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 .
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, 19, 22, 24, 27, 29, 32 and 34 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 enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Claim 17, for example, recites “random access report includes information on a one or more features associated to a used random access resource” without further clarification of what a used random access resource comprises. It is unclear whether the “used random access resource” is the resource used for the particular RA procedure triggered in Claim 16, whether it is a resource that is used for any RA procedure, whether it is a RA resource occupied when the RA report is transmitted, whether it is a RA resource that was used for a RA procedure at some point in the past, or some other interpretation.
For at least these reason(s), the claimed term “used random access resource” recited in Claim 17 is not enabled by the disclosure. Claims 22, 27 and 32 each recite at least the same non-enabled subject matter, and Claims 19, 24, 29 and 24 each inherit the non-enabled subject matter and are each rejected for at least the same reason(s) discussed above.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 17, 19, 22, 24, 27, 29, 32 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The term “used random access resource” in, for example, claim 17 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “used random access resource” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The indefiniteness of the descriptor ‘used’ renders Claim 17 indefinite because a POSITA is not able to ascertain the metes and bounds of the claims. Claims 19, 22, 24, 27, 29 and 34 each recite or inherit the same indefinite subject matter. For at least these reason(s), Claims 17, 19, 22, 24, 27, 32 and 34 are rejected for indefiniteness of the claimed term “used random access resource.”
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 16-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He (US 2023/0038191 A1) in view of Jeon (US 2020/0229241 A1).
Regarding Claim 16, He discloses the below limitation(s): receiving, from a base station, a random access configuration including parameters for a combination of a one or more features (He Fig 5A step 510 UE receives random access configuration information indicating RACH partitions and PRACH resources ("parameters") for configured RACH features; [0057] random access configuration information may include one or more parameters to be used in the random access procedure);
performing a random access procedure based on the random access configuration;
wherein, the random access report includes information on one or more features that triggers the random access procedure ([0076] which teaches that the UE has an awareness of RACH features that trigger RA procedures (e.g. RedCap, SDT, slice group), wherein the RACH features disclosed herein are interpreted as the RACH information reported by the wireless device of Jeon Fig 37).
He does not disclose the below limitation(s): receiving, from the base station, a request message for a random access report; and
transmitting, to the base station, a response message including the random access report,
In the same field of endeavor of RA procedure(s) triggered by feature, Jeon does disclose the below limitation(s): receiving, from the base station, a request message for a random access report (Jeon Fig 37 and [00481] base station transmits UE Information Request to wireless device; [0282] rach-ReportReq may be used to indicate whether the wireless device reports RACH information in response to UE Information Request; [0427] base station may trigger different types of random access reporting); and
transmitting, to the base station, a response message including the random access report (Fig 37 wireless device transmits UE Information Response to BS; [0483] wireless device may send/transmit, to the base station, a response message comprising RACH information),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the teaching of He to include transmitting a RA report as taught by Jeon. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to report features of an RA procedure to enable the base station to become aware of feature(s) specific to the RA procedure. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine He and Jeon to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 17, He and Jeon disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 16.
He further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein the random access report further includes information on a one or more features associated to a used random access resource, in case that the one or more features associated to the used random access resource is different from the one or more features that trigger the random access procedure (He Fig 5A and associated paragraphs, wherein RACH partitions and PRACH resources are associated with configured RACH features; see also [0076] for exemplary RACH features).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned method performed by a terminal/base station to include associating RA resources with particular features as taught by He. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to enable resource selection according to feature type of an RA procedure. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine He and Jeon to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 18, He and Jeon disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 16.
He further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein in case that the random access procedure is triggered by a slicing, the information on the one or more features that triggers the random access procedure includes information on a slice group that triggers the random access procedure (He [0076] RACH features may include a network slicing RACH feature (e.g. where dedicated PRACH resources are allocated to a particular network slice or slice group).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned method performed by a terminal/base station to include triggering RA according to a slicing feature that includes a slice group as taught by He. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to indicate a slice group feature such that the RA procedure can be transmitted to the indicated slice group. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine He and Jeon to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 19, He and Jeon disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 17.
