DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Response to Amendment
In response to the amendment filed 6/10/2026; claims 1 – 11 and 13 – 21 are pending; claim 12 has been cancelled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 17 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 17 – 20 have been added to the amendment filed on 6/10/2026. It appears that applicant attempts to add claims that mirror the languages in claims 5 – 8. However, the claimed variables (i.e., M1, M2, X_t^(r_2), X_t^(r_3), X_t^(r_4)) are not supported in the original disclosure. The variables believed to be M1, M2,
x
t
r
2
,
x
t
r
3
,
x
t
r
4
. Applicant(s) should enter the proper equations and mathematical expressions in the claims that is supported by the original disclosure.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1 – 11 and 13 – 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1: Is the claimed invention a statutory category of invention?
Claim 1 is directed to an electrocardiogram signal processing method (Step 1, Yes).
Step 2A, Prong 1: Does the claim recite an abstract idea?
The limitation of steps: … preprocessing, by the processor of the electronic device, electrocardiogram data to obtain first data, wherein the preprocessing is used to filter out baseline drift and power frequency interference noise in the electrocardiogram data; dividing, by the processor of the electronic device, data points in the first data into data points in a first-type area, data points in a second-type area, and data points in a buffer-type area, wherein the first-type area is a part of a QRS waveband in the electrocardiogram data, the first-type area comprises an R wave, the second-type area comprises an area from a start point of a T wave to an end point of a P wave, the buffer-type area comprises a third-type area and a fourth-type area, the third-type area is an area, with a preset length, that is in the buffer-type area and that is adjacent to a boundary of the second-type area, and the fourth-type area is an area other than the third-type area in the buffer-type area; performing, by the processor of the electronic device, smoothing processing on the data points in the second-type area by using a plurality of fixed-length windows, to obtain second data; performing, by the processor of the electronic device, smoothing processing on the data points in the third-type area by using a plurality of fixed-length windows, to obtain third data, wherein a length of a fixed window used to perform smoothing processing on the third-type area is less than a length of a fixed window used to perform smoothing processing on the second-type area; performing, by the processor of the electronic device, smoothing processing on the data points in the fourth-type area by using a plurality of non-fixed-length windows, to obtain fourth data; and integrating, by the processor of the electronic device, the second data, the third data, the fourth data, and the data points in the first-type area, to obtain fifth data obtained after the electrocardiogram data is smoothed as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components (claim 19). The claimed method akin to mental process of observations, evaluations, and judgements for signal processing and mathematical concept (mathematical relationship). The mere nominal recitation of an electronic device performing these steps does not take the claim limitation outside of the mental processes grouping. Thus, the claim recites a mental process (Step 2A, Prong 1: yes).
Step 2A, Prong 2: Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
Per the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, if a claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application of that exception, a claim is not "directed to" a judicial exception. Alternatively, a claim that does not integrate a recited judicial exception into a practical application is directed to the exception. Evaluating whether a claim integrates an abstract idea into a practical application is performed by a) identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the abstract idea, and b) evaluating those additional elements individual and in combination to determine whether they integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, using one or more of the considerations laid out by the Supreme Court and the Federal Circuit. Exemplary considerations indicative that an additional element (or combination of elements) may have or has not been integrated into a practical application are set forth in the 2019 PEG
Claim 1 recites the additional elements of: an electronic device. It is particularly noted that the use of an electronic device (wearable device) "as a tool" to perform an abstract method and steps for performing signal processing that only amount to extra solution activity are indicated in the 2019 PEG as examples that an additional element has not been integrated into a practical application. Even in combination, the recited additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits, such as an improvement to a computing system, on practicing the abstract idea (STEP 2A, Prong 2: NO).
