DETAILED ACTION
1. This action is responsive to the communications filed on 04/07/2026.
2. Claims 1-19, 21, are pending in this application.
3. Claims 1, 2, 15, 18, 19, have been amended.
4. Claim 20 has been cancelled.
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 with respect to claims 1-19, 21, have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
5. Claims 1-7, 9-11, 14, 15, 17-19, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu et al. (US 2016/0062759) in view of Ingerman et al. (US 2019/0386923).
Regarding claim 1, Lu disclosed:
A device (Figure 2, server 10), comprising:
a processing system including a processor (Figure 2, processor 270); and
a memory that stores executable instructions (Figure 2, storage 260) that, when executed by the processing system, facilitate performance of operations, the operations comprising:
identifying configuration data associated with firmware (Figure 7, step 702, latest firmware) that is to be transferred to a plurality of communication devices (Figure 1, clients A-D) (Figure 7, Paragraphs 28-29, a plurality of clients send a firmware version query to the detecting module of the server 10. The server transmits the current version information to the clients);
obtaining, based on the identifying, information (Figure 7, step 706, calculated total bandwidth) (Figure 7, Paragraphs 31-32, once the clients receive the current version of the firmware, they send a request to download the update if needed. The calculating module of the server calculates the total bandwidth of other client devices that are currently downloading the latest firmware version and the clients that have transmitted the firmware download request in order to determine whether the calculated total bandwidth is larger than a total bandwidth of the server);
analyzing, based on the obtaining, the information to determine whether a transfer of the configuration data is able to be accommodated relative to the capacity of resources that are available, resulting in a first determination (Figure 7, Paragraph 32, determining whether the calculated total bandwidth is larger than a total bandwidth of the server. If no, then the latest firmware is transmitted to the clients); and
based on the first determination (Figure 7, step 710, no) indicating that the transfer of the configuration data is able to be accommodated relative to the capacity of resources that are available, performing the transfer of the configuration data (Figure 7, Paragraph 34, the allocating module transmits the latest firmware to the clients which transmit the firmware download requests in response to the total bandwidth not being larger than the total downloading bandwidth of the server 10).
While Lu disclosed identifying information and using that information to determine whether to transfer the configuration data (see above), Lu did not explicitly disclose wherein the information includes an identification of a level of actual network congestion, an identification of a level of predicted network congestion, and a margin that is required to ensure a given level of quality of service in respect of an impact on communication sessions.
However, in an analogous art, Ingerman disclosed wherein the information includes an identification of a level of actual network congestion (Paragraph 36, congestion information), an identification of a level of predicted network congestion (Paragraphs 74-75, anticipated congestion), and a margin that is required to ensure a given level of quality of service in respect of an impact on communication sessions (Paragraph 5, accommodating occupant-originated data flows)(Paragraph 24, making a request to determine if there are any firmware patches that are due. Paragraph 36, managing the download process, such as the particular timing and data rate at which the downloads occur. The cellular congestion and download management entity CCMM collects information about congestion in the mobile network (see figure 3, showing congestion percentages of different cell towers. Paragraphs 74-75, the system is able to predict future congestion based on historical network traffic patterns. Paragraph 5, download management includes accommodating occupant originated data flows to and from the vehicle and accounting for contractual data arrangements between vehicle makers and cellular providers. Paragraph 38, congestion mitigation by delay/suspend/throttle the download. As the system accommodates occupant originated data flows and is designed to mitigate congestion, this is effectively maintaining the QoS margin so that user sessions in the vehicle are not unduly impacted by an update campaign).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Lu with Ingerman because the references involve updates being downloaded with regard to congestion information, and as such, are within the same environment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the actual congestion, predicted congestion, and margin of Ingerman with the teachings of Lu in order to optimize a range of download management factors (Ingerman, Paragraph 35).
Regarding claim 2, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Lu and Ingerman disclosed:
wherein the operations further comprise: based on the first determination indicating that the transfer of the configuration data is not able to be accommodated relative to the capacity of resources that are available, determining whether an adjustment (Lu, Figure 7, step 708, sequencing) can be made to accommodate the transfer of the configuration data, resulting in a second determination (Lu, Figure 7, Paragraph 33, 35, if the total bandwidth is larger than the total bandwidth of the server, the allocating module sequences the clients to wait for downloading the firmware. The sequencing is based on scoring each client which transmits a firmware download request according to attributes of the clients).
