DETAILED ACTION
In response to communications filed 07/25/2024.
Claims 1-21 are pending for examination.
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 .
Drawings
New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because Figures 2, 4, 5 and 6 contain illegible writing that is not clear enough to be read. Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-7, 9-13, 15-17, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park et al. (US 2022/0240139 A1) hereinafter “Park.”
Regarding Claim 1, Park teaches An apparatus (Park: paragraphs 0079, 0103, 0131 & Figs. 3A-7, base station of (first) network) comprising:
at least one processor (Park: paragraph 0103 & Fig. 4, source base station in communication with electronic device thus teaching the necessary hardware component); and
at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor (Park: paragraph 0103 & Fig. 4, source base station in communication with electronic device thus teaching the necessary memory component), cause the apparatus at least to perform the following:
sending, to a User Equipment, UE (Park: paragraphs 0041, 0103 & Figs. 1-4, electronic device), first conditional re-configuration information (Park: paragraph 0105 & Fig. 4, source base station transmits a RRC reconfiguration message to the electronic device) for enabling the UE to access a cell of a Secondary Cell Group, SCG (Park: paragraph 0105 & Fig. 4, RRC reconfiguration message includes information on the target base station; see also paragraphs 0107 & 0131, one or more candidate target cells or SpCells), upon a first condition to access the cell of the SCG being met (Park: paragraph 0105, reconfiguration completion message);
sending, to the UE, second conditional re-configuration information for enabling the UE to access a cell of another SCG (Park: paragraph 0111, 0157 & Fig. 5, sending another RRC reconfiguration message to the electronic device) upon a second condition to access the cell of the another SCG being met (Park: paragraph 0105 & Figs. 4-5, RRC reconfiguration message includes addition and/or change information of the conditional reconfiguration);
receiving, from the UE, first information indicating that the first condition has been met (Park: paragraph 0105, base station receives a reconfiguration completion message from the electronic device);
determining whether to delay the cell of the SCG triggering a path switch (Park: paragraphs 0114, 0131 & Figs. 4-7, condition for postponing the time point at which handover is performed during the RA procedure);
sending, to the cell of the SCG, a first indication to delay triggering the path switch (Park: paragraph 0114 & Fig. 5, suspend time point at which conditional handover is performed; see also paragraphs 0132-0133 & Fig. 7, suspend conditional handover), wherein the first indication is sent based at least in part on the determination (Park: paragraph 0114 & Fig. 5, suspend handover based on satisfaction of at least one condition for postponing the time point; see also paragraphs 0132-0133, avoid ping-pong);
receiving, from the UE, second information indicating that the second condition has been met (Park: paragraph 0114, timer for postponing the time point at which the handover is performed; see also paragraphs 0132-0133, identified time is longer than or equal to the predetermined time);
determining whether to abort the cell of the SCG triggering the path switch (Park: paragraphs 0132-0133, determine identified time is longer than or equal to predetermined time); and
sending, to the cell of the SCG, a second indication to abort triggering the path switch (Park: paragraph 0132, maintain suspension of the conditional handover; see also paragraph 0114 & Fig. 5, refrain from performing the conditional handover during random access procedure), wherein the second indication is sent based at least in part on the determination whether to abort triggering the path switch (Park: paragraph 0132, maintain suspension of the conditional handover based on if identified time is longer than or equal to the predetermined time).
Regarding Claim 2, Park teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein determining whether to abort triggering the path switch is based at least in part on when the first indication was sent and when the second information was received (Park: paragraphs 0105, 0132, refrain or suspension of handover after receiving complete message and identified time).
Regarding Claim 3, Park teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the first indication comprises an indication of a delay time, and wherein determining whether to abort triggering the path switch is based at least in part on a determination that a difference between the time the first indication was sent and the time the second information was received is less than the delay time (Park: paragraph 0114, timer for postponing the time point at which the handover is performed; see also paragraphs 0132-0133, identified time is longer than or equal to the predetermined time).
