ID information is explicitly or implicitly indicated within the DCI (In the case of multiple UEs sharing the same set of resources. e,g. DL MU-MIMO and DL non-orthogonal access, explicit indication of all scheduled UE IDs should be included in the DCI format, 3GPP: Page 1 Section 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Takeda in view of 3GPP in order to further modify the ID information which is explicitly or implicitly indicated within the DCI from the teachings of 3GPP.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because the control channel ove1head should be minimized (3GPP: Page 1 Section 1).
Regarding claim 42, Takeda discloses:
An apparatus comprising (apparatus comprises a processor, Takeda: [0129]-[0130]):
at least one processor (apparatus comprises a processor, Takeda: [0129]-[0130]); and
a memory storing processor-executable instructions that, when executed, cause the at least one processor to perform (The memory may store, or have recorded thereon, instructions. The instructions may include instructions that, when executed by the processor, Takeda: [0102]):
receiving downlink control information (DCI) from a radio access network (RAN) (receiving, by a UE from a BS, a PDCCH that includes a DCI, Takeda: [0117]),
the DCI schedules both first time-frequency resources for the first traffic for the apparatus and second time-frequency resources for the second traffic for the apparatus (configuring, at a base station (BS) of a first serving cell, a joint-carrier scheduling scheme using a downlink control information (DCI), wherein in the joint-carrier scheduling scheme causes a first data to be communicated on a first shared channel associated with the first serving cell and second data to be communicated on a second shared channel associated with a second serving cell, and transmitting, by the BS to a user equipment (UE), Takeda: [0023]); and
decoding the first traffic on the first time-frequency resources and the second traffic on the second time-frequency resources (After decoding the MIB, the UE may receive RMSI, OSI, and/or one or more system information blocks (SIBs). receiving the first data using the first shared channel and the second data using the second shared channel, Takeda: [0062], [0127]).
Takeda does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the DCI indicates identifier (ID) information associated with the apparatus,
the ID information identifying at least first traffic associated with a first service and second traffic associated with a second service different from the first service, and
However, in the same field of endeavor, 3GPP teaches:
wherein the DCI indicates identifier (ID) information associated with the apparatus (The UE lD shouid be contained in the DCI. Either an explicit indication is contained in the DCI, 3GPP: Page 1 Section 2),
the ID information identifying at least first traffic associated with a first service and second traffic associated with a second service different from the first service (The DCI design in NR system targets to support different types of services and the resource allocation for a single UE or shared by multiple UEs, 3GPP: Page 1 Section 2), and
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Takeda in view of 3GPP in order to further modify the DCI which indicates identifier (ID) information, and the ID information identifying at least first traffic associated with a first service and second traffic from the teachings of 3GPP.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because in the case of multiple UEs sharing the same set of resources, explicit indication of all scheduled UE IDs should be included in the DCI format (3GPP: Page 1 Section 2).
Regarding claim 44, Takeda in view of 3GPP teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 42 above.
Takeda does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the ID information is explicitly or implicitly indicated within the DCI.
However, in the same field of endeavor, 3GPP teaches:
wherein the ID information is explicitly or implicitly indicated within the DCI (In the case of multiple UEs sharing the same set of resources. e,g. DL MU-MIMO and DL non-orthogonal access, explicit indication of all scheduled UE IDs should be included in the DCI format, 3GPP: Page 1 Section 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Takeda in view of 3GPP in order to further modify the ID information which is explicitly or implicitly indicated within the DCI from the teachings of 3GPP.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because the control channel ove1head should be minimized (3GPP: Page 1 Section 1).
Claims 23, 33, and 43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeda in view of 3GPP and in further view of KIM (US 2012/0122441 Al, hereinafter “Kim”).
Regarding claim 23, Takeda in view of 3GPP teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 22 above.
Takeda does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the first service is associated with a first subscriber identity module (SIM) or a first network operator, and the second service is associated with a second SIM different from the first SIM or a second network operator different from the first network operator.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches:
wherein the first service is associated with a first subscriber identity module (SIM) or a first network operator, and the second service is associated with a second SIM different from the first SIM or a second network operator different from the first network operator (portable device operates on the basis of a first SIM in the first service operator network, moves to a communication range of the second service operator network, and uses a second SIM. The second service operator network, different from the first service operator network, Kim: [0023]-[0025]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Takeda and 3GPP in view of Kim in order to further modify the first service which is associated with a first subscriber identity module (SIM) or a first network operator, and the second service which is associated with a second SIM different from the first SIM or a second network operator from the teachings of Kim.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because depending on the distribution of service operator networks, the portable device may perform a camping-on to a new service operator network through only the change of SIMs (Kim: [0023]).
