DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/17/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
6. Claim(s) 1-4, 8-11 and 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al. (US 2021/0056174 A1) in view of Scott (US 202/0067241 A1).
7. With reference to claim 1, Zhao teaches A method comprising: by a computing system: accessing a computer-aided design object; defining an imprint region for a face of the CAD object; (“This disclosure describes computer aided design methods, systems, and non-transitory machine readable media that can generate mesh assemblies over a structure represented in a design that has non-conformal domains or regions. … A method according to one embodiment can include the following operations: determining a plurality of regions in a representation of a structure, the plurality of regions including a first region and a second region; determining that a first face of the first region is adjacent to a second face of the second region at an interface between the first face and the second face; determining that the first face includes a representation of an applied first finite element method (FEM) boundary condition that is not present in the second face; adding (e.g., imprinting), in response to determining that the first FEM boundary condition is not present in the second face, the first FEM boundary condition to the second face at a position on the second face corresponding to a position of the representation of the first FEM boundary condition on the first face; and generating meshes for use in a finite element method, the generation of the meshes constrained on the second face by the first FEM boundary condition added to the second face.” [0004-0005]) Zhao also teaches determining that the imprint region meets constraint criteria, wherein the constraint criteria are met when the imprint region encloses a circular edge that is connected to another face of the CAD object, when a portion of the imprint region is outside a boundary of the face of the CAD object, when the imprint region overlaps with a different imprint region defined for the face of the CAD object, when a mesh direction of the face of the CAD object is designated as unreliable based on a function of an area of the face of the CAD object, or any combination thereof; (“FIG. 2A shows an aspect of the embodiments in which a boundary condition, represented by representation 207, that is present on one side or face of an interface is added or imprinted on the other side or face of the interface before beginning a mesh generation process. The interface exists between two adjacent non-overlapping regions or domains that have been generated as a result of the domain decomposition method. The face 201 can be a face on a left domain (a three dimensional volume) and the face 205 can be a face on a right domain (a three dimensional volume) which is adjacent to and in contact with the left domain. For example, the face 201 shown in FIG. 2A can be the face 105A shown in FIG. 1B, and the face 205 shown in FIG. 2A can be the face 107A shown in FIG. 1B. The face 205 includes a representation 207 of a boundary condition, and this representation 207 is not present on the face 201 when the domain or region that includes the face 201 is created. The representation 207 can define the perimeter of an internal object or feature that has an FEM boundary condition that is represented on the face 205 by the representation 207. This FEM boundary condition is a boundary condition (e.g., those boundary conditions used in solving partial differential equations or other equations by a computerized solver) that is enforced in finite element methods and can be obtained from the properties (e.g. material properties or physical characteristics) of the internal object or feature that is not itself meshed and instead is represented by an applied boundary condition on the face 205, and this applied boundary condition is represented on the face 205 by the representation 207. The internal object or feature can be contained within the three dimensional volume of the domain that includes the face 205 as one of the surfaces of that three dimensional volume. The FEM boundary condition from that internal object or feature is applied onto the face 205 by the representation 207. In one embodiment, the FEM boundary condition can be used to represent a physical feature or physical property or physical characteristic on the face 205. According to the embodiments described herein, the representation 207 can be added or imprinted onto the face 201 before beginning a mesh generation process to create an imprinted boundary condition. The added or imprinted boundary condition, such as imprint 203, is used to constrain meshing when the mesh generation process generates meshes for the face 201 which is the face on a first domain, while the face 205 is a face on a second domain.” [0023] “the system identifies all neighboring object groups which are in contact with the given object group or domain. Then in operation 507 the system finds all object faces that touch the interface for the given object group or domain. Then in operation 509, the system creates imprint sheets representing the overlap areas between the touching face and the interface, … An object group can be defined to be a group of objects that form a connected region or domain and are mashed together, meaning that a mesh assembly or mesh pattern is generated for the domain.” [0027]) Zhao further teaches responsive to a determination that the imprint region meets the constraint criteria, modifying the imprint region into an adapted imprint region; (“the system identifies all of the outer interfaces of the given domain or object group. In operation 505, the system identifies all neighboring object groups which are in contact with the given object group or domain. Then in operation 507 the system finds all object faces that touch the interface for the given object group or domain. Then in operation 509, the system creates imprint sheets representing the overlap areas between the touching face and the interface, and