Regarding Claim 4, Park teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches receive, from the UE, a third indication to delay triggering the path switch (Park: paragraph 0132, access time of the access cell);
wherein the determination whether to delay the cell of the SCG from triggering a path switch is based at least in part on the third indication (Park: paragraph 0132, access time of the access cell), and
wherein the third indication is indicative of an evaluation by the UE of at least one of the following:
whether an expected time duration of access, by the UE, to the cell of the SCG is less than a threshold amount of time;
whether access, by the UE, to the cell of the SCG is expected to be a Short Stay, SS, access; and
whether access, by the UE, to the cell of the SCG is expected to be a Ping-Pong, PP, access (Park: paragraph 0132, avoiding unnecessary handovers or ping-pong).
Regarding Claim 5, Park teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches receive, from the UE, one or more measurements of signals from one or more Secondary Cell Groups (Park: paragraph 0129, measurement of a signal from the third base station), wherein the determination whether to delay the cell of the SCG from triggering the path switch is based at least in part on the received one or more measurements (Park: paragraph 0129, condition for suspension of conditional handover); and
evaluate, based at least in part on the one or more measurements of signals, at least one of the following:
whether an expected time duration of access, by the UE, to the cell of the SCG is less than a threshold amount of time;
whether access, by the UE, to the cell of the SCG is expected to be a Short Stay, SS, access; and
whether access, by the UE, to the cell of the SCG is expected to be a Ping-Pong, PP, access (Park: paragraph 0132, avoiding unnecessary handovers or ping-pong).
Regarding Claim 6, Park teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the determination whether to delay the cell of the SCG from triggering the path switch is based at least in part on the evaluation (Park: paragraph 0132, suspension of handover based on ping-pong).
Regarding Claim 7, Park teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the first condition to access the cell of the SCG and/or the second condition to access a cell of another SCG comprises at least one of the following:
a first and/or second execution condition for adding the cell of the SCG and/or the cell of the another SCG respectively (Park: paragraph 0105, add information of the conditional reconfiguration);
a first and/or second execution condition for changing to the cell of the SCG and/or the cell of the another SCG respectively (Park: paragraph 0105, change information of the conditional reconfiguration); and
a first and/or second execution condition of a CPC candidate PSCell (Park: paragraph 0107, identify the target candidate cell within the conditional RRC reconfiguration associated with the corresponding conditional reconfiguration ID as a triggered cell).
Regarding Claim 9, Park teaches An apparatus (Park: paragraphs 0041, 0103 & Figs. 1-4, electronic device) comprising:
at least one processor (Park: paragraph 0041 & Fig. 1, processor); and
at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor (Park: paragraph 0041 & Fig. 1, memory storing commands of processor), cause the apparatus at least to perform the following:
receiving, from a cell of a Master Cell Group, MCG (Park: paragraph 0079, serving cell or base station of first network), first conditional re-configuration information (Park: paragraph 0105 & Fig. 4, source base station transmits a RRC reconfiguration message to the electronic device) for enabling the apparatus to access a cell of a Secondary Cell Group, SCG (Park: paragraph 0105 & Fig. 4, RRC reconfiguration message includes information on the target base station; see also paragraphs 0107 & 0131, one or more candidate target cells or SpCells), upon a first condition to access the cell of the SCG being met (Park: paragraph 0105, reconfiguration completion message);
receiving, from the cell of the MCG, configuration information for configuring the apparatus: to evaluate whether to delay the cell of the SCG triggering a path switch (Park: paragraphs 0114, 0131 & Figs. 4-7, condition for postponing the time point at which handover is performed during the RA procedure), and to send, to the cell of the Master Cell Group, MCG, an indication to delay triggering the path switch based at least in part on the evaluation (Park: paragraph 0114 & Fig. 5, suspend handover based on satisfaction of at least one condition for postponing the time point; see also paragraphs 0132-0133, avoid ping-pong);
receiving, from the cell of the MCG, second conditional re-configuration information for enabling the apparatus to access a cell of another SCG upon a second condition to access the cell of the another SCG being met (Park: paragraph 0114, timer for postponing the time point at which the handover is performed; see also paragraphs 0132-0133, identified time is longer than or equal to the predetermined time);
determining whether the first condition has been met (Park: paragraph 0105, said reconfiguration completion message);
sending, to the cell of the MCG, first information indicating that the first condition has been met (Park: paragraph 0105, UE sends the reconfiguration completion message to the serving cell);
evaluating, responsive to receipt of the configuration information, whether to delay triggering the path switch (Park: paragraphs 0114, 0131 & Figs. 4-7, condition for postponing the time point at which handover is performed during the RA procedure); and
sending, to the cell of the MCG, and based at least in part on the evaluation, the indication to delay triggering the path switch (Park: paragraph 0114 & Fig. 5, suspend time point at which conditional handover is performed; see also paragraphs 0132-0133 & Fig. 7, suspend conditional handover).
