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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 21 October 2024 was filed after the mailing date of the patent application on 21 October 2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings, received on 21 October 2024, are acceptable for examination.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claim 1, Claim 2, Claim 16, and Claim 18 are objected to because of the following informalities: Said claims recite “a BSS”; however, this term is not defined in the claims. In order to improve claim clarity, Examiner respectfully suggests amending to “a Basic Service Set ,BSS”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 5 and Claim 6 are objected to because of the following informalities: Said claims recite “the bTWT ID”. Here, the recitation, “the bTWT ID”, is not supported by antecedent basis. In order to improve claim clarity, Examiner respectfully suggests amending to “a Broadcast TWT identifier, bTWT ID,”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: Said claim recites “which Traffic Identifier, TID, or TIDs”. Here, the recitation does not comport with antecedent basis. IN order to improve claim clarity, Examiner respectfully suggests amending to “which a Traffic Identifier, TID, or Traffic Identifiers, TIDs,”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: Said claim recites “the TID or TIDs”. Here, the recitation does not comport with antecedent basis. IN order to improve claim clarity, Examiner respectfully suggests amending to “the TID or the TIDs”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: Said claim recites “with a TDLS Action field of TDLS Peer Traffic Indication or TDLS Peer Power Save Mode Request or Response”. Here, the repetitive use of “or” is unclear. In order to improve claim clarity, Examiner respectfully suggests amending to “with a TDLS Action field of one of a TDLS Peer Traffic Indication, a TDLS Peer Power Save Mode Request, and a TDLS Peer Power Save Mode Response”. Examiner has only provided a suggestion; the only correction required of Applicant is to remove the repetitive use of “or”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 and Claim 12 are objected to because of the following informalities: Said claims recite “the two peer non-AP stations”. Here, the recitation is not supported by antecedent basis. In order to improve claim clarity, Examiner respectfully suggests amending to “the initiator peer non-AP station and the partner peer non-AP station”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 16 and Claim 18 are objected to because of the following informalities: Said claims recite “for carrying out the steps of”; however, the recitation of “the steps” is not supported by antecedent basis. In order to improve claim clarity, Examiner respectfully suggests amending to “for carrying out . Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 11, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Shafin et al. (US 20230021113 A1 using the provisional filing date of 01 February 2022 corresponding to U.S. Provisional Application No. 63/305,538; hereinafter referred to as “Shafin”).
Regarding Claim 1, Claim 1 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 16.
Regarding Claim 2, Claim 2 is rejected on the same basis as Claim 18.
Regarding Claim 3, Shafin discloses the method of Claim 1.
Shafin further discloses wherein the bTWT information includes a Broadcast TWT identifier, bTWT ID, identifying the bTWT schedule (¶126, Shafin discloses that the Broadcast TWT element including a Broadcast TWT Info subfield. ¶103 & Fig. 8, Shafin further discloses that the Broadcast TWT Info subfield further includes a Broadcast TWT ID field. Provisional App. No. 63/305,538: Pg. 22 & Figure 15, Shafin discloses a Broadcast TWT element including a Broadcast TWT ID).
Regarding Claim 5, Shafin discloses the method of Claim 1.
Shafin further discloses wherein the bTWT information includes or is made of a Broadcast TWT Info subfield including the bTWT ID (¶126, Shafin discloses that the Broadcast TWT element including a Broadcast TWT Info subfield. ¶103 & Fig. 8, Shafin further discloses that the Broadcast TWT Info subfield further includes a Broadcast TWT ID field. Provisional App. No. 63/305,538: Pg. 16 & Fig. 6, Shafin discloses a Broadcast TWT element, or Broadcast TWT Info subfield, including a Broadcast TWT ID).
Regarding Claim 6, Shafin discloses the method of Claim 1.
Shafin further discloses wherein the bTWT information includes or is made of a Restricted TWT Parameter Set subfield including the bTWT ID (¶109 & Fig. 11, Shafin discloses a Broadcast TWT Info subfield format in a Broadcast TWT Parameter Set field where the Broadcast TWT Info subfield format includes a Broadcast TWT ID. Provisional App. No. 63/305,538: Pg. 16 & Fig. 6, Shafin discloses that the Broadcast TWT Info subfield is within a Broadcast TWT Parameter Set field with Peer-to-Peer Restricted TWT subfield).