then in operation 511, the system adds the imprint sheets to the object group. An imprint sheet can contain imprints for boundary conditions.” [0027]) Zhao teaches generating an output mesh using the adapted imprint region, including by: decomposing the face into virtual faces, including an imprinted virtual face that covers the adapted imprint region and a remainder virtual face that covers a remainder portion of the face outside of the adapted imprint region; meshing the imprinted virtual face to form an imprint region mesh and meshing the remainder virtual face to form a remainder region mesh; (“FIG. 2B shows how the mesh generation process uses the constraints provided by imprint 203 to constrain the generation of meshes such that all mesh components within the imprint 203 are contained within the interior of the imprint 203 and do not cross the perimeter of the imprint 203, and similarly, meshes outside of the perimeter of the imprint 203 do not cross the perimeter of the imprint 203 as shown in FIG. 2B. … In operation 301, a design, which can be a tablet computer or a smart phone or other consumer electronic products, can be decomposed into several smaller non-overlapping regions or domains. Then in operation 303, an embodiment imprints finite element method boundary conditions from one region onto another region if, at an interface between two regions, the finite element boundary condition (indicated by a representation) is present on only one face of the two regions at the interface. Thus, for each interface between two regions, such as region i and region j, an embodiment will imprint or add all faces with such finite element method boundary conditions from region i to region j and vice versa. The imprinting or adding can be similar to the imprint 203 shown in FIG. 2A in which the representation 207 from the right region or domain is added or imprinted onto the face 201 on the left region or domain, where the left region did not include the representation 207 prior to the adding or imprinting. After operation 303, conventional meshing algorithms can be used to mesh each region independently in operation 305 shown in FIG. 3.” [0024-0025])
PNG
media_image1.png
521
539
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Zhao does not explicitly teach merging the imprint region mesh and the remainder region mesh together to form the output mesh. This is what Scott teaches (“The current state-of-the-art in hexahedral mesh generation is to first decompose the BREP into simpler subdomains, each of which can then be meshed individually with a semi-structured hexahedral mesh generation scheme. To facilitate recombining the subdomains after meshing an imprint and merge step is performed which ensures that adjacent subdomains share common BREP topology. The imprinted topology on each subdomain is then leveraged by the hexahedral mesh generation algorithms on each subdomain to ensure the resulting mesh m[Δ] is conforming or, in other words, that no hanging nodes or T-junctions are present in m[Δ]. This decompose, imprint, and merge process is shown in FIG. 11. After a decomposition step (see FIG. 11, VIEW A), two disconnected BREP volumes are created that do not share any topological information. A non-conforming (i.e., mismatched) hexahedral mesh is created (see FIG. 11, VIEW B) if the imprint and merge steps are not performed. Imprinting and merging the geometry across the interface (see FIG. 11, VIEW C) adds the cylinder BREP topology to the cube face. The duplicate surfaces are then merged resulting in two BREP volumes with matching topology. A conforming hexahedral mesh can then be created (see FIG. 11, VIEW D).” [0150-0151]) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Scott into Zhao, in order to control the accuracy and robustness of computed solutions.
8. With reference to claim 2, Zhao teaches when the imprint region meets the constraint criteria for when the imprint region encloses a circular edge that is connected to another face of the CAD object, modifying the imprint region into the adapted imprint region comprises using the imprint region as the adapted imprint region; and wherein meshing the imprinted virtual face to form the imprint region mesh comprises generating a boundary ring of the imprint region mesh by projecting points of an outer paver ring of the imprint region mesh to orthogonally intersect boundaries of the imprinted virtual face to form mesh elements of the boundary ring of the imprint region mesh. (“FIG. 2A shows an aspect of the embodiments in which a boundary condition, represented by representation 207, that is present on one side or face of an interface is added or imprinted on the other side or face of the interface before beginning a mesh generation process. The interface exists between two adjacent non-overlapping regions or domains that have been generated as a result of the domain decomposition method. The face 201 can be a face on a left domain (a three dimensional volume) and the face 205 can be a face on a right domain (a three dimensional volume) which is adjacent to and in contact with the left domain. For example, the face 201 shown in FIG. 2A can be the face 105A shown in FIG. 1B, and the face 205 shown in FIG. 2A can be the face 107A shown in FIG. 1B. The face 205 includes a representation 207 of a boundary condition, and this representation 207 is not present on the face 201 when the domain or region that includes the face 201 is created. The representation 207 can define the perimeter of an internal object or feature that has an FEM boundary condition that is represented on the face 205 by the representation 207. This FEM boundary condition is a boundary condition (e.g., those boundary conditions used in solving partial differential equations or other equations by a computerized solver) that is enforced in finite element methods and can be obtained from the properties (e.g. material properties or physical characteristics) of the internal object or feature that is not itself meshed and instead is represented by an applied boundary condition on the face 