Regarding claim 3, the limitations of claim 2 have been addressed. Lu and Ingerman disclosed:
wherein the operations further comprise: based on the second determination indicating that the adjustment can be made, enacting the adjustment (Lu, Figure 7, step 712, Paragraph 35, scoring each client based on their attributes); and
performing, based on the enacting, the transfer of the configuration data in accordance with the adjustment (Lu, Paragraph 35, the clients wait to download the firmware according to their scores).
Regarding claim 4, the limitations of claim 3 have been addressed. Lu and Ingerman disclosed:
wherein the adjustment comprises: utilizing a modified window for transferring the configuration data, reducing an amount of the configuration data that is to be transferred, reducing an amount or count of devices that are to obtain the configuration data (Lu, Figure 6, Paragraph 24, by assigning a score to each client when the total bandwidth is larger than the total bandwidth of the server, the clients download the firmware in sequence, in this case, clients E-D-A-B-C and not all at once), reducing an encryption or security scheme that is used, reducing a complexity of an encoding scheme that is used, transferring one or more communication sessions from a first resource to one or more other resources, or any combination thereof.
Regarding claim 5, the limitations of claim 2 have been addressed. Lu and Ingerman disclosed:
wherein the operations further comprise: based on the second determination indicating that the adjustment cannot be made, generating a warning, a message (Lu, Paragraphs 25-26, when the total bandwidth is not enough, replying No to client A and informs client A to wait 32 seconds), an alert, or any combination thereof; and
providing the warning, the message, the alert, or the combination thereof as output (Lu, Paragraph 25, replying No to client A).
Regarding claim 6, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Lu and Ingerman disclosed:
wherein the plurality of communication devices comprises an Internet of Things (IoT) device (Ingerman, Paragraph 2, Internet of Things including a connected vehicle).
For motivation, please refer to claim 1.
Regarding claim 7, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Lu and Ingerman disclosed:
wherein the information comprises: an identification of a window for transferring the configuration data, an identification of an amount of data included in the configuration data, an identification of a count of devices included in the plurality of communication devices, an identification of available resources to facilitate the transfer of the configuration data, an identification of a network or system load (Lu, Paragraph 32, calculating the total bandwidth to see if it is larger than the total download bandwidth of the server), an identification of a prediction of the network or system load, or any combination thereof.
Regarding claim 9, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Lu and Ingerman disclosed:
wherein the performing of the transfer of the configuration data comprises commanding infrastructure of a network or system to perform the transfer (Lu, Paragraph 34, in block 710, the allocating module (i.e., infrastructure of a system) transmits the latest firmware to the clients).
Regarding claim 10, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Lu and Ingerman disclosed:
wherein the infrastructure comprises: a router (Ingerman, Paragraph 149, system 700 is embodied in a router), a gateway, a switch, a base station, or any combination thereof.
For motivation, please refer to claim 1.
Regarding claim 11, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Lu and Ingerman disclosed::
wherein the identifying of the configuration data is based on a rollout of an application or a modification to the application (Ingerman, Paragraph 40, vehicles needing an update (i.e., modification) connect to the campaign server).
Regarding claim 14, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Lu and Ingerman disclosed:
wherein the analyzing is performed utilizing an algorithm (Lu, Paragraph 24, Figure 6, calculating the score for a client including a scoring formula (i.e., algorithm)).
Regarding claim 15, Lu disclosed:
A non-transitory machine-readable medium, comprising executable instructions that, when executed by a processing system including a processor (Figure 2, processor 270), facilitate performance of operations, the operations comprising:
identifying a need to update firmware associated with a plurality of devices (Figure 7, Paragraphs 28-29, a plurality of clients send a firmware version query to the detecting module of the server 10. The server transmits the current version information to the clients and therefore identifying a need to update the firmware if the versions do not match);
obtaining information (Figure 7, step 706, calculated total bandwidth) relevant to a transfer of configuration data to facilitate the update (Figure 7, Paragraphs 31-32, once the clients receive the current version of the firmware, they send a request to download the update if needed. The calculating module of the server calculates the total bandwidth of other client devices that are currently downloading the latest firmware version and the clients that have transmitted the firmware download request in order to determine whether the calculated total bandwidth is larger than a total bandwidth of the server);
analyzing the information to determine that resources are available to accommodate the transfer (Figure 7, Paragraph 32, determining whether the total bandwidth is larger than a total bandwidth of the server); and
enabling, based on the analyzing, the transfer of the configuration data to the plurality of devices (Figure 7, Paragraph 34, the allocating module transmits the latest firmware to the clients which transmit the firmware download requests in response to the total bandwidth not being larger than the total downloading bandwidth of the server 10).