Regarding Claim 7, Shafin discloses the method of Claim 6.
Shafin further discloses wherein the Restricted TWT Parameter Set subfield includes a Restricted TWT P2P TID Bitmap subfield (¶109 & Fig. 11 & ¶111-117 & Fig 13, Shafin discloses a Broadcast TWT Info subfield format in a Broadcast TWT Parameter Set field includes a Restricted TWT Peer-to-Peer TID bitmap when the Restricted TWT Peer-to-Peer TID Bitmap Present subfield is indicated. Provisional App. No. 63/305,538: Pg. 17 & Figure 7, Shafin discloses that the Broadcast TWT Parameter Set field format includes a Restricted TWT Peer-to-Peer TID bitmap) specifying which Traffic Identifier, TID, or TIDs are allowed as latency sensitive traffic streams for peer-to-peer exchange within the bTWT schedule (¶185, Shafin discloses the Restricted TWT Peer-to-Peer TID Bitmap subfield indicates which traffic identifiers (TIDs) can be used while communicating during the restricted TWT schedule. Provisional App. No. 63/305,538: Pg. 16 & Figure 7, Shafin discloses that the Restricted TWT Peer-to-Peer TID bitmap indicates allowed Traffic Identifiers (TIDs) for which the peer-to-peer ST As can use the rTWT schedule for communication over the peer-to-peer link).
Regarding Claim 11, Shafin discloses the method of Claim 1.
Shafin further discloses wherein the TDLS Action frame includes a TDLS Setup Request Action frame to establish a Tunneled Direct Link Setup, TDLS, session between the two peer non-AP stations (¶160-161 & Fig. 24 & ¶165 & Fig. 25, Shafin discloses that the TDLS Setup Request frame is used to establish a TDLS direct link between STA1 and STA2. Provisional App. No. 63/305,538: Pg. 8: ¶3, Shafin discloses that peer stations (STAs) use TDLS signaling to establish a peer-to-peer communication link).
Regarding Claim 16, Shafin discloses a wireless communication device
comprising at least one microprocessor (¶73-80 & Fig. 2B, Shafin discloses a processor) configured for carrying out the steps of a peer-to-peer communication method in a wireless network (¶170 & Fig. 25, Shafin discloses a station communicating in a peer-to-peer manner with another station over a TDLS direct link):
establishing a broadcast Target Wake Time, bTWT, schedule with an AP of a BSS (¶164 & Fig. 25 & ¶159, Shafin discloses establishing one or more broadcast target wakeup time (bTWT) schedules with AP1 of the basic service set (BSS) managed by AP1. Provisional App. No. 63/305,538: Pgs. 20-21: Figure 13 & Figure 14, Shafin discloses that STA1 establishes a restricted TWT schedule with the AP of the BSS),
notifying a partner peer non-AP station of the BSS about the bTWT schedule (¶160-161 & Fig. 24 & ¶165 & Fig. 25, Shafin discloses sending, by STA1 (or an initiating TDLS peer STA), a TDLS Setup Request frame where the TDLS Setup Request frame notifies STA2 (or a TDLS peer STA) about the one or more bTWT schedules. Provisional App. No. 63/305,538: Pg. 8: ¶3, Shafin discloses that peer stations (STAs) use TDLS signaling to establish a peer-to-peer communication link),
wherein notifying includes sending, to the partner peer non-AP station, a TDLS Action frame (¶160-161 & Fig. 24 & ¶165 & Fig. 25, Shafin discloses sending, by STA1 (or an initiating TDLS peer STA), a TDLS Setup Request frame where the TDLS Setup Request frame notifies STA2 (or a TDLS peer STA) about the one or more bTWT schedules. Examiner notes to Applicant that one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have known that a TDLS Action Frame is indicated as a TDLS Setup Request frame by setting the Action field to 0 in the TDLS Action category field. Provisional App. No. 63/305,538: Pg. 8: ¶3, Shafin discloses that peer stations (STAs) use TDLS signaling to establish a peer-to-peer communication link) including bTWT information about the bTWT schedule (¶168 & Fig. 25, Shafin discloses that the TDLS Setup Request frame includes a Broadcast TWT element. Provisional App. No. 63/305,538: Pg. 22 & Figure 15, Shafin discloses a Broadcast TWT element including a Broadcast TWT ID), and
exchanging, during one or more bTWT service periods, SPs, of the bTWT schedule, peer-to-peer data directly with the partner peer non-AP station (¶170 & Fig. 25, Shafin discloses that the TDLS Setup Request frame includes a Broadcast TWT element. Provisional App. No. 63/305,538: Pg. 8: ¶4-6, Shafin discloses a first STA, STA1, communicating with another STA, STA2, over a TDLS direct link according to a restricted TWT operation).