Regarding Claim 10, Park teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the configuration information further comprises at least one of the following:
one or more criteria for use by the apparatus to evaluate an indication to delay triggering a path switch the indication; and
one of more thresholds for use by the apparatus to evaluate an indication to delay triggering the path switch (Park: paragraph 0133, time that maintains the possibility of the ping-pong phenomenon to be equal to or lower than a threshold value may be configured as a standby time).
Regarding Claim 11, Park teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein evaluating whether to delay triggering the path switch is based at least in part on evaluating at least one of the following:
whether an expected time duration of access, by the apparatus, to the cell of the SCG is less than a threshold amount of time;
whether access, by the apparatus, to the cell of the SCG is expected to be a Short Stay, SS, access; and
whether access, by the apparatus, to the cell of the SCG is expected to be a Ping-Pong, PP, access (Park: paragraph 0132, avoiding unnecessary handovers or ping-pong).
Regarding Claim 12, Park teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the indication is indicative of an evaluation by the apparatus of at least one of the following:
whether an expected time duration of access, by the apparatus, to the cell of the SCG is less than a threshold amount of time;
whether access, by the apparatus, to the cell of the SCG is expected to be a Short Stay, SS, access; and
whether access, by the apparatus, to the cell of the SCG is expected to be a Ping-Pong, PP, access (Park: paragraph 0132, avoiding unnecessary handovers or ping-pong).
Regarding Claim 13, Park teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the indication is at one of the following:
a flag in a message sent to the cell of the Master Cell Group, MCG;
sent in a Radio Resource Control, RRC, message;
sent in an RRC connection reconfiguration complete message (Park: paragraph 0105 & Fig. 4, electronic device may transmit a reconfiguration completion message to the source base station); and
sent after the apparatus has determined that the first condition has been met.
Regarding Claim 15, Park teaches An apparatus (Park: paragraphs 0041, 0103 & Figs. 1-4, electronic device) comprising:
at least one processor; and
at least one processor (Park: paragraph 0041 & Fig. 1, processor); and
at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor (Park: paragraph 0041 & Fig. 1, memory storing commands of processor), cause the apparatus at least to perform the following:
receiving, from a cell of a Master Cell Group, MCG (Park: paragraph 0079, serving cell or base station of first network), first conditional re-configuration information (Park: paragraph 0104, receiving conditional handover procedure) for enabling the apparatus to access a cell of a Secondary Cell Group, SCG (Park: paragraph 0105 & Fig. 4, RRC reconfiguration message includes information on the target base station; see also paragraphs 0107 & 0131, one or more candidate target cells or SpCells), upon a first condition to access the cell of the SCG being met (Park: paragraph 0105, reconfiguration completion message);
receiving, from the cell of the MCG, configuration information for configuring the apparatus measure and report one or more measurements of signals from one or more SCGs for use by the cell of the MCG to determine whether to delay the cell of the SCG from triggering a path switch (Park: paragraphs 0114, 0131 & Figs. 4-7, condition for postponing the time point at which handover is performed during the RA procedure),
receiving, from the cell of the MCG, second conditional re-configuration information(Park: paragraph 0111, 0157 & Fig. 5, sending another RRC reconfiguration message to the electronic device) for enabling the apparatus to access a cell of another SCG upon a second condition to access the cell of the another SCG being met (Park: paragraph 0105 & Figs. 4-5, RRC reconfiguration message includes addition and/or change information of the conditional reconfiguration);
determining whether the first condition has been met (Park: paragraph 0105, said reconfiguration completion message);
sending, to the cell of the MCG, first information indicating that the first condition has been met (Park: paragraph 0105, UE sends the reconfiguration completion message to the serving cell);
measuring one or more measurements of signals from the one or more SCGs in accordance with the configuration information (Park: paragraphs 0114, 0131 & Figs. 4-7, condition for postponing the time point at which handover is performed during the RA procedure);
sending, to the cell of the MCG, the one or more measurements for use by the cell of the MCG to determine whether to delay the cell of the SCG from triggering a path switch (Park: paragraph 0114 & Fig. 5, suspend time point at which conditional handover is performed; see also paragraphs 0132-0133 & Fig. 7, suspend conditional handover).