While Lu disclosed identifying information and using that information to determine whether to transfer the configuration data (see above), Lu did not explicitly disclose wherein the information includes an identification of a level of actual network congestion, an identification of a level of predicted network congestion, and a margin that is required to ensure a given level of quality of service in respect of an impact on communication sessions; and analyzing the information in accordance with a quality of service that is owed to a plurality of client devices to determine that resources are available to accommodate the transfer and enabling, based on the analyzing, the transfer of the configuration data to the plurality of devices.
However, in an analogous art, Ingerman disclosed wherein the information includes an identification of a level of actual network congestion (Paragraph 36, congestion information), an identification of a level of predicted network congestion (Paragraphs 74-75, anticipated congestion), and a margin that is required to ensure a given level of quality of service in respect of an impact on communication sessions (Paragraph 5, accommodating occupant-originated data flows)(Paragraph 24, making a request to determine if there are any firmware patches that are due. Paragraph 36, managing the download process, such as the particular timing and data rate at which the downloads occur. The cellular congestion and download management entity CCMM collects information about congestion in the mobile network (see figure 3, showing congestion percentages of different cell towers. Paragraphs 74-75, the system is able to predict future congestion based on historical network traffic patterns. Paragraph 5, download management includes accommodating occupant originated data flows to and from the vehicle and accounting for contractual data arrangements between vehicle makers and cellular providers. Paragraph 38, congestion mitigation by delay/suspend/throttle the download. As the system accommodates occupant originated data flows and is designed to mitigate congestion, this is effectively maintaining the QoS margin so that user sessions in the vehicle are not unduly impacted by an update campaign); and
analyzing the information in accordance with a quality of service that is owed to a plurality of client devices to determine that resources are available to accommodate the transfer and enabling, based on the analyzing, the transfer of the configuration data to the plurality of devices (Paragraph 5, download management includes accommodating occupant originated data flows to and from the vehicle and accounting for contractual data arrangements between vehicle makers and cellular providers. Paragraph 38, congestion mitigation by delay/suspend/throttle the download. As the system accommodates occupant originated data flows and is designed to mitigate congestion, this is effectively maintaining the QoS margin so that user sessions in the vehicle are not unduly impacted by an update campaign).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Lu with Ingerman because the references involve updates being downloaded with regard to congestion information, and as such, are within the same environment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the actual congestion, predicted congestion, and margin of Ingerman with the teachings of Lu in order to optimize a range of download management factors (Ingerman, Paragraph 35).
Regarding claim 17, the limitations of claim 15 have been addressed. Lu and Ingerman disclosed:
wherein the information includes a specification of a window that is defined by a start time and at least one of an end time or a duration (Lu, Paragraphs 23-24, client attributes include downloading time (i.e., start time) and a work duration).
Regarding claim 18, Lu disclosed:
A method comprising: determining, by a processing system including a processor, that communication resources (Paragraph 31, bandwidth) are available in an amount greater than a threshold to accommodate a transfer of data to a plurality of devices (Figure 7, Paragraphs 31-32, the calculating module of the server calculates the total bandwidth of other client devices that are currently downloading the latest firmware version and the clients that have transmitted the firmware download request in order to determine whether the calculated total bandwidth is larger than a total bandwidth of the server);
based on the determining, selecting, by the processing system, first resources of the communication resources for transferring the data to first devices included in the plurality of devices and second resources of the communication resources for transferring the data to second devices included in the plurality of devices, wherein the second devices are different from the first devices and the second resources are different from the first resources (Paragraph 20, when the clients have determined what the latest firmware version is and when the firmware of the clients is an earlier firmware version than the current one, the clients A/B send firmware requests to the server. The server determines a total bandwidth of other devices that are downloading the latest firmware. Figure 5 showing clients A/B using the bandwidth (i.e., first resources) to download the latest firmware. Client C is rejected from downloading and must wait for bandwidth to free up (in this case, 30 seconds later). Client C is then able to download using the freed up bandwidth (i.e., second resources));
enabling, by the processing system and based on the selecting, the transfer of the data to the first devices via the first resources (Figure 5, clients A/B downloading the update files using current bandwidth); and
enabling, by the processing system and based on the selecting, the transfer of the data to the second devices via the second resources (Figure 5, client C downloading the update files using the freed up bandwidth).