Regarding Claim 17, Shafin discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a program which, when executed by a microprocessor or computer system in a wireless device, causes the wireless device to perform (¶15, Shafin discloses a computer readable medium storing one or more computer programs for execution by hardware to perform a method) the method of Claim 1 (See Rejection of Claim 16).
Regarding Claim 18, Shafin discloses a wireless communication device comprising at least one microprocessor (¶73-80 & Fig. 2B, Shafin discloses a processor) configured for carrying out the steps of a peer-to-peer communication method in a wireless network (¶170 & Fig. 25, Shafin discloses a station communicating in a peer-to-peer manner with another station over a TDLS direct link):
receiving a notification from an initiator peer non-AP station of a BSS managed by an AP, about a broadcast Target Wake Time, bTWT, schedule (¶160-161 & Fig. 24 & ¶165 & Fig. 25, Shafin discloses receiving, from STA1 (or an initiating TDLS peer STA), a TDLS Setup Request frame where the TDLS Setup Request frame notifies STA2 (or a TDLS peer STA) about the one or more bTWT schedules. Provisional App. No. 63/305,538: Pg. 8: ¶3, Shafin discloses that peer stations (STAs) use TDLS signaling to establish a peer-to-peer communication link) in which the initiator peer non-AP station has established membership with the AP of the BSS (¶164 & Fig. 25 & ¶159, Shafin discloses establishing one or more broadcast target wakeup time (bTWT) schedules with AP1 of the basic service set (BSS) managed by AP1. Provisional App. No. 63/305,538: Pgs. 20-21: Figure 13 & Figure 14, Shafin discloses that STA1 establishes a restricted TWT schedule with the AP of the BSS),
wherein the notification includes a TDLS Action frame including bTWT information about the bTWT schedule (¶168 & Fig. 25, Shafin discloses that the TDLS Setup Request frame includes a Broadcast TWT element. Provisional App. No. 63/305,538: Pg. 22 & Figure 15, Shafin discloses a Broadcast TWT element including a Broadcast TWT ID), and
exchanging, during one or more bTWT service periods, SPs, of the bTWT schedule, peer-to-peer data directly with the initiator peer non-AP station (¶170 & Fig. 25, Shafin discloses that the TDLS Setup Request frame includes a Broadcast TWT element. Provisional App. No. 63/305,538: Pg. 8: ¶4-6, Shafin discloses a first STA, STA1, communicating with another STA, STA2, over a TDLS direct link according to a restricted TWT operation).
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.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shafin in view of Kim et al. (US 20150373758 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Kim”).
Regarding Claim 9, Shafin discloses the method of Claim 1.
However, Shafin does not disclose wherein the TDLS Action frame includes an Action frame of the TDLS category with a TDLS Action field of TDLS Peer Traffic Indication or TDLS Peer Power Save Mode Request or Response.
