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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see p. 7, filed 3/3/2026, with respect to claims 3 and 12 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 USC 112(b) rejections of 12/5/2025 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 3/3/2026 with respect to the combination of prior art references have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Examiner respectfully disagrees with applicant’s assertion that “one of ordinary skill in the art would not look to combine a reference that relies on a stationary listener with a reference that modifies its settings based on a corresponding change in a listener's position” (see remarks, p. 9).
First, Gerrard teaches that cross-talk cancellation is improved when larger distances exist between listener and loudspeakers (see Gerrard, ¶ 0073). One of ordinary skill in the art (OOSITA) would see this teaching and would be encouraged to try cross-talk cancellation methods for different loudspeaker configurations than those that are described in the exemplary teachings of Gerrard.
Next, Kim teaches that it is difficult to calculate the inverse of matrix of head-related transfer functions (HRTFs) in real-time (see Kim, ¶ 0056). Therefore, Kim teaches precalculated inverse HRTFs stored in a look-up table format, where most listeners’ positions can be expressed only by several to several tens of HRTF inverse matrices (see Kim, ¶ 0056). OOSITA would interpret “several” with a plain meaning, such that they would interpret several to mean more than two, and Kim is therefore reasonably teaching that twenty to thirty inverse HRTF matrices are stored in a look-up table. The claimed invention does not specifically require the real-time calculation, such that a look-up table does not teach away from “adjusting parameters of the crosstalk cancellation process”.
Kim also teaches that the listener positions are determined with a camera or an ultrasonic sensor, such that the listeners’ position information, including distance and angle, is determined and used to look-up a stored inverse HRTF matrix to provide the cross-talk canceller (see Kim, ¶ 0056 and 0060). Importantly, Kim teaches the matrix represented by the distance is not complicated and the matrix represented by the distance is calculated in real-time (see Kim, ¶ 0055). OOSITA would then recognize that the look-up table corresponds to the angle information, and the look-up table comprises twenty or more entries of precomputed inverse HRTF matrices. Therefore, in light of the instant application, Kim is teaching the feature for “calibrating the crosstalk cancellation process by adjusting parameters of the crosstalk cancellation process, wherein the parameters comprise a distance and an angle of an intended listener position relative to the pair of the surround speakers” because Kim teaches the detection of the distance and angle of the listener position and teaches that the crosstalk cancellation process is “calibrated” by these parameters changing and the precalculated inverse HRTF matrices are computed for those changing parameters.
Therefore the combination of Jot, Gerrard, and Kim makes obvious the claimed invention.
Claim Objections
Applicant is advised that should claims 5 and 15 and claims 6 and 16 be found allowable, claims 15 and 16 will be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claims 5 and 6, respectively. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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(s) 1-2, 5-8, 10-12, and 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jot et al. (US 2017/0325043 A1, previously cited, and hereafter Jot) in view of Gerrard et al. (US 2019/0116445 A1, previously cited, and hereafter Gerrard), and further in view of Kim (US 2007/0154019 A1, previously cited).
Regarding claim 1, Jot teaches:
“A multi-channel audio processing method, the method comprising the steps of:
receiving multi-channel audio signals from an external audio source, the multi-channel audio signals comprise a pair of surround channel signals and a pair of top channel signals” by teaching the left and right surround channel pair and the left height and right height channel pair or the left surround height and right surround height channel pair (see Jot, ¶ 0073 and figure 9, unit 911 and signals Ls, Rs, Lh, Rh, Lsh, and Rsh);
“…”;
“…”;
“mixing the pair of processed top channel signals, respectively, with the pair of surround channel signals, to produce a pair of mixed surround channel signals” where processed top channel signals, such as the filtered left surround height and right surround height channel pair, are mixed with the corresponding surround channels (see Jot, ¶ 0076 and figure 9, unit 914); and
“providing the pair of mixed surround channel signals, respectively, to a pair of surround speakers” by teaching the 5-channel output signal that is provided to loudspeakers in a first plane including providing the mixed surround channel signals to the surround loudspeakers in the 5-channel system (see Jot, ¶ 0076 and figure 9, unit 920).
Jot teaches filtering the height, or top, channel signals with head-related transfer functions (HRTFs) (see Jot, ¶ 0043-0048 and figure 1). However, Jot does not appear to teach crosstalk cancellation in consideration of HRTFs.