Lu did not explicitly disclose the plurality of devices including an Internet of Things (loT) device, a connected vehicle, or a combination thereof, and wherein the determining is based on an analysis of information that includes an identification of a level of actual network congestion, an identification of a level of predicted network congestion, and a margin that is required to ensure a given level of quality of service in respect of an impact on communication sessions.
However, in an analogous art, Ingerman disclosed the plurality of devices including an Internet of Things (loT) device, a connected vehicle, or a combination thereof (Paragraph 2, Internet of Things including a connected vehicle); and
wherein the determining is based on an analysis of information that includes an identification of a level of actual network congestion (Paragraph 36, congestion information), an identification of a level of predicted network congestion (Paragraphs 74-75, anticipated congestion), and a margin that is required to ensure a given level of quality of service in respect of an impact on communication sessions (Paragraph 5, accommodating occupant-originated data flows)(Paragraph 24, making a request to determine if there are any firmware patches that are due. Paragraph 36, managing the download process, such as the particular timing and data rate at which the downloads occur. The cellular congestion and download management entity CCMM collects information about congestion in the mobile network (see figure 3, showing congestion percentages of different cell towers. Paragraphs 74-75, the system is able to predict future congestion based on historical network traffic patterns. Paragraph 5, download management includes accommodating occupant originated data flows to and from the vehicle and accounting for contractual data arrangements between vehicle makers and cellular providers. Paragraph 38, congestion mitigation by delay/suspend/throttle the download. As the system accommodates occupant originated data flows and is designed to mitigate congestion, this is effectively maintaining the QoS margin so that user sessions in the vehicle are not unduly impacted by an update campaign).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Lu with Ingerman because the references involve updates being downloaded with regard to congestion information, and as such, are within the same environment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the actual congestion, predicted congestion, and margin of Ingerman with the teachings of Lu in order to optimize a range of download management factors (Ingerman, Paragraph 35).
Regarding claim 19, the limitations of claim 18 have been addressed. Lu and Ingerman disclosed:
wherein the transfer of the data to the first devices causes an update to firmware, software, or a combination thereof, of the first devices from a first version to a second version that is different from the first version, and wherein the selecting is based on optimizing an efficiency of the communication resources (Lu, Paragraph 20, determining that the firmware of the clients is a different version than the current firmware and updating the clients to the current firmware. Paragraph 26, Figure 5, showing clients A/B using the bandwidth (i.e., first resources) to download the latest firmware. Client C is rejected from downloading and must wait for bandwidth to free up. Client C is then able to download using the freed up bandwidth (i.e., efficiency)).
6. Claims 8, 16, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu et al. (US 2016/0062759) in view of Ingerman et al. (US 2019/0386923) and Fink et al. (US 2023/0216735).
Regarding claim 8, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Lu and Ingerman did not explicitly disclose:
wherein the information comprises an identification of a level of quality of service or quality of experience that is owed to a communication session involving an identified user equipment.
However, in an analogous art, Fink disclosed wherein the information comprises an identification of a level of quality of service or quality of experience that is owed to a communication session involving an identified user equipment (Paragraph 60, the information regarding the operation of the network device includes information regarding performance of the network device such as QoS. The device state information is used to evaluate one or more configuration updates implemented on the network device).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Lu and Ingerman with Fink because the references involve sending firmware updates to clients, and as such, are within the same environment
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the QoS of Fink with the teachings of Lu and Ingerman in order to evaluate whether to implement configuration updates (Fink, Paragraph 60).
