Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections
set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is
not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention
and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the
claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention
was made.
Claims 1-5 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Castagnoli et al. (US 2006/0215582 A1, “Castagnoli”) in view of Han et al. (US 2015/0264636 A1, “Han”), further in view of Kiiskila et al. (US 2010/0302062 A1 / US 7,996,031 B2, “Kiiskila”), and further in view of Qi et al. (US 2015/0319596 A1, “Qi”).
Regarding claim 1, Castagnoli discloses: a method for managing an activation state of a node device, called current node, of a wireless communication network (WN), said wireless communication network (WN) being configured to provide a communication service to a client device, said wireless communication network (WN) comprising at least one other node device, called neighbor node,”
(figure 1, ¶[0017]-¶[0023], a hierarchical wireless mesh network having a plurality of routing nodes that communicate with one another and provide network access to wireless clients. A routing node constitutes the claimed current node; another routing node constitutes the claimed neighbor node; and the wireless client constitutes the claimed client device).
“said current node comprising a first radio hosting a first access point to a first wireless communication network, called core (CN) of the current node, configured to interconnect the current node and said at least one neighbor node (¶¶ [0019]-[0021], [0024]-[0026], Fig. 2). Castagnoli teaches that each routing node has a wireless backbone interface unit operating in a first frequency band. The backbone radio communicates with upstream parent and downstream child routing nodes and implements the inter-node wireless backbone.
“and a second radio hosting a second access point to a second wireless communication network, called user network (UN), of the current node, configured to connect the client device to said current node and, via the core network (CN), give it access to said communication service” (¶¶ [0017]-[0023], [0024]-[0026], Fig. 1, Fig. 2.)
Castagnoli teaches that the same routing node additionally has a WLAN interface unit operating in a second frequency band to establish and maintain wireless connections with wireless clients. Client traffic is routed through the routing-node hierarchy toward the external network.
Castagnoli does not disclose “said current node being configured, upon expiry of a period of inactivity during which no client device has connected to said user network (UN), to enter a partially deactivated state, comprising a partial deactivation of said radios, whereby one of said first and second radios remains active,”
“upon receipt of a communication request by the current node on one of said first and second radios, reactivation of the other radio of the current node, when said current node is in the partially deactivated state,”
“when it has been determined, at least as a function of the received communication request, that reconnection of the current node to said at least one neighbor node is required to process said communication request,” or “and following failure of reconnection of the current node to said at least one neighbor node, triggering reactivation of the at least one neighbor node by the current node sending a discovery request on at least one radio of said at least one neighbor node.”
Han discloses: said current node being configured, upon expiry of a period of inactivity during which no client device has connected to said user network (UN), to enter a partially deactivated state, comprising a partial deactivation of said radios, whereby one of said first and second radios remains active, (¶¶ [0003]-[0004], [0012], [0024], [0042]-[0044]. Han teaches that an access node may be placed into a dormant state when it is not serving a user and may remain partially or periodically awake to send or receive discovery messages. Han therefore teaches deactivating access-node functionality after inactivity while preserving an active discovery-signaling capability.
Han discloses triggering reactivation of the at least one neighbor node by the current node sending a discovery request on at least one radio of said at least one neighbor node (¶¶ [0043], [0055]-[0056], Fig. 2, steps 222-224).
Han teaches that the eNB or UE may send a discovery message to a dormant access node, that the message may request the access node to fully wake, and that the access node proceeds with a full wake-up procedure upon receipt of the command.
Thus, it would have been obvious to modify Castagnoli’s dual-radio routing node according to Han’s dormant-node power management so that a radio or associated access function that is not serving a client may be deactivated while sufficient discovery functionality remains available. Han expressly identifies reduced interference and power conservation as benefits. Applying that known dormant-node technique to Castagnoli’s known dual-radio node would have predictably reduced unnecessary power consumption while preserving the ability to restore service.
Han and Castagnoli do not disclose upon receipt of a communication request by the current node on one of said first and second radios, reactivation of the other radio of the current node, when said current node is in the partially deactivated state, “when it has been determined, at least as a function of the received communication request, that reconnection of the current node to said at least one neighbor node is required to process said communication request,” or “and following failure of reconnection of the current node to said at least one neighbor node,” Han also does not expressly identify the sender of the wake-up discovery message as the claimed dual-radio current node after failure of that current node’s reconnection to the same neighbor node.
Kiiskila discloses “when it has been determined ... that reconnection of the current node to said at least one neighbor node is required to process said communication request, and following failure of reconnection of the current node to said at least one neighbor node,” (col. 7, lines 18-27; col. 8, lines 48-65; col. 9, lines 21-40).
