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 .
Cross Reference to Related Applications
2. The present Application is a continuation of U.S. Non-Provisional Patent Application No. 16/911,209, entitled “TIMELINE CONSIDERATIONS FOR CHANNEL STATE INFORMATION REPORTING OF A SIDELINK CHANNEL,” filed June 24, 2020, which claims the benefit of Greek Provisional Patent Application No. 20190100336 by MANOLAKOS et al., entitled “TIMELINE CONSIDERATIONS FOR CHANNEL STATE INFORMATION REPORTING OF A SIDELINK CHANNEL,” filed August 6, 2019, each of which are assigned to the assignee hereof, and expressly incorporated by reference in their entirety.
Priority
3. Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Claims status
4. Based on the Response to Restriction Requirement filed on July 22, 2026, applicant elects, to prosecute Group I for examination without traverse. Claims 31-35 were canceled and therefore, claims 21-30, 36-45 and 51-60 are currently pending for examination.
Drawings
5. The Examiner contends that the drawings submitted on June 19, 2024 are acceptable for examination proceedings.
Information Disclosure Statement
6. The Examiner has considered the reference(s) listed on the Information Disclosure Statements submitted on June 19, 2024 and September 19, 2024.
35 USC § 112 (f) Claim Limitations Analysis
7. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
8. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
9. Use of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that § 112(f) (pre-AIA § 112, sixth paragraph) is invoked is rebutted when the function is recited with sufficient structure, material, or acts within the claim itself to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that § 112(f) (pre-AIA § 112, sixth paragraph) is not invoked is rebutted when the claim element recites function but fails to recite sufficiently definite structure, material or acts to perform that function.
Claim elements in this application that use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed to invoke § 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Similarly, claim elements that do not use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed not to invoke § 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claims 56-60 have been analyzed under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Regarding claims 56-60, since the claim limitation(s), “means for receiving”, “means for transmitting” and “means for determining” invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, the claims have been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof [Note: claim limitation(s), “means for receiving”, “means for transmitting” and “means for determining” are being treated in accordance with 112(f) because the functions of “transmitting”, “receiving” and “determining” are modified by the term “means” which is a word that serves as a generic placeholder for structure that performs the recited functions].
A review of the specification (e.g., Figs. 6-13, paragraphs [0126], [0132]-[0133], [0136], [0280]-[0282], of the Publication) appears to show the corresponding structure (i.e. “a processor may also be implemented as a combination of computing devices (e.g., a combination of a DSP and a microprocessor, multiple microprocessors, one or more microprocessors in conjunction with a DSP core, or any other such configuration); the functions described may be implemented in hardware, software executed by a processor, firmware, or any combination thereof; if implemented in software executed by a processor, the functions may be stored on or transmitted over as one or more instructions or code on a computer-readable medium”) described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation.
The structures are either defined in the specification as a particular structure or known by one skilled in the art as denoting a type of structure device. [Note: MPEP 2181, Non-specialized functions: functions known by those of ordinary skill in the art as being commonly performed by a general purpose computer or computer component].
If Applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the Examiner's interpretation of the corresponding structure, Applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office Action.
If the Applicant does not intend to have the claimed limitation(s) treated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, Applicant may amend the claim(s) so that it/they will clearly not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, present a sufficient showing that the claim recites/recite sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function to preclude application of 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
For more information, see MPEP § 2173 et seq. and Supplementary Examination Guidelines for Determining Compliance with 35 U.S.C. 112 and for Treatment of Related Issues in Patent Applications, 76 FR 7162, 7167 (Feb. 9, 2011).
Double Patenting
10. The non-statutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper time wise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A non-statutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a non-statutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 21-30, 36-45 and 51-60 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-29 of Patent No. (US 12,041,560 B2). Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims in the present application and Patent Number (US 12,041,560 B2) all disclose the method of receiving, from the second UE, the aperiodic reference signal on a second sidelink channel based at least in part on the received first control information; and transmitting, to the second UE on a third sidelink channel, a channel state information report (CSI) prior to a termination of the first timing configuration. (please see below the mapping of claims; the table below shows only example of claim 36 is anticipated by claim 1 of Patent No. US 12,041,560 B2).