Regarding Claim 16. , Park teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the configuration information further comprises at least one of the following:
one or more criteria for use by the apparatus in performing and/or reporting the one or more measurements of signals (Park: paragraphs 0166-0167, electronic determine whether a difference between R2 corresponding to the signal intensity of the target cell and R1 corresponding to the signal intensity is larger than or equal to a threshold value);
one or more identifiers of one or more cells of one or more Secondary Cell Groups, SCGs, whose signals are to be measured;
one or more group identifiers of the one or more Secondary Cell Groups, SCGs, whose signals are to be measured; and
information for configuring the apparatus to perform and report one or more inter Secondary Cell Group, SCG, measurements.
Regarding Claim 17, Park teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the one or more measurements of signals are sent in at one of the following:
a Radio Resource Control, RRC, message;
a layer 3 measurement report;
an RRC connection reconfiguration complete message (Park: paragraph 0105 & Fig. 4, electronic device may transmit a reconfiguration completion message to the source base station); and
a SN RRC reconfiguration complete message.
Regarding Claim 19, Park teaches An apparatus (Park: paragraph 0104 & Fig. 4, target base station) comprising:
at least one processor (Park: paragraph 0103 & Fig. 4, source base station in communication with target base station thus teaching the necessary hardware component); and
at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor (Park: paragraph 0103 & Fig. 4, source base station in communication with source base station thus teaching the necessary memory component), , cause the apparatus at least to perform the following:
receiving, from a cell of a Master Cell Group, MCG (Park: paragraph 0079, serving cell or base station of first network), reconfiguration information for configuring the apparatus as a candidate cell of a Secondary Cell Group, SCG (Park: paragraph 0104, receiving conditional handover procedure);
receiving, from the cell of the MCG, information indicative of a User Equipment, UE (Park: paragraphs 0041, 0103 & Figs. 1-4, electronic device), selecting the candidate cell of the SCG (Park: paragraph 0105 & Fig. 4, RRC reconfiguration message includes information on the target base station; see also paragraphs 0107 & 0131, one or more candidate target cells or SpCells); and
determining to delay triggering a path switch (Park: paragraphs 0114, 0131 & Figs. 4-7, condition for postponing the time point at which handover is performed during the RA procedure);
delaying the triggering of the path switch (Park: paragraph 0114 & Fig. 5, suspend time point at which conditional handover is performed; see also paragraphs 0132-0133 & Fig. 7, suspend conditional handover), wherein delaying the triggering of the path switch is based at least in part on the determination to delay triggering the path switch (Park: paragraph 0114 & Fig. 5, suspend handover based on satisfaction of at least one condition for postponing the time point; see also paragraphs 0132-0133, avoid ping-pong);
determining to abort triggering the path switch (Park: paragraphs 0132-0133, determine identified time is longer than or equal to predetermined time); and
aborting the triggering of the path switch (Park: paragraph 0132, maintain suspension of the conditional handover; see also paragraph 0114 & Fig. 5, refrain from performing the conditional handover during random access procedure), wherein aborting the triggering of the path switch is based at least in part on the determination to abort triggering the path switch (Park: paragraph 0132, maintain suspension of the conditional handover based on if identified time is longer than or equal to the predetermined time).
Regarding Claim 20, Park teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above and further teaches wherein the apparatus automatically determines to delay triggering the path switch (Park: paragraph 0114 & Fig. 5, suspend handover based on satisfaction of at least one condition for postponing the time point; see also paragraphs 0132-0133, avoid ping-pong).