Gerrard teaches systems and methods for providing an immersive listening experience using a front and rear sound bar (see Gerrard abstract). Herein, Gerrard teaches that cross talk cancellation algorithms using HRTFs for speaker virtualization, such that leakage signals are reduced in order for a listener to have an increased ability to distinguish between left and right acoustic signals (see Gerrard, ¶ 0071). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify Jot with the teachings of Gerrard for the purpose of improving the perceived stereo image when using physical speakers located a distance from the listener (see Jot, ¶ 0043 in view of Gerrard, ¶ 0071 and 0073).
However, the combination of Jot and Gerrard do not appear to teach the features for “calibrating the crosstalk cancellation process by adjusting parameters of the crosstalk cancellation process, wherein the parameters comprise a distance and an angle of an intended listener position relative to the pair of the surround speakers”.
Kim teaches an apparatus and method of reproducing virtual sound of two channels based on a listener’s position (see Kim, abstract). Herein, Kim teaches a crosstalk canceller using HRTFs to model the acoustic path between a speaker and two ears of the listener, and teaches an asymmetric crosstalk canceller that is designed to account for differing distances between the user and the two different loudspeakers (see Kim, ¶ 0047-0048 and figure 2). Kim teaches that the crosstalk canceller is designed to separate the information regarding the angle and distance of the listener from the inverse matrix comprising the HRTF filters (see Kim, ¶ 0050-0054 and figure 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the combination of Jot and Gerrard with the teachings of Kim for the purpose of improving the virtual sound presentation when the user moves from a sweet spot (see Jot, ¶ 0054 and Gerrard, ¶ 0073, in view of Kim, ¶ 0009-0010).
Therefore, the combination of Jot, Gerrard, and Kim makes obvious the “multi-channel audio processing method according to claim 1, further comprising the steps of:
calibrating the crosstalk cancellation process by adjusting parameters of the crosstalk cancellation process, wherein the parameters comprise a distance and an angle of an intended listener position relative to the pair of the surround speakers” by making it obvious to determine the listener’s position with respect to the loudspeakers in the system and use the position information (e.g., distance and angle) to adjust the crosstalk cancellation process through pre-calculating inverse HRTF matrices corresponding to several tens (e.g., twenty or more) angles, such that the crosstalk cancellation process is calibrated to many different listening positions (see Kim, ¶ 0055-0061 and figure 4, units 410, 420, and 430); [and]
“applying a crosstalk cancellation process in consideration of a head-related transfer function to the pair of top channel signals, to produce a pair of processed top channel signals, the head-related transfer function is configured to provide an elevation angle” because Jot teaches the HRTF processing of top channels to virtualize the height channels for playback with no physical height speakers, and Gerrard makes obvious to apply crosstalk cancellation in consideration of HRTFs in order to remove leakage from the left and right speakers to the opposite-side ear of the listener to improve the perceived stereo image when using physical speakers located a distance from the listener (see Jot, ¶ 0043-0044, 0048, and 0054 in view of Gerrard, ¶ 0071 and 0073).
Regarding claim 2, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. The combination makes obvious the “multi-channel audio processing method according to claim 1, wherein the head-related transfer function is configured to provide an elevation angle of 30-60 degrees” because Jot makes obvious the use of HRTFs with different altitude angles, and provides an example with a 45 degree elevation for different azimuth angles (see Jot, ¶ 0044 and 0049-0050).
Regarding claim 5, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. The combination makes obvious the “multi-channel audio processing method according to claim 1, wherein the step of calibrating the crosstalk cancellation process is performed automatically” because it is obvious to use the position recognition system automatically to update the listener’s position and change the crosstalk canceller’s parameters in real-time (see Kim, ¶ 0046, 0055-0056, and 0059).
Regarding claim 6, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 5 above. The combination makes obvious the “multi-channel audio processing method according to claim 5, wherein the step of calibrating the crosstalk cancellation process is performed upon an actuation by a user” because it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to allow a user to calibrate the measured HRTFs, such as allowing a user to initiate a measurement of several HRTFs corresponding to different listening positions, in order to calculate the necessary inverse matrix of the HRTFs and provide real-time position adjustment to the crosstalk cancellation process (see Kim, ¶ 0050 and 0054-0056).