Claim
Instant Application No. 18/747,959 (limitations)
Patent No. US 12,041,560 B2 (limitations)
Claim
36
A method for wireless communications at a first user equipment (UE), comprising:
receiving, from a second UE via a first sidelink channel, a first control information comprising a trigger to measure an aperiodic reference signal, wherein the first control information is relayed from the second UE to the first UE based at least in part on the first UE being out of coverage with respect to a network device;
receiving, from the second UE, the aperiodic reference signal via a second sidelink channel based at least in part on the received first control information; and
transmitting, to the second UE via a third sidelink channel, a channel state information (CSI) report based at least in part on the received aperiodic reference signal.
A method for wireless communications at a first user equipment (UE), comprising: receiving, from a second UE on a first sidelink channel, a first timing configuration, wherein the first UE and the second UE are different UEs; receiving, from the second UE on the first sidelink channel, a first control information comprising a trigger to measure an aperiodic reference signal based at least in part on the first timing configuration, wherein the first control information is relayed from the second UE to the first UE based at least in part on the first UE being out of coverage with respect to a network device; receiving, from the second UE, the aperiodic reference signal on a second sidelink channel based at least in part on the received first control information; and transmitting, to the second UE on a third sidelink channel, a channel state information report (CSI) prior to a termination of the first timing configuration.
1
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
11. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
12. Claims 21-22, 25, 27, 29-30, 36-37, 40, 42, 44-45, 51-52, 55, 56-57 and 60 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshioka et al. (US 2022/0014338 A1), hereinafter “Yoshioka” in view of Ye et al. (US 2022/0085923 A1), hereinafter “Ye”.
Regarding claim 21, Yoshioka discloses a first user equipment (UE) for wireless communication (Figs. 1, 10, operation example of performing sidelink communication), comprising:
one or more memories storing processor-executable code; and one or more processors coupled with the one or more memories (Figs. 6-13, each device, such as the processor and the memory, is also connected by the bus for communicating information) and individually or collectively operable to execute the code (Figs. 6-13, configuration example of a radio communication system) to cause the first UE to:
receive, from a second UE (Fig. 10, paragraphs [0049], [0077]-[0078], [0087], communication apparatus 20A) via a first sidelink channel (Fig. 10, paragraphs [0049], [0077]-[0078], [0087], SCI/PSCCH/PSSCH), a first control information comprising a trigger (Fig. 10, paragraphs [0049], [0077]-[0078], [0087], CSI request of the sidelink communication) to measure an aperiodic reference signal (Fig. 10, paragraphs [0049], [0077]-[0078], [0087], CSI on aperiodic sidelink communication), wherein the first control information is relayed (Fig. 10, paragraphs [0049], [0077]-[0078], [0087], sidelink communication) from the second UE (Fig. 10, paragraphs [0049], [0077]-[0078], [0087], communication apparatus 20A) to the first UE (Fig. 10, paragraphs [0049], [0077]-[0078], [0087], communication apparatus 20B) based at least in part on the first UE being out of coverage (Fig. 10, paragraphs [0049], [0077]-[0078], [0087], outside the coverage) with respect to a network device (Fig. 10, paragraphs [0049], [0077]-[0078], [0087], with respect to the base station);
receive, from the second UE (Fig. 10, communication apparatus 20A), the aperiodic reference signal (Fig. 10, paragraphs [0079], [0082]-[0084], CSI-RS) via a second sidelink channel (Fig. 10, SCI/PSCCH/PSSCH) based at least in part on the received first control information (Fig. 10, paragraphs [0079], [0082]-[0084], measuring CSI (SS/PBCH block; S-PSS/S-SSS/PSBCH; CSI-RS); and
transmit, to the second UE (Fig. 10, communication apparatus 20A) via a third sidelink channel (Fig. 10, paragraphs [0079], [0086], resource for reporting CSI of sidelink communication in SL interface), a channel state information (CSI) report (Fig. 10, paragraphs [0079], [0086], derived CSI of sidelink communication to communication apparatus 20A).