Regarding claim 33, Takeda in view of 3GPP teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 32 above.
Takeda does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the first service is associated with a first subscriber identity module (SIM) or a first network operator, and the second service is associated with a second SIM different from the first SIM or a second network operator different from the first network operator.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches:
wherein the first service is associated with a first subscriber identity module (SIM) or a first network operator, and the second service is associated with a second SIM different from the first SIM or a second network operator different from the first network operator (portable device operates on the basis of a first SIM in the first service operator network, moves to a communication range of the second service operator network, and uses a second SIM. The second service operator network, different from the first service operator network, Kim: [0023]-[0025]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Takeda and 3GPP in view of Kim in order to further modify the first service which is associated with a first subscriber identity module (SIM) or a first network operator, and the second service which is associated with a second SIM different from the first SIM or a second network operator from the teachings of Kim.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because depending on the distribution of service operator networks, the portable device may perform a camping-on to a new service operator network through only the change of SIMs (Kim: [0023]).
Regarding claim 43, Takeda in view of 3GPP teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claim 42 above.
Takeda does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the first service is associated with a first subscriber identity module (SIM) or a first network operator, and the second service is associated with a second SIM different from the first SIM or a second network operator different from the first network operator.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kim teaches:
wherein the first service is associated with a first subscriber identity module (SIM) or a first network operator, and the second service is associated with a second SIM different from the first SIM or a second network operator different from the first network operator (portable device operates on the basis of a first SIM in the first service operator network, moves to a communication range of the second service operator network, and uses a second SIM. The second service operator network, different from the first service operator network, Kim: [0023]-[0025]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Takeda and 3GPP in view of Kim in order to further modify the first service which is associated with a first subscriber identity module (SIM) or a first network operator, and the second service which is associated with a second SIM different from the first SIM or a second network operator from the teachings of Kim.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because depending on the distribution of service operator networks, the portable device may perform a camping-on to a new service operator network through only the change of SIMs (Kim: [0023]).
Claims 24, 26, 28-30, 34, 36, and 38-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Takeda in view of 3GPP and in further view of MAAREF (US 2018/0145805 Al, hereinafter “Maaref”).
Regarding claims 24 and 34, Takeda in view of 3GPP teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claims 22 and 32 above.
Takeda does not explicitly disclose:
a first indication indicating the first time-frequency resources for the first traffic and a second indication indicating the second time-frequency resources for the second traffic.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Maaref teaches:
a first indication indicating the first time-frequency resources for the first traffic and a second indication indicating the second time-frequency resources for the second traffic (The DCI indicates the resource allocation for the data for UE, i.e. time-frequency resource partition in the data channel at which data for UE is located. The control information may also indicate the transmission format of the data sent in the time-frequency resource partition. FIG. 3 illustrates a time-frequency resource allocation in which a first logical partition of resources form the downlink control channel and a second logical partition of resources form the downlink data channel, Maaref: Fig. 1, Fig. 3, [0041], [0056]-[0058]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Takeda and 3GPP in view of Maaref in order to further modify a first indication indicating the first time-frequency resources for the first traffic and a second indication indicating the second time-frequency resources for the second traffic from the teachings of Maaref.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because the DCI indicates, among other things, the time-frequency resource partition in the data channel (Maaref: [0057]).
Regarding claims 26 and 36, Takeda in view of 3GPP teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claims 22 and 32 above.
Takeda does not explicitly disclose:
wherein at least a portion of the DCI includes a cyclic redundancy check (CRC) scrambled using an ID associated with the apparatus.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Maaref teaches:
wherein at least a portion of the DCI includes a cyclic redundancy check (CRC) scrambled using an ID associated with the apparatus (the cyclic redundancy check (CRC) of the control information may be masked by scrambling the CRC with the ID of UE. the CRC of DCI is masked by scrambling the CRC of DCI with the ID of cooperating UEs (CUEs), Maaref: [0043], [0056]]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Takeda and 3GPP in view of Maaref in order to further modify a portion of the DCI which includes a cyclic redundancy check (CRC) scrambled using an ID from the teachings of Maaref.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because the cyclic redundancy check (CRC) of the control information may be masked by scrambling the CRC with the ID of UE (Maaref: [0043]).
Regarding claims 28 and 38, Takeda-3GPP-Maaref teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claims 26 and 36 above.