Step 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
Claim 1 recites the additional elements of: an electronic device set forth above for Step 2A, Prong 2. Regarding these limitations: Applicant's specification describes these features in generic manner "… The wearable device may include a processor 110, an internal memory 121, a universal serial bus (universal serial bus, USB)” in the Applicant’s specification, para. [0043]). There is no indication in the Specification that Applicants have achieved an advancement or improvement in computer for electrocardiogram signal processing method. Dependent claims 2 – 11 and 13 - 21 inherit the deficiencies of their respective parent claims through their dependencies and do not recite additional limitations sufficient to direct the claims to more than the claimed abstract idea, and are thus rejected for the same reasons.
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, 2, 9, 11, 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 2022/0202343 A1, known herein as Chen’343) in view of Chen et al. (US 2023/0309899 A1, known herein as Chen’899).
Re claims 1, 11, 13:
Chen’343 teaches 1. An electrocardiogram signal processing method, applied to an electronic device (Chen’343, Abstract), wherein the method comprises:
preprocessing, by a processor of the electronic device, electrocardiogram data to obtain first data (Chen’343, fig. 1, 121, 122), wherein the preprocessing is used to filter out baseline drift and power frequency interference noise in the electrocardiogram data (Chen’343, [0012], “Baseline wandering removal, noise removal, and standardization are performed on the ECG to generate the first ECG”; [0038], “The first pre-processing may include steps such as baseline wandering removal, noise removal, or standardization … Then, the first pre-processing module 121 may perform the noise removal on the adjusted ECG 22 through, for example, a low-pass filter to smooth the ECG 22”);
dividing, by the processor of the electronic device (Chen’343, fig. 3C - 3D; [0007], “The marking module divides the second ECG into multiple portions according to a window function”),
data points in the first data into data points in a first-type area (Chen’343, pg. 6, Table 2, “QRS”), data points in a second-type area (Chen’343, pg. 6, Table 2; [0046], “The at least one type of wave may include a P wave, a Q wave, an R wave, an S wave, or a T wave”), and
data points in a buffer-type area,
wherein the first-type area is a part of a QRS waveband in the electrocardiogram data, the first-type area comprises an R wave (Chen’343, pg. 6, Table 2; [0046], “The at least one type of wave may include a P wave, a Q wave, an R wave, an S wave, or a T wave”),
the second-type area comprises an area from a start point of a T wave to an end point of a P wave (Chen’343, pg. 6, Table 2; [0046], “The at least one type of wave may include a P wave, a Q wave, an R wave, an S wave, or a T wave”),
the buffer-type area comprises a third-type area and a fourth-type area (Chen’343, figs. 3C – 3D),
the third-type area is an area, with a preset length, that is in the buffer-type area and that is adjacent to a boundary of the second-type area (Chen’343, fig. 3D, “P5”), and
the fourth-type area is an area other than the third-type area in the buffer-type area (Chen’343, fig. 3D, “P4” and “W2”);
wherein a length of a fixed window used to perform smoothing processing on the third-type area is less than a length of a fixed window used to perform smoothing processing on the second-type area (Chen’343, pg. 6, Table 2; [0046], “The at least one type of wave may include a P wave, a Q wave, an R wave, an S wave, or a T wave” the combination of Pwave and Twave is longer than the fig. 3D, “P5”).
Chen’343 teaches a low-pass filter to smooth the ECG 22. Then, the first pre-processing module 121 may standardize the smoothed ECG 22 to generate the first ECG 23 with an average value of 0 (Chen’343, [0038]).
Chen’343 does not explicitly disclose performing, by the processor of the electronic device, smoothing processing on the data points in the second-type area by using a plurality of fixed-length windows, to obtain second data;
performing, by the processor of the electronic device, smoothing processing on the data points in the third-type area by using a plurality of fixed-length windows, to obtain third data;
performing, by the processor of the electronic device, smoothing processing on the data points in the fourth-type area by using a plurality of non-fixed-length windows, to obtain fourth data; and
integrating, by the processor of the electronic device, the second data, the third data, the fourth data, and the data points in the first-type area, to obtain fifth data obtained after the electrocardiogram data is smoothed.
