CTFR 18/810,296 CTFR 94822 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments and amendments filed on 02/11/2026 with respect to the previous 35 U.S.C. 112f rejection has been fully considered and is unpersuasive and thus maintaining 112f rejections. Applicant’s arguments and amendments filed on 02/11/2026 with respect to the previous 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection has been fully considered and is persuasive and thus withdrawn the 101 rejections. Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claim 1 filed on 02/11/2026 with respect to the previous 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. With respect to the newly amended subject matter and applicant’s arguments, the Examiner relies upon newly cited reference from the IDS filed on 12/02/2025 Takumi et al (JP2017056786A). 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation 07-30-03 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. 07-30-05 The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. 07-30-06 This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: a travelling locus calculation unit, an operation region calculation unit, a lane change detection unit and as in SPEC (page 8) in claims 1-8. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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, 3-4 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable in view of Nakamura et al (US 2010/0299063 A1), (hereinafter Nakamura) in further view Kiyokawa et al (US 2016/0075328 A1), (hereinafter Kiyokawa) in further view of Takumi et al (JP2017056786A), (hereinafter Takumi). Regarding claim 1, Nakamura discloses a driving assist apparatus that performs, in accordance with periphery monitoring information of an own vehicle acquired from a periphery monitoring apparatus, a driving assist operation of the own vehicle, the driving assist apparatus comprising: (see Nakamura paras “0006-0007” “a current position determining device according to the present invention includes: current position detection means which detects a current position of an own vehicle; storage means which stores: map information including road configuration information identifying a configuration of a road, and road type information identifying a type of the road; and branch position information identifying a branch position of a road contained in the map information”), a travelling locus calculation unit that calculates a travelling locus of the own vehicle (see Nakamura paras “0006-0007” “current position estimation means which estimates, using the map information, an estimated current position corresponding to the current position of the own vehicle detected by the current position detection means”), an operation region calculation unit that calculates an operation region in the vicinity of the own vehicle, based on the travelling locus of the own vehicle calculated by the travelling locus calculation unit (see Nakamura paras “0005-0007” “provide a technology capable of improving the accuracy of determining a position of an own vehicle in the vicinity of a branch point; in a current position determining device” and “detection range identification means which identifies, based on information on a road at the each branch position, a range for detecting a traveling direction of the own vehicle, as a detection range”), a lane change detection unit that detects a lane change of the own vehicle (see Nakamura paras “0005-0007” “lane change detection means which detects, when the estimated current position of the own vehicle detected by the current position estimation means is included in the detection range identified by the detection range identification means, whether the own vehicle has changed lanes”), But Nakamura fails to explicitly teach an operation determination unit that determines, when an object is detected in the operation region, whether the driving assist operation needs to be activated based on the periphery monitoring information. However, Kiyokawa teaches an operation determination unit that determines, when an object is detected in the operation region, whether the driving assist operation needs to be activated based on the periphery monitoring information (see Kiyokawa claim 1 and paras “0072-0089” “an electronic control unit configured to detect an obstacle, determine whether a vehicle is allowed to run over the obstacle, and when it is determined that the vehicle is allowed to run over the obstacle, set a target position, to which the vehicle moves, to a position at which the vehicle overlaps with the obstacle”), 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 invention of Nakamura for current position determining device and current position determining method “to detect an obstacle ahead of the vehicle and determine whether a vehicle is allowed to run over the obstacle” as taught by Kiyokawa (paras. [0072-0089]) in order to avoid an obstacle or informs a driver that there is an obstacle nearby to avoid the obstacle. But modified Nakamura fails to explicitly teach an operation region correction unit that corrects, when the lane change detection unit detects the lane change of the own vehicle, the operation region based on lane information related to a traffic lane after the lane change of the own vehicle and wherein the operation region is set in a lateral side of the own vehicle, the operation region being in a belt shape. However, Takumi teaches an operation region correction unit that corrects, when the lane change detection unit detects the lane change of the own vehicle, the operation region based on lane information related to a traffic lane after the lane change of the own vehicle (see Takumi paras “0024”, “0032”, “0041” and “0055” “When the lane change detection control unit 17 controls the change of the lane”, “performs a process of correcting the positions of the right lane probability map 51 and the left lane probability map 52”, “the adjacent lane probability map of the lane change destination is changed by the difference amount in the direction of lane change” and “the position of the adjacent lane map is corrected by the amount of divergence between the center line of the host vehicle and the center line of