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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5-7, 9, 15-16, and 19-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "a first contact pin at each location aligned to interface with the concentric ring" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “the scalar receiving the location from the processor and storing the location in the EDID”, in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “detecting presence of a display assembly at each location”, in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 19 recites the limitation “a first contact pin at each location”, in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 6-7, 16, and 20 are rejected based on their dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 20210373838 A1, and Kim ‘838 hereinafter) in view of Sasaki (US 20180067517 A1, and Sasaki hereinafter).
Regarding Claim 1, Kim ‘838 discloses an information handling system (1000, figs. 2-3) comprising:
a housing (fig. 3, housing of docking station 200);
a processor (230, fig. 2) coupled in the housing (fig. 3) and operable to execute instructions that process information (“the processor 230 may load and process a command or data received from at least one of the other components”, [0118]);
a memory ([0118]: "volatile memory”, “non-volatile memory”; fig. 8: storage 1110) coupled in the housing and interfaced with the processor, the memory operable to store the information and instructions ([0118]);
plural peripheral display assemblies (figs. 2-3: 100-1 through 100-n), each having a display panel (display panel portions of 100-1 through 100-n shown fig. 3) interfaced with the processor and operable to present the information as visual images (figs. 2-3; “The plurality of display apparatuses 100-1 through 100-n may display various images … For this operation … may receive an image signal from the processor 230”, [0069-0070]);
a peripheral display stand (200, figs. 2-3) having plural display supports (210, fig. 2 and 211-214, figs. 3-4) each coupled to one of the peripheral display assemblies (“The back plate 210 may be provided in each of the plurality of spaces of the docking station 200 and installed (or fixed) in one area of a front surface of the docking station 200 (e.g., a surface to which the display apparatus 100 is coupled)”, [0079]).
Kim ‘838 does not explicitly disclose a non-transitory memory coupled in each display assembly and accessible by the processor, the non-transitory memory storing a position of the associated display assembly on the display stand.
Sasaki discloses a non-transitory memory coupled in each display assembly (“the position information of display terminal devices 1 and 2 is stored in a non-volatile memory within the communication interface circuit of each of display terminal devices”, [0035]) and accessible by a processor (30, figs. 1A and 7), the non-transitory memory storing a position of the associated display assembly ([0035]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Kim ‘838 to incorporate the teachings of Sasaki so that it comprises a non-transitory memory coupled in each display assembly and accessible by the processor, the non-transitory memory storing a position of the associated display assembly on the display stand, in order to set content to be delivered to the plurality of display terminal devices (“in order to set content to be delivered to the plurality of display terminal devices, it is necessary to match a position relationship between a position of each display terminal on an operation screen on which a user's operation is performed and an installation position of each display terminal device”, [003] of Sasaki).
Regarding Claim 17, Kim ‘838 discloses a peripheral display comprising:
plural peripheral display assemblies (figs. 2-3: 100-1 through 100-n), each having a display panel (display panel portions of 100-1 through 100-n shown fig. 3) operable to present information as visual images (figs. 2-3; “The plurality of display apparatuses 100-1 through 100-n may display various images … For this operation … may receive an image signal from the processor 230”, [0069-0070]);
a peripheral display stand (200, figs. 2-3) having plural display supports (210, fig. 2 and 211-214, figs. 3-4) each coupled to one of the peripheral display assemblies (“The back plate 210 may be provided in each of the plurality of spaces of the docking station 200 and installed (or fixed) in one area of a front surface of the docking station 200 (e.g., a surface to which the display apparatus 100 is coupled)”, [0079]); and
Kim ‘838 does not explicitly disclose a non-transitory memory coupled in each display assembly and accessible by an information handling system processor, the non-transitory memory storing a position of the associated display assembly on the display stand.
Sasaki discloses a non-transitory memory coupled in each display assembly (“the position information of display terminal devices 1 and 2 is stored in a non-volatile memory within the communication interface circuit of each of display terminal devices”, [0035]) and accessible by an information handling system processor (30, figs. 1A and 7), the non-transitory memory storing a position of the associated display assembly ([0035]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Kim ‘838 to incorporate the teachings of Sasaki so that it comprises a non-transitory memory coupled in each display assembly and accessible by an information handling system processor, the non-transitory memory storing a position of the associated display assembly on the display stand, in order to set content to be delivered to the plurality of display terminal devices (“in order to set content to be delivered to the plurality of display terminal devices, it is necessary to match a position relationship between a position of each display terminal on an operation screen on which a user's operation is performed and an installation position of each display terminal device”, [003] of Sasaki).