205, and this applied boundary condition is represented on the face 205 by the representation 207. The internal object or feature can be contained within the three dimensional volume of the domain that includes the face 205 as one of the surfaces of that three dimensional volume. The FEM boundary condition from that internal object or feature is applied onto the face 205 by the representation 207. In one embodiment, the FEM boundary condition can be used to represent a physical feature or physical property or physical characteristic on the face 205. According to the embodiments described herein, the representation 207 can be added or imprinted onto the face 201 before beginning a mesh generation process to create an imprinted boundary condition. The added or imprinted boundary condition, such as imprint 203, is used to constrain meshing when the mesh generation process generates meshes for the face 201 which is the face on a first domain, while the face 205 is a face on a second domain. (“FIG. 2B shows how the mesh generation process uses the constraints provided by imprint 203 to constrain the generation of meshes such that all mesh components within the imprint 203 are contained within the interior of the imprint 203 and do not cross the perimeter of the imprint 203, and similarly, meshes outside of the perimeter of the imprint 203 do not cross the perimeter of the imprint 203 as shown in FIG. 2B. … In operation 301, a design, which can be a tablet computer or a smart phone or other consumer electronic products, can be decomposed into several smaller non-overlapping regions or domains. Then in operation 303, an embodiment imprints finite element method boundary conditions from one region onto another region if, at an interface between two regions, the finite element boundary condition (indicated by a representation) is present on only one face of the two regions at the interface. Thus, for each interface between two regions, such as region i and region j, an embodiment will imprint or add all faces with such finite element method boundary conditions from region i to region j and vice versa. The imprinting or adding can be similar to the imprint 203 shown in FIG. 2A in which the representation 207 from the right region or domain is added or imprinted onto the face 201 on the left region or domain, where the left region did not include the representation 207 prior to the adding or imprinting. After operation 303, conventional meshing algorithms can be used to mesh each region independently in operation 305 shown in FIG. 3.” [0023-0025] “the system identifies all neighboring object groups which are in contact with the given object group or domain. Then in operation 507 the system finds all object faces that touch the interface for the given object group or domain. Then in operation 509, the system creates imprint sheets representing the overlap areas between the touching face and the interface, and then in operation 511, the system adds the imprint sheets to the object group. An imprint sheet can contain imprints for boundary conditions … An object group can be defined to be a group of objects that form a connected region or domain and are mashed together, meaning that a mesh assembly or mesh pattern is generated for the domain.” [0027])
9. With reference to claim 3, Zhao teaches when the imprint region meets the constraint criteria for when a portion of the imprint region is outside a boundary of the face of the CAD object, modifying the imprint region into the adapted imprint region comprises truncating the imprint region along the boundary of the face of the CAD object. (“FIG. 2A shows an aspect of the embodiments in which a boundary condition, represented by representation 207, that is present on one side or face of an interface is added or imprinted on the other side or face of the interface before beginning a mesh generation process. The interface exists between two adjacent non-overlapping regions or domains that have been generated as a result of the domain decomposition method. The face 201 can be a face on a left domain (a three dimensional volume) and the face 205 can be a face on a right domain (a three dimensional volume) which is adjacent to and in contact with the left domain. For example, the face 201 shown in FIG. 2A can be the face 105A shown in FIG. 1B, and the face 205 shown in FIG. 2A can be the face 107A shown in FIG. 1B. The face 205 includes a representation 207 of a boundary condition, and this representation 207 is not present on the face 201 when the domain or region that includes the face 201 is created. The representation 207 can define the perimeter of an internal object or feature that has an FEM boundary condition that is represented on the face 205 by the representation 207. This FEM boundary condition is a boundary condition (e.g., those boundary conditions used in solving partial differential equations or other equations by a computerized solver) that is enforced in finite element methods and can be obtained from the properties (e.g. material properties or physical characteristics) of the internal object or feature that is not itself meshed and instead is represented by an applied boundary condition on the face 205, and this applied boundary condition is represented on the face 205 by the representation 207. The internal object or feature can be contained within the three dimensional volume of the domain that includes the face 205 as one of the surfaces of that three dimensional volume. The FEM boundary condition from that internal object or feature is applied onto the face 205 by the representation 207. In one embodiment, the FEM boundary condition can be used to represent a physical feature or physical property or physical characteristic on the face 205. According to the embodiments described herein, the representation 207 can be added or imprinted onto the face 201 before beginning a mesh generation process to create an imprinted boundary condition. The added or imprinted boundary condition, such as imprint 203, is used to constrain meshing when the mesh generation process generates