Regarding claim 16, the limitations of claim 15 have been addressed. Lu and Ingerman did not explicitly disclose:
wherein the quality of service is specified in terms of: a voice communication session, a video communication session, a gaming communication session, or any combination thereof
However, in an analogous art, Fink disclosed wherein the quality of service is specified in terms of: a voice communication session, a video communication session, a gaming communication session, or any combination thereof (Fink, Paragraph 78, voice recognition systems. Paragraph 83, gaming systems).
For motivation, please refer to claim 8.
7. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu et al. (US 2016/0062759) in view of Ingerman et al. (US 2019/0386923) and Patel et al. (US 2020/0301693).
Regarding claim 12, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Lu and Ingerman did not explicitly disclose:
wherein the performing of the transfer of the configuration data is based on a performance of a plurality of batch operations, and wherein a first batch operation included in the plurality of batch operations involves a first subset of the plurality of communication devices and a second batch operation included in the plurality of batch operations involves a second subset of the plurality of communication devices, the second subset being different from the first subset.
However, in an analogous art, Patel disclosed wherein the performing of the transfer of the configuration data is based on a performance of a plurality of batch operations, and wherein a first batch operation included in the plurality of batch operations involves a first subset of the plurality of communication devices and a second batch operation included in the plurality of batch operations involves a second subset of the plurality of communication devices, the second subset being different from the first subset (Paragraph 18, a set of UE devices are determined that need a FOTA (firmware over the air) update and the base stations associated with the UEs. The network capacity is determined for the base stations and a FOTA update batch is generated and sent to the one or more base stations. Each generated FOTA update batch identifies a subset of UEs to receive the FOTA update before the next FOTA update batch).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Lu and Ingerman with Patel because the references involve sending firmware updates to clients, and as such, are within the same environment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the batch operations of Patel with Lu and Ingerman in order to improve and expand available services as well as networks used to deliver such services (Patel, Paragraph 1).
8. Claims 13, 21, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu et al. (US 2016/0062759) in view of Ingerman et al. (US 2019/0386923) and Liao et al. (US 2023/0409311).
Regarding claim 13, the limitations of claim 1 have been addressed. Lu and Ingerman did not explicitly disclose:
wherein the analyzing is performed utilizing machine learning or artificial intelligence.
However, in an analogous art, Lazar disclosed wherein the analyzing is performed utilizing machine learning or artificial intelligence (Paragraph 80, using an AI model to determine the optimum time window of the upgrades).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Lu and Ingerman with Lazar because the references involve sending software updates to clients, and as such, are within the same environment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the AI or ML of Lazar with the teachings of Lu and Ingerman in order to reduce the impact to system performance (Lazar, Paragraph 19).
Regarding claim 21, the limitations of claim 18 have been addressed. While Lu and Ingerman disclosed having a downloading time (i.e., start time) and work duration time (Lu, Paragraphs 23-24), Lu and Ingerman did not explicitly disclose:
further comprising: determining, by the processing system, a window for conducting the transfer of the data, wherein the window is defined by a start time and an end time; and wherein the enabling of the transfer of the data to the first devices is in accordance with the window such that the transfer of the data to the first devices occurs between the start time and the end time.
However, in an analogous art, Lazar disclosed further comprising: determining, by the processing system, a window for conducting the transfer of the data, wherein the window is defined by a start time and an end time (Paragraph 65, AI-based firmware upgrades using an upgrade scheduler 120 that can generate a firmware upgrade schedule which includes an ordered list of devices to be upgraded and a time window for application of the firmware upgrade); and
wherein the enabling of the transfer of the data to the first devices is in accordance with the window such that the transfer of the data to the first devices occurs between the start time and the end time (Paragraph 67, system updater upgrades, during a time window specified by the upgrade scheduler).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Lu and Ingerman with Lazar because the references involve sending software updates to clients, and as such, are within the same environment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the start and end time of Lazar with the teachings of Lu and Ingerman in order to reduce the impact to system performance (Lazar, Paragraph 19).
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 Steven C. Nguyen whose telephone number is (571)270-5663. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7AM - 3PM and alternatively, through e-mail at Steven.Nguyen2@USPTO.gov.
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, Christopher Parry can be reached at 571-272-8328. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/S.C.N/Examiner, Art Unit 2451
/Chris Parry/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2451
Prosecution Insights