Claims 2-3 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim ‘838 in view of Sasaki, further in view of Kim et al. (US 20200234628 A1, and Kim ‘628 hereinafter).
Regarding Claim 2, Kim ‘838/Sasaki discloses the information handling system of Claim 1 but does not explicitly disclose a scalar coupled to each display assembly and interfaced with the non-transitory memory; and instructions stored in the non-transitory memory that when executed on the scalar communicate the position to the processor.
Kim ‘628 discloses a scalar (220, fig. 2; “The processor 220 may scale a resolution of an image”) coupled to each display assembly (fig. 3);
and instructions that when executed on the scalar communicate the position to the processor (“The processor may be configured to: identify a position in which the decomposed re-scaled image is to be displayed”, [0012]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Kim ‘838/Sasaki to incorporate the teachings of Kim ‘628 so that it further comprises a scalar coupled to each display assembly; and instructions that when executed on the scalar communicate the position to the processor, in order to rescale images so that users can view them at some areas of the modular display (“In some cases, a user desires to view an image through some areas among areas all display areas of the modular display apparatus. In this case, there is a necessity to scale a resolution of an image to correspond to some areas”, [0005] of Kim ‘628). Furthermore since Kim ‘838 as modified by Sasaki discloses the position of the display assemblies is stored in a non-transitory memory coupled in each display assembly, implementing the teachings of Kim ‘628 would necessarily have the scalar (processor) interfaced with the non-transitory memory and the instructions would necessarily be stored in the non-transitory memory (since they communicate the position to the processor).
Regarding Claim 3, Kim ‘838/Sasaki/Kim ‘628 discloses the information handling system of Claim 2 further comprising: a contact pad (210, fig. 2 of Kim ‘838) coupled to each display assembly (e.g., fig. 3 of Kim ‘838, double-headed arrows show portions of 100-1 through 100-4; “each of the plurality of display apparatuses 100-1 through 100-n may include a board for receiving power”, [0073] of Kim ‘838);
one or more contact pins (fig. 5 and “power board 220 may include an interface 240 including a plurality of pins”, [0093] of Kim ‘838) coupled to the display stand at each position aligned to contact the contact pad when a display assembly couples to the position (figs. 2-5 of Kim ‘838); and
instructions stored in the non-transitory memory (Kim ‘838 as modified by memory disclosed by Sasaki, see rejection of Claim 2 above) that when executed on the scalar analyze the contact pin contact at the contact pad to determine the position of the display assembly (“the processor 230 may identify a space in which the display apparatus connected to the power board 220 is mounted, based on the signal applied to the pin of the power board 220”, [0125] of Kim ‘838, taking into account scalar (processor) disclosed by Kim ‘268. See rejection of claim 2 above).
Regarding Claim 18, Kim ‘838/Sasaki discloses the peripheral display of Claim 17 further comprising:
a contact pad (210, fig. 2 of Kim ‘838) coupled to each display assembly (e.g., fig. 3 of Kim ‘838, double-headed arrows show portions of 100-1 through 100-4; “each of the plurality of display apparatuses 100-1 through 100-n may include a board for receiving power”, [0073] of Kim ‘838);
one or more contact pins (fig. 5 and “power board 220 may include an interface 240 including a plurality of pins”, [0093] of Kim ‘838) coupled to the display stand at each position aligned to contact the contact pad when a display assembly couples to the position (figs. 2-5 of Kim ‘838);
and instructions stored in the non-transitory memory (Kim ‘838 as modified by memory disclosed by Sasaki, see rejection of Claim 17 above) that when executed analyze the contact pin contact at the contact pad to determine the position of the display assembly (“the processor 230 may identify a space in which the display apparatus connected to the power board 220 is mounted, based on the signal applied to the pin of the power board 220”, [0125] of Kim ‘838).