meshes for the face 201 which is the face on a first domain, while the face 205 is a face on a second domain.” [0023] “the system identifies all neighboring object groups which are in contact with the given object group or domain. Then in operation 507 the system finds all object faces that touch the interface for the given object group or domain. Then in operation 509, the system creates imprint sheets representing the overlap areas between the touching face and the interface, and then in operation 511, the system adds the imprint sheets to the object group. An imprint sheet can contain imprints for boundary conditions In operation 513, the system determines whether it is done adding imprint sheets from one neighboring object group. For each touching face, operations 509 and 51 are repeated as shown in FIG. 5. Similarly, for each neighboring object group, operations 507, 509, 511, and 513 are repeated. In operation 515, the system determines whether it has completed adding imprint sheets for one interface. For each interface, operations 505, 507, 509, 511, 513 and 515 are repeated until all imprints have been added at all interfaces for a given domain or object group. The method shown in FIG. 5 is repeated for each domain or object group. An object group can be defined to be a group of objects that form a connected region or domain and are mashed together, meaning that a mesh assembly or mesh pattern is generated for the domain. Domains can be in contact but they cannot intersect with each other in one embodiment. The outer interfaces of an object group are defined as the outermost surfaces of the connected region which defines the domain or region that can contact the outer interfaces of other domains or object groups.” [0027])
10. With reference to claim 4, Zhao teaches when the imprint region meets the constraint criteria for when the imprint region overlaps with a different imprint region defined for the face of the CAD object, modifying the imprint region into the adapted imprint region comprises iteratively reducing a size of the imprint region, the different imprint region, or a combination of both, until the imprint region and different imprint region no longer overlap with one another. (“FIG. 2A shows an aspect of the embodiments in which a boundary condition, represented by representation 207, that is present on one side or face of an interface is added or imprinted on the other side or face of the interface before beginning a mesh generation process. The interface exists between two adjacent non-overlapping regions or domains that have been generated as a result of the domain decomposition method. The face 201 can be a face on a left domain (a three dimensional volume) and the face 205 can be a face on a right domain (a three dimensional volume) which is adjacent to and in contact with the left domain. For example, the face 201 shown in FIG. 2A can be the face 105A shown in FIG. 1B, and the face 205 shown in FIG. 2A can be the face 107A shown in FIG. 1B. The face 205 includes a representation 207 of a boundary condition, and this representation 207 is not present on the face 201 when the domain or region that includes the face 201 is created. The representation 207 can define the perimeter of an internal object or feature that has an FEM boundary condition that is represented on the face 205 by the representation 207. This FEM boundary condition is a boundary condition (e.g., those boundary conditions used in solving partial differential equations or other equations by a computerized solver) that is enforced in finite element methods and can be obtained from the properties (e.g. material properties or physical characteristics) of the internal object or feature that is not itself meshed and instead is represented by an applied boundary condition on the face 205, and this applied boundary condition is represented on the face 205 by the representation 207. The internal object or feature can be contained within the three dimensional volume of the domain that includes the face 205 as one of the surfaces of that three dimensional volume. The FEM boundary condition from that internal object or feature is applied onto the face 205 by the representation 207. In one embodiment, the FEM boundary condition can be used to represent a physical feature or physical property or physical characteristic on the face 205. According to the embodiments described herein, the representation 207 can be added or imprinted onto the face 201 before beginning a mesh generation process to create an imprinted boundary condition. The added or imprinted boundary condition, such as imprint 203, is used to constrain meshing when the mesh generation process generates meshes for the face 201 which is the face on a first domain, while the face 205 is a face on a second domain.” [0023] “In operation 301, a design, which can be a tablet computer or a smart phone or other consumer electronic products, can be decomposed into several smaller non-overlapping regions or domains. Then in operation 303, an embodiment imprints finite element method boundary conditions from one region onto another region if, at an interface between two regions, the finite element boundary condition (indicated by a representation) is present on only one face of the two regions at the interface. Thus, for each interface between two regions, such as region i and region j, an embodiment will imprint or add all faces with such finite element method boundary conditions from region i to region j and vice versa.” [0025] “the system identifies all neighboring object groups which are in contact with the given object group or domain. Then in operation 507 the system finds all object faces that touch the interface for the given object group or domain. Then in operation 509, the system creates imprint sheets representing the overlap areas between the touching face and the interface, and then in operation 511, the system adds the imprint sheets to the object group. An imprint sheet can contain imprints for boundary conditions In operation 513, the system determines whether it is