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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 8, 14, 18 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Zhang et al. (US 2025/0008389 A1) hereinafter “Zhang.”
Regarding Claim 8, Park teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above however fails to explicitly teach the apparatus is configured as a Master Node, MN, to the UE, wherein the UE is operating in a Multi Connectivity, MC, mode and is in an established connection with the MN and a source Secondary Node, SN. However, Zhang in an analogous art teaches a master node and a source node in a multi-radio dual connectivity (MR-DC) scenario that supports a primary secondary cell (PSCell) switch procedure for a user equipment to switch from a source PSCell to a target PSCell (Zhang: paragraphs 0009-0010).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Park to include Multi-RAT Dual Connectivity as taught by Zhang so as to allow concurrent communications between the electronic device and multiple radio access networks.
Regarding Claim 14, Park teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above however fails to explicitly teach wherein the apparatus is a User Equipment, UE (Park: paragraphs 0041, 0103 & Figs. 1-4, said electronic device), configured for operation in a Multi Connectivity, MC, and wherein the UE is in an established connection with a Master Node, MN, and a source Secondary Node, SN.
However, Zhang in an analogous art teaches a master node and a source node in a multi-radio dual connectivity (MR-DC) scenario that supports a primary secondary cell (PSCell) switch procedure for a user equipment to switch from a source PSCell to a target PSCell (Zhang: paragraphs 0009-0010).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Park to include Multi-RAT Dual Connectivity as taught by Zhang so as to allow concurrent communications between the electronic device and multiple radio access networks.
Regarding Claim 18, Park teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above however fails to explicitly teach wherein the apparatus is a User Equipment, UE, configured for operation in a Multi Connectivity, MC, mode, and wherein the UE is in an established connection with a Master Node, MN, and a source Secondary Node, SN.
However, Zhang in an analogous art teaches a master node and a source node in a multi-radio dual connectivity (MR-DC) scenario that supports a primary secondary cell (PSCell) switch procedure for a user equipment to switch from a source PSCell to a target PSCell (Zhang: paragraphs 0009-0010).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Park to include Multi-RAT Dual Connectivity as taught by Zhang so as to allow concurrent communications between the electronic device and multiple radio access networks.
Regarding Claim 21, Park teaches the respective claim(s) as presented above however fails to explicitly teach wherein the apparatus is configured as a target Secondary Node, SN, for the UE, wherein the UE is operating in a Multi Connectivity, MC, mode and is in an established connection with a Master Node, MN, and a source SN.
However, Zhang in an analogous art teaches a master node and a source node in a multi-radio dual connectivity (MR-DC) scenario that supports a primary secondary cell (PSCell) switch procedure for a user equipment to switch from a source PSCell to a target PSCell (Zhang: paragraphs 0009-0010).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Park to include Multi-RAT Dual Connectivity as taught by Zhang so as to allow concurrent communications between the electronic device and multiple radio access networks.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Jung et al. (US 2026/0156536 A1) teaches handing of secondary cell establishment timing in conditional mobility procedure (paragraphs 0008 & 0119).
Yan et al. (US 2025/0344125 A1) teaches methods and apparatuses for a conditional primary secondary cell group cell (PSCell) addition or change (CPAC) procedure (paragraph 0004).
Kim et al. (US 2024/0430759 A1) teaches a wireless device receives, from a master base station associated with a master cell group, a radio resource control (RRC) reconfiguration message that includes a configuration parameter of a secondary cell group (SCG) and a plurality of counters and can indicate that the plurality of counters is for subsequent cell group change (Fig. 17)
Eklof et al. (US 2023/0379776 A1) teaches a method of operating a master node includes determining to configure conditional PSCell addition or change (CPAC) (paragraph 0133).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NAJEEB ANSARI whose telephone number is (571)270-5446. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am to 2pm.
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, ASAD NAWAZ can be reached at (571) 272-3988. 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.
/NAJEEB ANSARI/Examiner, Art Unit 2463
/ASAD M NAWAZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2463
Prosecution Insights