Chen’899 teaches a determination method for a beginning of T-wave. Chen’899 teaches [A]n electrocardiogram signal processing method, applied to an electronic device, wherein the method comprises … performing, by the processor of the electronic device, smoothing processing on the data points in the second-type area by using a plurality of fixed-length windows, to obtain second data (Chen’899, [103], “Where w is a width of a sliding window, q is a width of a smooth window, s, is a mean value within the smooth window.”; [0104], “the width of the sliding window w is in a range of 25 to 35. For example, the width of the sliding window w is 25, 30, or 35”; [0105] – [0107]);
performing, by the processor of the electronic device, smoothing processing on the data points in the third-type area by using a plurality of fixed-length windows, to obtain third data (Chen’899, [0103], “Where w is a width of a sliding window, q is a width of a smooth window, s, is a mean value within the smooth window.”; [0104], “the width of the sliding window w is in a range of 25 to 35”; [0067], “Where S2j is a smoothing operator”; [0105] – [0107]);
performing, by the processor of the electronic device, smoothing processing on the data points in the fourth-type area by using a plurality of non-fixed-length windows, to obtain fourth data (Chen’899, [0103], “Where w is a width of a sliding window, q is a width of a smooth window, s, is a mean value within the smooth window.”; [0104], “the width of the sliding window w is in a range of 25 to 35”; [0067], “Where S2j is a smoothing operator … a coefficient of a low-pass filter and a coefficient of a high-pass filter”; [0105] – [0107]); and
integrating, by the processor of the electronic device, the second data, the third data, the fourth data, and the data points in the first-type area, to obtain fifth data obtained after the electrocardiogram data is smoothed (Chen’899, [0103], “Where w is a width of a sliding window, q is a width of a smooth window, s, is a mean value within the smooth window.”; [0104], “the width of the sliding window w is in a range of 25 to 35”; [0067], “Where S2j is a smoothing operator … a coefficient of a low-pass filter and a coefficient of a high-pass filter”; [0105] – [0107]).
Therefore, in view of Chen’899, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method described in Chen’343, by providing the low-pass filter (smoothing) as taught by Chen’899, since the mean value within the smooth window is used to eliminate the influence of noise (Chen’899, [0103]).
11. An electronic device, comprising:
a processor, and
a memory coupled to the processor to store instructions, which when executed by the processor, cause the electronic device to:
preprocess electrocardiogram data to obtain first data, wherein the preprocessing is used to filter out baseline drift and power frequency interference noise in the electrocardiogram data;
divide data points in the first data into data points in a first-type area, data points in a second-type area, and data points in a buffer-type area, wherein the first-type area is a part of a ORS waveband in the electrocardiogram data, the first-type area comprises an R wave, the second-type area comprises an area from a start point of a T wave to an end point of a P wave, the buffer-type area comprises a third-type area and a fourth-type area, the third-type area is an area, with a preset length, that is in the buffer-type area and that is adjacent to a boundary of the second-type area, and the fourth-type area is an area other than the third-type area in the buffer-type area;
perform smoothing processing on the data points in the second-type area by using a plurality of fixed-length windows, to obtain second data;
perform smoothing processing on the data points in the third-type area by using a plurality of fixed-length windows, to obtain third data, wherein a length of a fixed window used to perform smoothing processing on the third-type area is less than a length of a fixed window used to perform smoothing processing on the second-type area;
perform smoothing processing on the data points in the fourth-type area by using a plurality of non-fixed-length windows, to obtain fourth data; and
integrate the second data, the third data, the fourth data, and the data points in the first-type area, to obtain fifth data obtained after the electrocardiogram data is smoothed.