done adding imprint sheets from one neighboring object group. For each touching face, operations 509 and 51 are repeated as shown in FIG. 5. Similarly, for each neighboring object group, operations 507, 509, 511, and 513 are repeated. In operation 515, the system determines whether it has completed adding imprint sheets for one interface. For each interface, operations 505, 507, 509, 511, 513 and 515 are repeated until all imprints have been added at all interfaces for a given domain or object group. The method shown in FIG. 5 is repeated for each domain or object group. An object group can be defined to be a group of objects that form a connected region or domain and are mashed together, meaning that a mesh assembly or mesh pattern is generated for the domain. Domains can be in contact but they cannot intersect with each other in one embodiment. The outer interfaces of an object group are defined as the outermost surfaces of the connected region which defines the domain or region that can contact the outer interfaces of other domains or object groups.” [0027])
11. Claim 8 is similar in scope to claim 1, and thus is rejected under similar rationale. Zhao additionally teaches A system comprising: a processor; and a non-transitory machine-readable medium comprising instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause a computing system to (“the device 800, which is a form of a data processing system, includes a bus 803 which is coupled to a microprocessor(s) 805 and a ROM (Read Only Memory) 807 and volatile RAM 809 and a non-volatile memory 811.” [0030] “a “machine” may be a machine that converts intermediate form (or “abstract”) instructions into processor specific instructions (e.g., an abstract execution environment such as a “virtual machine” (e.g., a Java Virtual Machine), an interpreter, a Common Language Runtime, a high-level language virtual machine, etc.), and/or electronic circuitry disposed on a semiconductor chip (e.g., “logic circuitry” implemented with transistors) designed to execute instructions such as a general-purpose processor and/or a special-purpose processor. … Such a computer program may be stored in a computer readable storage medium, such as, but not limited to, any type of disk including floppy disks, optical disks, CD-ROMs, and magnetic-optical disks, DRAM (volatile), flash memory, read-only memories (ROMs), RAMs, EPROMs, EEPROMs, magnetic or optical cards, or any type of media suitable for storing electronic instructions, and each coupled to a device bus.” [0032-0033])
12. Claims 9-11 are similar in scope to claims 2-4, and they are rejected under similar rationale.
13. Claim 15 is similar in scope to claim 1, and thus is rejected under similar rationale. Zhao additionally teaches A non-transitory machine-readable medium comprising instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause a computing system to (“the device 800, which is a form of a data processing system, includes a bus 803 which is coupled to a microprocessor(s) 805 and a ROM (Read Only Memory) 807 and volatile RAM 809 and a non-volatile memory 811.” [0030] “a “machine” may be a machine that converts intermediate form (or “abstract”) instructions into processor specific instructions (e.g., an abstract execution environment such as a “virtual machine” (e.g., a Java Virtual Machine), an interpreter, a Common Language Runtime, a high-level language virtual machine, etc.), and/or electronic circuitry disposed on a semiconductor chip (e.g., “logic circuitry” implemented with transistors) designed to execute instructions such as a general-purpose processor and/or a special-purpose processor. … Such a computer program may be stored in a computer readable storage medium, such as, but not limited to, any type of disk including floppy disks, optical disks, CD-ROMs, and magnetic-optical disks, DRAM (volatile), flash memory, read-only memories (ROMs), RAMs, EPROMs, EEPROMs, magnetic or optical cards, or any type of media suitable for storing electronic instructions, and each coupled to a device bus.” [0032-0033])
14. Claims 16-18 are similar in scope to claims 2-4, and they are rejected under similar rationale.
Allowable Subject Matter
15. Claims 5-7, 12-14, 19 and 20 are objected to being dependent upon rejected base claims. The claims would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all the limitations of the base claims and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 5, 12 and 19, the prior arts of record fails to either individually or in combination teach the claimed feature of: “computing a ratio between an area of the minimum oriented bounding box to the area for the face of the CAD object; and designating the mesh direction of the face of the CAD object as unreliable responsive to a determination that the computed ratio exceeds a predetermined threshold.”
Regarding claims 6, 13 and 20, the prior arts of record fails to either individually or in combination teach the claimed feature of: “generating frame field vectors for mesh elements of the background mesh; and determining the region-specific axis as a function of the frame field vectors of one or more of mesh elements of the background mesh that the imprint region overlaps with; and rotating the imprint region according to the region-specific axis to determine the adapted imprint region.”
Claim 7 is also objected to for depending from claim 6.
Claim 14 is also objected to for depending from claim 13.
Conclusion
16. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michelle Chin whose telephone number is (571)270-3697. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00 AM-4:30 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http:/Awww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Kent Chang can be reached on (571)272-7667. 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:/Awww.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent- center for more information about Patent Center and https:/Awww.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.
/MICHELLE CHIN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2614