He further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein in case that a slicing is associated to the used random access resource, the information on the one or more features associated to the used random access resource includes information on a slice group associated to the used random access resource (He [0076] RACH features may include a network slicing RACH feature (e.g. where dedicated PRACH resources are allocated to a particular network slice or slice group).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned method performed by a terminal/base station to include triggering RA according to a slicing feature that includes a slice group as taught by He. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to indicate a slice group feature such that the RA procedure can be transmitted to the indicated slice group. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine He and Jeon to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 20, He and Jeon disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 16.
He further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein the one or more features includes at least one of redcap, small data, or slice group (He [0076] RACH features may include UE type RACH feature (e.g. RedCap), a network slicing RACH feature, an SDT ("small data") feature, among others).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned method performed by a terminal/base station to include RACH features comprising RedCap UE, SDT, and network slice group as taught by He. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to enable the network to perform feature-aware RA procedures according to UE-supported features/capabilities. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine He and Jeon to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 21, He discloses the below limitation(s): transmitting, to a terminal, random access configuration parameters for a combination of a one or more features (He Fig 5A step 510 UE receives random access configuration information indicating RACH partitions and PRACH resources ("parameters") for configured RACH features);
wherein the random access report includes information on a one or more features that triggers a random access procedure performed by a terminal ([0076] which teaches that the UE has an awareness of RACH features that trigger RA procedures (e.g. RedCap, SDT, slice group), wherein the RACH features disclosed herein are interpreted as the RACH information reported by the wireless device of Jeon Fig 37).
He does not disclose the below limitation(s): transmitting, to the terminal, a request message for a random access report; and
receiving, from the terminal, a response message including the random access report,
In the same field of endeavor of RA procedure(s) triggered by feature, Jeon does disclose the below limitation(s): transmitting, to the terminal, a request message for a random access report (Jeon Fig 37 base station transmits UE Information Request to wireless device; [0427] base station may trigger different types of random access reporting); and
receiving, from the terminal, a response message including the random access report (Fig 37 wireless device transmits UE Information Response to BS),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the teaching of He to include transmitting a RA report as taught by Jeon. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to report features of an RA procedure to enable the base station to become aware of feature(s) specific to the RA procedure. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine He and Jeon to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 22, He and Jeon disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 21.
He further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein the random access report further includes information on a one or more features associated to a used random access resource, in case that the one or more features associated to the used random access resource is different from the one or more features that trigger the random access procedure (He Fig 5A and associated paragraphs, wherein RACH partitions and PRACH resources are associated with configured RACH features; see also [0076] for exemplary RACH features).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned method performed by a terminal/base station to include associating RA resources with particular features as taught by He. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to enable resource selection according to feature type of an RA procedure. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine He and Jeon to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 23, He and Jeon disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 21.
He further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein in case that the random access procedure is triggered by a slicing, the information on the one or more features that triggers the random access procedure includes information on a slice group that triggers the random access procedure (He [0076] RACH features may include a network slicing RACH feature (e.g. where dedicated PRACH resources are allocated to a particular network slice or slice group).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned method performed by a terminal/base station to include triggering RA according to a slicing feature that includes a slice group as taught by He. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to indicate a slice group feature such that the RA procedure can be transmitted to the indicated slice group. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine He and Jeon to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 24, He and Jeon disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 2.
He further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein in case that a slicing is associated to the used random access resource, the information on the one or more features associated to the used random access resource includes information on a slice group associated to the used random access resource (He [0076] RACH features may include a network slicing RACH feature (e.g. where dedicated PRACH resources are allocated to a particular network slice or slice group).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned method performed by a terminal/base station to include triggering RA according to a slicing feature that includes a slice group as taught by He. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to indicate a slice group feature such that the RA procedure can be transmitted to the indicated slice group. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine He and Jeon to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 25, He and Jeon disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 21.