the own lane”), and wherein the operation region is set in a lateral side of the own vehicle, the operation region being in a belt shape (see Takumi figs. 3-5 and paras “0017-0019” “The adjacent lane probability map is provided such that the own lane probability map 50 is shifted leftward and rightward by the lane width with reference to the position of the own lane probability map 50” and “Since both the own lane probability map and the adjacent lane probability maps 51 and 52 are areas set around the own vehicle, they can also be referred to as own lane area and adjacent lane area” regarding as shown in the figs. 3-5 the elongated rectangular lane regions extending longitudinally along the roadway adjacent to the vehicle), 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 invention of modified Nakamura for current position determining device and current position determining method “to make the own vehicle follow the selected preceding vehicle and when the preceding vehicle does not exist, control is performed to keep the speed of the own vehicle constant” as taught by Takumi (paras. [0024-0032]) in order to monitor vehicles in the adjacent lane while allowing the operation region to be corrected based on the lane-change destination. Regarding claim 3, Nakamura discloses wherein the periphery monitoring information includes map information received by a reception apparatus; and the operation region correction unit corrects the operation region based on at least the map information (see Nakamura paras “0021-0022”, “0060” and “0072” “the map matching module 104 corrects the estimated current position determined by the map matching processing, by using a lane determination result by the lane determining module 107... In this way, the map matching module 104 obtains an estimated current position, and corrects the obtained estimated current position at a narrow-angled Y intersection, so that the estimated current position corresponds to a lane determined by the lane determining module 107”). Regarding claim 4, Nakamura discloses wherein the periphery monitoring information includes lane marking information as information related to a lane marking of a road where the own vehicle travels; and the operation region correction unit corrects the operation region based on at least the lane marking information (see Nakamura paras “0024” and “0074-0075” “recognizes a lane drop marking and the like indicating a lane change section, to thereby detect the direction of the lane change” and “The lane change detecting module 106… determines whether a lane change has been made across a lane line (lane drop marking) existing between a branch lane and a through lane” and “It should be noted that the lane drop marking is a line different from an ordinary lane line, and is painted on a road surface as, for example, a white bold broken line” regarding detecting a lane marking and it is used in determining lane changes). Regarding claim 7, Nakamura discloses wherein the travelling locus calculation unit calculates the travelling locus of the own vehicle based on odometry information indicating an operation state of the own vehicle (see Nakamura at least paras “0057-0059”). Regarding claim 8, Nakamura discloses a driving assist program stored in a non-transitory tangible computer readable media executed by a computer, being applied to a driving assist apparatus that performs, based on periphery monitoring information of an own vehicle acquired from a periphery monitoring apparatus, a driving assist operation of the own vehicle, the driving assist program comprising: (see Nakamura paras “0006-0007” and “0025” “a current position determining device according to the present invention includes: current position detection means which detects a current position of an own vehicle; storage means which stores: map information including road configuration information identifying a configuration of a road, and road type information identifying a type of the road; and branch position information identifying a branch position of a road contained in the map information”), a travelling locus calculation step that calculates a travelling locus of the own vehicle (see Nakamura paras “0006-0007” “current position estimation means which estimates, using the map information, an estimated current position corresponding to the current position of the own vehicle detected by the current position detection means”), an operation region calculation step that calculates, based on the travelling locus of the own vehicle calculated by the travelling locus calculation step, an operation region in the vicinity of the own vehicle (see Nakamura paras “0005-0007” “provide a technology capable of improving the accuracy of determining a position of an own vehicle in the vicinity of a branch point; in a current position determining device” and “detection range identification means which identifies, based on information on a road at the each branch position, a range for detecting a traveling direction of the own vehicle, as a detection range”), a lane change detection step that detects a lane change of the own vehicle (see Nakamura paras “0005-0007” “lane change detection means which detects, when the estimated current position of the own vehicle detected by the current position estimation means is included in the detection range identified by the detection range identification means, whether the own vehicle has changed lanes”), But Nakamura fails to explicitly teach an operation determination step that determines, when an object is detected in the operation region, whether a driving assist operation needs to be activated based on the periphery monitoring information. However, Kiyokawa teaches an operation determination step that determines, when an object is detected in the operation region, whether a driving assist operation needs to be activated based on the periphery monitoring information (see Kiyokawa claim 1 and paras “0072-0089” “an electronic control unit configured to detect an obstacle, determine whether a vehicle is allowed to run over the obstacle, and when it is determined that the vehicle is allowed to run over the obstacle, set a target position, to which the vehicle moves, to a