Regarding claim 7, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. The combination makes obvious the “multi-channel audio processing method according to claim 1, wherein multi-channel audio signals comprise 5.1.4 or 7.1.4 channel audio signals, and the pair of top channel signals is a pair of top rear channel signals” because Jot teaches a 7.1.4 input signal and teaches an embodiment of a 9 channel input system that receives four height, or top, channel signals, it would be obvious that a 9 channel input signal would include a 5.1.4 or that the system would extend to a 11 channel system to virtualize top channel signals for a layout of physical loudspeakers that do not include loudspeakers for the top channels (see Jot, ¶ 0054 and 0073 and figure 9, unit 901).
Regarding claim 8, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. The combination makes obvious the “multi-channel audio processing method according to claim 1, further comprising the step of:
prior to the step of mixing, delaying the pair of surround channel signals to synchronize with the pair of processed top channel signals” because Kim makes obvious delays for the purpose of synchronizing the virtual signals with the original signals to improve the sweet spot depending on the listener’s position (see Jot, ¶ 0076 and figure 9, unit 914, in view of Kim, ¶ 0074-0075 and 0077-0081, figure 7, units 700-702 and 704, and figure 8, units 800-1, 800-2, 815, 825, 835, and 845).
Regarding claim 10, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. Jot teaches many features of the multi-channel audio processing method of claim 1, and likewise teaches many features of a stereo apparatus with similar features. However, Jot does not appear to teach applying a crosstalk cancellation process in consideration of HRTFs. For the same reasons as stated above with respect to claim 1, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify Jot with the teachings of Gerrard for the purpose of improving the speaker virtualization (see Jot, ¶ 0043 in view of Gerrard, ¶ 0071 and 0073), and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the combination of Jot and Gerrard with the teachings of Kim for the purpose of improving the virtual sound presentation when the user moves from a sweet spot (see Jot, ¶ 0054 and Gerrard, ¶ 0073, in view of Kim, ¶ 0009-0010).
Therefore the combination of Jot, Gerrard, and Kim makes obvious the features for:
“A stereo apparatus, comprising:
an audio source” by teaching a multi-channel input that is received by hardware, such as an entertainment media system, Jot makes obvious an audio source that transmits the multi-channel input to the processing device (see Jot, ¶ 0038-0039, 0073, and 0105, figure 9, unit 911, and figure 18, units 1800, 1850, and 1854);
“a speaker system comprising a plurality of speakers, wherein the plurality of speakers comprises a pair of surround speakers” by teaching a surround sound output system including a 7.1 horizontal setup (see Jot, ¶ 0054, 0076, and 0109, figure 9, unit 920, and figure 18, units 1850 and 1852); and
“a multi-channel audio processing system having a non-transitory computer readable medium, the multi-channel audio system being configured to receive multi-channel audio signals from the audio source and the non-transitory computer readable medium having computer executable instructions which, when executed by a computer” by teaching the entertainment media system receiving multi-channel audio signals with non-transitory memory/storage and one or more processors to execute the instructions stored in the non-transitory memory/storage (see Jot, ¶ 0038-0039, 0073, and 0104-0111, and figure 18, units 1810, 1816, 1830, and 1850),
“cause the computer to perform a method comprising the steps of:
receiving multi-channel audio signals from an external audio source, the multi-channel audio signals comprise a pair of surround channel signals and a pair of top channel signals” by teaching the left and right surround channel pair and the left height and right height channel pair or the left surround height and right surround height channel pair (see Jot, ¶ 0073 and figure 9, unit 911 and signals Ls, Rs, Lh, Rh, Lsh, and Rsh);
“calibrating the crosstalk cancellation process by adjusting parameters of the crosstalk cancellation process, wherein the parameters comprise a distance and an angle of an intended listener position relative to the pair of the surround speakers” by making it obvious to determine the listener’s position with respect to the loudspeakers in the system and use the position information (e.g., distance and angle) to adjust the crosstalk cancellation process through pre-calculating inverse HRTF matrices corresponding to several tens (e.g., twenty or more) angles, such that the crosstalk cancellation process is calibrated to many different listening positions (see Kim, ¶ 0055-0061 and figure 4, units 410, 420, and 430);
“applying a crosstalk cancellation process in consideration of a head-related transfer function to the pair of top channel signals, to produce a pair of processed top channel signals, the head-related transfer function is configured to provide an elevation angle” because Jot teaches the HRTF processing of top channels to virtualize the height channels for playback with no physical height speakers, and Gerrard makes obvious to apply crosstalk cancellation in consideration of HRTFs in order to remove leakage from the left and right speakers to the opposite-side ear of the listener to improve the perceived stereo image when using physical speakers located a distance from the listener (see Jot, ¶ 0043-0044, 0048, and 0054 in view of Gerrard, ¶ 0071 and 0073);
“mixing the pair of processed top channel signals, respectively, with the pair of surround channel signals, to produce a pair of mixed surround channel signals” where processed top channel signals, such as the filtered left surround height and right surround height channel pair, are mixed with the corresponding surround channels (see Jot, ¶ 0076 and figure 9, unit 914); and
“providing the pair of mixed surround channel signals, respectively, to a pair of surround speakers” by teaching the 5-channel output signal that is provided to loudspeakers in a first plane including providing the mixed surround channel signals to the surround loudspeakers in the 5-channel system (see Jot, ¶ 0076 and figure 9, unit 920).