13. A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium having instructions stored therein, which when executed by a processor, cause a computer to:
preprocess electrocardiogram data to obtain first data, wherein the preprocessing is used to filter out baseline drift and power frequency interference noise in the electrocardiogram data;
divide data points in the first data into data points in a first-type area, data points in a second-type area, and data points in a buffer-type area, wherein the first-type area is a part of a ORS waveband in the electrocardiogram data, the first-type area comprises an R wave, the second-type area comprises an area from a start point of a T wave to an end point of a P wave, the buffer-type area comprises a third-type area and a fourth-type area, the third-type area is an area, with a preset length, that is in the buffer-type area and that is adjacent to a boundary of the second-type area, and the fourth-type area is an area other than the third-type area in the buffer-type area;
perform smoothing processing on the data points in the second-type area by using a plurality of fixed-length windows, to obtain second data;
perform smoothing processing on the data points in the third-type area by using a plurality of fixed-length windows, to obtain third data, wherein a length of a fixed window used to perform smoothing processing on the third-type area is less than a length of a fixed window used to perform smoothing processing on the second-type area;
perform smoothing processing on the data points in the fourth-type area by using a plurality of non-fixed-length windows, to obtain fourth data; and
integrate the second data, the third data, the fourth data, and the data points in the first-type area, to obtain fifth data obtained after the electrocardiogram data is smoothed.
Re claims 2, 14:
2. The method according to claim 1, wherein when the fourth-type area is an area that transitions from the first-type area to the third-type area, lengths of the plurality of non-fixed-length windows gradually increase over time; or when the fourth-type area is an area that transitions from the third-type area to the first-type area, lengths of the plurality of non-fixed-length windows gradually decrease over time(Chen’899, [0103], “Where w is a width of a sliding window, q is a width of a smooth window, s, is a mean value within the smooth window.”; [0104], “the width of the sliding window w is in a range of 25 to 35”; [0067], “Where S2j is a smoothing operator”; [0105] – [0107]). 14. The electronic device according to claim 11, wherein when the fourth-type area is an area that transitions from the first-type area to the third-type area, lengths of the plurality of non-fixed-length windows gradually increase over time; or when the fourth-type area is an area that transitions from the third-type area to the first-type area, lengths of the plurality of non-fixed-length windows gradually decrease over time (Chen’899, [0103], “Where w is a width of a sliding window, q is a width of a smooth window, s, is a mean value within the smooth window.”; [0104], “the width of the sliding window w is in a range of 25 to 35”; [0067], “Where S2j is a smoothing operator”; [0105] – [0107]).
Re claim 9:
9. The method according to claim 1, wherein the method further comprises: when the electronic device receives a trigger operation used to start electrocardiogram data detection, displaying, by the processor of the electronic device, data points in the fifth data (Chen’343, Abstract; [0006]).
Claims 10 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen’343 and Chen’899 as applied to claim 1 or 11 above, and further in view of Galloway et al. (US 2015/0018702 A1)
Re claims 10, 21:
Chen’343 doesn’t explicitly disclose a smart device. Galloway teaches apparatuses and methods (including methods of using such apparatuses) for de-noising electrocardiograms (ECGs) by manually or automatically adjusting the amount of filtering of an ECG signal (Galloway, Abstract). Galloway teaches
10. The method according to claim 1, wherein the electronic device comprises a wearable device, and the wearable device comprises one or more of: a smartwatch, a smart band, or smart glasses. 21. The electronic device according to claim 11, wherein the electronic device comprises a wearable device, and the wearable device comprises one or more of: a smartwatch, a smart band, or smart glasses (Galloway, [0064]). Therefore, in view of Galloway, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method described in Chen’343, by providing the smart watch/band as taught by Galloway, since the ECG signals may be conveniently acquired through the use of an everyday computing device such as a personal computer, a laptop computer, a tablet computer, a smartphone, a smart watch, a smart wrist band, a wearable computer, or the like (Galloway, [0064]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/10/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues:
Chen '343 fails to disclose or suggest dividing, by the processor of the electronic device, data points in the first data into data points in a first-type area, data points in a second-type area, and data points in a buffer-type area, wherein the first-type area is a part of a QRS waveband in the electrocardiogram data, the first-type area comprises an R wave, the second-type area comprises an area from a start point of a T wave to an end point of a P wave, the buffer-type area comprises a third-type area and a fourth-type area, the third-type area is an area, with a preset length, that is in the buffer-type area and that is adjacent to a boundary of the second-type area, and the fourth-type area is an area other than the third-type area in the buffer-type area.