Takeda further discloses:
wherein the DCI includes a first indication indicating the first time-frequency resources for the first traffic, wherein the DCI further includes a second indication indicating the second time-frequency resources for the second traffic, and wherein the CRC is computed using at least the first indication and the second indication (configuring, at a base station (BS) of a first serving cell, a joint-carrier scheduling scheme using a downlink control information (DCI), wherein in the joint-carrier scheduling scheme causes a first data to be communicated on a first shared channel associated with the first serving cell and second data to be communicated on a second shared channel associated with a second serving cell, and transmitting, by the BS to a user equipment (UE). Out of these DCI formats sizes, up to a second configurable number of sizes, e.g. three sizes, may be CRC scrambled by C-RNTI, Takeda: [0023], [0089]).
Regarding claims 29 and 39, Takeda-3GPP-Maaref teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claims 26 and 36 above.
Takeda further discloses:
wherein the DCI includes a first portion at first control channel time-frequency resources that includes the CRC, wherein the first portion schedules one of the first traffic or the second traffic, and wherein the first portion includes a field indicating that the other of the first traffic or the second traffic is scheduled (BSs can assign or schedule transmission resources (e.g., in the form of time-frequency resource blocks (RB)) for downlink (DL) and uplink (UL) transmissions in the network. Control information may include resource assignments and protocol controls. The scheduling grants may be transmitted in the form of DL control information (DCI). Some of these DCI format sizes, e.g. three sizes of the DCI formats, may have a CRC scrambled by a C-RNTI per serving cell. Takeda: [0058]-[0059], [0064], [0087]).
Regarding claims 30 and 40, Takeda-3GPP-Maaref teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claims 26 and 36 above.
Takeda does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the DCI includes a first portion at first control channel time-frequency resources that includes the CRC,
wherein the DCI further includes a second portion at second control channel time-frequency resources, and
wherein the first portion indicates that the second portion schedules both the first traffic and the second traffic.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Maaref teaches:
wherein the DCI includes a first portion at first control channel time-frequency resources that includes the CRC (At least a portion of DCI group is masked with D2D group ID using encoder, e.g., by scrambling a CRC of DCI group, Maaref: [0061]),
wherein the DCI further includes a second portion at second control channel time-frequency resources (additionally, by using the group ID, group-assisted TUE data may be multiplexed by the processing circuitry with other UE-specific data in the time-frequency resources during scheduling by the processing circuitry of the network. FIG. 4 illustrates an example in which CUE also receives a unicast transmission of data specifically for CUE at resource partition, Maaref: [0064]), and
wherein the first portion indicates that the second portion schedules both the first traffic and the second traffic (When a CUE receives the data, the CUE knows by virtue of the use of the group ID that it is data meant for a TUE assisted by the CUE. When a TUE receives the data, the TUE knows by virtue of the use of the group ID that it is data for which the TUE will receive assistance from a CUE, Maaref: [0063]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Takeda and 3GPP in view of Maaref in order to further modify the DCI which includes a first portion at first control channel time-frequency resources that includes the CRC, and a second portion at second control channel time-frequency resources, and the first portion which indicates that the second portion schedules both the first traffic and the second traffic from the teachings of Maaref.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because the cyclic redundancy check (CRC) of the control information may be masked by scrambling the CRC with the ID of UE (Maaref: [0043]).
Claims 27 and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takeda-3GPP-Maaref
in view of Selvaganapathy et al. (US 12,414,169 B2, hereinafter “Selvaganapathy”).
Regarding claims 27 and 37, Takeda-3GPP-Maaref teaches all the claimed limitations as set forth in the rejection of claims 26 and 36 above.
Takeda does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the ID associated with the apparatus is the same for both the first service and the second service.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Selvaganapathy teaches:
wherein the ID associated with the apparatus is the same for both the first service and the second service (the terminal device is configured to receive a second Radio Network Temporary Identifier, RNTI-2, associated with the second radio resource connection of the second subscription identity and an additional Radio network Temporary identifier common to the first and second radio resource connections, RNTI-C, Selvaganapathy: Col. 10, Lines. 13-22).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Takeda and 3GPP and Maaref in view of Selvaganapathy in order to further modify the ID associated with the apparatus is the same for both the first service and the second service from the teachings of Selvaganapathy.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated because the network and the apparatus having multiple subscription identities jointly define the elements that allows an efficient sharing of the the hardware resources of the apparatus without inducing network operation degradation (Selvaganapathy: Col. 10, Lines.. 59-63]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action.
Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee 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.
In the case of amendments, applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and support, for ascertaining the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should
be directed to SANG C LEE whose telephone number is (703)756-1461. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00AM-5:00PM 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, HASSAN PHILLIPS can be reached on (571)272-3940. 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.
/S.C.L./Examiner, Art Unit 2467
/HASSAN A PHILLIPS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2467