Regarding claim 11, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 10 above. The combination makes obvious the “stereo apparatus according to claim 10, wherein:
the speaker system is a 5.1.2 speaker system or a 7.1.2 speaker system” because Jot teaches a 7.1 horizontal speaker system, 5 channel output, and 2 channel output, where Jot teaches virtualization for horizontal and/or height channels, it would have been obvious to output signals to a system with any number of physical height speakers and virtualize the outputs for any missing height speakers (see Jot, ¶ 0054 and 0073 and figure 9, unit 901);
“the pair of top channel signals is a pair of top rear channel signals” (see Jot, figure 4, units 416 and 417, and figure 9, unit 911); and
“the speaker system does not comprises a top rear speaker” (see Jot, ¶ 0054-0055 and figure 4, units 406-407 and 416-417).
Regarding claim 12, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 10 above. The combination makes obvious the “stereo apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the head-related transfer function is configured to provide an elevation angle of 30-60 degrees” because Jot makes obvious the use of HRTFs with different altitude angles, and provides an example with a 45 degree elevation for different azimuth angles (see Jot, ¶ 0044 and 0049-0050).
Regarding claim 15, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 14 above. The combination makes obvious the “stereo apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the step of calibrating the crosstalk cancellation process is performed automatically” because it is obvious to use the position recognition system automatically to update the listener’s position and change the crosstalk canceller’s parameters in real-time (see Kim, ¶ 0046, 0055-0056, and 0059).
Regarding claim 16, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 15 above. The combination makes obvious the “stereo apparatus according to claim 15, wherein the step of calibrating the crosstalk cancellation process is performed upon an actuation by a user” because it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to allow a user to calibrate the measured HRTFs, such as allowing a user to initiate a measurement of several HRTFs corresponding to different listening positions, in order to calculate the necessary inverse matrix of the HRTFs and provide real-time position adjustment to the crosstalk cancellation process (see Kim, ¶ 0050 and 0054-0056).
Regarding claim 17, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 10 above. The combination makes obvious the “multi-channel audio processing system according to claim 10, wherein prior to the step of mixing, the multi-channel audio system is further configured to perform the step of delaying the pair of surround channel signals to synchronize with the pair of processed top channel signals” because Kim makes obvious delays for the purpose of synchronizing the virtual signals with the original signals to improve the sweet spot depending on the listener’s position (see Jot, ¶ 0076 and figure 9, unit 914, in view of Kim, ¶ 0074-0075 and 0077-0081, figure 7, units 700-702 and 704, and figure 8, units 800-1, 800-2, 815, 825, 835, and 845).
Claim(s) 3 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Jot, Gerrard, and Kim as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of Desloge (US 2022/0167111 A1, previously cited).
Regarding claim 3, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. The combination of Jot, Gerrard, and Kim make obvious the “multi-channel audio processing method according to claim 1, wherein the crosstalk cancellation process in consideration of the head-related transfer function” where the crosstalk cancellation process involves inverse functions (see Gerrard, ¶ 0071). However, the combination does not appear to teach the crosstalk cancellation process as defined in the instant claim with respect to the recited equations.
