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 .
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, 3-4, 6, 8-9, 13-16 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Alfarhan et al. (U.S. PGPub 2023/0308228), hereinafter referred to as Alfarhan.
Regarding claim 1, Alfarhan discloses a user equipment (UE) (WTRU; See Fig. 1B, #102), comprising:
at least one memory (non-removable memory; See Fig. 1B, #130); and
at least one processor (processor; See Fig. 1B, #118) coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the UE to:
receive a first scheduling grant that schedules transmission of a transport block (TB) on a physical channel over multiple transmission time intervals (TTIs) (a WTRU receives a first grant to transmit a TB in a first set of slots; See [0201]);
receive information to determine a number of portions of the multiple TTIs, determine a number of TTIs associated with each portion of the number of portions of the multiple TTIs, or a combination thereof (On condition 1504 that all of the slots are available for uplink, the WTRU transmits the entire TB in the first set of slots in step 1506. On condition 1504 that a subset of the first set of slots is unavailable for uplink, the WTRU segments the TB into a first segment and a second segment in step 1508. In some implementations, the first segment is of a size that fits into a first subset of the first set of slots that is available for uplink. In some implementations, the first segment is of a size that is equal to the amount of data that is possible to transmit in the first subset; See [0201]); and
receive a second scheduling grant that indicates at least one portion of the number of portions of the multiple TTIs to be retransmitted (on a condition 1512 that a second grant to transmit the TB in a second set of slots is received, the WTRU transmits the second segment of the second set of slots in step 1514; See [0202]).
Regarding claim 3, Alfarhan further discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the multiple TTs comprises a subset of noncontiguous TTs scheduled for the transmission of the TB on the physical channel, and wherein each portion of the number of portions of the multiple TTs is within a subset of contiguous TTIs of the multiple TTIs (first and second segments are separated by slots; See Fig. 14).
Regarding claim 4, Alfarhan further discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to determine the number of portions of the multiple TTIs based on a maximum number of portions, a minimum number of TTIs within a portion, a maximum number of TTIs within a portion, or some a combination thereof (the WTRU segments the TB into a first segment and a second segment in step 1508, interpreted as the number of portions. In some implementations, the first segment is of a size that fits into a first subset of the first set of slots that is available for uplink. In some implementations, the first segment is of a size that is equal to the amount of data that is possible to transmit in the first subset. In step 1510, the WTRU transmits the first segment of the TB in the first subset of the first set of slots; See [0201]-[0202]).
Regarding claim 6, Alfarhan further discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to determine the number of portions of the multiple TTIs based on a rate matching unit for the transmission of the TB over the multiple TTIs, wherein a duration for each portion of the number of portions of the multiple TTIs is determined based on a duration corresponding to the rate matching unit (The maximum number of additional slots for multi-slot PUSCH transmission is based on one or more, or a combination of, an indication of rate matching. Where the maximum number of additional slots (or the total, actual number of slots) is determined based on an indication of rate matching, puncturing, and/or truncation of part of the allocated resources for multi-slot PUSCH transmission, the WTRU may receive an indication indicating a part of the resources to be rate matched around, punctured or truncated; See [0148]-[0149]).
Regarding claim 8, Alfarhan further discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to determine the number of portions of the multiple TTIs based on a number of transmission occasions for the multiple TTIs, wherein a transmission occasion comprises a segment of contiguous TTIs of the multiple TTIs (for a multi-TTI grant (e.g., a 3GPP NR R16 multi-TTI grant), the WTRU may allocate each coded TB segment to a different PUSCH occasion of the multi-TTI grant signaled by the single DCI,; See [0162]).
Regarding claim 9, Alfarhan further discloses the UE of claim 8, wherein, in response to the number of transmission occasions being below a threshold, the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to determine that a duration of one portion is equal to a duration of one transmission occasion (for a multi-TTI grant (e.g., a 3GPP NR R16 multi-TTI grant), the WTRU may allocate each coded TB segment to a different PUSCH occasion of the multi-TTI grant signaled by the single DCI,; See [0162]).
Regarding claim 13, Alfarhan further discloses the UE of claim 1, wherein the transmission of the TB on the physical channel over multiple TTIs comprises the transmission of the TB on a PUSCH over multiple slots (a WTRU may be configured to repeat a UCI over multiple slots of the multi-slot PUSCH transmission; See [0196]).