position at which the vehicle overlaps with the obstacle”), 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 invention of Nakamura for current position determining device and current position determining method “to detect an obstacle ahead of the vehicle and determine whether a vehicle is allowed to run over the obstacle” as taught by Kiyokawa (paras. [0072-0089]) in order to avoid an obstacle or informs a driver that there is an obstacle nearby to avoid the obstacle. But modified Nakamura fails to explicitly teach an operation region correction step that corrects, when the lane change detection step detects the lane change of the own vehicle, the operation region based on lane information related to a traffic lane after the lane change of the own vehicle and wherein the operation region is set in a lateral side of the own vehicle, the operation region being in a belt shape. However, Takumi teaches an operation region correction step that corrects, when the lane change detection step detects the lane change of the own vehicle, the operation region based on lane information related to a traffic lane after the lane change of the own vehicle (see Takumi paras “0024”, “0032”, “0041” and “0055” “When the lane change detection control unit 17 controls the change of the lane”, “performs a process of correcting the positions of the right lane probability map 51 and the left lane probability map 52”, “the adjacent lane probability map of the lane change destination is changed by the difference amount in the direction of lane change” and “the position of the adjacent lane map is corrected by the amount of divergence between the center line of the host vehicle and the center line of the own lane”), and wherein the operation region is set in a lateral side of the own vehicle, the operation region being in a belt shape (see Takumi figs. 3-5 and paras “0017-0019” “The adjacent lane probability map is provided such that the own lane probability map 50 is shifted leftward and rightward by the lane width with reference to the position of the own lane probability map 50” and “Since both the own lane probability map and the adjacent lane probability maps 51 and 52 are areas set around the own vehicle, they can also be referred to as own lane area and adjacent lane area” regarding as shown in the figs. 3-5 the elongated rectangular lane regions extending longitudinally along the roadway adjacent to the vehicle), 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 invention of modified Nakamura for current position determining device and current position determining method “to make the own vehicle follow the selected preceding vehicle and when the preceding vehicle does not exist, control is performed to keep the speed of the own vehicle constant” as taught by Takumi (paras. [0024-0032]) in order to monitor vehicles in the adjacent lane while allowing the operation region to be corrected based on the lane-change destination. Regarding claim 9, modified Nakamura fails to explicitly teach wherein the driving assist operation is performed when determining that the driving assist operation needs to be activated based on the periphery monitoring information. However, Takumi teaches wherein the driving assist operation is performed when determining that the driving assist operation needs to be activated based on the periphery monitoring information (see Takumi figs. 3-5 and at least paras “0015”, “0020” and “0041-0042” “If the adjacent lane preceding vehicle is selected (S109: YES), control of the steering angle and control of the vehicle speed are performed so as to follow the adjacent lane preceding vehicle (S110)”), 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 invention of modified Nakamura for current position determining device and current position determining method “to make the own vehicle follow the selected preceding vehicle and when the preceding vehicle does not exist, control is performed to keep the speed of the own vehicle constant” as taught by Takumi (paras. [0041-0042]) in order to monitor vehicles in the adjacent lane while allowing the operation region to be corrected based on the lane-change destination. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable in view of Nakamura et al (US 2010/0299063 A1), (hereinafter Nakamura) in further view Kiyokawa et al (US 2016/0075328 A1), (hereinafter Kiyokawa) in further view of Takumi et al (JP2017056786A), (hereinafter Takumi) as applied to claim 1 above, in further view Han et al (US 2014/0347450 A1), (hereinafter Han). Regarding claim 2, Nakamura discloses wherein the periphery monitoring information includes image information of an image in the vicinity of the own vehicle captured by a camera apparatus (see Nakamura at least paras “0063-0065” and “0101-0102”), But Nakamura fails to explicitly teach the operation region correction unit corrects the operation region based on at least the image information. However, Han teaches the operation region correction unit corrects the operation region based on at least the image information (see Han para “0003” “The vehicle surrounding image display system captures surroundings via cameras installed on the front, rear, left, and right of the vehicle, corrects an overlapping area to be seen naturally based on the captured images, and displays an image of the surroundings of the vehicle on a screen. Accordingly, the driver can exactly recognize the surroundings of the vehicle by viewing the image of the surroundings and can easily park the vehicle without viewing a side view mirror or a rear view mirror”), 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 invention of Nakamura for current position determining device and current position determining method “to express the image of vehicle surroundings including surrounding obstacles more naturally and 3-dimensionally” as taught by Han (para. [0003]) in order to improve safety of cars and promote driver's convenience. Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable in view of Nakamura et al (US 2010/0299063 A1), (hereinafter Nakamura) in further view Kiyokawa et al (US 2016/0075328 A1), (hereinafter Kiyokawa) in further view of Takumi et al (JP2017056786A), (hereinafter Takumi) as applied to claim 4 above, in further view Kato (US 2020/0026297 A1), (hereinafter Kato). Regarding claim 5, Nakamura fails to explicitly teach wherein the operation region correction unit does not correct the operation region when a reliability of the lane marking information is low. However, Kato teaches wherein the operation region correction unit does not correct the operation region when a reliability of the lane marking information is low (see Han para “0028”, “0059”, “0061”, “0066” and “0089” “The first vehicle control based on the road marking information is to correct the target track so that the vehicle changes lanes in cases where the vehicle is travelling on a lane with a road marking whose detection accuracy is low” and “when the autonomous driving control unit 18 determines that a road marking, which is suitable as a reference for the own vehicle position estimation in the low positional accuracy direction Dtag, is situated near the target track (step S204; Yes), the autonomous driving control unit 18 corrects the target track of the vehicle so as for the vehicle to approach the above road marking (step S205)… when the autonomous driving control unit 18 determines that a road marking, which is suitable as a reference for the own vehicle position estimation in the low positional accuracy direction Dtag, is not situated near the target track (step S204; No), the autonomous driving control unit 18 determines that there is no need to correct the target track of the vehicle. Then, the autonomous driving control unit 18 ends the process of the flowchart”), 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 invention of modified Nakamura for current position determining device and current position determining method “to acquire accuracy information indicating an accuracy of the collation with respect to each road marking” as taught by Kato (para. [0028] – [0089]) in order to maintain the accuracy of the estimated position in a predetermined level by using the accuracy information regarding the collation. Regarding claim 6, Nakamura teaches wherein the periphery monitoring information at least includes lane marking information as information of a lane marking of a road where the own vehicle travels and information other than the lane marking information (see Nakamura para “0025” and “0076” “the arithmetic processing unit 1 acquires an image of an area around the vehicle using the camera 12, recognizes a lane drop marking and the like indicating a lane change section, to thereby detect the direction of the lane change and the like, uses the information to determine the estimated current position”), But Nakamura fails to explicitly teach the operation region correction unit corrects the operation region based on the information other than the lane marking information, when a reliability of the lane marking information is low. However, Kato teaches the operation region correction unit corrects the operation region based on the information other than the lane marking information, when a reliability of the lane marking information is low (see Han para “0028”, “0059”, “0061”, “0066” and “0089” “The first vehicle control based on the road marking information is to correct the target track so that the vehicle changes lanes in cases where the vehicle is travelling on a lane with a road marking whose detection accuracy is low” and “when the autonomous driving control unit 18 determines that a road marking, which is suitable as a reference for the own vehicle position estimation in the low positional accuracy direction Dtag, is situated near the target track (step S204; Yes), the autonomous driving control unit 18 corrects the target track of the vehicle so as for the vehicle to approach the above road marking (step S205)… when the autonomous driving control unit 18 determines that a road marking, which is suitable as a reference for the own vehicle position estimation in the low positional accuracy direction Dtag, is not situated near the target track (step S204; No), the autonomous driving control unit 18 determines that there is no need to correct the target track of the vehicle. Then, the autonomous driving control unit 18 ends the process of the flowchart”), 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 invention of modified Nakamura for current position determining device and current position determining method “to acquire accuracy information indicating an accuracy of the collation with respect to each road marking” as taught by Kato (para. [0028] – [0089]) in order to maintain the accuracy of the estimated position in a predetermined level by using the accuracy information regarding the collation. Conclusion 07-40 AIA Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOSSAM M ABDELLATIF whose telephone number is (571)272-5869. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8 am-5 pm EST. 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, Rachid Bendidi can be reached on (571) 272-4896. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /HOSSAM M ABD EL LATIF/Examiner, Art Unit 3664 Application/Control Number: 18/810,296 Page 2 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 18/810,296 Page 3 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 18/810,296 Page 4 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 18/810,296 Page 5 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 18/810,296 Page 6 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 18/810,296 Page 7 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 18/810,296 Page 8 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 18/810,296 Page 9 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 18/810,296 Page 10 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 18/810,296 Page 11 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 18/810,296 Page 12 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 18/810,296 Page 13 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 18/810,296 Page 14 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 18/810,296 Page 15 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 18/810,296 Page 16 Art Unit: 3664 Application/Control Number: 18/810,296 Page 17 Art Unit: 3664
Prosecution Insights