Kiiskila teaches maintaining neighbor and route state, validating upstream neighbors with unicast HELLO messages, determining that upstream neighbors are down, and initiating neighbor or network discovery when no route is available. Kiiskila further teaches beginning network discovery when upstream-neighbor communication links have been severed or repeated registration messages are not acknowledged.
“the current node sending a discovery request on at least one radio of said at least one neighbor node.” (col. 7, lines 28-64; col. 8, lines 1-30).
Kiiskila teaches that the node experiencing the failed or severed link transmits broadcast network-discovery messages, waits for acknowledgments from neighboring nodes, gathers a complete neighbor list, and selects an available network or neighbor.
Kiiskila
Thus, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to incorporate Kiiskila’s failure-responsive neighbor-discovery procedure into the Castagnoli/Han system so that the modified dual-radio node initiates discovery when an inter-node route fails. Castagnoli supplies the inter-node backbone and neighboring routing nodes; Han supplies dormant-node wake-up by discovery signaling; and Kiiskila supplies the known decision to initiate discovery after failed neighboring connectivity. The combination would have predictably restored a usable communication path after link failure.
Kiiskila does not disclose“upon receipt of a communication request by the current node on one of said first and second radios, reactivation of the other radio of the current node, when said current node is in the partially deactivated state,” Kiiskila does not disclose a request received on one radio of a dual-radio node causing the other radio of that node to reactivate. Kiiskila also does not itself disclose that the discovery request wakes a dormant neighbor; Han supplies that wake-up effect.
Qi discloses “upon receipt of a communication request by the current node on one of said first and second radios, reactivation of the other radio of the current node, when said current node is in the partially deactivated state,” (¶¶ [0016]-[0020], [0023]-[0025], [0029]-[0030], [0035]-[0040]).
Qi expressly teaches first and second radios, communication of connectivity and remote-wakeup information using the second, lower-power radio, and powering on the first radio to establish the requested connection. Qi also teaches determining availability of the first radio and conveying that availability over the second radio.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to further modify the Castagnoli/Han/Kiiskila system according to Qi so that the radio remaining active carries the communication or wake-up request and selectively reactivates the other radio only when the requested connection is needed. Qi expressly identifies reduced power consumption as a benefit. The modification would have predictably provided the claimed cross-radio wake-up while preserving failure-responsive discovery and dormant-neighbor reactivation.
Regarding claim 2,“The method of managing an activation state of a node device according to claim 1, characterized in that it comprises determining that a reconnection of the current node to said at least one neighbor node is required, at least as a function of a type of the communication request, and of a topology of the wireless communication network.”
Castagnoli discloses:“a topology of the wireless communication network” (Castagnoli ¶¶ [0017]-[0018], [0038]-[0040]). Castagnoli teaches a hierarchical topology with parent, child, root, and neighboring routing nodes and reconfiguration when topology changes.
Castagnoli does not disclose: “determining that a reconnection of the current node to said at least one neighbor node is required, at least as a function of a type of the communication request, and of a topology of the wireless communication network.”
Han discloses“determining that a reconnection of the current node to said at least one neighbor node is required” (Han ¶¶ [0043], [0055]-[0056]).
Han teaches determining from a discovery/wake-up request that dormant-node activation is required.
Thus, it would have been obvious to apply Han’s request-responsive wake-up determination to Castagnoli’s topology-aware mesh node so that reconnection is initiated only when service restoration is requested.
Castagnoli and Han do not disclose at least as a function of a type of the communication request, and of a topology of the wireless communication network.
Kiiskila discloses “of a topology of the wireless communication network” (Kiiskila col. 5, ll. 27-54; col. 7, ll. 28-64). Kiiskila teaches neighbor lists, available routes, upstream-neighbor status, and route selection based on discovered network topology.
Thus, It would have been obvious to use Kiiskila’s known topology and route state when deciding whether Han’s requested reconnection is required in Castagnoli’s mesh network.
Castagnoli, Han, and Kiiskila do not disclose at least as a function of a type of the communication request.
Qi discloses“at least as a function of a type of the communication request” (¶¶ [0023]-[0025])
Qi teaches that the received request identifies the requested connectivity capability, permitting activation to depend on the request type.
Thus, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use Qi’s request-type information together with Kiiskila’s topology information to decide whether reconnection is necessary, avoiding unnecessary radio activation.