Regarding claim 14, Alfarhan discloses a method at of a user equipment (UE) (WTRU; See Fig. 1B, #102), the method comprising:
receiving a first scheduling grant that schedules transmission of a transport block (TB) on a physical channel over multiple transmission time intervals (TTIs) (a WTRU receives a first grant to transmit a TB in a first set of slots; See [0201]);
receiving information to determine a number of portions of the multiple TTIs, determine a number of TTIs associated with each portion of the number of portions of the multiple TTIs, or a combination thereof (On condition 1504 that all of the slots are available for uplink, the WTRU transmits the entire TB in the first set of slots in step 1506. On condition 1504 that a subset of the first set of slots is unavailable for uplink, the WTRU segments the TB into a first segment and a second segment in step 1508. In some implementations, the first segment is of a size that fits into a first subset of the first set of slots that is available for uplink. In some implementations, the first segment is of a size that is equal to the amount of data that is possible to transmit in the first subset; See [0201]); and
receiving a second scheduling grant that indicates at least one portion of the number of portions of the multiple TTIs to be retransmitted (on a condition 1512 that a second grant to transmit the TB in a second set of slots is received, the WTRU transmits the second segment of the second set of slots in step 1514; See [0202]).
Regarding claim 15, Alfarhan discloses a base station (base station; See [0203]), comprising:
at least one memory (memory; See [0203]); and
at least one processor (processor; See [0203]) coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the base station to:
transmit a first scheduling grant that schedules transmission of a transport block (TB) on a physical channel over multiple transmission time intervals (TTIs) (a WTRU receives a first grant to transmit a TB in a first set of slots; See [0201]);
transmit information to determine a number of portions of the multiple TTIs, determine a number of TTIs associated with each portion of the number of portions of the multiple TTIs, or a combination thereof (On condition 1504 that all of the slots are available for uplink, the WTRU transmits the entire TB in the first set of slots in step 1506. On condition 1504 that a subset of the first set of slots is unavailable for uplink, the WTRU segments the TB into a first segment and a second segment in step 1508. In some implementations, the first segment is of a size that fits into a first subset of the first set of slots that is available for uplink. In some implementations, the first segment is of a size that is equal to the amount of data that is possible to transmit in the first subset; See [0201]); and
transmit a second scheduling grant that indicates at least one portion of the number of portions of the multiple TTIs to be retransmitted (on a condition 1512 that a second grant to transmit the TB in a second set of slots is received, the WTRU transmits the second segment of the second set of slots in step 1514; See [0202]).
Regarding claim 16, Alfarhan discloses a processor (WTRU; See Fig. 1B, #102) for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one memory (non-removable memory; See Fig. 1B, #130); and
at least one controller (processor; See Fig. 1B, #118) coupled with at least one memory and configured to cause the processor to:
receive a first scheduling grant that schedules transmission of a transport block (TB) on a physical channel over multiple transmission time intervals (TTIs) (a WTRU receives a first grant to transmit a TB in a first set of slots; See [0201]);
receive information to determine a number of portions of the multiple TTIs, determine a number of TTIs associated with each portion of the number of portions of the multiple TTIs, or a combination thereof (On condition 1504 that all of the slots are available for uplink, the WTRU transmits the entire TB in the first set of slots in step 1506. On condition 1504 that a subset of the first set of slots is unavailable for uplink, the WTRU segments the TB into a first segment and a second segment in step 1508. In some implementations, the first segment is of a size that fits into a first subset of the first set of slots that is available for uplink. In some implementations, the first segment is of a size that is equal to the amount of data that is possible to transmit in the first subset; See [0201]); and
receive a second scheduling grant that indicates at least one portion of the number of portions of the multiple TTIs to be retransmitted (on a condition 1512 that a second grant to transmit the TB in a second set of slots is received, the WTRU transmits the second segment of the second set of slots in step 1514; See [0202]).
Regarding claim 18, Alfarhan further discloses the processor of claim 16, wherein the multiple TTIs comprises a subset of noncontiguous TTIs scheduled for the transmission of the TB on the physical channel, and wherein each portion of the number of portions of the multiple TTIs is within a subset of contiguous TTIs of the multiple TTIs (first and second segments are separated by slots; See Fig. 14).