While Yoshioka implicitly refers to “a channel state information (CSI) report based at least in part on the received aperiodic reference signal”, Ye from the same or similar field of endeavor explicitly discloses transmit, to the second UE via a third sidelink channel (Fig. 6, paragraphs [0204]-[0205], [0207], [0210], [0211], PSSCH containing CSI reports), a channel state information (CSI) report (Fig. 6, paragraphs [0204]-[0205], [0207], [0210], [0211], aperiodic CSI report) based at least in part on the received aperiodic reference signal (Fig. 6, paragraphs [0204]-[0205], [0207], [0210], [0211], CSI report time window and CSI report time depending on CSI-RS resources).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “a channel state information (CSI) report based at least in part on the received aperiodic reference signal” as taught by Ye, in the system of Yoshioka, so that it would provide implementations of providing feedback for sidelink communications to access data networks communicatively coupled with radio access network (Ye, paragraph [0004]).
Regarding claim 22, Yoshioka discloses the first control information triggers transmission of respective CSI reports to the second UE from a plurality of UEs comprising at least the first UE (paragraphs [0067]-[0068], groupcast and/or broadcast PSCCH/PSCCH transmission refers to figs 9B-9C).
Regarding claim 25, Yoshioka discloses the one or more processors are individually or collectively further operable to execute the code to cause the first UE to: determine a first timing configuration, wherein the first timing configuration defines a time period for the second UE to transmit, to the network device, aggregated CSI reports (paragraphs [0080], [0084], [0114], [0119], report the CSI of the sidelink communication and the CSI of the other sidelink communication by multiplexing the CSI of the sidelink communication and the CSI of the other sidelink communication).
Regarding claim 27, Yoshioka in view of Ye disclose the first UE according to claim 25.
Ye further discloses to determine the first timing configuration, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the first UE to: receive, from the second UE via the first sidelink channel, an indication of the first timing configuration (Fig. 6, paragraphs [0204]-[0205], [0207], [0210], [0211], CSI report time window and CSI report time depending on CSI-RS resources).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “to determine the first timing configuration, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the first UE to: receive, from the second UE via the first sidelink channel, an indication of the first timing configuration” as taught by Ye, in the system of Yoshioka, so that it would provide implementations of providing feedback for sidelink communications to access data networks communicatively coupled with radio access network (Ye, paragraph [0004]).
Regarding claim 29, Yoshioka discloses the first control information is relayed from the second UE to the first UE based at least in part on the second UE being located within coverage with respect to the network device (Fig. 10, paragraphs [0049], [0077]-[0078], [0087], a case in which some of communication apparatuses are within the coverage and other communication apparatuses are outside the coverage).
Regarding claim 30, Yoshioka discloses to receive the first control information, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the first UE to: receive, from the second UE, a downlink control information message comprising the first control information (Fig. 10, paragraphs [0049], [0077]-[0078], [0087], scheduling sidelink control information transmitted).
Regarding claim 36, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 21 from the perspective of a network device.
Regarding claim 37, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 22.
Regarding claim 40, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 25.
Regarding claim 42, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 27.
Regarding claim 44, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 29.
Regarding claim 45, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 30.
Regarding claim 51, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 21.
Regarding claim 52, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 22.
Regarding claim 55, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 25.
Regarding claim 56, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 21.
Regarding claim 57, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 22.
Regarding claim 60, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 25.
13. Claims 23, 38, 53 and 58 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshioka et al. (US 2022/0014338 A1), hereinafter “Yoshioka” in view of Ye et al. (US 2022/0085923 A1), hereinafter “Ye” in view of LI et al. (US 2022/0007403 A1), hereinafter “Li”.
Regarding claim 23, Yoshioka in view of Ye disclose the first UE according to claim 21.
Neither Yoshioka nor Ye explicitly discloses “the first control information and the aperiodic reference signal are included in a same slot, or the first control information is included in a first slot that occurs prior to a second slot comprising the aperiodic reference signal”.
However, Li from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses the first control information and the aperiodic reference signal are included in a same slot, or the first control information is included in a first slot that occurs prior to a second slot comprising the aperiodic reference signal (Fig. 16, paragraphs [0202], [0293], one time domain resource assignment may be used for both PSCCH and PSSCH; scheduled sidelink transmission may occur in slot k, where k=1, 2, 3, etc.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the first control information and the aperiodic reference signal are included in a same slot, or the first control information is included in a first slot that occurs prior to a second slot comprising the aperiodic reference signal” as taught by Li, in the combined system of Yoshioka and Ye, so that it would provide sidelink resource configurations and allocation schemes as Vehicle-to-everything applications making significant progress, transmission of short messages about vehicles' own status data for basic safety extended with transmission of larger messages (Li, paragraph [0002]).