Regarding Claim 3, Claim language: “The method of managing an activation state of a node device according to claim 1, characterized in that, when it has been determined that a connection of said current node to the wireless communication network (WN) is required, the method comprises selecting at least one said neighbor node and the discovery request is sent to said at least one selected neighbor node.” Castagnoli discloses “said at least one neighbor node” (Castagnoli ¶¶ [0017]-[0023]; Fig. 1). Castagnoli teaches neighboring parent and child routing nodes in the wireless mesh.
Castagnoli does not disclose: “when it has been determined that a connection of said current node to the wireless communication network (WN) is required, the method comprises selecting at least one said neighbor node and the discovery request is sent to said at least one selected neighbor node.” Han discloses “the discovery request is sent to said at least one selected neighbor node” (Han ¶¶ [0043], [0055]-[0056])
Han teaches sending a discovery/wake-up message to a dormant access node selected for activation.
Motivation to combine A+B:
Thus, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to direct Han’s known wake-up request to a neighboring Castagnoli routing node whose activation is needed to restore service.
Han and Castagnoli do not disclose “selecting at least one said neighbor node.”
Kiiskila discloses “selecting at least one said neighbor node” (Kiiskila col. 7, ll. 28-64)
Kiiskila teaches receiving acknowledgments, compiling a neighbor list, and selecting an available or preferred neighboring node/network.
Thus, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to use Kiiskila’s neighbor-selection procedure to choose the target of Han’s discovery request in Castagnoli’s mesh, providing predictable route restoration.
Regarding Claim 4, Claim language: “The method of managing an activation state of a node device according to claim 3, characterized in that, when the communication request comprises a request for discovery of said network of the current node, said at least one selected neighbor node is located on said connection path from the current node to another of said node devices of the wireless communication network (WN), called gateway node, configured to provide the communication service.”
Castagnoli discloses: “said at least one selected neighbor node is located on said connection path from the current node to another of said node devices of the wireless communication network (WN), called gateway node, configured to provide the communication service.” (Castagnoli ¶¶ [0017]-[0023]; Fig. 1)
Castagnoli teaches a hierarchical path through parent routing nodes toward root routing nodes connected to an external network, with an upstream neighbor located on the service path.
Castagnoli does not disclose “when the communication request comprises a request for discovery of said network of the current node.”
Han discloses: “when the communication request comprises a request for discovery of said network of the current node” (Han ¶¶ [0043], [0055]-[0056])
Han teaches discovery messages used to discover and wake dormant nodes for service availability.
Thus, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to use Han’s discovery request within Castagnoli’s known upstream service path to identify or wake the neighbor needed to reach the gateway.
Han does not disclose “said at least one selected neighbor node is located on said connection path ... called gateway node” . Kiiskila discloses “said at least one selected neighbor node is located on said connection path ... called gateway node” (Kiiskila col. 4, ll. 21-45; col. 5, ll. 27-54).
Kiiskila teaches selecting an upstream neighbor having a valid route toward a gateway/master network.
Thus, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to select the target neighbor using Kiiskila’s valid-route information so the discovery request proceeds along the known path to the gateway providing the service.
Regarding claim 5, Claim language: “The method of managing an activation state of a node device according to claim 3, characterized in that when the communication request comprises a request for configuration of the communication network, it is determined that a reconnection of the current node to the core network is required to process said communication request, all nodes neighboring the current node to which it is not already connected are selected and reactivation of said neighboring nodes is triggered by sending a discovery request.”
Castagnoli discloses:“when the communication request comprises a request for configuration of the communication network” (Castagnoli ¶¶ [0037]-[0040])
Castagnoli teaches reconfiguration of the hierarchical mesh when nodes fail or new nodes are added.
Castagnoli does not disclose: “all nodes neighboring the current node to which it is not already connected are selected and reactivation of said neighboring nodes is triggered by sending a discovery request.” Han discloses “reactivation of said neighboring nodes is triggered by sending a discovery request” (Han ¶¶ [0043], [0055]-[0056]). Han teaches triggering dormant-node wake-up by sending a discovery message containing a wake-up command.:
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use Han’s discovery-triggered wake-up during Castagnoli’s mesh reconfiguration so dormant neighbors can participate in restoring the network.
Castagnoli and Han do not disclose all nodes neighboring the current node to which it is not already connected are selected. Kiiskila discloses all nodes neighboring the current node to which it is not already connected are selected (Kiiskila col. 7, ll. 28-64).
Kiiskila teaches full network discovery in which all hearing neighbors may respond and be included in the discovered neighbor set when no usable route exists.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to apply Kiiskila’s full-neighbor discovery during Castagnoli’s reconfiguration and use Han’s wake-up message to reactivate the responding dormant neighbors, predictably restoring the core connection.