Kim, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the TDLS Action frame includes an Action frame of the TDLS category with a TDLS Action field of TDLS Peer Traffic Indication or TDLS Peer Power Save Mode Request or Response (¶108 & Table 1, Kim discloses that a TDLS Action frame include an Action field where the Action field indicates TDLS Peer Traffic Indication when the Action field has a value of 4 and indicates a TDLS Peer PSM Request or Response when the Action field has a value of 7 or 8 respectively).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shafin by requiring that the TDLS Action frame includes an Action frame of the TDLS category with a TDLS Action field of TDLS Peer Traffic Indication or TDLS Peer Power Save Mode Request or Response as taught by Kim because handling of a TDLS direct link is improved when changing the AID (Kim, ¶4-5).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shafin in view of Shafin et al. (US 20220408367 A1 using the provisional filing date of April 14 2022 corresponding to U.S. Provisional App. No. 63/331,136; hereinafter referred to as “Shafin2”).
Regarding Claim 10, Shafin discloses the method of Claim 1.
However, Shafin does not disclose wherein the TDLS Action frame includes an Action frame of the TDLS category with a TDLS Action field set to any value from 11 to 255 to define a TDLS Peer bTWT Indication.
Shafin2, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the TDLS Action frame includes an Action frame of the TDLS category with a TDLS Action field set to any value from 11 to 255 to define a TDLS Peer bTWT Indication (¶83-88 & Table 5, Shafin2 discloses that the Action field of a TDLS Action frame indicates that the TDLS Action frame is either TDLS Transmission Start Notification or a TDLS Transmission End Notification when the Action field is set to 12 or 13 respectively. U.S. Provisional Application No. 63/331,136: Pgs. 14-17 & Table 5: TDLS Action field values, Shafin2 discloses that the TDLS Action field value can be set to either 12 or 13 to indicate either a TDLS Transmission Start Notification or a TDLS Transmission End Notification respectively. Shafin further indicates that the TDLS Transmission Start Notification indicates, or notifies, of an impending transmission over the TDLS direct link from a TDLS peer STA to another TDLS peer STA).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shafin by requiring that the TDLS Action frame includes an Action frame of the TDLS category with a TDLS Action field set to any value from 11 to 255 to define a TDLS Peer bTWT Indication as taught by Shafin2 because notifying an AP MLD of an impending TDLS transmission between non-AP MLDs in a wireless local area network facilitates harmonious operation of tunneled direct link setup links and non-simultaneous transmit and receive link pairs in stations of multi-link devices in a wireless local area network communications system (Shafin2, ¶2-10).
Claims 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shafin in view of Chitrakar et al. (US 20240040639 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Chitrakar”).
Regarding Claim 12, Shafin discloses the method of Claim 11.
Shafin further discloses wherein the TDLS Setup Response (¶160-161, Shafin discloses that the TDLS Setup Response frame includes broadcast TWT information) and Confirm Action frames include the bTWT information (¶160-161, Shafin discloses that the TDLS Setup Confirm/Confirmation frame includes broadcast TWT information indicating a subset of restricted TWT schedules for communication over the TDLS direct link).
However, Shafin does not disclose that [the method] further comprising exchanging a TDLS Setup Response Action frame and a TDLS Setup Confirm Action frame between the two peer non-AP stations.
Chitrakar, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches [the method] further comprising exchanging a TDLS Setup Response Action frame and a TDLS Setup Confirm Action frame between the two peer non-AP stations (¶73-74 & Fig. 3 (314 & 316), Chitrakar discloses exchanging a TDLS Setup Response frame and a TDLS Setup Confirm frame between STA1 and STA2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shafin by exchanging a TDLS Setup Response Action frame and a TDLS Setup Confirm Action frame between the two peer non-AP stations as taught by Chitrakar because communication data throughput is increased by enabling multi-channel aggregation over multiple links (Chitrakar, ¶3-6).
Regarding Claim 13, Shafin discloses the method of Claim 1.
However, Shafin does not disclose [the method] further comprising, at the initiator peer non-AP station, prior to establishing membership in the bTWT schedule, negotiating a Tunneled Direct Link Setup, TDLS, session with the partner peer non-AP station, wherein the TDLS Action frame is sent within the TDLS session.