Regarding claim 19, Alfarhan further discloses the processor of claim 16, wherein the at least one controller is configured to cause the processor to determine the number of portions of the multiple TTIs based on a maximum number of portions, a minimum number of TTIs within a portion, a maximum number of TTIs within a portion, or a combination thereof (the WTRU segments the TB into a first segment and a second segment in step 1508, interpreted as the number of portions. In some implementations, the first segment is of a size that fits into a first subset of the first set of slots that is available for uplink. In some implementations, the first segment is of a size that is equal to the amount of data that is possible to transmit in the first subset. In step 1510, the WTRU transmits the first segment of the TB in the first subset of the first set of slots; See [0201]-[0202]).
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.
Claims 2, 5, 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alfarhan as applied to claims 1 and 16 above, and further in view of Deng et al. (U.S. PGPub 2023/0345432), hereinafter referred to as Deng.
Regarding claim 2, Alfarhan fails to teach the UE of claim 1, wherein the multiple TTs comprises a subset of contiguous TTs scheduled for the transmission of the TB on the physical channel, and wherein the number of portions of the multiple TTIs is less than or equal to a number of the multiple TTIs.
Deng teaches wherein the multiple TTs comprises a subset of contiguous TTs scheduled for the transmission of the TB on the physical channel, and wherein the number of portions of the multiple TTIs is less than or equal to a number of the multiple TTIs (TB processing over multiple slots has been supported in Rel-17 coverage enhancement work item. The number of slots which the TB crossed needs to be determined. In addition, if repetition is also supported together with TB processing over multiple slots, it needs to further determine the number of slots for TB processing and the number of repetitions. In some embodiments, the number of slots can be consecutive slots. In some embodiments, the number of slots can be consecutive available slots; See [0077]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Alfarhan to include wherein the multiple TTs comprises a subset of contiguous TTs scheduled for the transmission of the TB on the physical channel, and wherein the number of portions of the multiple TTIs is less than or equal to a number of the multiple TTIs taught by Deng in order to optimize resource utilization.
Regarding claim 5, Alfarhan fails to teach the UE of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to determine the number of portions of the multiple TTIs based on a number of redundancy versions (RVs) for the transmission of the TB over the multiple TTIs, wherein a duration for each portion of the number of portions of the multiple TTIs is determined based on a duration corresponding to a single RV.
Deng teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to determine the number of portions of the multiple TTIs based on a number of redundancy versions (RVs) for the transmission of the TB over the multiple TTIs (the multiple slots for TB processing may be regarded as a bundle, then RV cycling in the multiple bundles. For instance, when the number of repetitions K is 4, the number of slots for TB processing is 2, RV pattern is {0,2,3,1}, as shown in FIG. 5. The first 2 slots regard as the first bundle and the last 2 slots regard as the second bundle, the RV index for the first bundle is 0 and the RV index for the second bundle is 2, then the RV index is {0,0,2,2} for each repetition, respectively; See [0093]), wherein a duration for each portion of the number of portions of the multiple TTIs is determined based on a duration corresponding to a single RV (the RV is the same or different within multiple slots for TB processing and the RV cycling in multiple slots for TB processing. For instance, when the number of repetitions K is 4, number of slots is 2, RV pattern is {0,2,3,1}, as shown in FIG. 6. Each repetition includes 1 slot, the RV cycling for each repetition is {0,2,0,2}; See [0094]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Alfarhan to include wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to determine the number of portions of the multiple TTIs based on a number of redundancy versions (RVs) for the transmission of the TB over the multiple TTIs, wherein a duration for each portion of the number of portions of the multiple TTIs is determined based on a duration corresponding to a single RV taught by Deng in order to optimize resource utilization.
Regarding claim 17, Alfarhan fails to teach the processor of claim 16, wherein the multiple TTIs comprises a subset of contiguous TTIs scheduled for the transmission of the TB on the physical channel, and wherein the number of portions of the multiple TTIs is less than or equal to a number of the multiple TTIs.