Desloge teaches three-dimensional audio source spatialization using crosstalk cancellation and vector-based amplitude panning (VBAP) operations (see Desloge, abstract and ¶ 0003). Herein, Desloge teaches the crosstalk cancellation operation in consideration of HRTFs (see Desloge, ¶ 0046-0051 and figure 2, units 300 and 320, also see figure 3, step 204). Desloge also teaches the well-known Penrose pseudoinverse of a loudspeaker matrix L, where the pseudoinverse is [LTL]-1LT, for determining weights to use in the VBAP operation (see Desloge, ¶ 0067-0070). The well-known Penrose pseudoinverse is used to determine an inverse matrix of a non-square matrix, because an NxM matrix with N not equal to M does not have an inverse, and every matrix has a pseudoinverse. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the combination of Jot, Gerrard, and Kim with the teachings of Desloge for the purpose of using the well-known Penrose pseudoinverse to determine an inverse matrix of a non-square matrix when virtualizing multiple height channels with different physical speaker configurations (see Jot, ¶ 0054 and Gerrard, ¶ 0071, in view of Desloge, ¶ 0070).
Therefore, the combination of Jot, Gerrard, Kim, and Desloge makes obvious the “multi-channel audio processing method according to claim 1, wherein the crosstalk cancellation process in consideration of the head-related transfer function is defined as one of the following:
H=CHRTF[CHC]-1CH ;
H=[CHC]-1CHCHRTF ;
H=[CHC]-1CHRTFCH ,
wherein H stands for the crosstalk cancellation process in consideration of the head-related transfer function, CHRTF stands for the head-related transfer function, C stands for a transfer function between speaker(s) and a listener, the superscript H stands for a conjugate transpose operation, and the superscript -1 stands for an inverse operation” because Jot and Gerrard makes obvious the crosstalk cancellation filter applied to the output of the virtualizing HRTF filters (see Jot, figure 9, unit 913, and see Gerrard, ¶ 0071), and Desloge further makes obvious to compute the inverse crosstalk cancellation filter as a pseudoinverse, such as computing [LTL]-1LT (i.e., [CHC]-1CH) to improve the stereo image of the virtualized top, or height, channels (see Jot, ¶ 0054 and Gerrard, ¶ 0071, in view of Desloge, ¶ 0070).
Regarding claim 13, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 10 above. The combination of Jot, Gerrard, and Kim make obvious the “stereo apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the crosstalk cancellation process in consideration of the head-related transfer function” where the crosstalk cancellation process involves inverse functions (see Gerrard, ¶ 0071). However, the combination does not appear to teach the crosstalk cancellation process as defined in the instant claim with respect to the recited equations.
For the same reasons as claim 3 above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the combination of Jot, Gerrard, and Kim with the teachings of Desloge for the purpose of using the well-known Penrose pseudoinverse to determine an inverse matrix of a non-square matrix when virtualizing multiple height channels with different physical speaker configurations (see Jot, ¶ 0054 and Gerrard, ¶ 0071, in view of Desloge, ¶ 0070).
Therefore, the combination of Jot, Gerrard, Kim, and Desloge makes obvious the “stereo apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the crosstalk cancellation process in consideration of the head-related transfer function may be defined as one of the following:
H=CHRTF[CHC]-1CH ;
H=[CHC]-1CHCHRTF ;
H=[CHC]-1CHRTFCH ,
wherein H stands for the crosstalk cancellation process in consideration of the head-related transfer function, CHRTF stands for the head-related transfer function, C stands for a transfer function between speaker(s) and a listener, the superscript H stands for a conjugate transpose operation, and the superscript -1 stands for an inverse operation” because Jot and Gerrard makes obvious the crosstalk cancellation filter applied to the output of the virtualizing HRTF filters (see Jot, figure 9, unit 913, and see Gerrard, ¶ 0071), and Desloge further makes obvious to compute the inverse crosstalk cancellation filter as a pseudoinverse, such as computing [LTL]-1LT (i.e., [CHC]-1CH) to improve the stereo image of the virtualized top, or height, channels (see Jot, ¶ 0054 and Gerrard, ¶ 0071, in view of Desloge, ¶ 0070).
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniel R Sellers whose telephone number is (571)272-7528. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 10:00-4:00.
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, Fan S Tsang can be reached at (571)272-7547. 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.
/Daniel R Sellers/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2694