Kim ‘838/Sasaki does not explicitly disclose a scalar coupled in each display assembly.
Kim ‘628 discloses a scalar (220, fig. 2; “The processor 220 may scale a resolution of an image”) coupled in each display assembly (fig. 3);
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Kim ‘838/Sasaki to incorporate the teachings of Kim ‘628 so that it further comprises a scalar coupled to each display assembly, in order to rescale images so that users can view them at some areas of the modular display (“In some cases, a user desires to view an image through some areas among areas all display areas of the modular display apparatus. In this case, there is a necessity to scale a resolution of an image to correspond to some areas”, [0005] of Kim ‘628). Furthermore since Kim ‘628 discloses the scalar is a processor with scaling capabilities, while implementing said modification, a person of ordinary skill would have found obvious that the instructions stored in the non-transitory memory would be executed on the scalar (“The processor may be configured to: identify a position in which the decomposed re-scaled image is to be displayed”, [0012] of Kim ‘628).
Regarding Claim 19, Kim ‘838/Sasaki discloses the peripheral display of Claim 18 further comprising:
plural location pads (210, figs. 2-3 of Kim ‘838) of conductive material coupled to the contact pad (1-4, fig. 4 of Kim ‘838; “the back plate 210 may include a conductive member”, [0080]); and
a first contact pin at each location (fig. 5 and “power board 220 may include an interface 240 including a plurality of pins”, [0093] of Kim ‘838), the first contact pin aligned at each location to contact a different of the plural location pads (figs. 2-5 of Kim ‘838).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim ‘838 in view of Sasaki and Kim ‘628, further in view of Chen et al. (US 20160275880 A1, and Chen hereinafter).
Regarding Claim 4, Kim ‘838/Sasaki/Kim ‘268 discloses the information handling system of Claim 3 but does not explicitly disclose the instructions further detect a landscape and portrait orientation of the display assembly based upon contact pin contact at the contact pad.
Chen discloses instructions detect a landscape and portrait orientation of a display assembly (“the memory element 114 may store parameters relating to the electronic paper display 106 such … orientation”, [0035], “the display device 102 being attached in different orientations (e.g. landscape or portrait)”, [0054]) based upon contact pin contact at a contact pad (“the first set of contacts 410 is used when the display device 404 is in portrait orientation, the second set of contacts 412 is used when the display device 404 is in landscape orientation”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Kim ‘838, Sasaki, and Kim ‘628 to incorporate the teachings of Chen so that the instructions further detect a landscape and portrait orientation of the display assembly based upon contact pin contact at the contact pad, in order to properly adjust the rendering of content on the display (“use the data received to change its operation (e.g. the voltages provided via the bus or the particular content provided for rendering on the display)”, [0036]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim ‘838 in view of Sasaki, further in view of Park et al. (US 20180181252 A1, and Park hereinafter).
Regarding Claim 8, Kim ‘838/Sasaki discloses the information handling system of Claim 1 but does not explicitly disclose the non-transitory memory comprises extended display identification data (EDID).
Park discloses a non-transitory memory comprises extended display identification data (EDID) ([0057]: “The arrangement calculator 22 includes a memory and stores the display identification information (panel ID), the EDID and time-position information of the displays #1 to #10 sequentially input from the position detector 21 in the memory”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Kim ‘838 and Sasaki to incorporate the teachings of Park so that the non-transitory memory comprises extended display identification data (EDID), in order to facilitate creating a single multi-tiled display from individual displays that may have different resolution and size (“The displays #1 to #10 may be the same or different from each other in resolution and size”, [0044] of Park; “(EDID) information that includes including resolution information, size information, and identification information (ID) for each individual display”, [0047] of Park; and “individual displays are positioned in a desired group to create a single large, multi-tiled display”, [0052] of Park).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim ‘838 in view of Sasaki and Park, further in view of Kim ‘628.
Regarding Claim 9, Kim ‘838/Sasaki/Park discloses the information handling system of Claim 8 but does not explicitly disclose a scalar coupled in each display assembly and interfaced with the processor and the EDID, the scalar receiving the location from the processor and storing the location in the EDID.