Deng teaches wherein the multiple TTs comprises a subset of contiguous TTs scheduled for the transmission of the TB on the physical channel, and wherein the number of portions of the multiple TTIs is less than or equal to a number of the multiple TTIs (the WTRU segments the TB into a first segment and a second segment in step 1508. In some implementations, the first segment is of a size that fits into a first subset of the first set of slots that is available for uplink. In some implementations, the first segment is of a size that is equal to the amount of data that is possible to transmit in the first subset. In step 1510, the WTRU transmits the first segment of the TB in the first subset of the first set of slots; See [0201]-[0202]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Alfarhan to include wherein the multiple TTs comprises a subset of contiguous TTs scheduled for the transmission of the TB on the physical channel, and wherein the number of portions of the multiple TTIs is less than or equal to a number of the multiple TTIs taught by Deng in order to optimize resource utilization.
Regarding claim 20 Alfarhan fails to teach the processor of claim 16, wherein the at least one controller is configured to cause the processor to determine the number of portions of the multiple TTIs based on a number of redundancy versions (RVs) for the transmission of the TB over the multiple TTIs, wherein a duration for each portion of the number of portions of the multiple TTIs is determined based on a duration corresponding to a single RV.
Deng teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to determine the number of portions of the multiple TTIs based on a number of redundancy versions (RVs) for the transmission of the TB over the multiple TTIs (the multiple slots for TB processing may be regarded as a bundle, then RV cycling in the multiple bundles. For instance, when the number of repetitions K is 4, the number of slots for TB processing is 2, RV pattern is {0,2,3,1}, as shown in FIG. 5. The first 2 slots regard as the first bundle and the last 2 slots regard as the second bundle, the RV index for the first bundle is 0 and the RV index for the second bundle is 2, then the RV index is {0,0,2,2} for each repetition, respectively; See [0093]), wherein a duration for each portion of the number of portions of the multiple TTIs is determined based on a duration corresponding to a single RV (the RV is the same or different within multiple slots for TB processing and the RV cycling in multiple slots for TB processing. For instance, when the number of repetitions K is 4, number of slots is 2, RV pattern is {0,2,3,1}, as shown in FIG. 6. Each repetition includes 1 slot, the RV cycling for each repetition is {0,2,0,2}; See [0094]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Alfarhan to include wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to determine the number of portions of the multiple TTIs based on a number of redundancy versions (RVs) for the transmission of the TB over the multiple TTIs, wherein a duration for each portion of the number of portions of the multiple TTIs is determined based on a duration corresponding to a single RV taught by Deng in order to optimize resource utilization.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alfarhan as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yu et al. (U.S. PGPub 2024/0008011), hereinafter referred to as Yu.
Regarding claim 7, Alfarhan fails to teach the UE of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to determine the number of portions of the multiple TTIs based on a number of TTIs indicated for transmission of the TB over the multiple TTIs, wherein, in response to the number of TTIs being below a threshold, the processor to determine that a duration of one portion is equal to one TTI.
wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to determine the number of portions of the multiple TTIs based on a number of TTIs indicated for transmission of the TB over the multiple TTIs, wherein, in response to the number of TTIs being below a threshold, the processor to determine that a duration of one portion is equal to one TTI (in a scenario of UCI multiplexing when data transmission is performed by using a TBoMS, when the terminal device transmits data by using the TBoMS, the threshold may be less than or equal to a quantity of slots occupied by the TBoMS. That is, a quantity of slots occupied by one TB transmitted by using the TBoMS, that is, a quantity of slots occupied by a PUSCH used to carry the TB. It is assumed that when data is transmitted by using the TBoMS, a quantity of slots occupied by one TB is 8, and the threshold may be 4; See [0311]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Alfarhan to include wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to determine the number of portions of the multiple TTIs based on a number of TTIs indicated for transmission of the TB over the multiple TTIs, wherein, in response to the number of TTIs being below a threshold, the processor to determine that a duration of one portion is equal to one TTI taught by Yu in order to enhance data transmission performance.
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alfarhan as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Guo et al. (U.S. PGPub 2024/0314771), hereinafter referred to as Guo.