Regarding Claim 8, Castagnoli discloses: “An apparatus for managing an activation state of a node device, called current node, of a wireless communication network (WN), configured to provide a communication service to a client device, said wireless communication network (WN) comprising at least one other node device, called neighbor node,” (Castagnoli ¶¶ [0017]-[0023]; Fig. 1).
Castagnoli teaches a routing-node apparatus in a hierarchical wireless mesh having neighboring routing nodes and wireless clients.
“said current node comprising a first radio hosting a first access point to a first wireless communication network, called core network (CN) of the current node, configured to interconnect said current node and said at least one neighbor node, and a second radio hosting a second access point to a second wireless communication network, called user network (UN) of the current node, configured to connect the client device to said user network (UN) and, via the core network, give it access to the communication service,” (Castagnoli ¶¶ [0019]-[0026]; Fig. 2)
Castagnoli teaches a backbone radio/interface for routing-node communication and a separate WLAN radio/interface for client communication.
Castagnoli does not disclose “said current node being configured, upon expiry of a period of inactivity during which no client device has connected to said user network (UN), to enter into a partially deactivated state, comprising a partial deactivation of said radios, according to which one of said radios among the first and second radios remains active,” “upon receipt of a communication request by the current node on one of said first and second radios, reactivation of the other radio, when said current node is in the partially deactivated state,” “when the deactivated state of the current node comprises a deactivation of the first radio and when it has been determined, at least as a function of the received communication request, that a connection of the current node to the core network is required to process said communication request, and following a connection failure of the current node to said at least one neighbor node, triggering a reactivation of the at least one neighbor node by the current node sending a discovery request on the radio remaining active of said at least one neighbor node.”
Han discloses:“said current node being configured, upon expiry of a period of inactivity during which no client device has connected to said user network (UN), to enter into a partially deactivated state, comprising a partial deactivation of said radios, according to which one of said radios among the first and second radios remains active,” (Han ¶¶ [0024], [0042]-[0044])
Han teaches a dormant access-node apparatus that remains partially or periodically awake for discovery signaling while not providing a service cell.
Han discloses “triggering a reactivation of the at least one neighbor node by the current node sending a discovery request” (Han ¶¶ [0043], [0055]-[0056]).
Han teaches receipt of a discovery message containing a wake-up command and performance of a full wake-up procedure.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to incorporate Han’s dormant-state and wake-up control into Castagnoli’s dual-interface routing-node apparatus to reduce power and interference while preserving discovery availability.
Castagnoli and Han do not disclose “upon receipt of a communication request by the current node on one of said first and second radios, reactivation of the other radio, when said current node is in the partially deactivated state,” “following a connection failure of the current node to said at least one neighbor node.
Kiiskila discloses: “following a connection failure of the current node to said at least one neighbor node,” (Kiiskila col. 7, ll. 18-27; col. 8, ll. 48-65; col. 9, ll. 21-40). Kiiskila teaches detecting loss of neighbor connectivity and initiating network discovery after severed or failed links.
“the current node sending a discovery request” (Kiiskila col. 7, ll. 28-64).Kiiskila teaches that the node experiencing the failed link transmits network-discovery messages to neighboring nodes.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to add Kiiskila’s failed-neighbor detection and discovery logic to the Castagnoli/Han apparatus so that the node automatically initiates recovery after loss of the backbone connection.
Castagnoli, Han, and Kiiskila do not disclose “upon receipt of a communication request by the current node on one of said first and second radios, reactivation of the other radio.” Qi discloses:
“upon receipt of a communication request by the current node on one of said first and second radios, reactivation of the other radio, when said current node is in the partially deactivated state,” (Qi ¶¶ [0023]-[0025], [0029]-[0030], [0035]-[0040]).
Qi teaches receiving remote-wakeup and connection information through a lower-power second radio and powering on the first radio to establish the requested connection.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to implement Qi’s cross-radio wake-up circuitry in the Castagnoli/Han/Kiiskila apparatus to keep one radio available for low-power signaling and activate the other only when required to restore the network connection.
Regarding claim 9, Claim 9 recites a node device (NG, NEL, NEH), called current node, of a first wireless communication network (WN), comprising at least one other node device, called neighbor node, said current node comprising a first radio hosting at least a first access point to a first wireless communication network of said current node, called core network (CN), and a second radio hosting at least one second access point to a second wireless communication network of the current node, called user network (UN), configured to connect the client device to the current node and, via the core network, give it access to the communication service, characterized in that said current node comprises an apparatus for managing an activation state of the node device according to claim 8.
Castagnoli discloses a node device (NG, NEL, NEH), called current node, of a first wireless communication network (WN), comprising at least one other node device, called neighbor node,” (Castagnoli ¶¶ [0017]-[0023]; Fig. 1).