He further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein the one or more features includes at least one of redcap, small data, or slice group (He [0076] RACH features may include UE type RACH feature (e.g. RedCap), a network slicing RACH feature, an SDT ("small data") feature, among others).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned method performed by a terminal/base station to include RACH features comprising RedCap UE, SDT, and network slice group as taught by He. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to enable the network to perform feature-aware RA procedures according to UE-supported features/capabilities. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine He and Jeon to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 26, He discloses the below limitation(s): a transceiver; and a controller (He Fig 2 UE 120 comprising controller/processor 280 and transceiver 252a) configured to:
receive, from a base station, a random access configuration including parameters for a combination of a one or more features (Fig 5A step 510 UE receives random access configuration information indicating RACH partitions and PRACH resources ("parameters") for configured RACH features; [0057] random access configuration information may include one or more parameters to be used in the random access procedure);
perform a random access procedure based on the random access configuration;
wherein, the random access report includes information on one or more features that triggers the random access procedure ([0076] which teaches that the UE has an awareness of RACH features that trigger RA procedures (e.g. RedCap, SDT, slice group), wherein the RACH features disclosed herein are interpreted as the RACH information reported by the wireless device of Jeon Fig 37).
He does not disclose the below limitation(s): receive, from the base station, a request message for a random access report; and
transmit, to the base station, a response message including the random access report,
In the same field of endeavor of RA procedure(s) triggered by feature, Jeon does disclose the below limitation(s): receive, from the base station, a request message for a random access report (Jeon Fig 37 and [00481] base station transmits UE Information Request to wireless device; [0282] rach-ReportReq may be used to indicate whether the wireless device reports RACH information in response to UE Information Request; [0427] base station may trigger different types of random access reporting); and
transmit, to the base station, a response message including the random access report (Fig 37 wireless device transmits UE Information Response to BS; [0483] wireless device may send/transmit, to the base station, a response message comprising RACH information),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the teaching of He to include transmitting a RA report as taught by Jeon. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to report features of an RA procedure to enable the base station to become aware of feature(s) specific to the RA procedure. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine He and Jeon to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 27, He and Jeon disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 26.
He further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein the random access report further includes information on a one or more features associated to a used random access resource, in case that the one or more features associated to the used random access resource is different from the one or more features that trigger the random access procedure (He Fig 5A and associated paragraphs, wherein RACH partitions and PRACH resources are associated with configured RACH features; see also [0076] for exemplary RACH features).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned method performed by a terminal/base station to include associating RA resources with particular features as taught by He. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to enable resource selection according to feature type of an RA procedure. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine He and Jeon to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 28, He and Jeon disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 26.
He further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein in case that the random access procedure is triggered by a slicing, the information on the one or more features that triggers the random access procedure includes information on a slice group that triggers the random access procedure (He [0076] RACH features may include a network slicing RACH feature (e.g. where dedicated PRACH resources are allocated to a particular network slice or slice group).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned method performed by a terminal/base station to include triggering RA according to a slicing feature that includes a slice group as taught by He. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to indicate a slice group feature such that the RA procedure can be transmitted to the indicated slice group. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine He and Jeon to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 29, He and Jeon disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 27.
He further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein in case that a slicing is associated to the used random access resource, the information on the one or more features associated to the used random access resource includes information on a slice group associated to the used random access resource (He [0076] RACH features may include a network slicing RACH feature (e.g. where dedicated PRACH resources are allocated to a particular network slice or slice group).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned method performed by a terminal/base station to include triggering RA according to a slicing feature that includes a slice group as taught by He. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to indicate a slice group feature such that the RA procedure can be transmitted to the indicated slice group. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine He and Jeon to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 30, He and Jeon disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 26.