Kim ‘628 discloses a scalar (220, fig. 2; “The processor 220 may scale a resolution of an image”) coupled in each display assembly (fig. 3) and interfaced with the processor and the EDID, the scalar receiving the location from the processor (scalar being the processor, it would be interfaced with itself or at least with the specific component performing the scaling function. Also, non-transitory memory comprises EDID interfaced with processor. See claim 8 above),
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Kim ‘838, Sasaki, and Park to incorporate the teachings of Park so that it further comprises a scalar coupled in each display assembly and interfaced with the processor and the EDID, in order to rescale images so that users can view them at some areas of the modular display (“In some cases, a user desires to view an image through some areas among areas all display areas of the modular display apparatus. In this case, there is a necessity to scale a resolution of an image to correspond to some areas”, [0005] of Kim ‘628). Furthermore since Kim ‘838 as modified by Sasaki and Park discloses the position of the display assemblies is stored in a non-transitory memory comprising extended display identification data (EDID), a person of ordinary skill would have found obvious to have the location stored in the EDID, because the non-transitory memory has been disclosed to store information of the position of each display assembly (see claim 1 above) and location would be considered analogous to position.
Claim 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sasaki in view of Kim ‘838.
Regarding Claim 10, Sasaki discloses a method for presenting visual images of an information handling system at plural display assemblies coupled to a display stand, the method comprising:
storing a position of each display assembly in non-transitory memory of the display assembly (fig. 11(a), “position information of display terminal devices 1 and 2 is stored in a non-volatile memory within the communication interface circuit of each of display terminal devices”, [0035]); and
communicating the position from each display assembly to an information handling system when the information handling system interfaces with each display assembly (figs. 1A-1B and 11, “position information analyzing circuit 103 analyzes terminal information obtained by terminal information obtaining and setting circuit 102, and extracts the position information and the terminal specific information of display terminal devices”, [0036]).
Sasaki does not explicitly disclose each display assembly on a display stand.
Kim ‘838 discloses plural display assemblies (figs. 2-3: 100-1 through 100-n) each coupled to a display stand (200, figs. 2-3).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of Sasaki to incorporate the teachings of Kim ‘838 so that it comprises each display assembly coupled to a display stand, in order to provide mount support to arrange the plural display assembly in different spatial configurations that display a single image through a plurality of displays (“The modular display apparatus is an apparatus configured to display a single image through a plurality of display apparatuses” and “The docking station 200 may be divided into a plurality of spaces …in which the plurality of display apparatuses 100-1 through 100-n may be mounted”, [0005] and [0066] of Kim ‘838).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sasaki in view of Kim ‘838, further in view of Park.
Regarding Claim 11, Sasaki/Kim ‘838 discloses the method of Claim 10 but does not explicitly disclose the non-transitory memory of each display assembly comprises EDID of the display assembly.
Park discloses a non-transitory memory comprises extended display identification data (EDID) ([0057]: “The arrangement calculator 22 includes a memory and stores the display identification information (panel ID), the EDID and time-position information of the displays #1 to #10 sequentially input from the position detector 21 in the memory”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Sasaki and Kim ‘838 to incorporate the teachings of Park so the non-transitory memory of each display comprises extended display identification data (EDID), in order to facilitate creating a single multi-tiled display from individual displays that may have different resolution and size (“The displays #1 to #10 may be the same or different from each other in resolution and size”, [0044] of Park; “(EDID) information that includes including resolution information, size information, and identification information (ID) for each individual display”, [0047] of Park; and “individual displays are positioned in a desired group to create a single large, multi-tiled display”, [0052] of Park).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sasaki in view of Kim ‘838 and Park, further in view of Kim ‘628.
Regarding Claim 12, Sasaki/Kim’838/Park discloses the method of Claim 11 further comprising:
determining the position with an information handling system (30, fig. 1B of Sasaki) interfaced with each display assembly (figs. 1A-1B of Sasaki, “Position information analyzing circuit 103 analyzes terminal information obtained by terminal information obtaining and setting circuit 102, and extracts the position information and the terminal specific information of display terminal devices 1 and 2”, [0036] of Sasaki);
Sasaki/Kim’838/Park does not explicitly disclose communicating the position from the information handling system to scalar of each display; storing the position in the EDID with the scalar.