Chitrakar, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches [the method] further comprising,
at the initiator peer non-AP station, prior to establishing membership in the bTWT schedule, negotiating a Tunneled Direct Link Setup, TDLS, session with the partner peer non-AP station (¶73 & Fig. 3 (314 & 316), Chitrakar discloses, at STA1 prior to establishing a TDLS direct link hosting the one or more TWT schedules, negotiating a TDLS direct link between STA1 and STA2 by exchanging a TDLS Setup Request frame and TDLS Setup Response frame), wherein the TDLS Action frame is sent within the TDLS session (¶73 & Fig. 3 (314 & 316), Chitrakar discloses that the TDLS Setup Request frame and the TDLS Setup Response frame are sent after receipt of the TDLS Channel Use Permission Response (SUCCESS) frame and before setting up the TDLS direct link).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shafin by requiring that [the method] further comprising, at the initiator peer non-AP station, prior to establishing membership in the bTWT schedule, negotiating a Tunneled Direct Link Setup, TDLS, session with the partner peer non-AP station, wherein the TDLS Action frame is sent within the TDLS session as taught by Chitrakar because communication data throughput is increased by enabling multi-channel aggregation over multiple links (Chitrakar, ¶3-6).
Regarding Claim 14, Shafin discloses the method of Claim 2.
However, Shafin does not disclose [the method] further comprising, at the partner peer non-AP station, negotiating a Tunneled Direct Link Setup, TDLS, session with the initiator peer non-AP station, wherein the TDLS Action frame is received within the TDLS session once established.
Chitrakar, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches [the method] further comprising,
at the partner peer non-AP station, negotiating a Tunneled Direct Link Setup, TDLS, session with the initiator peer non-AP station (¶73 & Fig. 3 (314 & 316), Chitrakar discloses, at STA1 prior to establishing a TDLS direct link hosting the one or more TWT schedules, negotiating a TDLS direct link between STA1 and STA2 by exchanging a TDLS Setup Request frame and TDLS Setup Response frame),
wherein the TDLS Action frame is received within the TDLS session once established (¶73 & Fig. 3 (314 & 316), Chitrakar discloses that the TDLS Setup Request frame and the TDLS Setup Response frame are sent after receipt of the TDLS Channel Use Permission Response (SUCCESS) frame and before setting up the TDLS direct link).
Regarding Claim 15, Shafin discloses the method of Claim 1.
However, Shafin does not disclose wherein the initiator peer non- AP station or the partner peer non-AP station is affiliated to a non-AP multi-link device, MLD.
Chitrakar, a prior art reference in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the initiator peer non- AP station or the partner peer non-AP station is affiliated to a non-AP multi-link device, MLD (¶233 & Fig. 28 & ¶67 & Fig. 1, Chitrakar discloses that the wireless network includes a non-access point (non-AP) multi-link device (MLD) 1 2612 and a non-AP MLD 2 2622 of a basic service set (BSS) managed by the AP/AP MLD 2602. Examiner correlates the non-AP MLD 1 2612 to "an initiator peer non-access point, AP, station" and correlates the non-AP MLD 2 2622 to "the partner peer non-AP station").
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shafin by requiring that the initiator peer non- AP station or the partner peer non-AP station is affiliated to a non-AP multi-link device, MLD as taught by Chitrakar because communication data throughput is increased by enabling multi-channel aggregation over multiple links (Chitrakar, ¶3-6).
Internet Communications
Applicant is encouraged to submit a written authorization for Internet communications (PTO/SB/439, http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf) in the instant patent application to authorize the examiner to communicate with the applicant via email. The authorization will allow the examiner to better practice compact prosecution. The written authorization can be submitted via one of the following methods only: (1) Central Fax which can be found in the Conclusion section of this Office action; (2) regular postal mail; (3) EFS WEB; or (4) the service window on the Alexandria campus. EFS web is the recommended way to submit the form since this allows the form to be entered into the file wrapper within the same day (system dependent). Written authorization submitted via other methods, such as direct fax to the examiner or email, will not be accepted. See MPEP § 502.03.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC NOWLIN whose telephone number is (313)446-6544. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 12:00PM-10:00PM.
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, Michael Thier can be reached at (571) 272-2832. 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.
/ERIC NOWLIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2427
Prosecution Insights