Regarding claim 10, Alfarhan fails to teach the UE of claim 1, wherein the second scheduling grant indicates a bit field with a bitmap size equal to the number of portions, and, if a bit is indicated as "1", then retransmission for a corresponding portion of the number of portions is performed and, if a bit is indicated as "0", then the retransmission for the corresponding portion is not performed.
Guo teaches wherein the second scheduling grant indicates a bit field with a bitmap size equal to the number of portions, and, if a bit is indicated as "1", then retransmission for a corresponding portion of the number of portions is performed (the sequence of TBs indicated by the bitmap may follow same order as the TB were transmitted by the UE. That is, if the HARQ process ID field 704 indicates 0, the first bit in the bitmap 706 corresponds to the TB with HP ID 0, the second bit in the bitmap 706 corresponds to the TB with HP ID 1, and so on; See [0108]) and, if a bit is indicated as "0", then the retransmission for the corresponding portion is not performed (the UE can determine, based on the HARQ process ID field 704 and the bitmap 706, which of the TBs to retransmit. Because the bitmap 706 indicates that the second TB is to be retransmitted (i.e. second bit is 1), the UE retransmits the second TB; See [0108]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Alfarhan to include wherein the second scheduling grant indicates a bit field with a bitmap size equal to the number of portions, and, if a bit is indicated as "1", then retransmission for a corresponding portion of the number of portions is performed and, if a bit is indicated as "0", then the retransmission for the corresponding portion is not performed taught by Guo in order to improve communication reliability.
Regarding claim 11, Alfarhan further teaches the apparatus UE of claim 1, wherein, to receive the second scheduling grant, the receiver receives at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to receive the second scheduling grant after a start of the scheduled transmission of the TB and before an end of the scheduled transmission of the TB (On condition 1504 that a subset of the first set of slots is unavailable for uplink, the WTRU segments the TB into a first segment and a second segment in step 1508. In some implementations, the first segment is of a size that fits into a first subset of the first set of slots that is available for uplink. In some implementations, the first segment is of a size that is equal to the amount of data that is possible to transmit in the first subset; See [0201]), but fails to teach wherein the second scheduling grant indicates a bit field with a bitmap size equal to a number of portions received prior to the second scheduling grant.
Guo teaches wherein the second scheduling grant indicates a bit field with a bitmap size equal to a number of portions received prior to the second scheduling grant (the sequence of TBs indicated by the bitmap may follow same order as the TB were transmitted by the UE. That is, if the HARQ process ID field 704 indicates 0, the first bit in the bitmap 706 corresponds to the TB with HP ID 0, the second bit in the bitmap 706 corresponds to the TB with HP ID 1, and so on. The UE can determine, based on the HARQ process ID field 704 and the bitmap 706, which of the TBs to retransmit. Because the bitmap 706 indicates that the second TB is to be retransmitted (i.e. second bit is 1), the UE retransmits the second TB; See [0108]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Alfarhan to include wherein the second scheduling grant indicates a bit field with a bitmap size equal to a number of portions received prior to the second scheduling grant taught by Guo in order to improve communication reliability.
Regarding claim 12, Alfarhan still fails to teach the apparatus UE of claim 11, wherein the number of portions to be retransmitted are scheduled for transmission after an end of the multiple TTIs.
Guo teaches wherein the number of portions to be retransmitted are scheduled for transmission after an end of the multiple TTIs (the sequence of TBs indicated by the bitmap may follow same order as the TB were transmitted by the UE. That is, if the HARQ process ID field 704 indicates 0, the first bit in the bitmap 706 corresponds to the TB with HP ID 0, the second bit in the bitmap 706 corresponds to the TB with HP ID 1, and so on. The UE can determine, based on the HARQ process ID field 704 and the bitmap 706, which of the TBs to retransmit. Because the bitmap 706 indicates that the second TB is to be retransmitted (i.e. second bit is 1), the UE retransmits the second TB; See [0108]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the apparatus of Alfarhan to include wherein the number of portions to be retransmitted are scheduled for transmission after an end of the multiple TTIs taught by Guo in order to improve communication reliability.
Conclusion
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents,
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Hand delivered responses should be brought to:
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASHLEY L SHIVERS whose telephone number is (571)270-3523. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chirag Shah can be reached at 571-272-3144. 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.
/ASHLEY SHIVERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2477 3/6/2026