He further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein the one or more features includes at least one of redcap, small data, or slice group (He [0076] RACH features may include UE type RACH feature (e.g. RedCap), a network slicing RACH feature, an SDT ("small data") feature, among others).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned method performed by a terminal/base station to include RACH features comprising RedCap UE, SDT, and network slice group as taught by He. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to enable the network to perform feature-aware RA procedures according to UE-supported features/capabilities. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine He and Jeon to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 31, He discloses the below limitation(s): a transceiver; and a controller (He Fig 2 base station 110 comprising controller/processor 240 and transceiver 234a) configured to:
transmit, to a terminal, random access configuration parameters for a combination of a one or more features (He Fig 5A step 510 UE receives random access configuration information indicating RACH partitions and PRACH resources ("parameters") for configured RACH features);
wherein the random access report includes information on a one or more features that triggers a random access procedure performed by a terminal ([0076] which teaches that the UE has an awareness of RACH features that trigger RA procedures (e.g. RedCap, SDT, slice group), wherein the RACH features disclosed herein are interpreted as the RACH information reported by the wireless device of Jeon Fig 37).
He does not disclose the below limitation(s): transmit, to the terminal, a request message for a random access report; and
receive, from the terminal, a response message including the random access report,
In the same field of endeavor of RA procedure(s) triggered by feature, Jeon does disclose the below limitation(s): transmit, to the terminal, a request message for a random access report (Jeon Fig 37 base station transmits UE Information Request to wireless device; [0427] base station may trigger different types of random access reporting); and
receive, from the terminal, a response message including the random access report (Fig 37 wireless device transmits UE Information Response to BS),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the teaching of He to include transmitting a RA report as taught by Jeon. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to report features of an RA procedure to enable the base station to become aware of feature(s) specific to the RA procedure. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine He and Jeon to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 32, He and Jeon disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 31.
He further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein the random access report further includes information on a one or more features associated to a used random access resource, in case that the one or more features associated to the used random access resource is different from the one or more features that trigger the random access procedure (He Fig 5A and associated paragraphs, wherein RACH partitions and PRACH resources are associated with configured RACH features; see also [0076] for exemplary RACH features).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned method performed by a terminal/base station to include associating RA resources with particular features as taught by He. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to enable resource selection according to feature type of an RA procedure. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine He and Jeon to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 33, He and Jeon disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 31.
He further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein in case that the random access procedure is triggered by a slicing, the information on the one or more features that triggers the random access procedure includes information on a slice group that triggers the random access procedure (He [0076] RACH features may include a network slicing RACH feature (e.g. where dedicated PRACH resources are allocated to a particular network slice or slice group).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned method performed by a terminal/base station to include triggering RA according to a slicing feature that includes a slice group as taught by He. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to indicate a slice group feature such that the RA procedure can be transmitted to the indicated slice group. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine He and Jeon to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 34, He and Jeon disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 32.
He further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein in case that a slicing is associated to the used random access resource, the information on the one or more features associated to the used random access resource includes information on a slice group associated to the used random access resource (He [0076] RACH features may include a network slicing RACH feature (e.g. where dedicated PRACH resources are allocated to a particular network slice or slice group).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned method performed by a terminal/base station to include triggering RA according to a slicing feature that includes a slice group as taught by He. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to indicate a slice group feature such that the RA procedure can be transmitted to the indicated slice group. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine He and Jeon to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding Claim 35, He and Jeon disclose the limitation(s) of Claim 31.
He further discloses the below limitation(s): wherein the one or more features includes at least one of redcap, small data, or slice group (He [0076] RACH features may include UE type RACH feature (e.g. RedCap), a network slicing RACH feature, an SDT ("small data") feature, among others).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the aforementioned method performed by a terminal/base station to include RACH features comprising RedCap UE, SDT, and network slice group as taught by He. The suggestion/motivation to do so would have been to enable the network to perform feature-aware RA procedures according to UE-supported features/capabilities. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine He and Jeon to obtain the invention, as specified in the instant claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAWN D MILLER whose telephone number is (571)272-8599. The examiner can normally be reached M-TR 8-5.
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, Charles C Jiang can be reached at (571) 270-7191. 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.
/SHAWN D MILLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2412