Kim ‘628 discloses communicating the position from the information handling system to a scalar of each display (“The processor may be configured to: identify a position in which the decomposed re-scaled image is to be displayed”, [0012], and “The processor 220 may scale a resolution of an image”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Sasaki, Kim ‘838, and Park to incorporate the teachings of Kim ‘628 so that it further comprises communicating the position from the information handling system to a scalar of each display, in order to obtain position information of each display in case users want to scale images at some areas of the modular display (“In some cases, a user desires to view an image through some areas among areas all display areas of the modular display apparatus. In this case, there is a necessity to scale a resolution of an image to correspond to some areas”, [0005] of Kim ‘628). Furthermore since Sasaki as modified by Kim ‘838 and Park discloses the position of the display assemblies is stored in a non-transitory memory comprising extended display identification data (EDID), a person of ordinary skill would have found obvious to store in the EDID with the scalar, because the non-transitory memory has been disclosed to store information of the position of each display assembly (see claim 11 above) and the scalar identifies position in which the re-scaled image is to be displayed ([0012] of Kim ‘628).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-7, 13-16, and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, and if all pending 112(b) issues are resolved.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claims 5 and 20, patentability exists, at least in part, with the claimed features of “a concentric ring of conductive material coupled to the contact pad; and a … contact pin at each location aligned to interface with the concentric ring when a display assembly is present at the location”. Chatterjee (US 20100081377 A1), Kim (US 20210373838 A1), Klein (US 11841107 B1), Zeller (US 20110223802 A1), Moscovitch (US 20100128423 A1), Dunn (US 20030015632 A1), Jeong (US 7529083 B2), Ozolins (US 7995332 B2), and Selvi (US 20240053884 A1) are cited as teaching some elements of the claimed invention including a display assembly, a ring, a contact pin, and/or a contact pad. However, the prior art, when taken alone, or, in combination, cannot be construed as reasonably teaching or suggesting all of the elements of the claimed invention as arranged, disposed, or provided in the manner as claimed by the Applicant. For instance, Chatterjee discloses a concentric ring of conductive material (431, fig. 6A) to be coupled to a contact pad, however it lacks a first contact pin at each location aligned to interface with the concentric ring when a display assembly is present at the location. Kim discloses contact pins but given the geometrical arrangement of said pins, a person of ordinary skill would not deem a modification/combination of the cited art as an obvious choice.
Regarding Claim 13, patentability exists, at least in part, with the claimed features of “detecting a contact pin of each display stand position with a contact pad of each display assembly; and determining with a scalar of each display assembly from the contact pin and contact pad the position of each display assembly”, Sasaki (US 20180067517 A1), Kim (US 20210373838 A1), Furuhashi (US 6583771 B1), McIntyre (US 6549194 B1), and Akimoto (US 20120242893 A1) are cited as teaching some elements of the claimed invention including a display assembly, a contact pin, a contact pad, and/or a scalar. However, the prior art, when taken alone, or, in combination, cannot be construed as reasonably teaching or suggesting all of the elements of the claimed invention as arranged, disposed, or provided in the manner as claimed by the Applicant. For instance, Sasaki disclose a method for presenting visual images of an information handling system at plural display assemblies, the method comprising storing a position of each display assembly in non-transitory memory of the display assembly (fig. 11(a), [0035]); and communicating the position from each display assembly to an information handling system when the information handling system interfaces with each display assembly (figs. 1A-1B and 11, [0036]) but lacks detecting a contact pin of each display stand position with a contact pad of each display assembly; and determining with a scalar of each display assembly from the contact pin and contact pad the position of each display assembly. Kim discloses a contact pin (fig. 5 and [0093]) coupled to the display stand at each position, a contact pad (210, fig. 2) of each display stand position (fig. 3 of Kim) but lacks the “detecting” step of the method and determining with a scalar of each display assembly from the contact pin and contact pad the position of each display assembly.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Martin A Asmat-Uceda whose telephone number is (571)270-7198. The examiner can normally be reached 8 AM - 5 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, Allen L Parker can be reached at 303-297-4722. 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.
/ALLEN L PARKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2841
/MARTIN ANTONIO ASMAT UCEDA/Examiner, Art Unit 2841