Regarding claim 38, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 23.
Regarding claim 53, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 23.
Regarding claim 58, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 23.
14. Claims 24, 39, 54 and 59 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshioka et al. (US 2022/0014338 A1), hereinafter “Yoshioka” in view of Ye et al. (US 2022/0085923 A1), hereinafter “Ye” in view of AIBA et al. (US 2022/0104238 A1), hereinafter “Aiba”.
Regarding claim 24, Yoshioka in view of Ye disclose the first UE according to claim 21.
While Yoshioka in view of Ye implicitly refer to “the first sidelink channel comprises a physical sidelink shared channel (PSSCH), the second sidelink channel comprises the PSSCH or a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH), and the third sidelink channel comprises the PSSCH or a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH)”, Aiba from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses the first sidelink channel comprises a physical sidelink shared channel (PSSCH), the second sidelink channel comprises the PSSCH or a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH), and the third sidelink channel comprises the PSSCH or a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH) (paragraphs [0117], [0138], [0155], [0147], SCI on PSSCH; second SCI transmitted through PSSCH; SL measurement info to the first UE through PSSCH).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the first sidelink channel comprises a physical sidelink shared channel (PSSCH), the second sidelink channel comprises the PSSCH or a physical uplink shared channel (PUSCH), and the third sidelink channel comprises the PSSCH or a physical sidelink feedback channel (PSFCH)” as taught by Aiba, in the combined system of Yoshioka and Ye, so that it would provide improved communication flexibility and/or efficiency relate to user equipments, base stations and methods for sidelink (SL) communications (Aiba, paragraph [0005]).
Regarding claim 39, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 24.
Regarding claim 54, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 24.
Regarding claim 59, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 24.
15. Claims 26 and 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshioka et al. (US 2022/0014338 A1), hereinafter “Yoshioka” in view of Ye et al. (US 2022/0085923 A1), hereinafter “Ye” in view of CHENG et al. (US 2020/0322024 A1), hereinafter “Cheng”.
Regarding claim 26, Yoshioka in view of Ye disclose the first UE according to claim 25.
Neither Yoshioka nor Ye explicitly discloses “to transmit the CSI report, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the first UE to: transmit the CSI report prior to a termination of the first timing configuration”.
However, Cheng from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses to transmit the CSI report, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the first UE to: transmit the CSI report prior to a termination of the first timing configuration (paragraph [0052], CSI report may be considered an outdated CSI report if the time difference is greater than the time threshold and the UE may ignore the outdated CSI report or may not update the CSI for the triggered CSI report in slot n).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “to transmit the CSI report, the one or more processors are individually or collectively operable to execute the code to cause the first UE to: transmit the CSI report prior to a termination of the first timing configuration” as taught by Cheng, in the combined system of Yoshioka and Ye, so that it would provide improved and efficient mechanism for a UE to acquire CSI on an SL channel (Cheng, paragraph [0005]).
Regarding claim 41, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 26.
16. Claims 28 and 43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshioka et al. (US 2022/0014338 A1), hereinafter “Yoshioka” in view of Ye et al. (US 2022/0085923 A1), hereinafter “Ye” in view of KIM et al. (US 2019/0165846 A1), hereinafter “Kim”.
Regarding claim 28, Yoshioka in view of Ye disclose the first UE according to claim 25.
Neither Yoshioka nor Ye explicitly discloses “the first timing configuration is based at least in part on timing capabilities of the first UE, the second UE, or both”.
However, Kim from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses the first timing configuration is based at least in part on timing capabilities of the first UE, the second UE, or both (paragraphs [0356], [0535], CSI reporting timing and UE capabilities).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to provide “the first timing configuration is based at least in part on timing capabilities of the first UE, the second UE, or both” as taught by Kim, in the combined system of Yoshioka and Ye, so that it would provide development of more advanced mobile communication systems reporting Channel State Information for supporting coverage from voice services through data services up to high-speed data services (Kim, paragraph [0003]).
Regarding claim 43, the claim is rejected based on the same reasoning as presented in the rejection of claim 28.
Conclusion
17. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SITHU KO whose telephone number is 571-272-8647. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Friday 8:30am-5:00pmEST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Edan Orgad can be reached on 571-272-7884. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SITHU KO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2414
Prosecution Insights