Castagnoli teaches a routing node in a wireless mesh having other neighboring routing nodes.
“said current node comprising a first radio hosting at least a first access point to a first wireless communication network of said current node, called core network (CN), and a second radio hosting at least one second access point to a second wireless communication network of the current node, called user network (UN), configured to connect the client device to the current node and, via the core network, give it access to the communication service,” (Castagnoli ¶¶ [0024]-[0031]; Fig. 2).
Castagnoli teaches the backbone radio/interface, WLAN radio/interface, client access, and routing-node control processor. Castagnoli does not disclose “said current node comprises an apparatus for managing an activation state of the node device according to claim 8.
Han discloses:“an apparatus for managing an activation state of the node device” (Han ¶¶ [0024], [0042]-[0044], [0055]-[0056]). Han teaches dormant-state and wake-up management for an access-node apparatus.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to implement Han’s activation-state control in Castagnoli’s known dual-radio routing node to conserve power while preserving wake-up capability.
Han and Castagnoli do not disclose the complete apparatus for managing an activation state of the node device according to claim 8. Kiiskila discloses “following a connection failure ... sending a discovery request” (Kiiskila col. 7, ll. 18-64; col. 8, ll. 48-65). Kiiskila supplies the failed-neighbor detection and discovery-request portions incorporated through claim 8.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to incorporate Kiiskila’s failure-responsive discovery into the Castagnoli/Han node for automatic recovery after loss of backbone connectivity.
Han, Castagnoli, and Kiiskila do not disclose the cross-radio reactivation relationship incorporated through claim 8. Qi discloses upon receipt of a communication request on one radio, reactivation of the other radio” (Qi ¶¶ [0023]-[0025], [0029]-[0030], [0035]-[0040]). Qi supplies the cross-radio wake-up relationship incorporated through claim 8.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use Qi’s low-power cross-radio wake-up in the Castagnoli/Han/Kiiskila node device for the same power-saving and connectivity-restoration reasons stated for claim 8.
Regarding Claim 10, Claim recites a communication system (S) comprising at least two node devices according to claim 9, of a first wireless communication network, called core network (CN), configured to provide a communication service to a client device, said system comprising a client device (UT) able to connect to a second wireless communication network (UN), called user network, of at least one of said node devices to access said communication service.
Castagnoli discloses a communication system (S) comprising at least two node devices according to claim 9, of a first wireless communication network, called core network (CN), configured to provide a communication service to a client device,” (Castagnoli ¶¶ [0017]-[0023]; Fig. 1)
Castagnoli teaches a system with multiple routing nodes forming a wireless backbone and providing access to an external network “said system comprising a client device (UT) able to connect to a second wireless communication network (UN), called user network, of at least one of said node devices to access said communication service.” (Castagnoli ¶¶ [0017]-[0026]; Figs. 1-2).
Castagnoli teaches wireless clients connecting through the WLAN interface of a routing node and receiving service through the routing-node backbone.
Castagnoli does not disclose at least two node devices according to claim 9. Han discloses activation-state management of the node devices incorporated through claim 9” (Han ¶¶ [0024], [0042]-[0044], [0055]-[0056]). Han supplies dormant-state and wake-up management for the node devices incorporated through claim 9. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to apply Han’s activation-state management to multiple Castagnoli routing nodes to reduce network-wide power consumption and interference.
Castagnoli and Han do not disclose “the complete node devices according to claim 9”
Kiiskila discloses “failure-responsive neighbor discovery incorporated through claim 9” (Kiiskila col. 7, ll. 18-64; col. 8, ll. 48-65).
Kiiskila supplies the failed-link discovery behavior incorporated through claims 8 and 9.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to apply Kiiskila’s recovery procedure across the multiple-node Castagnoli/Han system to restore paths after node or link failure.
Castagnoli, Han, and Kiiskila do not disclose “the cross-radio wake-up incorporated through claim 9.” Qi discloses the cross-radio wake-up incorporated through claim 9” (Qi ¶¶ [0023]-[0025], [0029]-[0030], [0035]-[0040]).
Qi supplies the low-power cross-radio activation relationship incorporated through claim 9.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use Qi’s cross-radio wake-up in each applicable node of the Castagnoli/Han/Kiiskila communication system to preserve low-power availability while selectively restoring higher-power connectivity.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
should be directed to ANGEL T BROCKMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5664. The examiner
can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6:00 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://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor,
Charles Jiang can be reached at 571-270-7191. 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.
/ANGEL T BROCKMAN/
Examiner, Art Unit 2412
Prosecution Insights