The Office submits that Chen’343 teaches the limitations: data points in the first data into data points in a first-type area (Chen’343, pg. 6, Table 2, “QRS”), data points in a second-type area (Chen’343, pg. 6, Table 2; [0046], “The at least one type of wave may include a P wave, a Q wave, an R wave, an S wave, or a T wave”), and
data points in a buffer-type area,
wherein the first-type area is a part of a QRS waveband in the electrocardiogram data, the first-type area comprises an R wave (Chen’343, pg. 6, Table 2; [0046], “The at least one type of wave may include a P wave, a Q wave, an R wave, an S wave, or a T wave”),
the second-type area comprises an area from a start point of a T wave to an end point of a P wave (Chen’343, pg. 6, Table 2; [0046], “The at least one type of wave may include a P wave, a Q wave, an R wave, an S wave, or a T wave”),
the buffer-type area comprises a third-type area and a fourth-type area (Chen’343, figs. 3C – 3D),
the third-type area is an area, with a preset length, that is in the buffer-type area and that is adjacent to a boundary of the second-type area (Chen’343, fig. 3D, “P5”), and
the fourth-type area is an area other than the third-type area in the buffer-type area (Chen’343, fig. 3D, “P4” and “W2”);
Applicant argues:
None of these steps can be performed "in the human mind" as they are all specifically tied to concrete technologies. Further, the processing performed is explicitly performed by a computing device and thus there are indeed multiple elements of the claim that "preclude the [claim] from being performed in the human mind."
Further, the claims are not directed toward "mental processes." The claims describe numerous computing processor actions within the computing device that require non-mental processes. As stated in the updated examples (Example 37), if a claim "requires action by a processor that cannot be practically applied in the mind," such a claim does not recite a "mental process." In contrast to the Examiner's content, the claims include various steps that cannot be performed in the human mind such as preprocessing, by a processor … Thus, the claim cannot reasonably be construed as a mere "mental process." Thus, the claims do not fall into an Office-enumerated category of abstract idea and fail prong one of Step 2A. Since the claims to not pass prong one, the claims are per se not directed to an abstract idea.
The Office disagrees. Concepts determined to be abstract ideas, and thus patent ineligible, include certain methods of organizing human activity, such as fundamental economic practices (Alice, 573 U.S. at 219–20; Bilski, 561 U.S. at 611); mathematical formulas (Parker v. Flook, 437 U.S. 584, 594– 95 (1978)); and mental processes (Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 67 (1972)). The claim at issue recited a mathematical formula, but the Court held that “a claim drawn to subject matter otherwise statutory does not become non-statutory simply because it uses a mathematical formula.” Diehr, 450 U.S. at 187; see also id. at 191 (“We view respondents’ claims as nothing more than a process for molding rubber products and not as an attempt to patent a mathematical formula.”). Having said that, the Court also indicated that a claim “seeking patent protection for that formula in the abstract . . . is not accorded the protection of our patent laws, and this principle cannot be circumvented by attempting to limit the use of the formula to a particular technological environment.” Id. at 191 (citing Benson and Flook); see also, e.g., id. at 187 (“It is now commonplace that an application of a law of nature or mathematical formula to a known structure or process may well be deserving of patent protection.”). The examiner submits that tying the claimed method to “by a processor of the electronic device” is an attempt to limit the use of the formula: “dividing, by the processor of the electronic device, data points”, “smoothing processing”, “integrating, by the processor of the electronic device, the second data, the third data, the fourth data, and the data points in the first-type area” to a particular technological environment. Second, the claimed method can definitely perform by the human mind since the claimed method is applying one or more mathematical equations on electrocardiogram data. There is nothing technologic about applying mathematical equations on sensor data.
Conclusion
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACK YIP whose telephone number is (571)270-5048. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 9:00 AM - 5:00 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, XUAN THAI can be reached at (571) 272-7147. 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.
/JACK YIP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
